Atsu completes £6.2m move to Mags

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mr Clarko said:
Everything that you have just said is conjecture, that after you stated that you "can't predict the future".

You mention "the money that they are likely to be on", which is something that a lot of people like to mention, a lot of those people are uniformed, Hanley's wage is estimated at around £20,000 per week, Gayle's wage is estimated at £35,000 per week (potentially lower) and Clark's wage was estimated at £30,000 per week before the Newcastle move, for a former captain, a star striker and an experienced Premier League centre back, those are low numbers in my opinion, based on those numbers I think it is sensible to assume the likes of Murphy (Ipswich), Sels (Gent), Lazaar (Palermo), Ritchie (Bournemouth), ect... will be on a similarly low(er) wage.

Why does signing Atsu mean "more work to shift players", are we signing Atsu to immediately offload him in the same window? The amount of players Newcastle want to offload stay the same, with or without Atsu.

How many players do you think Newcastle have to offload? Which players would Newcastle struggle to offload and why?
Click to expand...
I agree its all conjecture, I have no clue what anyone is on or what the budget is. However if a player is on say 25 grand a week with three years left on his contract then he will only move if it suits him to. So if you want to move Hanley on then you will have to find someone willing to pay 20 grand a week to him for the remainder of his contract. That might not be easy. We are skint and have just been relegated and may be looking at players of a standard of Grant Hanley. I dount that we would be in a position to commit a three year contract at 20 grand a week plus a 5 million transfer fee for a player at that level. Another club may be able to, but they will be few and far between.
You can only have a 25 man squad. I dont know what your squad size is but it feels like you have a lot of players of a similar standard. Room will need to be made to add to the squad and that is easier said than done when contracts have a few years to run and the player is on decent money for the level that they are at.

Tin Soldier said:
Is the Piss Biscuit a squad player or still England material ?
Click to expand...
3 years left on a 40 grand a week contract. Doubt he will be going anywhere
 
Last edited:


knitting away said:
I agree its all conjecture, I have no clue what anyone is on or what the budget is. However if a player is on say 25 grand a week with three years left on his contract then he will only move if it suits him to. So if you want to move Hanley on then you will have to find someone willing to pay 20 grand a week to him for the remainder of his contract. That might not be easy. We are skint and have just been relegated and may be looking at players of a standard of Grant Hanley. I dount that we would be in a position to commit a three year contract at 20 grand a week plus a 5 million transfer fee for a player at that level. Another club may be able to, but they will be few and far between.
You can only have a 25 man squad. I dont know what your squad size is but it feels like you have a lot of players of a similar standard. Room will need to be made to add to the squad and that is easier said than done when contracts have a few years to run and the player is on decent money for the level that they are at.


3 years left on a 40 grand a week contract. Doubt he will be going anywhere
Click to expand...


Again you are now undervaluing what "Championship level players" earn.

Think about the business that Newcastle made logically and impartially, a club purchased a player (Hanley as an example) from a Championship side (Blackburn), to play for another Championship side (Newcastle), that player assisted his new club in winning the league title. The former describes a player who is earning a similar wage to which they were previously earning who now has an increased stock value. That doesn't sound like an impossible player to move on.

You go on and say "I don't know what your squad size is but it feels like you have a lot of players", and that about sums up your entire thought process, you do not know something and then proceed to make claims about that subject based on nothing but how you "feel" about it without any reasoning, evidence or fact, it makes you look incredibly unintelligent. If you had researched you would see that Newcastle have 27 first team players (including Atsu), did that match your feeling of having "a lot" of players?
 
Last edited:
Mr Clarko said:
Gouffran made a goal contribution (goals and assists) every 313 minutes of Championship football.
Atsu made a goal contribution (goals and assists) every 196 minutes of Championship football.
Click to expand...
Who played more games fuck face ?
 
Mr Clarko said:
Again you are now undervaluing what "Championship level players" earn.

Think about the business that Newcastle made logically and impartially, a club purchased a player (Hanley as an example) from a Championship side (Blackburn), to play for another Championship side (Newcastle), that player assisted his new club in winning the league title. The former describes a player who is earning a similar wage to which they were previously earning who now has an increased stock value. That doesn't sound like an impossible player to move on.

