Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Keith Scott

Maddison to be sold before window shuts

Recommended Posts

kirku wrote the following post at 27/01/2018 6:06 PM:

You''d rather keep him than have 6 £8m players in the team? I certainly wouldn''t.

Utterly irrelevant as we won’t replace him with 6 £8 million players. The wages alone that would come with that would cripple the club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The real crime is that we didn''t give him a go last season instead of shipping him out to Aberdeen the moment he arrived.Who knows what might have happened if we had only had the balls to try him here first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We were clearly in hypothetical dreamland, seeing as the premise was receiving £50m for him..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="kirku"]We were clearly in hypothetical dreamland, seeing as the premise was receiving £50m for him..[/quote]

Maddison, is the best prospect we have had for as long as I can remember, we all know that he wont stay here, as much as we would want him to, they will sell him, maybe not in this window, fingers crossed, but the summer definitely.

In today''s market, a player of his potential, age, goal scoring capability from midfield, and being English, no discussions with any club should start at less than 30 Million, with addons, loan back, appearances, sell on clause, full international caps. It''s good while it lasts..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
£30m+ for a player with 1 (?) under-21 cap, 0 Premiership minutes and half a season of Championship form?

As I said, dreamland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Making Plans"]The real crime is that we didn''t give him a go last season instead of shipping him out to Aberdeen the moment he arrived.Who knows what might have happened if we had only had the balls to try him here first[/quote]

Or the loan did him the world of good, toughened him up a bit, and helped him on his way to being the player we saw today. I wasn’t the biggest fan of AN but come on.

But it’s Anything to beat the club with I suppose. 🙃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He has a long contract with us, that puts us in a very strong position. That''s where i like my Club to be. I have no desire to see him go.From a coaches point of view , the team has progressed well overall when you consider the changes this season. He is very much part of this.We have already met this seasons financial targets/predictions/whatever. I believe that we are building,not dismantling. The rest is conjecture.I''m with Lakey as , at the moment, i hear no fat lady singing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Making Plans"]The real crime is that we didn''t give him a go last season instead of shipping him out to Aberdeen the moment he arrived.Who knows what might have happened if we had only had the balls to try him here first[/quote]

Lol did we not send him up to Scotland to toughen him up ? Looks like it worked. Why not praise our scouts and coaches for getting a player to come here for next to nothing and is now worth as much as £20m possibly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the players we have spent about £8m on. A right mixed bag right there!

Once Maddison goes, I don''t think we''ll see as good a player playing for us for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tettey''s Jig,

I give you Jamal Lewis and Angus Gunn, but I suspect neither will be here long term!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fulham knocked back £15m for Tom Cairney if Sky Sports are to be believed and told West Ham to stop wasting their time as they wouldn''t sell him for £40mill. Cairney and his agent don''t like it but have accepted it. Cairney in similar contract situ to Maddison.
That''s exactly what we should do with Maddison during this window. Hold on to him until the summer and sell then for £20m+ to Spurs or Liverpool with a caveat that we get him back on loan for next season. I think that kind of deal would suit all parties to be honest, and what the board will be looking to strike if they have any sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="kick it off"]Fulham knocked back £15m for Tom Cairney if Sky Sports are to be believed and told West Ham to stop wasting their time as they wouldn''t sell him for £40mill. Cairney and his agent don''t like it but have accepted it. Cairney in similar contract situ to Maddison.
That''s exactly what we should do with Maddison during this window. Hold on to him until the summer and sell then for £20m+ to Spurs or Liverpool with a caveat that we get him back on loan for next season. I think that kind of deal would suit all parties to be honest, and what the board will be looking to strike if they have any sense.
[/quote]

And this how we should have also been with Pritchard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
If a player is under contract then unless we are desparate for money, and I assume we haven''t reached that point, we are entitled to ask what we want for Maddison.

If it frightens others away, so be it, he remains our player. I am positive the lad can hold on for another 3 months ( 3 months of being a big fish and enhancing his reputation) or so before everyone sits down and works out an agreement that suits all concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="kick it off"]Fulham knocked back £15m for Tom Cairney if Sky Sports are to be believed and told West Ham to stop wasting their time as they wouldn''t sell him for £40mill. Cairney and his agent don''t like it but have accepted it. Cairney in similar contract situ to Maddison.
That''s exactly what we should do with Maddison during this window. Hold on to him until the summer and sell then for £20m+ to Spurs or Liverpool with a caveat that we get him back on loan for next season. I think that kind of deal would suit all parties to be honest, and what the board will be looking to strike if they have any sense.
[/quote]

And this how we should have also been with Pritchard.[/quote]Huddersfield would never have agreed to loaning Pritchard back, because they wanted him straight away to avoid getting relegated. Unless you mean we shouldn''t have sold Pritchard at all. In that case I assume we would have had to sell someone else this winter, with Maddison being the obvious candidate. And of the two in the here and now it made more sense to offload Pritchard, since Maddison''s value is likely to appreciate more between now and the summer than Pritchard''s would have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="kick it off"]Fulham knocked back £15m for Tom Cairney if Sky Sports are to be believed and told West Ham to stop wasting their time as they wouldn''t sell him for £40mill. Cairney and his agent don''t like it but have accepted it. Cairney in similar contract situ to Maddison.
That''s exactly what we should do with Maddison during this window. Hold on to him until the summer and sell then for £20m+ to Spurs or Liverpool with a caveat that we get him back on loan for next season. I think that kind of deal would suit all parties to be honest, and what the board will be looking to strike if they have any sense.
[/quote]

