tomsky_11

9 hours ago, sne said:

Miller will likely be fine too (if he can stay out of trouble)

Surely, the Charlotte thing to do would be for him to land in more trouble

Fun one for Magic with two lotto picks and cap space. Could go any way. Whichever way, shooters are a must.

54 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Need to get 2.4m euros back to not book a loss on disposal in the accounts.

FTFY. I think we'll still just about manage to "cover FFP" even if we don't.

1 hour ago, Tom13 said:

He's a wonderkid. Why would you be happy to risk losing him to someone else?

Yes. At that price it's a big gamble, whether he's a "wonderkid" or not. His stats look ok, not amazing. And from clips he looks pretty raw. It's not enough of a cert for me that he'd be able to come in an make the kind of impact straight away I'd expect from a transfer of that value.

And I think that's what we need this season, players who can come straight into first XI and improve out current levels and we can be confident about them hitting the ground running. Top 4 might be a possibility with a few impactful additions and that changes everything for us.

But we do not have an infinite budget to do this. Do we have scope to spend big? Sure. £100M should be pretty doable. Maybe more. To use up almost half that resource on a bit of a gamble that we might be able to secure 6 months down the line for significantly less doesn't seem like the best use of that budget.

Could I be entirely wrong about his ability? Sure, I've seen very little of him. He could be amazing and come in and have the impact we need straight away to carry us forward. And obviously if Emery thinks he's the perfect player for us and the price is worth it no matter what and that works with the budget for his other targets this summer then great, let's hope it works out. But I'm sure he's not the only player we are looking at for the role, and I imagine some of those other options might have more pedigree, be better value or both.

7 hours ago, Chicken Field said:

My predicition is that we will soon reveal the signing of Joel Robles

I thought David Soria might be a shout for keeper. Out of contract and was cup keeper for one of Emery's Europa League wins at Sevilla.

5 hours ago, MotoMkali said:

He may just re-sign in that case. Bilbao has done a lot for him and his family. And his brother plays there too. His mother recently got an award for contributions from. The club. I think it's more likely than not he re-signs rather thna leave on a free so bilbao get something for him.

Though perhaps a lesser fee might be negotiated it won't be less than 40 mil euros. 

If he does, he does. We'd be overpaying massively even at €40M in my opinion. Either negotiate a fee that's reasonable given the contract situation and his current level or walk.

7 hours ago, Tom13 said:

Another year for us without him, while he increases his rep even more and has even more clubs circling? I'd rather get him now.

For €50M? When he's available for free in 6 months? Nah, mad. Especially for someone who seems mostly potential at the moment. Must be so many better options at that price where we aren't mostly buying potential.

This guy has a year left on his contract. So available on a free in 6 months time. Surely the €50M fee has to be rubbish?

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

Are you sure?  I thought our accounts showed a £100m "gain" upon that sale?

Paid upfront or in installments would show the same in the P&L.

Just now, MrBlack said:

Is that because the limit comes down another notch?

This plus I believe the contribution from player sales is a three year average, so like with FFP we lose the Grealish sale from the calc.

13 minutes ago, paul514 said:

I would be more worried about the UEFA wage cap than the loss limits.

We'll be fine for it this season. Like FFP, the following year will be more of a push.

Just now, paul514 said:

Ok so FFP wise that allows us to spend a lot

Yes, though 1) pushing it too far does make things more difficult the following season unless we see dramatic revenue increase (ie Champions League) or profitable sales, and 2) we've also got the UEFA rules to contend with, which perhaps restrict us further.

Either way, I'm fairly sure we could do what we need this summer without going too overboard. £100M on four players on decent salaries isn't a major risk and should add enough quality to have us competing for at least Europa League places. Especially given we've already secured the first of these four players on a free.

4 hours ago, duke313 said:

Might need to sell somebody

Digne
Cash
Dendoncker
Chambers

And even Buendia or Bailey.

Not all of them obviously, but 2 or 3 along with Sanson, Nakamba and Davis.

 

Huh? With sales of only £25M for senior returning loanees, and bringing in 4 players for combined £100M on around £100K a week average, I've got us with 23/24 adjusted losses in the £40-50M range. So no urgent need to sell any of the first team players suggested.

4 hours ago, ender4 said:

I guess the only issue with doing that is that is what Everton did - spent loads and thought it would buy them increase revenue with European football… it’s a dangerous game if you don’t get it right and succeed in the first attempt.

