| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 09:37 - Apr 20 with 840 views | Butty101 |
I think thats right. If you cant afford to pay the wages then you shouldnt be spending millions on new players.
Our players in the light of day dont quite look as generous by only deferring rather than taking a cut.
Assuming players defer for 3months and the average player is deferring 7k. That at best Saints 2million - a drop in the ocean for the club. Hardly worth it |  |
|  |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:14 - Apr 20 with 808 views | dirk_doone |
The good news just keeps rolling in.
Although Nick often says Saints' fans want the owners to spend a lot of money on new players, it's not true: all we really want is for them to stop selling our best players at the earliest available opportunity. |  |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:31 - Apr 20 with 795 views | Heisenberg |
Millions of people including those with small businesses are going to be financially screwed after all this. And yet we shall see pretty soon the big clubs touting millions and millions for players. Another nail in the coffin. As you say will always love Saints but with each passing year coming to despise the modern game. |  |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:36 - Apr 20 with 791 views | SaintNick |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:14 - Apr 20 by dirk_doone |
The good news just keeps rolling in.
Although Nick often says Saints' fans want the owners to spend a lot of money on new players, it's not true: all we really want is for them to stop selling our best players at the earliest available opportunity. |
Im not quite sure what your comments have to do with the actual story.
You are right though Saints fans do want us to stop selling our best players, but the Virgil Van Dijk transfer showed that despite the fact that we told the player and the club that we weren't going to sell, the player forced our hand, so much so we removed him from the squad before the January transfer window opened.
Perhaps you could tell us what Saints could have done to prevent that and indeed the moves of the other players who all demanded to go to varying degrees.
We tried to make a stand by not selling Van Dijk, we tried to make a statement, but it was ultimatley shown that the clubs do not have the power the players do, please show me footage of our players being dragged kicking and screaming to Anfield and Old Trafford if I am wrong.
The problem is not that Saints are selling players, but that some like yourself cannot accept the situation in modern football, that the only way we can compete is by buying and selling and keep on repeating the process, aside of the Big six the likes of Everton have followed the model that you seem to want, an owner with no real caring for the club but who is willing to throw his money at it for his own ego, they have done no better than us.
I'm not being abusive Dirk, I think your opinions though sometimes excitable are interesting and a good read and they are your opinions so don't take offence if I or others challenge them.
But all the continued whinging about Saints selling players just creates a totally negative vibe around the club, you want a new owner but who would be interested in coming here and getting the abuse that Gao gets.
The rest of football see us as we are, a club that runs itself properly and can punch above it's weight through good purchases, a good youth system and by raining cash through sales.
All the cash brought in is reinvested so what is the problem with that, nothing except when it is badly invested and we only have to look at Everton and a few others to see that spending money doesn't mean you spend it well.
This club will never move forward until the fans get behind it and accept it for what it is now and not keep harping on about what it could be.
Van Dijk, Lallana, Lovren were all told that they would not be sold, all forced the clubs hand, yet you still claim that we sold them at the first opportunity.
We could prosper as a club, but not until we support it and not keep slagging it off and dredging up the past.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:45 - Apr 20 with 775 views | this_charming_man |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:36 - Apr 20 by SaintNick |
Im not quite sure what your comments have to do with the actual story.
You are right though Saints fans do want us to stop selling our best players, but the Virgil Van Dijk transfer showed that despite the fact that we told the player and the club that we weren't going to sell, the player forced our hand, so much so we removed him from the squad before the January transfer window opened.
Perhaps you could tell us what Saints could have done to prevent that and indeed the moves of the other players who all demanded to go to varying degrees.
We tried to make a stand by not selling Van Dijk, we tried to make a statement, but it was ultimatley shown that the clubs do not have the power the players do, please show me footage of our players being dragged kicking and screaming to Anfield and Old Trafford if I am wrong.
The problem is not that Saints are selling players, but that some like yourself cannot accept the situation in modern football, that the only way we can compete is by buying and selling and keep on repeating the process, aside of the Big six the likes of Everton have followed the model that you seem to want, an owner with no real caring for the club but who is willing to throw his money at it for his own ego, they have done no better than us.
I'm not being abusive Dirk, I think your opinions though sometimes excitable are interesting and a good read and they are your opinions so don't take offence if I or others challenge them.
