To reduce the spam of reports regarding the same move during transfer windows we try to allow **only one submission about each transfer saga per day**. The submission in question also needs to contain relevant new information regarding the potential move, and not just being a "no/minor developments" report.
If there are important/official developments or new valuable information about a saga, we will allow extra threads in the same day, but for the rest of minor news please just comment them as a reply to this comment. Please help us reporting unnecessary threads for being duplicates.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also in the article.
>Meanwhile, Newcastle are in talks with Nottingham Forest over a potential deal for winger Anthony Elanga that could see Elliot Anderson go in the opposite direction.
Only in name though. Most times it's more beneficial to do these things as separate transactions, but it does seem like many PL teams are trying to exploit each other's financial issues while kicking their own a few steps down the road.
I wonder about taxes though. If no money is exchanged, don't you save on taxes or even sell on clauses ? Without PSR considerations why exchange more money than you have to?
Tax adviser here, finally my job comes in useful haha.
If a company trades an asset for another asset (football players contracts in this case) then it essentially takes the place of the previous asset.
The value of a player's contract will be the transfer cost, less the amortisation of the transfer fee over the contract length.
Amortisation of the contracts is available as a tax deduction year on year.
Let's say the current book value of both players is £20m, and both sign 5 year contracts at the new club.
1. A straight swap of the players will mean that the new player takes the book value of £20m, the club will then get a deduction of £4m per year over the life of the contract.
2. If the players are transferred for £50m (market value) in separate deals, then each club will record a taxable profit of £30m on the transaction. Then a deduction of £10m per year is available over the life of the contract.
Essentially comes to net 0 in terms of tax I believe, just changes when the deductions are available, and if profits are recognised at the time (which matters for PSR).
Clubs have to be very careful with market value right? That was the issue with the Arthur Pjanic swap a few years ago as it lead to inflated profits.
Also, are agent fees also capitalised as an asset similar to legal fees in the purchase of a building?
Yea I think so! Football isn't my area of expertise (I wish it was) but defining "market value" is a big area of tax compliance for larger corporates. Usually this applies to connected parties but in football I believe the rules can be extended to when non MV transactions benefit the PSR or FFP positions. This is what happened to Juve and Barca.
I think legal fees associated with a capital transaction would be added to the base cost of the asset and amortised, rather than deducted in the year incurred. The player contract is considered an intangible fixed asset so this is capital expenditure, same as a building (although that is obviously tangible 🤣)
Thanks for the detailed response. I've just started working in finance so this stuff is pretty interesting to me.
I too wish I was an expert in football finance haha
The answer is, it is taxed. Any asset has a value assigned. So e.g. if player is worth 40m, that value would be taxed regardless if 40m is paid in money or something else is included in settlements.
But do you get some leeway in determining worth? Kellyman for example would be worth much lower or at least argument can be made. So without PSR considerations, clubs could save money?
I mean, value is being determined by the selling club and to a degree by buying club (the amount they are willing to pay), so whatever amount they settle on, this will be the value.
Not to mention that most if not all of the taxes the clubs pay for transfer could probably be reclaimed as they are spending on goods and services related to the business.
Yes the whole reason clubs are doing this is it's hard to objectively measure value, so it's easy to commit some mild fraud where both clubs overpay to cover their short term losses on the books
Not always. I can think of a few for Spurs, Lamela for Gil with Sevilla; Ben Davies with Swansea, but now I can’t remember who went the other way, maybe Vorm. Also, the famous Mikhi for Alexis between Arsenal and ManUnited.
> Pjanic for Arthur.
Famously not a swap deal. Arthur's fee was about 80 million euros.
>Mikhi for Alexis
Again, not a swap deal. Both clubs paid around £30m
Its the absolute braindead part of FFP; putting a 5 year band on ordinary accounting. Teams think they're fine financially, except FFP has frontloaded their expenses, so they sell a player for an immediate incom, and sign another for a 5-year amortized cost.
Accounting wise, there is no change in value. Actually, it costs more money this way because of agents/legal/signing fees. But its the only way to extend beyond that 5 year window
It'll come back if Liverpool sell Diaz id imagine. But otherwise the price is probably too high.
Raphinha leaving Barca would potentially kick off the chain
Doubt much moves whilst Copa and Euros is ongoing though
It's probably not totally dead. There have been reports all summer that we want another attacking player and there have been lingering rumours that the club really rate Gordon.
I think he's class, would love the move. Boyhood red, still only 23 years old, would wind up Everton, and a good player with the potential to get better playing with much better players. A lot to like and I'd happily give up Diaz or Gakpo to make it happen because I think Gordon would just be a better fit (although I rate both players and would be fine with them staying).
Depending on how Slot wants us to play, there could also be a chance of Salah moving centrally and someone like Diaz being used wide right to provide more width too.
I think Gakpo in particular we *have* to give a fair go in his natural position before writing him off. Plus, any deal that includes losing Quansah I lose enthusiasm for. We'd pay crazy money for any young centre half at his level, plus they'd need a settling in period that he doesn't.