You go on and say "I don't know what your squad size is but it feels like you have a lot of players", and that about sums up your entire thought process, you do not know something and then proceed to make claims about that subject based on nothing but how you "feel" about it without any reasoning, evidence or fact, it makes you look incredibly unintelligent. If you had researched you would see that Newcastle have 27 first team players (including Atsu), did that match your feeling of having "a lot" of players?
Click to expand...
27 is more than 25. And you are only allowed 25 so if you buy 6 you have to sell 8 you thick gyet.
 
knitting away said:
What is?
Click to expand...
You, that is you coming out, I brought it out, you started by trying (and failing) to eloquently share your (incorrect) views on Newcastle, I rendered your thoughts wrong using facts, reasoning, logic and evidence only for you to respond this time using the more usual standards "27 is more than 25. And you are only allowed 25 so if you buy 6 you have to sell 8 you thick gyet". Brilliant.
 
Mr Clarko said:
You, that is you coming out, I brought it out, you started by trying (and failing) to eloquently share your (incorrect) views on Newcastle, I rendered your thoughts wrong using facts, reasoning, logic and evidence only for you to respond this time using the more usual standards "27 is more than 25. And you are only allowed 25 so if you buy 6 you have to sell 8 you thick gyet". Brilliant.
Click to expand...

No mate. You reckon Newcastle have 27 players. So 27 plus 6 is 33, 33 less 25 is 8.
You stupid stupid boy. In your words. Brilliant. Now fuck off
 
Jack Torrance said:
Chelsea know how to do business mind. Nobody better at it
Click to expand...
Aye, it makes sense for a club their size to buy a large pool of young players that they then loan out. They can comfortably swallow the wages and should the player not make it, they still can make some money on their resale. Hell, even when they do kind of make it, they can sell for millions and if the player then goes on to become top class (Lukaku) they can afford to buy them back at the full price without risking rack and ruin.

They signed Lukaku for c£13m from their feeder club, loaned him out for a few seasons, sold him for c£30m and if they wanted to, could buy him back for £50m, effectively buying the finished product for £33m.

It's great if you can afford the initial outlay, I mean, they have about 37 players out on loan, most of whom were bought for fees, and I'm sure they're paying at least some of the wages, but that doesn't matter to Chelsea. And of course, if any of them come good, their transfer fees will go towards the next group of promising young lads.
 
Bear said:
Who's better Mitrovic or Daryl Murphy ?

Obviously Murphy because he was more effective?
Click to expand...
Quality and effectiveness are not the same thing, but I wouldn't necessarily disagree that Murphy is better than Mitrovic, I certainly wouldn't want to argue it. I'll ask you the same question who is better Atsu or Gouffran?
 
Mr Clarko said:
Quality and effectiveness are not the same thing, but I wouldn't necessarily disagree that Murphy is better than Mitrovic, I certainly wouldn't want to argue it. I'll ask you the same question who is better Atsu or Gouffran?
Click to expand...
Obviously your World Class manager thinks Gouffran you f***ing idiot that's why he played him more
 
Bear said:
Obviously your World Class manager thinks Gouffran you f***ing idiot that's why he played him more
Click to expand...
Is that why Newcastle have yet to offer Gouffran, who is out of contract, a new deal and have opted to pay Chelsea £6.2m for Atsu?
 
Mr Clarko said:
Is that why Newcastle have yet to offer Gouffran, who is out of contract, a new deal and have opted to pay Chelsea £6.2m for Atsu?
Click to expand...
So why didn't Fat Rafa start Atsu more ? 33 starts to 15

Btw £6.2m doesn't get you much these days enjoy Atsu he's f***ing shit
 
Bear said:
So why didn't Fat Rafa start Atsu more ? 33 starts to 15

Btw £6.2m doesn't get you much these days enjoy Atsu he's f***ing shit
Click to expand...
I'm sure the fantastic footballing mind of Rafa Benitez had great reasons for starting Gouffran more often then Atsu, maybe because Gouffran offers a more defensive quality, maybe because Atsu is a more effective player off the bench if the roles were reversed, again the important question is, which you have dodged much like the previous questions I have asked, is why Newcastle have yet to offer Gouffran a new deal, while opting to pay £6.2m for Atsu if Gouffran is "better"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top