But all the continued whinging about Saints selling players just creates a totally negative vibe around the club, you want a new owner but who would be interested in coming here and getting the abuse that Gao gets.
The rest of football see us as we are, a club that runs itself properly and can punch above it's weight through good purchases, a good youth system and by raining cash through sales.
All the cash brought in is reinvested so what is the problem with that, nothing except when it is badly invested and we only have to look at Everton and a few others to see that spending money doesn't mean you spend it well.
This club will never move forward until the fans get behind it and accept it for what it is now and not keep harping on about what it could be.
Van Dijk, Lallana, Lovren were all told that they would not be sold, all forced the clubs hand, yet you still claim that we sold them at the first opportunity.
We could prosper as a club, but not until we support it and not keep slagging it off and dredging up the past.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
We didn't make a stand with Van Dijk! That's just spin. The deals for him and Cedric were as good as agreed and then they got pulled due to the takeover, Van Dijk behaved like a helmet which was wrong but we weren't denying him a transfer because we were making a stand over him signing a big new contract only 12 months earlier. We even managed to somehow sell him before the transfer window had even opened a few months later.
I agree with Dirk, the majority of saints fans aren't asking for the chairman to spend hundreds of millions of his own cash, it would be nice if like every other club just for once we didn't have to sell players to buy new ones, especially when we have been lacking in certain areas for years. [Post edited 20 Apr 2020 10:46]
|  |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 11:04 - Apr 20 with 750 views | dirk_doone |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 10:36 - Apr 20 by SaintNick |
Im not quite sure what your comments have to do with the actual story.
You are right though Saints fans do want us to stop selling our best players, but the Virgil Van Dijk transfer showed that despite the fact that we told the player and the club that we weren't going to sell, the player forced our hand, so much so we removed him from the squad before the January transfer window opened.
Perhaps you could tell us what Saints could have done to prevent that and indeed the moves of the other players who all demanded to go to varying degrees.
We tried to make a stand by not selling Van Dijk, we tried to make a statement, but it was ultimatley shown that the clubs do not have the power the players do, please show me footage of our players being dragged kicking and screaming to Anfield and Old Trafford if I am wrong.
The problem is not that Saints are selling players, but that some like yourself cannot accept the situation in modern football, that the only way we can compete is by buying and selling and keep on repeating the process, aside of the Big six the likes of Everton have followed the model that you seem to want, an owner with no real caring for the club but who is willing to throw his money at it for his own ego, they have done no better than us.
I'm not being abusive Dirk, I think your opinions though sometimes excitable are interesting and a good read and they are your opinions so don't take offence if I or others challenge them.
But all the continued whinging about Saints selling players just creates a totally negative vibe around the club, you want a new owner but who would be interested in coming here and getting the abuse that Gao gets.
The rest of football see us as we are, a club that runs itself properly and can punch above it's weight through good purchases, a good youth system and by raining cash through sales.
All the cash brought in is reinvested so what is the problem with that, nothing except when it is badly invested and we only have to look at Everton and a few others to see that spending money doesn't mean you spend it well.
This club will never move forward until the fans get behind it and accept it for what it is now and not keep harping on about what it could be.
Van Dijk, Lallana, Lovren were all told that they would not be sold, all forced the clubs hand, yet you still claim that we sold them at the first opportunity.
We could prosper as a club, but not until we support it and not keep slagging it off and dredging up the past.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Sorry, Nick, but that's a load of PR bollo@cks about van Dijk.
Kat and Les wanted to sell him to Liverpool in the summer but Gao wouldn't let them sell him until after he'd taken over. If Kat had sold him when she wanted to, Gao wasn't going to pay her the 200 million, which was a larger amount than his transfer fee, so she agreed to delay the sale.
And what my reply has got to do with the original post is staring you in the face in the title of the thread: transfer restrictions!
As for what the owners could do if they wanted to: they could just turn down the first offers they get for players instead of accepting them. For example, if Liverpool make an offer for Ward-Prowse this summer, they don't have to sell him if they don't want to but we all know they will if they get the chance.