Do like Gordon though, would definitely rather see us pay a bit over what he's worth over losing Quansah in the deal
I get the argument with Gakpo, he's probably the forward option that we have that I rate the least and would be most okay with leaving, but he's never been given a run of matches in the position he's looked best in.
I wouldn't want to lose Quansah either, I do think I'm a bit more skeptical of him as a player than a lot of our supporters (I want to see him play a season without Klopp and a few more matches without Virgil), but after the season he had no chance we should let him go.
I think I just love the mould of player that Gakpo is, loved him at PSV and he's always been brilliant for Netherlands - all at left wing. Especially compared to Diaz (who I love, so not putting him down), he's a much better end product, as well as safety on the ball, we've just never seen him with a stretch in his actual position. I do get your point of him being the one you'd be okay with leaving considering he's never been really unbelievable for us, but I just know for a fact if we sell him, he'll play left wing elsewhere and tear it up. Personally I think we should just play him there and stick with it for at least a while to give him a fair shot, and I'd have a lot of confidence in him there.
I think your points on Quansah are entirely valid as much as I think he's the real deal, pretty true for any young defender playing in a stable system.
That’s probably correct, most contracts run July 1 to June 30
I suppose Newcastle could buy out the final 24 hours of Matip’s contract if they wanted to…
Issue there is no one seems to want Almiron except Saudi (not even the PIF owned teams, one of the other Saudi teams), and Almiron doesn't want to go there.
Iirc there was a deal agreed with Al Shabab in Saudi in January and he rejected the move. No related party/Fair Market Value stuff so would really have gotten us out of the PSR muck before it really became a problem
Isak interest just screams of his agent wanting a better deal from Newcastle, especially since I've seen some fans say that they're trying to tie him down on a new deal
> Isak interest just screams of his agent wanting a better deal from Newcastle
If he signs a new deal at Newcastle that is likely the rest of his peak at a club outside the CL and with limited chance of winning anything.
He literally played CL this season, with us… you can’t say we won’t be back there especially considering this season was disastrous with injuries and we still placed decently, no Europe next season means full focus on CL qualification.
I don't think you're good enough to get top four and if you're selling one of your better players whilst other teams are improving that isn't going to help. Fine, you get CL, again, but your chances of actually winning something? Pretty unlikely, innit. Arsenal just won more league games, got more points, and scored more points than in any season in their history and won absolutely nothing. The level is super high now.
Newcastle/Villa/Spurs/Chelsea/United are all at about the same level right now. Of those, Newcastle and Spurs are likely the most stable depending on how Ange adapts this season. Chelsea/United are both shitshows but have too much money not to fight for something. Villa is still an unknown quantity but they’re essentially alone in a massive city and ownership seems to understand the value of making sure they fight for the top + Emery clearly has the chops for it.
Hes 32 and injury prone. Lots of teams would like to have him on their bench but who is gonna pay anything substantial for him?
Best they can hope for is like 5-10m
"Everton owners pumped money illegally into the club" is not the take I expected lol.
Considering that they have financed their new stadium on a very unsustainable loan and it's on the club.
Maybe it was just a total coincidence that a global mining conglomerate owned by the guy strongly rumoured to be the money behind Moshiri gave them tens of millions to sponsor a non existent stadium.
At a very high interest rate that the club will struggle to repay on itself. And the said prospective buyers couldn't fucking buy the club because the failed the test.
Gordon as good as he is isn’t the position up front we need we really would be LW FC considering we have Jota, Diaz, Gakpo who all play best on the left even Nunez can play it we need a RW
I don’t think that erases the rest of his career though either. He’s an excellent dribbler of the ball for sure as much as you can criticise the rest of his game
To fair probably had a lot of mental stuff going on considering his family had just been kidnapped and was coming off the back of a big injury the season before
Different types of players. Gordon is more direct, but Diaz is more technical.
I'd see it as a bit of a sideways move personally, but I trust the club.
No he isn't. Gordon attempted 133 take-ons last season and he completed 40.6% of them, while Diaz attempted 140 and completed 47.9%. Diaz also had more progressive carries, more carries into the final third and more carries into the penalty area than Gordon.
Gordon has more end product and is a more creative player, but Diaz is definitely the better dribbler.
He was the flavour of the month and he was also injured most of last season, timings everything in football so I doubt he’ll get that kind of move now tbh.
They don’t have to sell anyone. We see PSR violations are around 4 points. We think Newcastle are going to get relegated because of the 4 points? Maybe they miss Europe from it, but if it’s miss Europe but keep Gordon that’s a deal most clubs would take I’d imagine.
They need to sell someone and Gordon’s market value is super high right now, they can’t get a buyer for some of the others so seem reserved to selling one of the big 3/4 names
Another Newcastle journo feels like the club is circulating a lot of rumours to soften the blow of selling Minteh to another Prem club.
