Yeah but the person posting above you has no interest in the football we play, just wanking off over transfers.
1 Like
Letting the club… well, of course, who is holding them? We don’t have any influence on it. We can only watch and comment among ourselves on it. Who doesn’t want to read or comment, obviously doesn’t have to.
I personally stay away from topics and talks about referees, because I just can’t be bothered to learn about them, remember their names, try to figure out conspiracy theories and stuff. I just see their decisions on the pitch, blank faces and move on.
Slot inherited a quality team and also did a very good job in taking it to another winning level in his first season.
The next step is nothing especially new.
Sometimes we have more active summers, sometimes less active. This might be a bit more active than usually. Whether someone from the public will call that a revolution or evolution, who cares, it doesn’t even matter, it’s a game of words sometimes.
Summers without any deals are incredibly rare, the work to improve our football is constant, 24/7 365. Training, matches, talks behind the scenes and yes transfer windows. It’s something that has to be prepared in advance and it’s something that is talked about in the public a lot. Because it’s the unknown and it’s easier for masses to talk about other than what… detailed reviews of matches (there is also that) and training sessions (the second which we don’t see, or see just short selected clips).
Us winning the league doesn’t mean we should just continue with the same 22 odd players, because trophies and squad situations don’t have to be perfectly aligned.
Think we can all agree that we can be happy where we are and now it’s up to our “dexters” to prove themselves. It never stops.
There are huge differences among fans, if some want to talk more about transfers it doesn’t mean that all of them just want pure transfer activity or that they want us to implement the “Chelsea model”.
Sometimes it’s what the person doesn’t have to do that speak volumes of how well he has done in the job.
1 Like
There’s more on that here:
It seems to focus more on Villa’s financial constraints, but if he comes in, who would head out? Elliott would be an obvious one for a player plus cash deal which, if Slot doesn’t see a future for Harvey, might be beneficial for all parties.
2 Likes
Ok well I just saw an instagram “Liverpool transfer influencer” type person say that they want us to sign De Bruyne, Huijsen, Kerkez, Kluivert, Isak, Alvarez, Zubimendi and Frimpong if we are “serious” this summer.
The planet some of you live on is insane.
9 Likes
1 Like
I know. With concerns about Ibou’s contract we probably need another CB as well. We cannot find ourselves in a repeat of 2020-21.
3 Likes
What about Malouda, Simão Sabrosa, Pablo Aimar, David Villa, David Silva, etc.?
2 Likes
Let’s play the PSR game like everyone else. We buy Rodgers from Villa for £50m. They buy Elliott from us for £40m. Everyone gets a nice bump on their PSR cap whilst also immediately replacing the player they’re selling.
Adjust those numbers accordingly to make that work for all involved and to maximise the craftiness…
3 Likes
Seems realistic 
If we are making a few sales I can see some PSR adjustments happening to engineer win-win scenarios. Obviously it will have to be plausible, but within the world of football transfers, there’s lots of wiggle room.
That sort of accounting fuckery is robbing peter to pay paul and so doesnt help a well run club. It is a way of raising money (sales are booked in full for that year’s accounts) to cover upcoming commitments but at the expense of adding liabilities to your balance sheet for years down the road.
3 Likes
Obviously you have to want the player you sign. It wouldn’t just be a liability on a balance sheet. It would need to be a player you want to bring in.
Without that foundation there’s no point.
I think you are missing the point. It is an accounting conversation and “liability” refers to something on your books you have to pay for, not a player you dont want.
If we want to bring in Rogers lets say it is 40 million and a 4 year contract. That is 10m in liabilities to our books for each of those 4 years. Now lets say they take Harvey and we value him at 35, that all gets added to this years books so we make a 25 million profit this year, but still have 10 million to account for every year for the remaining 3 years. That is the accounting impact of a non-fuckery based approach to the deals (waving the ARD flag).
Now play the PSR fuckery game. There is a 5 million difference in valuation so we collude with Villa to give them 100m for rogers and get 95m back for Harvey. Our liabilities for this deal now increase to 25 million a year for each of the 4 years, but we can book the full 95 million for Harvey this year giving us 70 million in profit on the first of those 4 years for this deal.
It is only an approach worth taking if you have a hump to get over in the present year’s finances because there is a future cost to pay for doing it. It is basically the PSR version of a payday loan.
5 Likes
Also missing amongst all of this is that we simply don’t need to play that game. We’re not exactly starving for funds are we?
That is my entire point 
Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but it thought it was only thinly implied in your post.
I think my point was more that we have more than ample financial headroom and don’t need to worry, even if we have the wet dream of a transfer window that some people have.
Read a snippet earlier that Wolves could be ready to pay as much as £45m for Harvey Elliot…!
Will monitor for further information if it surfaces
2 Likes