I know Leicester haven't been able to hold on to all of their players but I bet they have turned down plenty of offers for Vardy and Schmeichel over the years, and look how much they have benefitted from that. In a similar position, our owners would have sold them both, the first chance they got. [Post edited 20 Apr 2020 11:17]
| |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 12:57 - Apr 20 with 683 views | SaintNick |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 11:04 - Apr 20 by dirk_doone |
Sorry, Nick, but that's a load of PR bollo@cks about van Dijk.
Kat and Les wanted to sell him to Liverpool in the summer but Gao wouldn't let them sell him until after he'd taken over. If Kat had sold him when she wanted to, Gao wasn't going to pay her the 200 million, which was a larger amount than his transfer fee, so she agreed to delay the sale.
And what my reply has got to do with the original post is staring you in the face in the title of the thread: transfer restrictions!
As for what the owners could do if they wanted to: they could just turn down the first offers they get for players instead of accepting them. For example, if Liverpool make an offer for Ward-Prowse this summer, they don't have to sell him if they don't want to but we all know they will if they get the chance.
I know Leicester haven't been able to hold on to all of their players but I bet they have turned down plenty of offers for Vardy and Schmeichel over the years, and look how much they have benefitted from that. In a similar position, our owners would have sold them both, the first chance they got. [Post edited 20 Apr 2020 11:17]
|
It is funny how people are so in the know about the reasons behind every transfer, given that Van Dijk's fee went up in between the summer and the january window by about £10-15 million and his attempts to try and force the move through it seems that he wasn't aware of the fact that we were going to let him go.
Also Gao took over the club on 14th August over two weeks before the transfer window closed, so he could have sold him in August 2017 if the deal had already been agreed, so that blows that myth out of the water about the sale being blocked till Gao had bought the club.
As I said the evidence is that Saints don't accept the first offer they get, they refused to sell Van Dijk, they refused to sell Lallana & Lovren whose fees went up, they refused to sell Wanyama and Scheiderlin who stayed an extra season, just about the only two offers we didn't seem to put up too much protest against were Luke Shaw and Sadio Mane, Mane etc was a fantastic price for a player whose track record at that time was not that good and who many would have snapped another clubs hand off for £10 million in January 2016.
Again you put up a lot of pure speculation and try to create a myth that Saints have just rolled over and died the moment a club comes knocking and if you cant find some sort of back up for it, find another reason like Van Dijk could not be sold till Gao's takeover, all plausible till you actually google the date that this took place.
So tell me if Gao is just looking to make money, why didn't he just sell Van Dijk there and then and recoup the £65 million on the table and put it into his bank ?
What is the plausible reason behind that
Sorry Dirk but you try to disguise things to prove a point, yes Leicester did hang on to Vardy when Arsenal came calling, but they accepted £30 million from Chelsea for Kante and £35 million a year later for Drinkwater, they have used their money well.
You say the club dont try to hang on to players, but can give no real evidence as to why they would do that, im sure that they would prefer to keep the players they have than have to keep searching tin the transfer market, the players have all the powers these days, but you cant see that.
If you hate the owners and those running the club so much why bother supporting it, I am no happy clapper but until I see a better deal on the table Ill stick with what we have .
Yours and others continued sniping at the club is actually counter productive, prospective owners see us as a fickle unappreciative bunch and will look elsewhere, I would love an owner that could take us on to that fabled next level, but there arent many out there and given the relatively few trophies and champions league places up for grabs, who would spent £500 million of their own money to challenge for sixth | |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 13:02 - Apr 20 with 681 views | this_charming_man |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 12:57 - Apr 20 by SaintNick |
It is funny how people are so in the know about the reasons behind every transfer, given that Van Dijk's fee went up in between the summer and the january window by about £10-15 million and his attempts to try and force the move through it seems that he wasn't aware of the fact that we were going to let him go.
Also Gao took over the club on 14th August over two weeks before the transfer window closed, so he could have sold him in August 2017 if the deal had already been agreed, so that blows that myth out of the water about the sale being blocked till Gao had bought the club.
As I said the evidence is that Saints don't accept the first offer they get, they refused to sell Van Dijk, they refused to sell Lallana & Lovren whose fees went up, they refused to sell Wanyama and Scheiderlin who stayed an extra season, just about the only two offers we didn't seem to put up too much protest against were Luke Shaw and Sadio Mane, Mane etc was a fantastic price for a player whose track record at that time was not that good and who many would have snapped another clubs hand off for £10 million in January 2016.