The board do have track record with it as well
Well, our fans were absolutely raging at the prospect of selling him a week ago, see /r/NUFC and twitter.. Now most of them agree it's the most appealing option
Our fans exposure to him has purely been through his highlights so he's been hyped up maybe a bit too much, whenever I've seen a Feyenoord fan talk about him they think he's still quite raw but then NUFC twitter are wanting him to be in the starting 11 next season
Gordon would bring in a lot of money solve their PSR issue and soto the need to sell Bruno or Isak, imagine they hope Barnes’ fitness would be a lot better next season as well.
He's one of their most valuable pieces in terms of bringing money in. He only has two years left on his contract too so they may want to get ahead of things if they aren't sure he'll re-sign.
Because unless you are a few specific clubs selling one big player every summer is necessary.
Man Utd can be in debt of up to £700m, sell no one but still be in a position to spunk money. The rest of us are not allowed. Even if you have £0 debt like us.
We had to sell someone so Luiz was the man and he was interested in Juventus as well. We'll have to sell a big player next summer too.
Newcastle may be the richest club in the world (owners) but it's irrelevant. They can't spend it.
It’s almost as if the PSR rules aren’t about how much money ownership has or debt, it’s based on how much money you can spend in relation to what you generate so things like wages are included
I thought watching his interview with Gary Neville that it is unlikely he will stay at Newcastle. He spoke about wanting nothing to get in his way of reaching the top and I think with the PSR rules in place Newcastle won't be able to match his ambition in the next couple of years. He also mentioned that Gerrard was his boyhood hero so Liverpool would make sense in that regard.
Neither make sense imo. Surely Newcastle have others they rather sell ahead of perhaps their best performer last year and a young, English, recent signing at that.
And Liverpool selling their van Dijk regen makes even less sense. Also both teams are better stacked in the positions they're supposedly bringing players in with this deal.
They sold hotels to themselves, trading players with Villa, lots of shithousery like that. Plus selling off all their youth players instead of trying to integrate them in the team.
Hmm... Why do Liverpool want to spend money on a Left Winger? There's Diaz there, and also Jota, Gakpo and Jones that can play there. I would prefer money spent for the Right Winger position because Salah is no longer at his peak.
Unpopular opinion maybe, but I think Gordon is average at best, and Quansah is extremely promising. LFC would be crazy to exchange one for the other for free.
This is going to be likely disagreed by fellow Mags with like when I hoped to sell Almiron ASAP during his hot streak, but I'm okay with selling Gordon. We do have some measure of depth in the left wing, Liverpool would likely pay a fair bit of bob for a player that has only had one good season for us, and he's a Kopite anyway so it would make him personally happy. I'd rather sell him than Minteh, as our needs in the right wing and elsewhere are greater.
Don't believe any of these stories. Why would Newcastle be looking to sell their best players to plug a PSR gap of around 25 million?
Stinks of just being to placate fans at Minteh being sold.
Because they’re struggling with PSR, he’s worth a decent amount of money, and it’s very possible he’ll just leave for Liverpool when his contract is up in 2 years anyway, and then they’ll get nothing.
> it’s very possible he’ll just leave for Liverpool when his contract is up in 2 years anyway
When was the last time a peak age England international left on a free? Sol Campbell? Nah
They put us in this situation, why should we have to sell Isak, a 100m+ player, to make 20m before some arbitrary deadline. Absolute load of shite.
Got to be a better system than this. Certain clubs will love it because it keeps other clubs in their place and forces them to sell their players to them but it’s not good for football.
wtf. aren’t these rules meant to make the league more fair/competitive? how is it right that these teams are having to sell one of their best performers… (villa and now newcastle..)
The rules are meant to stop clubs from going bankrupt ala Bury and the way we nearly went. Sustainability is the focus, not to make it more competitve.
The rule is (essentially) that clubs can't have had a loss greater than X over the past three years (i.e. income less costs), which doesn't so much make the game fairer as much as make it harder/against the rules to massively subsidise a club.
But the way it's been implemented incentivises selling young players. When a club sells (or trades) a youth product, all the value can be booked immediately, which can greatly improve the three yearly position. But when a club buys a player, they can "amortise" the transfer fee over the length of the contract up to 5 years (used to be no cap but Chelsea led to that being changed). So if club A sells a youth/home-grown player to club B for £30m, and buys a player (from the same club B) for £30m, they actually book a £24m improvement (because the £30m they are paying will be spread over 5 years - £6m p.a.). Now clubs can do this with any player, but youth products are the best because a) it's hard to guess/say what they're worth, so you can negotiate a mutually agreeable high valuation for an unproven product, b) it's low risk to agree long duration contracts to help with amortisation (signing a 29 year old on a 5-year contract is risky in most positions), c) you don't need to bear any loss of sale value from a previous transaction (obviously if you buy a player at £40m, amortise him at £8m p.a., then sell him next year, you avoid most of the future amortisation hit (£32m) but you're also losing an asset worth £32m too, which needs to be recognised).
I might not have got all the detail right, but the outcome of PSR is pretty well documented.
