Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Bradwell canary

Maddison to Spurs....

Recommended Posts

Just hope we have got a great sell on clause!! Would be a great fit there.

always felt he would end up at a top top club.

 

 

 

Tottenham will likely have to hand over a sizeable portion of the £70m plus their run to the showpiece occasion in Madrid will net them if they are to snare Maddison.

The Mirror claim Leicester will be asking for substantially more than the £22.5m they gave Norwich for the 22-year-old last summer.

Maddison scored seven goals and provided seven assists in 36 Premier League appearances for Leicester after heading to the King Power Stadium.

And his performances have caught the eye of Pochettino, who is facing the prospect of losing Christian Eriksen to Real Madrid.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had the chance to sign him last summer and they turned it down. Can’t see why they would change their mind now. 

Also, they have just bid £50m for Lo Celso who plays in the same position.

Was told that Leicester wouldn’t mind selling Maddison as he doesn’t really fit Bredan’s preferred system, he’s been played on the wing quite a few times to accommodate others, and they feel Harvey Barnes could be better suited for them. Also they want to sign Tielemens who is going to cost a lot and does a similar job to Maddison. This could be Leicester trying to drum up some interest from a few clubs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bradwell canary said:

Just hope we have got a great sell on clause!!

Coventry had a 15% on any profit sell on clause. Which I suspect maybe subject to the vagaries on the adds on City could earn.

Odd how now we are in line for a £130m plus season this no longer is so important.

It's Coventry I feel sorry for, having seen their brightest youngster 'snatched' from them for relative peanuts now having to watch both City and Leicester make the kind of money that would solve all their problems.

A real example of the have and have nots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a pure footballing perspective it is a good fit. Thinking back to past play makers at spurs - Gaza, Hoddle ... he’s got that potential. Now he just needs to record a God-awful pop-song!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He would be a decent signing for them and a good move for him. They have lacked a bit of creativity at times and if Eriksen does go they’ll need two creative types imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Had the chance to sign him last summer and they turned it down. Can’t see why they would change their mind now. 

Because he's had an excellent season in the Premier League?

I generally trust your opinion on players but I feel like you've got a bit of a blind spot with Maddison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasnt Maddison created more opportunities than any other player in the prem this past season? At midtable Leicester?

Can see why bigger clubs would now be considering him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s always a question mark whether a champs player can make the step up, and Madders has shown that now, a good fit for Spurs imo. No surprise if a top 6 club is now interested and Leicester decide to cash in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bill said:

Coventry had a 15% on any profit sell on clause. Which I suspect maybe subject to the vagaries on the adds on City could earn.

Odd how now we are in line for a £130m plus season this no longer is so important.

It's Coventry I feel sorry for, having seen their brightest youngster 'snatched' from them for relative peanuts now having to watch both City and Leicester make the kind of money that would solve all their problems.

A real example of the have and have nots.

Sorry Bill,

But Coventry is NOT one of the clubs I feel sorry for. The shenanigans with them and Everton still rankles! 😡

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i imagine Tottenham only Turned him down as he was still a bit of a gamble and would not have got any game time , Now he has proven he can a top premier player , Can not have dele Ali and Eriksen in the same team though someone must be going 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/05/2019 at 19:11, Bill said:

Coventry had a 15% on any profit sell on clause. Which I suspect maybe subject to the vagaries on the adds on City could earn.

Odd how now we are in line for a £130m plus season this no longer is so important.

It's Coventry I feel sorry for, having seen their brightest youngster 'snatched' from them for relative peanuts now having to watch both City and Leicester make the kind of money that would solve all their problems.

A real example of the have and have nots.

Maybe I'm being thick on this or misreading but how can we still owe Coventry more money if we now make a profit from Leicester selling Maddison? 

Surely the Coventry benefit was within the value for what we had sold Maddison to Leicester for? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

Maybe I'm being thick on this or misreading but how can we still owe Coventry more money if we now make a profit from Leicester selling Maddison? 

Surely the Coventry benefit was within the value for what we had sold Maddison to Leicester for? 

Norwich will owe a percentage on any profit they make on Maddison. This will cover any future payments Norwich receive for him as well. 

So if Norwich get £2m from Leicester should Maddison be sold in the future, for example, a percentage of that would go to Coventry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Norwich will owe a percentage on any profit they make on Maddison. This will cover any future payments Norwich receive for him as well. 

So if Norwich get £2m from Leicester should Maddison be sold in the future, for example, a percentage of that would go to Coventry. 