Not looked at their figures in a while but from what I remember they were way past what we we're spending on transfers and salaries relative to revenue. We aren't even close to the limit and certainly won't be even with a decent summer of incomings.

5 hours ago, paul514 said:

Just so I am clear the year that is being cleared from the accounts has a large deficit and therefore we would be entering the new year with a minus -20m? Therefore you have 85m for this season 

Yes covid period average was £25M adjusted loss.

With my estimate for 22/23 we'd be at losses of £10-20M for the first two assessment periods, leaving £85-95M of allowable adjusted losses in 23/24 before we hit the limit.

6 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

But if we want to target that it does mean we basically need to sell another Grealish within the next 3 years. Obviously, that can be spread out over the three years, but as a pure academy sale, he leaves a big hole for us to fill from next seasons rolling calculations.

I suspect we'll go big still, and cover losses over the next couple of years with a few sales of academy players. We definitely have the leeway to spend large amounts on whoever we think we need though. 

Yeah sure, it's a simplistic view of the extent of the limits. We won't push close to it this season, but I'd still expect us to use some of the additional scope we have while we can to push for a higher league position and therefore better revenue down the line.

44 minutes ago, paul514 said:

Quick question what our allowed losses limit this season according to the last accounts?

For 22/23 almost all the £105M. Prior two periods (three seasons because of covid) we only have a small adjusted loss, less than £5M.

I reckon we are probably at about £30-40M adjusted losses for 22/23. We lose the covid seasons from the calc (loss of £25M) for 23/24 so I'd guess we'd have about £85-95M spare adjusted loss capacity for 23/24.

1 hour ago, babyblue said:

Poor as in loads of mistakes, slow to get back, slow to get forward, or frankly just anonymous a lot of the time. Numbers can mask a performance can't they, does popping up with something good in the 80th minute when already 4-0 down and stat padding, does that make it a good performance?

Sure they can. And like I say, I've not seen any of him whereas you have so genuinely interested to hear what the issues where when the numbers look ok.

The thing I'm still somewhat puzzled by with the numbers though is the "popping up late" thing but mostly anonymous suggests perhaps more headline stats - goals, assists, etc. - but lesser numbers elsewhere and lower volume. But he's seen an incredible amount of the ball and that has only increased as time has gone on at Leicester, and his numbers of errors, dispossessions and miscontrols are all low. His long pass completion seems to have taken the biggest hit, but that would make some sense if playing deeper while still trying to be expansive and creative. (Have seen that video earlier in the thread of him looking a bit half-arsed with some of his long balls forward which probably also plays a part). Perhaps hard to judge the slowness from the stats, but he's making enough challenges to suggest he's not just stood around.

4 hours ago, babyblue said:

He has had poor seasons even in a more attacking position. But his and our best football was played with him and Maddison as 8’s with Ndidi holding. Later on when Rodgers shit the bed, it was more Maddison as a 10 and Ndidi and Tielemans behind. 

Poor in what sense? I've not watched any of him expect when against Villa so hard to judge for me on anything other than the data and how it compares to our current midfield. We are being told by Leicester fans who have watched him he's been poor recently. To me from the numbers it looks more like a deeper role leading to less attacking impact. But even still he's still hitting pretty decent numbers in terms of ball progression and chance creation, and looks reasonable defensively too.

Sure, the numbers say he's never hit the heights of that first six months with you. But then the numbers he put up then were exceptional. He's dropped off to a level that is still pretty good from what I can see.

I'd guess we are likely to see him predominantly in the McGinn role under Emery, which for the most part has been the advanced right side of a box midfield 4. So more license to drift into the attacking 3rd and penalty box (mostly in the inside right channel)and attempt to create chances or take chances with low risk of being caught out with Kamara and Luiz deeper in the midfield.

He could also end up in the deeper Luiz role, though he's unlikely to be ahead of Luiz so that would probably mean Luiz taking the more advanced position, or it being cover in case Luiz was ever out.

19 hours ago, lexicon said:

Have they broken FFP or spent within it?

And citing 45m on Gordon as a reason to be worried about them, when really it's a reason to laugh at their scouting 

Newcastle have been well within FFP, helped by Ashley spending nothing. But his seasons are falling away from the calc and estimates suggested they've probably got far less room for losses than we do this season. They can obviously make a fair bit of that difference up (nad most likely surpass us) with CL revenue plus whatever dodgy commercial deals they do. But their starting point is certainly more restrictive than ours and at this moment I'd argue they've a worse squad and manager.

