Transfer Rumour Thread Season 2021/22

[horsefly 4,287]

2 minutes ago, Badger said:

It might be considered worth it though. From memory, I think we paid a 2 million pound loan fee for Farhman (spelling?) + hefty wages. Unless they have their eyes on a centre-back, we could use the signing on fee as the equivalent of a loan fee + part-subsidise the wages. I don't think he would cost any more than Farhman was reported to have done.

Yep I think that's precisely the issue. If we can't buy better then someone like Cahill on big wages would probably be worth a punt (assuming his attitude ir right and he's not just seeking another year's lucrative wages). Having said that, if he is a free agent isn't he able to join the club at any stage? If so I'd rather wait and see what happens up to the deadline in his case.

[Monty13 2,229]

43 minutes ago, horsefly said:

The rumours I've seen are of £50,000+, but I wouldn't pretend to have any authorative info on that. From the way Farke has been speaking it suggests there is money available for a couple of transfers and a loan. If Cahill comes he would certainly be considered as one of the transfers, whether that would be good or bad I have no idea (I would like to see what other options at CB we are considering to judge that).

Weren’t the rumours he turned down 30k at Palace, he may want 50k but doubt he’ll get it if there’s not much interest in the PL.

Back of a fag packet maths. A one year deal in the 35-40 range would cost us approx 2 million. Say 3-3.5 million all in for a agent and signing on fees.

That still seems a good low risk deal for me if we don’t have the funds to go spend 5-10 million in transfer fees on someone who can compete with Gibson and Hanley, an upgrade would cost us even more and then there’s similar wages to pay.

Edited August 15, 2021 by Monty13

[horsefly 4,287]

1 minute ago, Monty13 said:

Weren’t the rumours he turned down 30k at Palace, he may want 50k but doubt he’ll get it if there’s not much interest in the PL.

Back of a fag packet maths. A one year deal in the 35-40 range would cost us approx 2 million. Say 3-3.5 million all in for a agent and signing on fees.

That still seems a good low risk deal for me if we don’t have the funds to go spend 5-10 million in transfer fees on someone who can compete with Gibson and Hanley, an upgrade would cost us even more and then there’s similar wages to pay.

That's what nags at me, if Palace don't think he's worth hanging on to then what message does that send out? However, I'm sure Farke will have a very clear view of the matter, and time will tell whether he considers him a genuine option.

[Monty13 2,229]

2 minutes ago, horsefly said:

That's what nags at me, if Palace don't think he's worth hanging on to then what message does that send out? However, I'm sure Farke will have a very clear view of the matter, and time will tell whether he considers him a genuine option.

But they did apparently, just not at the wage levels Cahill wanted. Looking at transfer market looks like Palace have 6 senior CBs so can understand why they didn’t.

[horsefly 4,287]

2 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

But they did apparently, just not at the wage levels Cahill wanted. Looking at transfer market looks like Palace have 6 senior CBs so can understand why they didn’t.

Yes, but that is the point, they didn't value his potential contribution enough to warrant paying anything like his previous wage. With a few notable exceptions, City have a bit of a poor record for giving players at the close of their careers an extended year of wages with little to show for the outlay. But as I said before, I have no idea about Cahill's current abilities or mindset, but I bet Farke is pretty clued up so will be happy with what ever judgement he makes in Cahill's case.

[Badger 2,405]

27 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Having said that, if he is a free agent isn't he able to join the club at any stage? If so I'd rather wait and see what happens up to the deadline in his case.

I believe that's the case.

[Badger 2,405]

21 minutes ago, horsefly said:

That's what nags at me, if Palace don't think he's worth hanging on to then what message does that send out? However, I'm sure Farke will have a very clear view of the matter, and time will tell whether he considers him a genuine option.

I know that some posters on here are in a state of high sexual excitement, over Crystal Palace's "investments", but the truth is it they got themselves into a bit of a muddle over the wage bill. This is why they have had to let several decent players leave.

They got themselves into a situation where they had an ageing squad on high wages. Thus they have let several of them go and have bought younger players to replace them, with what I suspect is a director's loan. 

It is a gamble they had to take, however, as what they were doing was totally unsustainable.