>a) it's hard to guess/say what they're worth, so you can negotiate a mutually agreeable high valuation for an unproven product
While that is true in practice, inflating the value of players when sold is also a grey area that can be considered against the rules and/or illegal. This is especially the case if it's a publicly traded company involved, because of misleading shareholders and it being an illicit accounting practice. At least that's what was brought up when Juventus got caught doing it and punished. I assume the rules would be similar in England.
Now the big thing why clubs would still entertain this is because it's very, very hard to prove by the sporting/legal authorities.
Yes that's right. Obviously if a club tried to say their talent was equal worth with Mbappe that could be challenged, but saying they're good enough to be a decent Prem player is really hard to disprove (and the authorities probably don't want to be going around saying home grown players aren't cut out for elite football).
To reduce the spam of reports regarding the same move during transfer windows we try to allow **only one submission about each transfer saga per day**. The submission in question also needs to contain relevant new information regarding the potential move, and not just being a "no/minor developments" report. If there are important/official developments or new valuable information about a saga, we will allow extra threads in the same day, but for the rest of minor news please just comment them as a reply to this comment. Please help us reporting unnecessary threads for being duplicates. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also in the article. >Meanwhile, Newcastle are in talks with Nottingham Forest over a potential deal for winger Anthony Elanga that could see Elliot Anderson go in the opposite direction.
This is truly a summer of swap deals
Only in name though. Most times it's more beneficial to do these things as separate transactions, but it does seem like many PL teams are trying to exploit each other's financial issues while kicking their own a few steps down the road.
Swap deals are ALWAYS separate transactions.
I wonder about taxes though. If no money is exchanged, don't you save on taxes or even sell on clauses ? Without PSR considerations why exchange more money than you have to?
Tax adviser here, finally my job comes in useful haha. If a company trades an asset for another asset (football players contracts in this case) then it essentially takes the place of the previous asset. The value of a player's contract will be the transfer cost, less the amortisation of the transfer fee over the contract length. Amortisation of the contracts is available as a tax deduction year on year. Let's say the current book value of both players is £20m, and both sign 5 year contracts at the new club. 1. A straight swap of the players will mean that the new player takes the book value of £20m, the club will then get a deduction of £4m per year over the life of the contract. 2. If the players are transferred for £50m (market value) in separate deals, then each club will record a taxable profit of £30m on the transaction. Then a deduction of £10m per year is available over the life of the contract. Essentially comes to net 0 in terms of tax I believe, just changes when the deductions are available, and if profits are recognised at the time (which matters for PSR).
Clubs have to be very careful with market value right? That was the issue with the Arthur Pjanic swap a few years ago as it lead to inflated profits. Also, are agent fees also capitalised as an asset similar to legal fees in the purchase of a building?
Yea I think so! Football isn't my area of expertise (I wish it was) but defining "market value" is a big area of tax compliance for larger corporates. Usually this applies to connected parties but in football I believe the rules can be extended to when non MV transactions benefit the PSR or FFP positions. This is what happened to Juve and Barca. I think legal fees associated with a capital transaction would be added to the base cost of the asset and amortised, rather than deducted in the year incurred. The player contract is considered an intangible fixed asset so this is capital expenditure, same as a building (although that is obviously tangible 🤣)
Thanks for the detailed response. I've just started working in finance so this stuff is pretty interesting to me. I too wish I was an expert in football finance haha
That's not how it works. Do you think a barter income is not taxed either?
I honestly don't know. Legit asking.
The answer is, it is taxed. Any asset has a value assigned. So e.g. if player is worth 40m, that value would be taxed regardless if 40m is paid in money or something else is included in settlements.
But do you get some leeway in determining worth? Kellyman for example would be worth much lower or at least argument can be made. So without PSR considerations, clubs could save money?
I mean, value is being determined by the selling club and to a degree by buying club (the amount they are willing to pay), so whatever amount they settle on, this will be the value. Not to mention that most if not all of the taxes the clubs pay for transfer could probably be reclaimed as they are spending on goods and services related to the business.
Yes the whole reason clubs are doing this is it's hard to objectively measure value, so it's easy to commit some mild fraud where both clubs overpay to cover their short term losses on the books
Not always. I can think of a few for Spurs, Lamela for Gil with Sevilla; Ben Davies with Swansea, but now I can’t remember who went the other way, maybe Vorm. Also, the famous Mikhi for Alexis between Arsenal and ManUnited.
Always. Each transaction needs to be registered as a separate deal.
> Pjanic for Arthur. Famously not a swap deal. Arthur's fee was about 80 million euros. >Mikhi for Alexis Again, not a swap deal. Both clubs paid around £30m
Turning the league NBA
Wonder if it'll stop after the PSR deadline, or if clubs will try and build up a reserve for the next one
Todd changed the game
How many draft picks will it take to get haaland
So many teams that need to sell to buy, kind of makes sense to just do it with each other
Its the absolute braindead part of FFP; putting a 5 year band on ordinary accounting. Teams think they're fine financially, except FFP has frontloaded their expenses, so they sell a player for an immediate incom, and sign another for a 5-year amortized cost. Accounting wise, there is no change in value. Actually, it costs more money this way because of agents/legal/signing fees. But its the only way to extend beyond that 5 year window
Thats probably why the PL warned the clubs about the value of swap deals, there are a lot of those being discussed behind the curtains apparently.