And this how we should have also been with Pritchard.[/quote]lol @ trying to compare our situation to Fulham... 🤦‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="kick it off"]Fulham knocked back £15m for Tom Cairney if Sky Sports are to be believed and told West Ham to stop wasting their time as they wouldn''t sell him for £40mill. Cairney and his agent don''t like it but have accepted it. Cairney in similar contract situ to Maddison.
That''s exactly what we should do with Maddison during this window. Hold on to him until the summer and sell then for £20m+ to Spurs or Liverpool with a caveat that we get him back on loan for next season. I think that kind of deal would suit all parties to be honest, and what the board will be looking to strike if they have any sense.
[/quote]

And this how we should have also been with Pritchard.[/quote]Huddersfield would never have agreed to loaning Pritchard back, because they wanted him straight away to avoid getting relegated. Unless you mean we shouldn''t have sold Pritchard at all. In that case I assume we would have had to sell someone else this winter, with Maddison being the obvious candidate. And of the two in the here and now it made more sense to offload Pritchard, since Maddison''s value is likely to appreciate more between now and the summer than Pritchard''s would have done.[/quote]

No, the club said we didn''t need to sell anyone this winter. Or was that a lie?

Keeping Pritchard would have massively improved our chances of a late play off push. It would have been shown ambition to hold on to him for the rest of the season. Pritchard''s value wouldn''t have depreciated.

Any way I''m fighting a losing battle with this one. The majority support selling prised assets at the minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Purple didn’t say that Pritchsrd’s value would depreciate-he said it would appreciate less than Maddison’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, let''s not forget wages. An £8million player from Spurs is almost certainly on far higher wages than a £3.5m player from Coventry. All around it actually made sense to sell Pritchard in this window, it''s just a shame we didn''t hold out for a little bit more (but then taking the early deal has allowed us to get our business done in a calm manner which should save money).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="cornish sam"]Also, let''s not forget wages. An £8million player from Spurs is almost certainly on far higher wages than a £3.5m player from Coventry. All around it actually made sense to sell Pritchard in this window, it''s just a shame we didn''t hold out for a little bit more (but then taking the early deal has allowed us to get our business done in a calm manner which should save money).[/quote]

It''s all about risk reward balance. I certainly don''t believe it made ''sense'' to sell now. Our chances of a playoff place have all but gone with the sale of Pritchard.

Had we kept him and not gone up... well we''d have still got a similar transfer fee but paid out for 5 months wages. 5 months for a shot at the play offs is more than worth the risk IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="lincoln canary"][quote user="kick it off"]Fulham knocked back £15m for Tom Cairney if Sky Sports are to be believed and told West Ham to stop wasting their time as they wouldn''t sell him for £40mill. Cairney and his agent don''t like it but have accepted it. Cairney in similar contract situ to Maddison.
That''s exactly what we should do with Maddison during this window. Hold on to him until the summer and sell then for £20m+ to Spurs or Liverpool with a caveat that we get him back on loan for next season. I think that kind of deal would suit all parties to be honest, and what the board will be looking to strike if they have any sense.
[/quote]

And this how we should have also been with Pritchard.[/quote]Huddersfield would never have agreed to loaning Pritchard back, because they wanted him straight away to avoid getting relegated. Unless you mean we shouldn''t have sold Pritchard at all. In that case I assume we would have had to sell someone else this winter, with Maddison being the obvious candidate. And of the two in the here and now it made more sense to offload Pritchard, since Maddison''s value is likely to appreciate more between now and the summer than Pritchard''s would have done.[/quote]

No, the club said we didn''t need to sell anyone this winter. Or was that a lie?

Keeping Pritchard would have massively improved our chances of a late play off push. It would have been shown ambition to hold on to him for the rest of the season. Pritchard''s value wouldn''t have depreciated.

Any way I''m fighting a losing battle with this one. The majority support selling prised assets at the minute.[/quote]Webber said there was no financial pressure to sell but in reality it was always likely we would want to get one high-earner off our books this winter rather than potentially selling Pritchard and Maddison in the summer. I think there may be a tax advantage to splitting those deals up in this way, but it also certainly gave us some money to spend on Hernandez and Srbeny now. And I didn''t say Pritchard''s value would depreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes Lincoln, it is all about risk reward balance. However, our chances of playoffs were slim even with Pritchard here, we were still having the same problems breaking down teams at home with him as without him so whilst our chances of playoffs has gone down it''s gone from (e.g) 10% to 5%. Offset that with the fact we''ve been able to make some promising signing who now have half a season to get used to the team and surroundings and have 5 months savings of (e.g. again) £15k pw I think that in hindsight it does make sense.

AS you say though, this is all in our opinions and based on postings on here my opinion very rarely aligns with yours (not a dig, just a statement of fact).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...