19 hours ago, Steero113 said:

Completed purchase Winter 2021, they've had 3 windows so far and have bought miles above their previous station in terms of incomings.

For god's sake, they spent £45m on Anthony Gordon who is solidly around league 2 level. How much more madness do you require. 

They will skirt the rules the same way the other clubs that are owned by countries do, don't you worry about that. 

They did this because had loads of scope within FFP, because Ashley had them profitable by spending nothing. That profitable period is no longer relevant for FFP, and the activity you mention will most likely have eaten up the majority of their FFP loss allowance to date.

On Barnes, I'm not sure Newcastle are even after him are they? Same as us, I'm not sure if the fit is right. He's got attributes we could possibly utilise in our set up, but it's a risk changing what seems to have been a pretty defined role for him previously. I'd expect Newcastle to be more focused on improving the defensive end, and while they might throw a bit of money boostign their forward area too, I doubt that would be on Harvey Barnes. West Ham seems about right.

He says in current role. We go big on a elite second striker to play the role Bailey/Buendia did last season but hopefully add similar level of G+A to Ollie.

13 minutes ago, HolteExile said:

Guendouzi or similar are the sort of players that get under the skin of the opposition. And get the side firing if we are up against it.  Vibe I get with Tielemans is he's fine if we're on top and dominating possession but goes missing for the hard yards.

We still have McGinn. I don't see Tielemans shutting him out completely. Not after his performances under Emery.

Kamara has the more defensive pivot role nailed down, and I'd suspect Luiz to play the majority of the other pivot role. But both McGinn and Tielemans are capable of playing either in the pivot or more advanced, and I think both will get plenty of game time either rotating in-game or between games depending on the opposition, the state of the game and/or our intended approach to it.

Tielemans' defensive stats look fine anyway, he looks generally ahead of both McGinn and Ramsey based on last season. He absolutely doesn't look incapable of putting himself about. And even if it were the case he went missing occasionally on the defensive end, I'd suspect with both Luiz and Kamara behind him there's plenty of cover and his qualities in possession should more than make up for any negatives.

How much is his change in perceived performance at Leicester down to tactical changes impacting him and his role? And the performance of the rest of the team?

There's a pretty noticable difference in his areas of operation at Leicester between his earlier and later seasons. Far more touches and tackles in the defensive and middle 3rds in the last two seasons, far more in the attacking 3rd in the seasons before that. Alongside this, other indicators of a switch to a less attacking, more defensive role - in the last two seasons, far more shots blocked, more tackles (and noticably better success in them), fewer progressive passes received (but more possession), fewer miscontrols and being dispossessed, more fouls, but also less fouled himself despite more possession, improved short and medium range passing but worse long range, fewer shots and on average further from goal, with npxG per shot halved from his first to last season.

Even seeming to play this deeper role, he's still been putting up decent shot creation numbers and getting the ball into dangerous areas through passing far more often than any of our current midfield. And his assist numbers dropped off far more at Leicester than the volume and quality of his chance creation did, so is this impacted more by the players he had around him?

It seems to me like he'll come into our side most likely in the current McGinn role on the advanced right side of our midfield 4, and therefore operate in areas more like I suspect he was utilised early on at Leicester, in a team performing towards the higher end of the table. If indeed his ability in possession and as a goal threat hasn't changed and we can utilise him higher up the field, I don't see why we can't get goal and assist numbers from him similar to his most productive periods at Leicester.

To potential add that to our squad while saving potenitally £5-10M a season on paying a fee for an equivalent player is great business for us.

For all this talk of his last few seasons being poor, he's been putting up better numbers in a number of areas compared to our other midfielders this season, especially in ball progression and chance creation. And for all the deserved plaudits McGinn has had recently it's him in particular that Tielemans seems to outshine. Ramsey at least offers something different to the rest of the midfield in progression through carrying the ball. Luiz comes closest to Tielemans in touch/passing volume and is generally safer in possession and better defensively.

1 hour ago, lexicon said:

My man @tomsky_11 has a raging semi at this sort of stat-work and spreadsheeting 

That and shitting on referees.

20 minutes ago, duke313 said:

allowing Athletic Bilbao to qualify and they will be seeded ahead of us 

How? Their coefficient is worse than us.