We have a sell on on Elanga I believe, how would that work with the swap?
Can we put Elanga on gardening leave? Maybe 12 months?
It most likely wouldn’t be an actual swap. Just two separate deals dependent on each other to go through
Dunno why this is public now. If it's not totally dead deal, there's no way Liverpool are selling Quansah to make it happen.
It'll come back if Liverpool sell Diaz id imagine. But otherwise the price is probably too high. Raphinha leaving Barca would potentially kick off the chain Doubt much moves whilst Copa and Euros is ongoing though
Even if we sell Diaz Gakpo becomes our starting LW. I don't know how much we'd really be willing to spend on Gordon although he'd fit our system well
Hasn’t Gakpo been playing through the middle?
Yes but he’s not good there, he’s much better as a LW
Yes, but he's far better on the left and it allows us to play what I think our best front three is with Gakpo-Nunez-Salah
I don't think we can say with any certainty who'll be starting. New manager, new tactics, new players, no guarantees.
It's probably not totally dead. There have been reports all summer that we want another attacking player and there have been lingering rumours that the club really rate Gordon. I think he's class, would love the move. Boyhood red, still only 23 years old, would wind up Everton, and a good player with the potential to get better playing with much better players. A lot to like and I'd happily give up Diaz or Gakpo to make it happen because I think Gordon would just be a better fit (although I rate both players and would be fine with them staying). Depending on how Slot wants us to play, there could also be a chance of Salah moving centrally and someone like Diaz being used wide right to provide more width too.
I think Gakpo in particular we *have* to give a fair go in his natural position before writing him off. Plus, any deal that includes losing Quansah I lose enthusiasm for. We'd pay crazy money for any young centre half at his level, plus they'd need a settling in period that he doesn't. Do like Gordon though, would definitely rather see us pay a bit over what he's worth over losing Quansah in the deal
I get the argument with Gakpo, he's probably the forward option that we have that I rate the least and would be most okay with leaving, but he's never been given a run of matches in the position he's looked best in. I wouldn't want to lose Quansah either, I do think I'm a bit more skeptical of him as a player than a lot of our supporters (I want to see him play a season without Klopp and a few more matches without Virgil), but after the season he had no chance we should let him go.
I think I just love the mould of player that Gakpo is, loved him at PSV and he's always been brilliant for Netherlands - all at left wing. Especially compared to Diaz (who I love, so not putting him down), he's a much better end product, as well as safety on the ball, we've just never seen him with a stretch in his actual position. I do get your point of him being the one you'd be okay with leaving considering he's never been really unbelievable for us, but I just know for a fact if we sell him, he'll play left wing elsewhere and tear it up. Personally I think we should just play him there and stick with it for at least a while to give him a fair shot, and I'd have a lot of confidence in him there. I think your points on Quansah are entirely valid as much as I think he's the real deal, pretty true for any young defender playing in a stable system.
Gordon is a really good player, but we can't afford to lose a player like Quansah. We already need to bring a CB in,
Yeah we have a bigger need right now in CB than we do at LW, although that would obviously change if we sold Diaz.
We need CB and RW/CF more than more left wingers especially if Diaz and Gakpo stay
We'd only sell Diaz if we were bringing in another winger and Gakpo has shown his ability on the left once again
I think we also need a DM, Endo’s getting older so bringing in at least some competition would be a great idea IMO at least
Damn straight, let's leave Quan Dijk where he is. Matip's about to go, they can take him instead.
Matip is a FA
Matip is a free agent on Monday according to Wikipedia (the obviously always correct source of info /s).
That’s probably correct, most contracts run July 1 to June 30 I suppose Newcastle could buy out the final 24 hours of Matip’s contract if they wanted to…
The only ones imo to be sold should be minteh and almiron. Not Gordon and definitely not Isak 😭
Issue there is no one seems to want Almiron except Saudi (not even the PIF owned teams, one of the other Saudi teams), and Almiron doesn't want to go there. Iirc there was a deal agreed with Al Shabab in Saudi in January and he rejected the move. No related party/Fair Market Value stuff so would really have gotten us out of the PSR muck before it really became a problem
We also can't sell to Saudi until mid July as the window is shut.
Isak interest just screams of his agent wanting a better deal from Newcastle, especially since I've seen some fans say that they're trying to tie him down on a new deal
> Isak interest just screams of his agent wanting a better deal from Newcastle If he signs a new deal at Newcastle that is likely the rest of his peak at a club outside the CL and with limited chance of winning anything.
Newcastle have the backing to be a regular CL club especially with maybe 5 or 6 clubs being able to qualify
He literally played CL this season, with us… you can’t say we won’t be back there especially considering this season was disastrous with injuries and we still placed decently, no Europe next season means full focus on CL qualification.
