Mr-Paul Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 I've never said I said I support Liverpool but carry on. Also that's rich coming an Arsenal fan whose club has an unhealthy predilection for Southamptons teenage kids. Unhealthy? What the hell?! Grow up. And this "I've never said who I support" crap isn't even funny. It's clear you're a Liverpool fan, cut the act, please.
Wii Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 Unhealthy? What the hell?! Grow up. And this "I've never said who I support" crap isn't even funny. It's clear you're a Liverpool fan, cut the act, please. Jesus! Relax, it's a joke and I wasn't talking to you. They've done as much business with the Saints as anyone. Oxlade-Chamberlain, Walcott and now Chambers. All teenagers at the time of signing. Did you never hear of banter between soccer fans? And I did say who I support, Barcelona.
Ellmeister Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 Makes it all the worse. Do we have any Southampton fans? They will have earnt over £100million but lost the majority of their team!
Wii Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 Makes it all the worse. Do we have any Southampton fans? They will have earnt over £100million but lost the majority of their team! I've never seen one here. They might not done selling yet either. There's still a lot of interest in Osvaldo, Schneiderlin and Rodriguez.
Mr-Paul Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 @Wii 3 players in 8 years is totally excessive, don't you think? And it's called football :p I live in Southampton so have a little soft spot for them, but of course I don't mind if their best players would prefer to go to Arsenal! All the Saints fans I know are genuinely gutted with how this summer is going. I wonder if the exodus would be as massive if Pochettino had stayed? There would inevitably be some departures, but not as many in my opinion. By the sounds of it, all the players were very fond of him. It's going to be interesting how they fare this season. They've got the money to re-invest, but it needs to be spent wisely, and hopefully Koeman can get his new team to gel quickly. It would be a shame for them to struggle after they've risen back up from League One and performed so well last season. Southampton have one of the best academies in the country, and there are still some decent prospects at the club.
Ellmeister Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 My £100million is including the expected poor moves to Tottenham. Think without them it is £92m? This season I think there'll be a wider gulf in the league between top and bottom.Last season there was never really an easy game as lots of teams were taking points off everyone but I think top 6 or so have spent a lot this window and enhanced the gap.
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 (edited) Makes it all the worse. Do we have any Southampton fans? They will have earnt over £100million but lost the majority of their team! One of my children who I taught this year is a big Southampton fan. He was adamant that Pochettino would stay, but conceded that one big player would go, probably Luke Shaw. He was heart broken when the manager left and seeing Lallana linked to Liverpool was a blow. Can't remember if we were in school or not when Lallana eventually moved. There's a fair few people in my school (parents, mostly) who are Saints fans. The general impression seemed to be that at least one big player (either Lallana or Rodriguez) would go, but if they could keep the majority of the team that they should be ok for next season. All this money is good, but it's temporary. Now every club knows that Southampton have stacks of money and are desperate for players, so the prices are all going to be jacked up. Long term wise, the players will see the club as a stepping stone before moving to a bigger club, or they may go there with the intention of getting a bigger move at the end of it. I can't imagine the fans are happy. Whether the club have 40 million or 80 million in the bank is irrelevant. Without the right players, they're not going to be in the Premier League next season, seats won't get filled in the stadium, so they may end up losing a lot more in the long run. Edited July 28, 2014 by Fierce_LiNk
Ellmeister Posted July 28, 2014 Posted July 28, 2014 One of my children who I taught this year is a big Southampton fan. He was adamant that Pochettino would stay, but conceded that one big player would go, probably Luke Shaw. He was heart broken when the manager left and seeing Lallana linked to Liverpool was a blow. Can't remember if we were in school or not when Lallana eventually moved. There's a fair few people in my school (parents, mostly) who are Saints fans. The general impression seemed to be that at least one big player (either Lallana or Rodriguez) would go, but if they could keep the majority of the team that they should be ok for next season. All this money is good, but it's temporary. Now every club knows that Southampton have stacks of money and are desperate for players, so the prices are all going to be jacked up. Long term wise, the players will see the club as a stepping stone before moving to a bigger club, or they may go there with the intention of getting a bigger move at the end of it. I can't imagine the fans are happy. Whether the club have 40 million or 80 million in the bank is irrelevant. Without the right players, they're not going to be in the Premier League next season, seats won't get filled in the stadium, so they may end up losing a lot more in the long run. We talking about Southampton or Manchester United? :p
Wii Posted July 29, 2014 Posted July 29, 2014 Southampton manager Ronald Koeman took to Twitter - in what could be seen as poking fun at the club's lack of personnel - after Calum Chambers joined Rickie Lambert, Adam Lallana, Dejan Lovren and Luke Shaw in heading out of the club, posting a picture of an empty pitch and the words: "Ready for #Training!"
