• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Nico Zaniolo

Finney Is Back said:
Personally I think it is pretty much impossible to prove. I think it could be perfectly reasonable to decide that Osimhen was worth €71m and €20m for four young players also isn't necessarily outside the bounds of a realistic figure. It could also be that the best deal Lille could get from another club was (e.g) €50m and so getting €51m and 4 players was a better deal for them. I think it's quite dangerous when regulatory bodies start trying to decide what something very hard to value is worth.
Click to expand...
That’s the case against Juve
 
Finney Is Back said:
Personally I think it is pretty much impossible to prove. I think it could be perfectly reasonable to decide that Osimhen was worth €71m and €20m for four young players also isn't necessarily outside the bounds of a realistic figure. It could also be that the best deal Lille could get from another club was (e.g) €50m and so getting €51m and 4 players was a better deal for them. I think it's quite dangerous when regulatory bodies start trying to decide what something very hard to value is worth.
Click to expand...

Indeed, how much were Ndombele and Sanchez worth really? We we definitely overpaid? But did we do it for some unknown nefarious reason?
 
NaijaSpurs said:
Indeed, how much were Ndombele and Sanchez worth really? We we definitely overpaid? But did we do it for some unknown nefarious reason?
Click to expand...
In the case of Sanchez maybe so we could pay in installments, he also had a 6 year contract which would help with the current fans favourite word amortisation.

Ndombele at the time didn't seem unreasonable, I'd say Pepe was a more outlandish fee for example.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
It’s very different buying international player who have excelled in Europe to claiming some pub players are worth £20m
Click to expand...

Impossible to value though, if a club says x then its x if thats how they value them. Its like putting clauses in contracts before a player has even played a game, how do you get to that figure, its speculative, so if someone comes in, pays the inflated fee in the clause, is that a con? Hard to prove

Also for a club, say for this example Lille, for them to accept the inflated price and it to be a con, whats in it for them?
 
Grays_1890 said:
Impossible to value though, if a club says x then its x if thats how they value them. Its like putting clauses in contracts before a player has even played a game, how do you get to that figure, its speculative, so if someone comes in, pays the inflated fee in the clause, is that a con? Hard to prove

Also for a club, say for this example Lille, for them to accept the inflated price and it to be a con, whats in it for them?
Click to expand...
Booking a higher overall sale price for Osimhen and then amortising the 20m spend on the 4 new players at (e.g) a combined 5m per year (assuming they brought them in on 4 year contracts) Is what’s in it for Lille.

If Lille were falling the wrong side of FFP then there is a decent gain for them in doing this (though I have no idea on where they were against FFP)

The difficulty is proving this of course. I think the only way there is a case is if there is evidence that Lille wanted 50m for Osimhen but took 70m including 20m of worthless players instead.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Booking a higher overall sale price for Osimhen and then amortising the 20m spend on the 4 new players at (e.g) a combined 5m per year (assuming they brought them in on 4 year contracts) Is what’s in it for Lille.

If Lille were falling the wrong side of FFP then there is a decent gain for them in doing this (though I have no idea on where they were against FFP)
Click to expand...

Ahhh ok get ya, still hard to prove I suppose because both sides can just claim away that it was their values. There is nothing out there to tell clubs what they should and should not sell players for....other than Spurs twitter haha
 
Grays_1890 said:
Ahhh ok get ya, still hard to prove I suppose because both sides can just claim away that it was their values. There is nothing out there to tell clubs what they should and should not sell players for....other than Spurs twitter haha
Click to expand...

Unless like it seems with juve they have wiretaps of the conversation. Where they agreed to raise the value of the players to get around ffp. Napoli isn't publicly listed though so i'm not sure they will.
 
kb 1984 said:
I think the board wanted a nice few days in Rome he was never going to Bournemouth
Click to expand...

I think he will end up there. Short contract and relegation clause. But Roma will say there or rot in the stiffs, and Bournemouth will offer something like double his wages. Roma aren't going to lose money and do Milan a favour.
 
Last edited:
Grays_1890 said:
Impossible to value though, if a club says x then its x if thats how they value them. Its like putting clauses in contracts before a player has even played a game, how do you get to that figure, its speculative, so if someone comes in, pays the inflated fee in the clause, is that a con? Hard to prove

Also for a club, say for this example Lille, for them to accept the inflated price and it to be a con, whats in it for them?
Click to expand...
I fully agree
But the “authorities” have put a value on those players, a much lower one
I’d hate to see Napoli punished this season as they have IMO been the best side in Europe
 
Given that we’ve been linked to Zaniolo for several years now it’s hard to think we’d turn down the chance for €30m
 
were we to get him and make Danjuma permanent in the summer that'd give us a pretty stacked attack for next season, 6 players of quality for each of the 3 positions.

2 CBs & a GK (assuming Porro signs this window) would then give us a the makings of a real strong squad (on paper) for 23/24
 
billyiddo said:
were we to get him and make Danjuma permanent in the summer that'd give us a pretty stacked attack for next season, 6 players of quality for each of the 3 positions.

2 CBs & a GK (assuming Porro signs this window) would then give us a the makings of a real strong squad (on paper) for 23/24
Click to expand...
We'd lack balance though - Son, Danjuma and Zaniolo are all quite similar, whereas Kulusevski is the only passer in there. We could really do with at least one more lock picker (if that's not going to be Gil)
 
Gutter Boy said:
We'd lack balance though - Son, Danjuma and Zaniolo are all quite similar, whereas Kulusevski is the only passer in there. We could really do with at least one more lock picker (if that's not going to be Gil)
Click to expand...
Still find it weird that you consider Gill to be such a player? I don’t think he would get a start for any more than 2 or 3 teams in the PL and perhaps even none.
 
Gutter Boy said:
We'd lack balance though - Son, Danjuma and Zaniolo are all quite similar, whereas Kulusevski is the only passer in there. We could really do with at least one more lock picker (if that's not going to be Gil)
Click to expand...

Not sure that I'd class Son/Danjuma as being that similar to Zaniolo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back