Player Watch Player Watch: James Maddison

[Spursmatty87]

Maybe Leicester sell Maddison to a Saudi club for £100m and then Newcastle loan him

Aren’t they already doing that with Neves

 

[funkycoldmedina]

I certainly confused a few people was obviously just meant as a joke as many were fretting back and forth on every update everyday so I was stating the reality that we will either sign him or we won’t but yea never seen so many diff rating types

Top banter from whoever disagreed with it

I put a dislike to complete the set, it seemed the honourable thing to do

 

[-Afri-Coy-]

Not sure how he even managed to get a disagree!

Ratings Bingo on SC? Completed it mate

 

[GMI]

Aren’t they already doing that with Neves

Exactly. It was my bad attempt at cynical humour…

That said I’m not sure that rumour has much truth to it. Football is broken but if they manage to blatantly circumvent ffp in such a manor we might as well blow everything up and start again.

 

[Finchyid]

Maybe I should’ve expanded.

It’s been reported Newcastle only have 75 million to spend based on FFP

FFP is not relevant for them

 

[Styopa]

FFP is not relevant for them

I think some people (not necessarily @Ginola+Tonic) are placing too much faith in FFP.

I hope they are correct, but practically nothing I have witnessed during the last thirty years of following football would lead me to believe something like FFP will effectively curtail the spending power of clubs like Newcastle. Ok, maybe they'll need to be more creative in bending the rules than Chelsea or Manchester City were, but this feels like a minor detail rather than a significant stumbling block.

I think with Maddison it will come down to whether Newcastle really want him. Our best hope is that they are prioritising other targets for that position.

 

[Hotspur88]

I think some people (not necessarily @Ginola+Tonic) are placing too much faith in FFP.

I hope they are correct, but practically nothing I have witnessed during the last thirty years of following football would lead me to believe something like FFP will effectively curtail the spending power of clubs like Newcastle. Ok, maybe they'll need to be more creative in bending the rules than Chelsea or Manchester City were, but this feels like a minor detail rather than a significant stumbling block.

I think with Maddison it will come down to whether Newcastle really want him. Our best hope is that they are prioritising other targets for that position.

Sorry but you're wrong here. The simple fact is Maddison prefers us over Newcastle and there isn't too much more to it. Both clubs are aware of what it will take to get Maddison so it's down to us now to make it happen. If both clubs agree a fee, he's only coming to one club.

 

[Japhet]

I think some people (not necessarily @Ginola+Tonic) are placing too much faith in FFP.

I hope they are correct, but practically nothing I have witnessed during the last thirty years of following football would lead me to believe something like FFP will effectively curtail the spending power of clubs like Newcastle. Ok, maybe they'll need to be more creative in bending the rules than Chelsea or Manchester City were, but this feels like a minor detail rather than a significant stumbling block.

I think with Maddison it will come down to whether Newcastle really want him. Our best hope is that they are prioritising other targets for that position.

There's an opportunity right now to hammer Man City for over 100 transgressions. To have any hope of curtailing the cheats their punishment has to be absolutely brutal and fines are pointless. They need to be kicked out of competitions for a good long time imo. The financially doped clubs have been taking the piss for years now and it's just getting worse and worse with more joining the party.

 

[Styopa]

Sorry but you're wrong here. The simple fact is Maddison prefers us over Newcastle and there isn't too much more to it. Both clubs are aware of what it will take to get Maddison so it's down to us now to make it happen. If both clubs agree a fee, he's only coming to one club.

That's excellent news, and I was going to add that where the player wants to go is (obviously) massively relevant. But the bolded part is really what I was referring to. If Newcastle are still in the race and is willing to pay more, surely that complicates things considerably? Maddison could force things by digging in his heels and refusing to consider moving to Newcastle, but Leicester could also dig in their heels, knowing Newcastle are still interested.

Again, I think this becomes more straightforward if Newcastle drop their interest and maybe they will or have if Maddison has made it clear he won't move there.

 

[Ghost Hardware]

That's excellent news, and I was going to add that where the player wants to go is (obviously) massively relevant. But the bolded part is really what I was referring to. If Newcastle are still in the race and is willing to pay more, surely that complicates things considerably? Maddison could force things by digging in his heels and refusing to consider moving to Newcastle, but Leicester could also dig in their heels, knowing Newcastle are still interested.

Again, I think this becomes more straightforward if Newcastle drop their interest and maybe they will or have if Maddison has made it clear he won't move there.

I don't think its a case of him not willing to go there just that out of the two he would prefer us. I mean Newcastle have supposedly been in contact with his people and Leicester since last summer and are still after him now. You don't do that if the player has no interest in going as it would be a complete waist of everyones time. This seems to be a case of who blinks first regarding fee really. Ether way i'm sure Maddison will want to keep his options open even if he has a preference.

Im just curious if there's anyone else looking as well, kind of surprised if its just us and Newcastle.

 

[Anurag Jo]

Daniel Levy told Simon Jordan they are not in for Maddison apparently.

 

[Dunc2610]

Daniel Levy told Simon Jordan they are not in for Maddison apparently.

Is this not referring to when we had apparently bid £50m for Maddison and Barnes?