[Monty13 2,229]

20 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Yes, but that is the point, they didn't value his potential contribution enough to warrant paying anything like his previous wage. With a few notable exceptions, City have a bit of a poor record for giving players at the close of their careers an extended year of wages with little to show for the outlay. But as I said before, I have no idea about Cahill's current abilities or mindset, but I bet Farke is pretty clued up so will be happy with what ever judgement he makes in Cahill's case.

Badger has already posted it but it doesn’t make sense to look at Cahill leaving Palace in isolation. It needs to be taken in context with the club, it’s squad and the financial situation.

Cahill may well be worth what he was asking for but not to palace who needed wages reducing and already had plenty of options in that position. Our clubs situation is different.

[horsefly 4,287]

26 minutes ago, Badger said:

I know that some posters on here are in a state of high sexual excitement, over Crystal Palace's "investments", but the truth is it they got themselves into a bit of a muddle over the wage bill. This is why they have had to let several decent players leave.

They got themselves into a situation where they had an ageing squad on high wages. Thus they have let several of them go and have bought younger players to replace them, with what I suspect is a director's loan. 

It is a gamble they had to take, however, as what they were doing was totally unsustainable.

 

16 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

Badger has already posted it but it doesn’t make sense to look at Cahill leaving Palace in isolation. It needs to be taken in context with the club, it’s squad and the financial situation.

Cahill may well be worth what he was asking for but not to palace who needed wages reducing and already had plenty of options in that position. Our clubs situation is different.

Don't disagree with either of you. Just saying that out of the players they decided to let go he was one of them, and that raises many questions. As I said too, I'm trusting Farke on this one as I have no real idea about Cahill's current mindset or ability to perform at the level required. Does anyone know what the average Palace fan's view was about Cahill's departure?

[Alex Moss 2,165]

25 minutes ago, horsefly said:

 

Don't disagree with either of you. Just saying that out of the players they decided to let go he was one of them, and that raises many questions. As I said too, I'm trusting Farke on this one as I have no real idea about Cahill's current mindset or ability to perform at the level required. Does anyone know what the average Palace fan's view was about Cahill's departure?

Got two Palace supporters, one a season ticket holder, at my local, and both are very disappointed Cahill’s been allowed to go, they share the same view that he was very good for them last season, Horsey 👍

[Fuzzar 1,702]

Skipp starting for Spurs today. 

[Monty13 2,229]

16 minutes ago, Fuzzar said:

Skipp starting for Spurs today. 

Yea think we can put this one to bed now.

[Monty13 2,229]

55 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Got two Palace supporters, one a season ticket holder, at my local, and both are very disappointed Cahill’s been allowed to go, they share the same view that he was very good for them last season, Horsey 👍

That’s interesting to hear. I still think he’s exactly what we need personally, just for this season, if the finances work and we think he’s up for it. I’ve no idea whether Webber and Farke are even considering it though, any rumours seem pretty weak. Need a “wide of the mark/not on our radar” from the Pinkun boys.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,680]

I see Cahill is being linked again

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Just now, Monty13 said:

That’s interesting to hear. I still think he’s exactly what we need personally, just for this season, if the finances work and we think he’s up for it. I’ve no idea whether Webber and Farke are even considering it though, any rumours seem pretty weak. Need a “wide of the mark/not on our radar” from the Pinkun boys.

Am in total agreement - we don’t need another promising young CB from another club, we already have that in Andy Omobamidele. A seasoned pro with genuine Premier League experience and quality is what we need I feel. Cahill has looked after himself, and even a 1 year deal would be perfect if it ensured we had the strength and options at the back to ensure survival this season. Then we could push the boat out for next step again. Makes good sense to me, but I’d still hazard a guess that this is just one of those lazy column filling rumours - would be delighted if that wasn’t the case however! 

[Top corner 225]

Seeing as it looks like Skipp won't be returning (as long as he doesn't have a nightmare game today) I'm sure whilst looking at Skipp, we also considered Ethan Ampadu. He back at Chelsea after a season on loan at Sheffield United. Either a loan or buy him. What do we all think? 

Edited August 15, 2021 by Top corner

[Alex Moss 2,165]

3 minutes ago, Top corner said:

Seeing as it looks like Skipp won't be returning (as long as he doesn't have a nightmare game today) I'm sure whilst looking at Skipp, we also considered Ethan Ampadu. He back at Chelsea after a season on loan at Sheffield United. Either a loan or buy him. What do we all think? 