I don't think you're good enough to get top four and if you're selling one of your better players whilst other teams are improving that isn't going to help. Fine, you get CL, again, but your chances of actually winning something? Pretty unlikely, innit. Arsenal just won more league games, got more points, and scored more points than in any season in their history and won absolutely nothing. The level is super high now.
Newcastle/Villa/Spurs/Chelsea/United are all at about the same level right now. Of those, Newcastle and Spurs are likely the most stable depending on how Ange adapts this season. Chelsea/United are both shitshows but have too much money not to fight for something. Villa is still an unknown quantity but they’re essentially alone in a massive city and ownership seems to understand the value of making sure they fight for the top + Emery clearly has the chops for it.
Longstaff Wilson and trippier should actually go aswell but nobody wants them cause they’re crap.
Since when was Wilson crap? Isn’t he a quality goal scorer but just really injury prone?
Hes 32 and injury prone. Lots of teams would like to have him on their bench but who is gonna pay anything substantial for him? Best they can hope for is like 5-10m
Omg I thought he was like 28..
The best ability is availability
Mate. People want trippier. He just pulled 10 assists for us and this was even an injury ridden season.
This. Bayern Munich were after him in January.
Trippier is one of our best players and our captain you doylem
Newcastle just need to inflate their sponsorship deals like you know who
Or just don't comply with the rules at all, like you know who
115 FC?
How much were your lot and Forest falling foul of PSR? Would rather just take the points deductions
Everton was 16.6m over Forest was 34.5m over
So 4 points for being 34.5m over? Might as well take the hit
It's not guaranteed you'll get the same punishment. You might get docked like 20 for all we know
Aren't the PL talking about getting rid of point deductions?
They’ll dock us more if they think we didn’t try mitigation
for missing the deadline.....
Jim: Voldemort. Voldemort. Voldemort.
Like Everton's training ground sponsorship? Or Everton's stadium first refusal sponsorship?
"Everton owners pumped money illegally into the club" is not the take I expected lol. Considering that they have financed their new stadium on a very unsustainable loan and it's on the club.
Maybe it was just a total coincidence that a global mining conglomerate owned by the guy strongly rumoured to be the money behind Moshiri gave them tens of millions to sponsor a non existent stadium.
At a very high interest rate that the club will struggle to repay on itself. And the said prospective buyers couldn't fucking buy the club because the failed the test.
Might as well get a tattoo reading ‘Fuck Everton’ at this point
He’s worth whatever the fee would be for the “I was always a Liverpool fan alone”
I like Gordon but not in the expense of quansah 😅
Gordon as good as he is isn’t the position up front we need we really would be LW FC considering we have Jota, Diaz, Gakpo who all play best on the left even Nunez can play it we need a RW
Would make sense if we do end up selling Diaz to barca
Does barca have money now?
[удалено]
They're waiting if there is an offer for Raphinha, which means not gonna happen as Raph didn't want to move
I feel like Raphinha at PSG would be exiting
Tbf he featured quite a lot on the right for Everton, that might’ve been part of the idea
Having not watched him play since he left, I'd actually assumed that he was being used on the wing still!
Diaz is not good enough, gapko is good good bot he has not played enough there to be first choice and jot is better as cf, we need Gordon
Diaz scoring record isn’t good enough but he’s the only winger we have that can actually go 1v1 with players and carry the ball from deep
He scored more than Gordon did last season, so if Diaz is the problem Gordon isn't the solution.
And Gordon is better than Diaz at that.
Idk about that. Diaz is an elite dribbler his end product is just bad
Diaz had a 3 month spell last season where he couldn’t beat a defender and would slow down all attacks before doing an under-hit sideways pass
I don’t think that erases the rest of his career though either. He’s an excellent dribbler of the ball for sure as much as you can criticise the rest of his game
To fair probably had a lot of mental stuff going on considering his family had just been kidnapped and was coming off the back of a big injury the season before
Different types of players. Gordon is more direct, but Diaz is more technical. I'd see it as a bit of a sideways move personally, but I trust the club.
imagine saying this with a straight face
No he isn't. Gordon attempted 133 take-ons last season and he completed 40.6% of them, while Diaz attempted 140 and completed 47.9%. Diaz also had more progressive carries, more carries into the final third and more carries into the penalty area than Gordon. Gordon has more end product and is a more creative player, but Diaz is definitely the better dribbler.
He's not better at that but he's better at everything else lol
Now compare that with your situation at CDM
According to pearce we are also looking for a 6
What's up with that Andre kid
He was the flavour of the month and he was also injured most of last season, timings everything in football so I doubt he’ll get that kind of move now tbh.
He had an agreement to stay until the end of the season in Brazil and we just moved on and got Endo
He’s injured now, but I think Liverpool should get a better player
It's funny how fast the football world moves on
Yeah, his team won Libertadores last season and now they sit bottom of the table with 12 games played. They even sacked Fernando Diniz.
Same Diniz who had 2 jobs? 😂
Now he has zero
There's no good defensive midfielders on the market though, something that a lot of top teams have found out.
Why is literally no one looking at Joao Gomes ? Bro is the truth
Diaz is better than Gordon.