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 30, 2014 Posted July 30, 2014 So, Everton stumped up the cash and paid £28 million for Lukaku. It's strange, everywhere else was reporting around £23.5 million, so not sure where that final price came from. Hefty. But, he'll get them goals and he's only going to get better. I'm glad he's actually at a team that will give him football.
Kav Posted July 30, 2014 Posted July 30, 2014 I am gutted we never gave Lukaku a run out in the first team, I'd have liked to have seen what he could do.
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 30, 2014 Posted July 30, 2014 I am gutted we never gave Lukaku a run out in the first team, I'd have liked to have seen what he could do. I'm a bit annoyed because Chelsea did the same thing with De Bruyne. I find it even more bizarre that Torres is STILL being given chances, yet Lukaku couldn't get a look in. It's even stranger when you realise that Drogba has come back, Torres is still there and Lukaku has now gone. Something isn't quite right there, in my opinion. A bit of a kick in the teeth to a player who has come to England at a young age and scored goals for West Brom and Everton.
-Dem0- Posted July 30, 2014 Posted July 30, 2014 Yeah, I think he would've done well for them. Especially when they needed a striker. I find it even more bizarre that Torres is STILL being given chances, yet Lukaku couldn't get a look in. It's even stranger when you realise that Drogba has come back, Torres is still there and Lukaku has now gone. Lol, wow. I forgot that they still had Torres.
Ellmeister Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Mourinho trying to show he's the boss and no divas allowed? Just a theory, otherwise I can't really understand what is going on. In terms of financial fair play, we seem to be selling off quite a few to keep the books balanced...doesn't seem to be the same for Arsenal, United, City and Liverpool. Or am I wrong?
Emerald Emblem Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) Mourinho trying to show he's the boss and no divas allowed? Just a theory, otherwise I can't really understand what is going on. That would appear to have something to do with it. To be fair to the bloke, with how misfiring the first and second choice strikers were, he could very well have made himself first choice if given a run out. Edited July 31, 2014 by Emerald Emblem
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Lukaku, a diva? Come on. What's wrong with a striker coming to a club and wanting to be first choice ahead of the likes of Torres, Demba Ba and an ageing Samuel Eto'o last season. He's done the business at West Brom, Everton and Anderlecht. Well within his rights to be the first choice striker. In fact, wouldn't we/Jose be criticising Lukaku if he didn't want to be the first choice striker? Who wants to go to a club and sit on the bench? I respect Lukaku for not being satisfied with just being a bench warmer, like players such as Scott Sinclair or Jack Rodwell. Blatantly it's to do with FFP. Plus, Everton came in with a big offer and so Chelsea took it. It's just the latest in a long line of young players who go to Chelsea and don't get the football that they need though. There's still the likes of Van Ginkel, Marco Marin, Romeu, Josh McEachran, Victor Moses, Bertrand, Lucas Piazon and Matic when he was there the first time; plus players who have left like De Bruyne and Daniel Sturridge. Unless you're already a well established player like Fabregas, why would you go there?
Ellmeister Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 I agree. We should field a B team under the name Seachel and claim its a coastal down in Kent for all our young players.
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 I agree. We should field a B team under the name Seachel and claim its a coastal down in Kent for all our young players. Actually, get the Chelsea owner to buy Southampton (probably really cheap now) and loan all the players from the Chelsea first eleven/first team contenders and put them there.
MadDog Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Mourinho trying to show he's the boss and no divas allowed? Just a theory, otherwise I can't really understand what is going on. In terms of financial fair play, we seem to be selling off quite a few to keep the books balanced...doesn't seem to be the same for Arsenal, United, City and Liverpool. Or am I wrong? We're in a good position regarding FFP, and once we sell Agger to Barca we'll actually be in profit for this window.
Emerald Emblem Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Arsenal are in a great financial situation since we've spent so long preparing for it, the only money being spent is self generated revenue.
bob Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Yeah i don't think anyone has been all that silly this transfer window. Except Southampton obviously.
Blade Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 We have beaten Turkish champions Fenerbahce 2-1 at Bramall Lane! Guuu on Blades
Ellmeister Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Completely forgot about Suarez leaving! Plus Borini, so Ignore what I said about Liverpool. Who have United or Arsenal sold recently?
Eddage Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 United have sold Buttner, Evra and Bebe, and no longer have Giggs, Vidic and Ferdinand. So whilst that's hardly anything in terms of transfer money recieved, it is six players off the books. You just know van Gaal is gonna offload a fair few players as well once he's seen them on the US tour.
Emerald Emblem Posted July 31, 2014 Posted July 31, 2014 Arsenal have only sold Eisfeld to Fulham, 12 further players including Bendtner have had their contracts expire.
Recommended Posts