Again you put up a lot of pure speculation and try to create a myth that Saints have just rolled over and died the moment a club comes knocking and if you cant find some sort of back up for it, find another reason like Van Dijk could not be sold till Gao's takeover, all plausible till you actually google the date that this took place.
So tell me if Gao is just looking to make money, why didn't he just sell Van Dijk there and then and recoup the £65 million on the table and put it into his bank ?
What is the plausible reason behind that
Sorry Dirk but you try to disguise things to prove a point, yes Leicester did hang on to Vardy when Arsenal came calling, but they accepted £30 million from Chelsea for Kante and £35 million a year later for Drinkwater, they have used their money well.
You say the club dont try to hang on to players, but can give no real evidence as to why they would do that, im sure that they would prefer to keep the players they have than have to keep searching tin the transfer market, the players have all the powers these days, but you cant see that.
If you hate the owners and those running the club so much why bother supporting it, I am no happy clapper but until I see a better deal on the table Ill stick with what we have .
Yours and others continued sniping at the club is actually counter productive, prospective owners see us as a fickle unappreciative bunch and will look elsewhere, I would love an owner that could take us on to that fabled next level, but there arent many out there and given the relatively few trophies and champions league places up for grabs, who would spent £500 million of their own money to challenge for sixth |
Cedric gave an interview about wo years ago where he said that him and Van Dijk both had transfers agreed but the club pulled them due to the Goa takeover, so Cedric was lying was he? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 14:26 - Apr 20 with 646 views | Butty101 |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 12:57 - Apr 20 by SaintNick |
It is funny how people are so in the know about the reasons behind every transfer, given that Van Dijk's fee went up in between the summer and the january window by about £10-15 million and his attempts to try and force the move through it seems that he wasn't aware of the fact that we were going to let him go.
Also Gao took over the club on 14th August over two weeks before the transfer window closed, so he could have sold him in August 2017 if the deal had already been agreed, so that blows that myth out of the water about the sale being blocked till Gao had bought the club.
As I said the evidence is that Saints don't accept the first offer they get, they refused to sell Van Dijk, they refused to sell Lallana & Lovren whose fees went up, they refused to sell Wanyama and Scheiderlin who stayed an extra season, just about the only two offers we didn't seem to put up too much protest against were Luke Shaw and Sadio Mane, Mane etc was a fantastic price for a player whose track record at that time was not that good and who many would have snapped another clubs hand off for £10 million in January 2016.
Again you put up a lot of pure speculation and try to create a myth that Saints have just rolled over and died the moment a club comes knocking and if you cant find some sort of back up for it, find another reason like Van Dijk could not be sold till Gao's takeover, all plausible till you actually google the date that this took place.
So tell me if Gao is just looking to make money, why didn't he just sell Van Dijk there and then and recoup the £65 million on the table and put it into his bank ?
What is the plausible reason behind that
Sorry Dirk but you try to disguise things to prove a point, yes Leicester did hang on to Vardy when Arsenal came calling, but they accepted £30 million from Chelsea for Kante and £35 million a year later for Drinkwater, they have used their money well.
You say the club dont try to hang on to players, but can give no real evidence as to why they would do that, im sure that they would prefer to keep the players they have than have to keep searching tin the transfer market, the players have all the powers these days, but you cant see that.
If you hate the owners and those running the club so much why bother supporting it, I am no happy clapper but until I see a better deal on the table Ill stick with what we have .
Yours and others continued sniping at the club is actually counter productive, prospective owners see us as a fickle unappreciative bunch and will look elsewhere, I would love an owner that could take us on to that fabled next level, but there arent many out there and given the relatively few trophies and champions league places up for grabs, who would spent £500 million of their own money to challenge for sixth |
Nick you evidence is just your hear say. No more or less likely than what TCM is saying. | |
| |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 14:27 - Apr 20 with 644 views | this_charming_man |
| Saints Could Be Hit By Transfer Restrictions ! on 14:26 - Apr 20 by Butty101 |
Nick you evidence is just your hear say. No more or less likely than what TCM is saying. |
Mine came direct from an interview Cedric gave where he stated both him and VVD had moves agreed but they were pulled due to the takeover, i'll try and find it. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