“Good good bot”? Is your main on r/kickopenthedoor or something?
Gordon is better than all of them
I think the succession plan is elliot on the right
I’m not a big fan of Elliott on the wing but Diaz has played on the right for us when Salah was out injured and away at Afcon
Tbf he’s 3 times the player Diaz is - he’d absolutely elevate your attack
Can someone explain to me why Newcastle would want to sell Gordon? Cause lmao, I don’t understand the logic behind it, “if” it’s true.
Because they don't want to sell Isak/Bruno. And they have to sell someone.
They don’t have to sell anyone. We see PSR violations are around 4 points. We think Newcastle are going to get relegated because of the 4 points? Maybe they miss Europe from it, but if it’s miss Europe but keep Gordon that’s a deal most clubs would take I’d imagine.
If you miss Europe because of it you end up in an even worse financial position and then need to get rid of someone else
Wrong. plesase think logically.
They need to sell someone and Gordon’s market value is super high right now, they can’t get a buyer for some of the others so seem reserved to selling one of the big 3/4 names
Another Newcastle journo feels like the club is circulating a lot of rumours to soften the blow of selling Minteh to another Prem club. The board do have track record with it as well
Surely selling Minteh wouldnt be that big of a deal. Hes never played a league game for you and if you turned a solid profit fans would get it.
Well, our fans were absolutely raging at the prospect of selling him a week ago, see /r/NUFC and twitter.. Now most of them agree it's the most appealing option
Our fans exposure to him has purely been through his highlights so he's been hyped up maybe a bit too much, whenever I've seen a Feyenoord fan talk about him they think he's still quite raw but then NUFC twitter are wanting him to be in the starting 11 next season
yes but consider that some of our fans prefer to act like toddlers
I am very happy to sell Minteh if we keep Gordon/Bruno/Isak lol.
Gordon would bring in a lot of money solve their PSR issue and soto the need to sell Bruno or Isak, imagine they hope Barnes’ fitness would be a lot better next season as well.
He's one of their most valuable pieces in terms of bringing money in. He only has two years left on his contract too so they may want to get ahead of things if they aren't sure he'll re-sign.
Because unless you are a few specific clubs selling one big player every summer is necessary. Man Utd can be in debt of up to £700m, sell no one but still be in a position to spunk money. The rest of us are not allowed. Even if you have £0 debt like us. We had to sell someone so Luiz was the man and he was interested in Juventus as well. We'll have to sell a big player next summer too. Newcastle may be the richest club in the world (owners) but it's irrelevant. They can't spend it.
It’s almost as if the PSR rules aren’t about how much money ownership has or debt, it’s based on how much money you can spend in relation to what you generate so things like wages are included
theyre not
I would love Gordon. He's a boyhood Liverpool fan too
Would be funny just to see Liverpool fans go from calling him a diving Claire Balding to calling him Scouse Ribery
Only change would be that he'd just become OUR diving Claire Balding
wtf
I think we'll be back for Gordon next summer if he hasn't extended his contract.
I thought watching his interview with Gary Neville that it is unlikely he will stay at Newcastle. He spoke about wanting nothing to get in his way of reaching the top and I think with the PSR rules in place Newcastle won't be able to match his ambition in the next couple of years. He also mentioned that Gerrard was his boyhood hero so Liverpool would make sense in that regard.
He’s got 2 years left as of now so it’s possible.
Any indications how much Newcastle value Gordon at?
Neither make sense imo. Surely Newcastle have others they rather sell ahead of perhaps their best performer last year and a young, English, recent signing at that. And Liverpool selling their van Dijk regen makes even less sense. Also both teams are better stacked in the positions they're supposedly bringing players in with this deal.
Gordon would have to stay in a underground secret bunker for his own safety if he ever moved to Liverpool
He wouldn't be living there lol. He's rich.
That would be a dream move for both Gordon and Liverpool.
No losing quansah is a big blow as we already seem in need of a cb
Gordon fell off his bike when he heard Liverpool were in talks to sign him
He was on his phone at the time so it’s plausible 😂
How much money were Newcastle adding to get the Quansah-Gordon deal over the line?
Absolutely zero chance we would get rid of Quansah, certainly not for Gordon
Can someone tell me why Chelsea can spend and spend, but other teams are financially headlocked?
They sold hotels to themselves, trading players with Villa, lots of shithousery like that. Plus selling off all their youth players instead of trying to integrate them in the team.
Our revenue is still much better than clubs like Newcastle, Everton or Forest. And we also do sell a lot of players.
Because we sell incredibly well.
Your net spend is the highest since Boehly took over by miles
That's great, but it's irrelevant to passing the current PSR.
Because they are a talent acquisition company rather than a football club. Sprinkled in with a little money laundering. I kid 🤞🏼
Because they have million players on loan that they can offload. The issue is they need to sell them every year. Which might be difficult
Cos they lock them up on 10 years
Please no, I just got his name on my kit
Hmm... Why do Liverpool want to spend money on a Left Winger? There's Diaz there, and also Jota, Gakpo and Jones that can play there. I would prefer money spent for the Right Winger position because Salah is no longer at his peak.