Just said exactly the same thing on another thread funnily enough, TC. Wouldn’t be a loan though, so would have to be a permanent. But everything about him ticks the boxes I feel, and I have had a sneaking suspicion recently that he might just be who we’re looking to sign - just a fun little prediction though!

[chicken 2,604]

36 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

That’s interesting to hear. I still think he’s exactly what we need personally, just for this season, if the finances work and we think he’s up for it. I’ve no idea whether Webber and Farke are even considering it though, any rumours seem pretty weak. Need a “wide of the mark/not on our radar” from the Pinkun boys.

It's from the same idiot at the Sun who was saying we were still keen for Armstrong which later transpired to mean that the offer we had put in at the beginning of the summer was still on the table... 

Literally not worth the time of day listening to him.

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

Can't see his wages remaining that high considering his age and the post-Covid market.

[Badger 2,405]

34 minutes ago, Top corner said:

Seeing as it looks like Skipp won't be returning (as long as he doesn't have a nightmare game today) I'm sure whilst looking at Skipp, we also considered Ethan Ampadu. He back at Chelsea after a season on loan at Sheffield United. Either a loan or buy him. What do we all think? 

I am pretty sure that you cannot loan two players from the same club in the Premier League.

[Monty13 2,229]

7 minutes ago, Badger said:

I am pretty sure that you cannot loan two players from the same club in the Premier League.

Yea this. Any loan won’t be from Chelsea

[Alex Moss 2,165]

The Skipp news today I suppose increases the chances of getting Brandon Williams in, though I can’t see Farke dropping Aarons or Giannoulis so it does seem unlikely Man Utd themselves would see value in such a loan.

[KeiranShikari 1,410]

If Brandon WIlliams was going to happen I thought it would have by now, although I supposose it might be that they're holding out for guarenteed football.

 

[Samwam27 519]

At least the will he/won't he with Skipp is over, and Farke/Webber can now press on with alternate plans, and can maybe press on quickly now the door is clearly closed. 

[WSM 62]

5 hours ago, Badger said:

It might be considered worth it though. From memory, I think we paid a 2 million pound loan fee for Farhman (spelling?) + hefty wages. Unless they have their eyes on a centre-back, we could use the signing on fee as the equivalent of a loan fee + part-subsidise the wages. I don't think he would cost any more than Farhman was reported to have done.

I know for a fact that Amadou and Drmic were on 50k each in the Prem last time

[Capt. Pants 4,202]

Ampadu has 2 years left on his contract. Can we afford £50k a week? Even on a 2 year contract that's around £5m. Plus say £15m transfer.

It would be a good signing but I would be amazed it happens, unless of course either Todd or Max leave.

[Norfolk Dan 308]

2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

Can't see his wages remaining that high considering his age and the post-Covid market.

As he is a free agent, wages are not really the problem. £25-£30k a week... Can be balanced out with signing on fees. 

[Badger 2,405]

15 minutes ago, WSM said:

I know for a fact that Amadou and Drmic were on 50k each in the Prem last time

Thanks.

It doesn't surprise me in the least. Some people on here tend to exaggerate our "financial incapacity." I'm reasonably confident that we could afford to sign Cahill if we wanted him. It could be issues like him wanting a two-year contract, that might possibly scupper a deal. Other than that, IMO it is whether or not we want him, and how much?

[Badger 2,405]

8 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Ampadu has 2 years left on his contract. Can we afford £50k a week? Even on a 2 year contract that's around £5m. Plus say £15m transfer.

It would be a good signing but I would be amazed it happens, unless of course either Todd or Max leave.

I have no idea whether your figures are correct or not. Assuming that they are, I think the biggest is she would be paying a 20-year old 50 grand a week. I suspect this would cause problems with other young members of the squad.

They might expect an established ex-international or somebody with significant experience of higher leagues getting that sort of money, but they  would certainly view with jealousy a fellow "youngster" getting the same amount and with surely feel they deserve the same or similar.

[Branston Pickle 3,638]

1 minute ago, Norfolk Dan said:

As he is a free agent, wages are not really the problem. £25-£30k a week... Can be balanced out with signing on fees. 

Yup - no transfer fee so we can up the salary element/build it into a signing on fee and afford a player who wants a bit ‘more’.