Spursalot
Jimmy McCormick
ok, so lets not sell Modric, then we wont lose out financially at all.
I'm perfectly happy with selling Modric, just on our own terms.
I think if they offered something like 38m Levy would take it.
ok, so lets not sell Modric, then we wont lose out financially at all.
All transfers come with a risk. We know Modric is effective in our team, Moutinho might not. There are loads of apparently good transfers that don't work out and its often not clear why. Moutinho's familiarity with AVB is a plus and reduces the risk, but we still don't know it will work.
If we had a choice of Modric or Moutinho playing for us for the next few years, Modric is by far the safer choice. That safety has to be worth more than £2m.
Personally I like the Liverpool method used for Torres and Carroll. We want Moutinho and £10m for Modric. If Moutinho costs £31m, then demand £41m from Madrid, if only £25m then let Modric go for £35m, and so on. I doubt we can link the deals, but if we can get Moutinho for less we can reduce the asking price for Modric to get the deal done.
Your arrogance is breathtaking. Some advice. Stop talking in riddles, stop being overbearingly rude to everyone and start making your point clearly so as it's a discussion people can actually have.
I think that was a terrible method to be honest. Because they decided to work it like that, they get lumbered with a player that will never, ever be worth that amount of money, and who no club will come close to paying anything like that amount to sign him if they want to sell him. So considering they were buying potential, in the fairly likely event that he doesn't live up to that potential that are stuck with either a humoungous loss or a player that simply isn't worth the ridiculous amount paid for him.
Really can't get on board with praising a Liverpool transfer deal from the last year or so. That method ignores that if they got a better deal for Carroll then they could have spent money in other areas of the squad too, rather than simply saying they wanted to make £15m on that deal alone.
I think if we sell Modric, we do it for the best price we can get, and if we sign Moutinho, we do it for the best price. And we do it as soon as possible so as to not disrupt our season. I understand that it can help hurry up the transfer process, but the risk of massively overpaying for a player that might fail that you are then stuck with is too great IMO.
Some advice? Please --> :lol:
Steff, I don't know how to break this to you, but your opinion - never mind your advice - ranks very low to me. And as for "talking in riddles", why don't you entertain us all: tell us another wonderfully convoluted story, the details of which only the all-knowing Steff is privy to?
I'm very 'plain English' me, Steff; no riddles or crosswords to decipher. If you can't see that, then I'd suggest the problem lays somewhat closer to home, dear boy. But that's understandable, given that - in almost every single post - you seem utterly at pains, almost obsessed, with presenting yourself as this all-knowing ITK; carried away on the waves of your own, often vivid, imagination. But each to their own.
Leeds is an intelligent gent (...albeit a Tory 8-[) - he has no problem understanding my position, so why are you struggling?
I think that was a terrible method to be honest. Because they decided to work it like that, they get lumbered with a player that will never, ever be worth that amount of money, and who no club will come close to paying anything like that amount to sign him if they want to sell him. So considering they were buying potential, in the fairly likely event that he doesn't live up to that potential that are stuck with either a humoungous loss or a player that simply isn't worth the ridiculous amount paid for him.
Really can't get on board with praising a Liverpool transfer deal from the last year or so. That method ignores that if they got a better deal for Carroll then they could have spent money in other areas of the squad too, rather than simply saying they wanted to make £15m on that deal alone.
I think if we sell Modric, we do it for the best price we can get, and if we sign Moutinho, we do it for the best price. And we do it as soon as possible so as to not disrupt our season. I understand that it can help hurry up the transfer process, but the risk of massively overpaying for a player that might fail that you are then stuck with is too great IMO.
I dont imagine that was there logic at all to be honest. Do you really think their method of valuing Carroll was "Whatever we get for Torres - £15m"? I imagine it would have been somewhat different to that.
I would think the logic was more "Sell Torres for as much as possible, get Carroll (#1 target) for as little as possible" with the caveat they would go as high as required because they really wanted him and could afford it.
presenting yourself as this all-knowing ITK; carried away on the waves of your own, often vivid, imagination.
What do you mean? He only claimed that Modric was in a headlock somewhere in the middle of this lot, being forced to leave Spurs.......but NOT forced to hand in a transfer request, as the mob though that was a bit disrepectful to the fans.
View attachment 821
It's easy to see Carroll as a failure and dismiss the method, but the logic holds up. They made the decision that they thought Torres was worth £15m more than Carroll and they got the deal they wanted. Now, in hindsight, it looks crazy to buy Carroll for £35m, but that's only part of the equation. £50m for Torres looks a pretty bad decision too. However, if the deal had been £25m for Torres and £10m for Carroll the evaluation of the deals in hindsight would be different, although for Liverpool it would be exactly the same outcome. Clearly Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Chelsea get different results, but the point is the logic of Liverpool's decision.
I dont imagine that was there logic at all to be honest. Do you really think their method of valuing Carroll was "Whatever we get for Torres - £15m"? I imagine it would have been somewhat different to that.
I would think the logic was more "Sell Torres for as much as possible, get Carroll (#1 target) for as little as possible" with the caveat they would go as high as required because they really wanted him and could afford it.
I still think it is terrible.
If Chelsea want to pay £50m for Torres, then Liverpool could have got 3 good strikers for that, all of them would have done at least as well as Carroll and at least 2 of them would have ended up doing a lot better. Or, they could have bought 2 strikers and got a good right winger in. Or strengthened any number of other areas.
I get the logic, but I just find it stupid. Yes they got Carroll, they got the deal done, but what then? A player that is nowhere near close to ever being anywhere near £35m is on their books. So he has to be an absolutely rip roaring success, otherwise he's a failure. And what if they want to sell him? They would have to accept massive loss when they could have put that money into other areas of the team.
Not on the transfer deadline day. They didn't want to enter the season without a striker to replace Torres. Anyone they would have bought would have had a massively inflated price..
Bit silly really. Why would the Bosnian Mafia even ask him to hand in a transfer request and lose his loyalty bonus when he would clearly like a cut of it.