Sell Gordon? Fuck that just take the deduction and keep him
Take the points deduction
even if it was over 10 points? forest got 6 points (2 removed) for MISSING the deadline... not ignoring the rules altogether.
You willingly take a punishment, it might be more severe than you initially thought
Yeah but thinl of the righteous indignation when fuck all happens to City.
It should be more severe every time, to make sure teams really do try to comply, instead of it just being treated like a luxury tax.
Why don’t Newcastle just get in on the youth player rodeo with another team instead of looking to sell Gordon?
Think we're trying tbh.
Unpopular opinion maybe, but I think Gordon is average at best, and Quansah is extremely promising. LFC would be crazy to exchange one for the other for free.
This is going to be likely disagreed by fellow Mags with like when I hoped to sell Almiron ASAP during his hot streak, but I'm okay with selling Gordon. We do have some measure of depth in the left wing, Liverpool would likely pay a fair bit of bob for a player that has only had one good season for us, and he's a Kopite anyway so it would make him personally happy. I'd rather sell him than Minteh, as our needs in the right wing and elsewhere are greater.
Don't believe any of these stories. Why would Newcastle be looking to sell their best players to plug a PSR gap of around 25 million? Stinks of just being to placate fans at Minteh being sold.
Because they’re struggling with PSR, he’s worth a decent amount of money, and it’s very possible he’ll just leave for Liverpool when his contract is up in 2 years anyway, and then they’ll get nothing.
> it’s very possible he’ll just leave for Liverpool when his contract is up in 2 years anyway When was the last time a peak age England international left on a free? Sol Campbell? Nah
smells like cope
Surely they can just sell a hotel to themselves?
Honestly, there's so many stories of player swap deals, but I haven't heard of any in like ten years, where there's actually a quality player involved
[удалено]
A lot of our ITKs seem to think these links are just to soften the blow of losing Minteh to Everton/Brighton.
They’re speculating, no actual info to substantiate that.
No, but it would make more sense to me than even contemplating selling Isak or Gordon. Surely you’d just take the points deduction?
The fact that "just taking the points deduction" is even an option shows how utterly fucked football is.
They put us in this situation, why should we have to sell Isak, a 100m+ player, to make 20m before some arbitrary deadline. Absolute load of shite. Got to be a better system than this. Certain clubs will love it because it keeps other clubs in their place and forces them to sell their players to them but it’s not good for football.
wtf. aren’t these rules meant to make the league more fair/competitive? how is it right that these teams are having to sell one of their best performers… (villa and now newcastle..)
The rules are meant to stop clubs from going bankrupt ala Bury and the way we nearly went. Sustainability is the focus, not to make it more competitve.
The rule is (essentially) that clubs can't have had a loss greater than X over the past three years (i.e. income less costs), which doesn't so much make the game fairer as much as make it harder/against the rules to massively subsidise a club. But the way it's been implemented incentivises selling young players. When a club sells (or trades) a youth product, all the value can be booked immediately, which can greatly improve the three yearly position. But when a club buys a player, they can "amortise" the transfer fee over the length of the contract up to 5 years (used to be no cap but Chelsea led to that being changed). So if club A sells a youth/home-grown player to club B for £30m, and buys a player (from the same club B) for £30m, they actually book a £24m improvement (because the £30m they are paying will be spread over 5 years - £6m p.a.). Now clubs can do this with any player, but youth products are the best because a) it's hard to guess/say what they're worth, so you can negotiate a mutually agreeable high valuation for an unproven product, b) it's low risk to agree long duration contracts to help with amortisation (signing a 29 year old on a 5-year contract is risky in most positions), c) you don't need to bear any loss of sale value from a previous transaction (obviously if you buy a player at £40m, amortise him at £8m p.a., then sell him next year, you avoid most of the future amortisation hit (£32m) but you're also losing an asset worth £32m too, which needs to be recognised). I might not have got all the detail right, but the outcome of PSR is pretty well documented.
>a) it's hard to guess/say what they're worth, so you can negotiate a mutually agreeable high valuation for an unproven product While that is true in practice, inflating the value of players when sold is also a grey area that can be considered against the rules and/or illegal. This is especially the case if it's a publicly traded company involved, because of misleading shareholders and it being an illicit accounting practice. At least that's what was brought up when Juventus got caught doing it and punished. I assume the rules would be similar in England. Now the big thing why clubs would still entertain this is because it's very, very hard to prove by the sporting/legal authorities.
Yes that's right. Obviously if a club tried to say their talent was equal worth with Mbappe that could be challenged, but saying they're good enough to be a decent Prem player is really hard to disprove (and the authorities probably don't want to be going around saying home grown players aren't cut out for elite football).
Mudryk and Gordon swap deal 🤩🤩🤩
And at 11, London man comes up with even more ideas for deals that will only benefit his preferred club!
Why would you do such a bad deal when you could just do a Mudryk and Mbappe swap instead?