D
Deleted member 27995
Depends if you bothered reading what had gone before my post to be perfectly honest. Obviously you didn't so ....What has Pulisic got to do with sessegnon?
Depends if you bothered reading what had gone before my post to be perfectly honest. Obviously you didn't so ....What has Pulisic got to do with sessegnon?
Not me it doesn't.
Each to their own. Fuck Fulham. I care about my club, and if it means we got him cheap to allow to spend elsewhere then I'm all for it.
Being ruthless is one of the only ways we are going to be competitive. They aren't a charity case. If you think teams like United/City and especially Chelsea wouldn't do it to us then it's very niave
I like the moral high ground too... right up until Dier goes cleats up into a knee high challenge against a gooner then I'm swimming in the filth with the pigs. We all got our bends in the moral fiber (though some people's are straight up shattered)I know full well the likes of Chelsea would do it and we all jump on their case when they do something like that. I don't want my club becoming like that thanks. I like the moral high ground.
But nobody cares and you're fucking wrong anywayI have to vent my frustrations somewhere !
I know full well the likes of Chelsea would do it and we all jump on their case when they do something like that. I don't want my club becoming like that thanks. I like the moral high ground.
We've been little old nice spurs, winning fuck all, "but ain't they a nice club?" for too long.
Bollocks to that. You think Levy goes into a negotiation hoping to ensure the best deal for the other club? My arse does he.
It would be a bit vindictive and a bit nasty but if it benefits spurs then I frankly couldn't give a shit. I'll bow to your superior ethical fibre but I've had 30 years of that. I want shiny pots now and a bit of recognition instead of being a by-word for failure, bottling it and being the nearly men. If it means playing the same game as the successful sides then so be it.
I've got signatures turned off so I'd never see it, but this has got to be your sig, dude!I like the moral high ground.
I know full well the likes of Chelsea would do it and we all jump on their case when they do something like that. I don't want my club becoming like that thanks. I like the moral high ground.
Oliver Norwood currently on loan at Fulham from Brighton. Reports that Fulham have had a bid to buy him turned down . IIRC Norwood is all left foot and plays on the left. They have already signed Matt Targett on loan at left back. Is this a good sign regarding Sessegnon . We can only hope
Oliver Norwood currently on loan at Fulham from Brighton. Reports that Fulham have had a bid to buy him turned down . IIRC Norwood is all left foot and plays on the left. They have already signed Matt Targett on loan at left back. Is this a good sign regarding Sessegnon . We can only hope
But otherwise the hypothesis is sound?He's right footed and plays through the middle.
There will be a more sensible level that they will deal at. It won’t do them any good to have a player worth all this money playing for them nor the player either. My take it is that he will go for a figure more like that in the last window (£27m) but with a lot of additional bonuses tied into development. Probably after they fail to get promotion.
I just can’t see any club putting up £50m for such a young player where things could go wrong. If it did then they might have to write off £25m (if they’re lucky) on a re sale. Despite what it appears they are still businesses. On the whole they tend to pay for the more finished article or development standard.It depends on whether one of the plastic clubs takes the bait (which is what I suspect Fulham are hoping for).
I just can’t see any club putting up £50m for such a young player where things could go wrong. If it did then they might have to write off £25m (if they’re lucky) on a re sale. Despite what it appears they are still businesses. On the whole they tend to pay for the more finished article or development standard.
I just can’t see any club putting up £50m for such a young player where things could go wrong. If it did then they might have to write off £25m (if they’re lucky) on a re sale. Despite what it appears they are still businesses. On the whole they tend to pay for the more finished article or development standard.
Shaw was left back of the season in the PremI agree its nuts but United spent 30 million on an 18 year old Luke Shaw 4 years ago and fees have only gone up. I know Shaw had prem experience but 40million+ is nothing to United or City or Chelsea.