Do those kind of contractual agreements usually have a time limitation, I.e after 3 years it no longer applies? I suppose that's irrelevant anyway as even if so the same would then apply to us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Norwich will owe a percentage on any profit they make on Maddison. This will cover any future payments Norwich receive for him as well. 

So if Norwich get £2m from Leicester should Maddison be sold in the future, for example, a percentage of that would go to Coventry. 

Really? 

I'm mates with an ex NCFC member of staff and he'd always suggested that these kind of deals were based on the first time a player was moved on not based on then subsequent transfers, ie Coventry benefited from Norwich selling Maddison to Leicester but that's where there benefit stops?! 

Maybe the Maddison deal was different and some on here seem to have in depth knowledge of the Maddison from Coventry deal. 

Must make accounting for all these permutations a nightmare to keep up with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it's standard practice, in part it I'll be to stop unscrupulous chairmen selling a player for a reduced fee with a huge sell on clause to prevent having to share the profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

I believe it's standard practice, in part it I'll be to stop unscrupulous chairmen selling a player for a reduced fee with a huge sell on clause to prevent having to share the profits.

That's business suicide, let's say Webber is one of those do we think he'd take £10m (as an example) and put in a larger sell on clause, what would have happened had Maddison suffered a career ending injury, we'd have lost out on £14m!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

Really? 

I'm mates with an ex NCFC member of staff and he'd always suggested that these kind of deals were based on the first time a player was moved on not based on then subsequent transfers, ie Coventry benefited from Norwich selling Maddison to Leicester but that's where there benefit stops?! 

Maybe the Maddison deal was different and some on here seem to have in depth knowledge of the Maddison from Coventry deal. 

Must make accounting for all these permutations a nightmare to keep up with. 

It’s pretty standard from what I’ve seen. Coventry are owed a percentage of the profit Norwich make. This will include a slice of all the monthly payments Leicester make and any performance related bonuses. 

If Leicester sold to Tottenham, who in turn sold to Man U at a profit, and all the relevant clauses were in place, then it the due payments will continue to filter down the clubs. 

Generally isn’t a time limit on these things and in reality it doesn’t usually get too complicated - as you don’t normally see players move multiple times with these clauses in place. 

On top of these negotiated clauses - there is also the FIFA enforced ‘solidarity payments’ which means for every year a player is with a club before they turn 23 they are due some money from the transfer fee - this is due every time the player is transferred. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

 

On top of these negotiated clauses - there is also the FIFA enforced ‘solidarity payments’ which means for every year a player is with a club before they turn 23 they are due some money from the transfer fee - this is due every time the player is transferred. 

Solidarity payments are triggered on international transfers only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Man City also interested for 60 mil according to FootballInsider (no idea how reliable that is!).

Man City vs Spurs  would be a tough decision for him - he’d no doubt learn a lot from Guardiola and would probably win more at City but he’d likely be a rotation player in that squad (especially when you remember De Bruyne was out for half of this season). At Spurs he’d probably get more first team game time, still going to be playin European competition but probably not going to be winnin any league titles for a few years at least. 

Edited by Aggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/05/2019 at 21:16, ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) said:

Sorry Bill,

But Coventry is NOT one of the clubs I feel sorry for. The shenanigans with them and Everton still rankles! 😡

That wasn't Coventry's fault, you can't blame them for trying to win every game. It was the football league's fault for allowing games to be staggered towards the end of the season and carry on after the season should have finished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/06/2019 at 15:10, K Lo said:

That wasn't Coventry's fault, you can't blame them for trying to win every game. It was the football league's fault for allowing games to be staggered towards the end of the season and carry on after the season should have finished.

Fair point! And Everton’s fault!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

According to the Pink Un report today we have a 15% sell on clause and we'll get £5-6m if the selling price is £60m 🙈. Archant maths. 🤣

Edited by spencer 1970

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, spencer 1970 said:

According to the Pink Un report today we have a 15% sell on clause and we'll get £5-6m if the selling price is £60m 🙈. Archant maths. 🤣

No, they are correct as any sell on clause will be on the profit made.

So if he goes for £60m we'd get our 15% of the £35/40m profit- so about £5-6m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's 15% of the profit on the player (£35m, if he sells for £60m), then we'd be due £5.25m. Coventry would be due a percentage of that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spencer 1970 said:

According to the Pink Un report today we have a 15% sell on clause and we'll get £5-6m if the selling price is £60m 🙈. Archant maths. 🤣

Seems roughly right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Independent reporting the Man Utd are now interested. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ec-p said:

Independent reporting the Man Utd are now interested. 

Feels like this has some legs- when it gets out of the Sun and into some of the more reputable papers I start to give a rumour a bit more credence.

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  

×