 

[curlacious]

Is this not referring to when we had apparently bid £50m for Maddison and Barnes?

It was yes - just bemoaning that Daily Mail story that we had bid £50m for both.

 

[chas vs dave]

It was yes - just bemoaning that Daily Mail story that we had bid £50m for both.

The headline said 50m.

The article said in excess of 50m. Its all click bait nonsense with no truth imo.

 

[C0YS]

FFP is not relevant for them

Of course it is. You can get round FFP in ways such as sponsorship deals but it is absolutely relevent. Teams like PSG and Man city have had reduced squad sizes, transfer and wage limits and fines imposed (60m but 40m suspended, meaning they had to pay out 20m but if caught again would have to pay the 40m on top of any new penalties).

While Milan and Malaga have been outright banned from european competition for breaching FFP.

Clubs like Man city (with sponsorship) and Chelsea last window intentionally try to get round FFP in numerous ways but it does quite clearly affect how they do things and it is a reason why Newcastle have not acted in the same way that Chelsea and Man city did before FFP.

Is FFP strong enough, no, though its principle aim isn't actually to stop financial doping but to stop clubs getting bankrupt and cease to exist, something incredibly common in serie A before FFP.

But it does apply and Newcastle will be budgeting to try to meet its criteria. They wont spend whatever on Maddison. They will have a top figure in mind that they wont want to breach.

 

[muppetman]

Of course it is. You can get round FFP in ways such as sponsorship deals but it is absolutely relevent. Teams like PSG and Man city have had reduced squad sizes, transfer and wage limits and fines imposed (60m but 40m suspended, meaning they had to pay out 20m but if caught again would have to pay the 40m on top of any new penalties).

While Milan and Malaga have been outright banned from european competition for breaching FFP.

Clubs like Man city (with sponsorship) and Chelsea last window intentionally try to get round FFP in numerous ways but it does quite clearly affect how they do things and it is a reason why Newcastle have not acted in the same way that Chelsea and Man city did before FFP.

Is FFP strong enough, no, though its principle aim isn't actually to stop financial doping but to stop clubs getting bankrupt and cease to exist, something incredibly common in serie A before FFP.

But it does apply and Newcastle will be budgeting to try to meet its criteria. They wont spend whatever on Maddison. They will have a top figure in mind that they wont want to breach.

I think a lot of people do forget about this.

 

[brasil_spur]

Isn't Tonali a defensive midfielder?

Yes but they're not bringing in Tonali so they can boot Guimares out of the first team, or vice versa.

The view is that it will allow more options in midfield, but primarily allow Guimares to play a more CM role and allow Joelinton to push up a bit more.

It doesn't definitely mean that they will not sign an AM this window, but spending £70m on Tonali looks to indicate an unlikeliness that they will then go and spend £50m+ on an attacking mid as well.

 

[Stoof]

Of course it is. You can get round FFP in ways such as sponsorship deals but it is absolutely relevent. Teams like PSG and Man city have had reduced squad sizes, transfer and wage limits and fines imposed (60m but 40m suspended, meaning they had to pay out 20m but if caught again would have to pay the 40m on top of any new penalties).

While Milan and Malaga have been outright banned from european competition for breaching FFP.

Clubs like Man city (with sponsorship) and Chelsea last window intentionally try to get round FFP in numerous ways but it does quite clearly affect how they do things and it is a reason why Newcastle have not acted in the same way that Chelsea and Man city did before FFP.

Is FFP strong enough, no, though its principle aim isn't actually to stop financial doping but to stop clubs getting bankrupt and cease to exist, something incredibly common in serie A before FFP.

But it does apply and Newcastle will be budgeting to try to meet its criteria. They wont spend whatever on Maddison. They will have a top figure in mind that they wont want to breach.

Unless they sell Loris Karius for £100m to one of the 4 Saudi clubs ...

 

[Russ1201]

Of course it is. You can get round FFP in ways such as sponsorship deals but it is absolutely relevent. Teams like PSG and Man city have had reduced squad sizes, transfer and wage limits and fines imposed (60m but 40m suspended, meaning they had to pay out 20m but if caught again would have to pay the 40m on top of any new penalties).

While Milan and Malaga have been outright banned from european competition for breaching FFP.

Clubs like Man city (with sponsorship) and Chelsea last window intentionally try to get round FFP in numerous ways but it does quite clearly affect how they do things and it is a reason why Newcastle have not acted in the same way that Chelsea and Man city did before FFP.

Is FFP strong enough, no, though its principle aim isn't actually to stop financial doping but to stop clubs getting bankrupt and cease to exist, something incredibly common in serie A before FFP.

But it does apply and Newcastle will be budgeting to try to meet its criteria. They wont spend whatever on Maddison. They will have a top figure in mind that they wont want to breach.

I didn't post saying FFP is irrelevant to them it was someone else, so don't know why your trying to convince me

 

[felmani26]

Wouldn't surprise me if we take a similar stance with Leicester as we have done with Brentford in that unless the terms are alot more palatable to us then we will conclude business fairly swiftly elsewhere as you get the sense that we want key players for Postecoglou in for the upcoming tour.