By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:07 - Jun 27 by Luk38644
As others have said today and regarding transfers before this (Murphy, Mings, Cresswell), it's a decent deal if the money is heavily reinvested.
If it isn't, we may as well not bother selling him.
It always is reinvested, just that some seem to think going towards wages doesn't constitute reinvesting.
For the record, I think it's a very good fee for someone who has struggled to get fit for more than a handful of games in a row and, for all his attributes, could be blamed for a lot of goals during his time here.
10
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:11 - Jun 27 with 5141 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:09 - Jun 27 by PhilTWTD
It always is reinvested, just that some seem to think going towards wages doesn't constitute reinvesting.
For the record, I think it's a very good fee for someone who has struggled to get fit for more than a handful of games in a row and, for all his attributes, could be blamed for a lot of goals during his time here.
Reinvested as in used to offset the often bandied £5-6m ME puts in?
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:09 - Jun 27 by PhilTWTD
It always is reinvested, just that some seem to think going towards wages doesn't constitute reinvesting.
For the record, I think it's a very good fee for someone who has struggled to get fit for more than a handful of games in a row and, for all his attributes, could be blamed for a lot of goals during his time here.
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:09 - Jun 27 by PhilTWTD
It always is reinvested, just that some seem to think going towards wages doesn't constitute reinvesting.
For the record, I think it's a very good fee for someone who has struggled to get fit for more than a handful of games in a row and, for all his attributes, could be blamed for a lot of goals during his time here.
You're probably right Phil but we have to balance that against the fact that we let go one of our most promising defenders in some time as part of the Webster deal. It's not just about the cash that went out and is now coming in. It's all hypothetical but with careful nurturing we could currently have a young centre half who is worth more than we're selling Webster for.
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:11 - Jun 27 by SouperJim
Reinvested as in used to offset the often bandied £5-6m ME puts in?
Which is largely wages, of course. I think PH will probably get a fair chunk to spend in terms of fees though in this instance. We're not going to splash £3m or £4m on one player but probably over a few deals.
1
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:17 - Jun 27 with 5076 views
I like him and maybe his potential will see him get moire valuable. But I think for the needs of the Championship we can find a cost-effective replacement and use the money ... either to plug the gap or spend a little, doesn't matter as it's all the same pot.
Pronouns: He/Him
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:19 - Jun 27 with 5068 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:13 - Jun 27 by soupytwist
You're probably right Phil but we have to balance that against the fact that we let go one of our most promising defenders in some time as part of the Webster deal. It's not just about the cash that went out and is now coming in. It's all hypothetical but with careful nurturing we could currently have a young centre half who is worth more than we're selling Webster for.
Perhaps, I've always felt he wasn't as good as he needed to be defensively, although obviously a decent footballer. Too many mistakes. Maybe over time he would have been worth a lot more but - particularly with his injury record - I reckon we've done as well as we could have done.
1
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:20 - Jun 27 with 5045 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:15 - Jun 27 by PhilTWTD
Which is largely wages, of course. I think PH will probably get a fair chunk to spend in terms of fees though in this instance. We're not going to splash £3m or £4m on one player but probably over a few deals.
I think what frustrates supporters is wages are hidden costs, so we can't see where the money goes. I have no problem with us not paying seven figure transfer fees for players if the money we're making on sales is actually going back into the squad. What worries me is the club have a habit of giving politicians answers on this kind of thing, "reinvested in the club" etc. I was led to believe that ME's £6m a season claim had been debunked via the accounts and in fact large portions of incoming fees in recent years had meant Evans reduced what he needed to put in?
For all those that answered 'no' - I wonder if you'd be happy with is paying 5m for a player that has spent most of his time at his last club out injured ?
1
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:30 - Jun 27 with 4984 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:20 - Jun 27 by SouperJim
I think what frustrates supporters is wages are hidden costs, so we can't see where the money goes. I have no problem with us not paying seven figure transfer fees for players if the money we're making on sales is actually going back into the squad. What worries me is the club have a habit of giving politicians answers on this kind of thing, "reinvested in the club" etc. I was led to believe that ME's £6m a season claim had been debunked via the accounts and in fact large portions of incoming fees in recent years had meant Evans reduced what he needed to put in?
Not been debunked, it's a fact that ME put in c£6m or so a season for a number of years. Some years when players have been sold the cash coming in for them has covered some of the shortfall. In the year Mings was sold, the year when there was a profit, there would have been the usual loss but for his sale in the last week or so of the accountancy year.
All fees have been reinvested, just not in the way some imagine they might be. Back in the days of David Sheepshanks the club broke even so was more visible that a fee of £6m led to a number of smaller fees being paid. Not really the same now when there's such a significant annual shortfall and the markets for loanees and free signings where wages are the only outlay.
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:39 - Jun 27 with 4919 views
Presumably he has to play every game for the next 4 seasons, win the Champions League, play for England and negotiate a Brexit deal that pleases everyone in order for us to get to £8m?
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:43 - Jun 27 with 4883 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:30 - Jun 27 by PhilTWTD
Not been debunked, it's a fact that ME put in c£6m or so a season for a number of years. Some years when players have been sold the cash coming in for them has covered some of the shortfall. In the year Mings was sold, the year when there was a profit, there would have been the usual loss but for his sale in the last week or so of the accountancy year.
All fees have been reinvested, just not in the way some imagine they might be. Back in the days of David Sheepshanks the club broke even so was more visible that a fee of £6m led to a number of smaller fees being paid. Not really the same now when there's such a significant annual shortfall and the markets for loanees and free signings where wages are the only outlay.
For a number of years, but not every year? So Evans will cover a loss at the end of the year if there is one, but how much this is will depend on any fees coming in?
If that is correct, there's the problem. Any fee we receive for a player makes us no better off in the eyes of supporters, as it just reduces what Evans will need to put in to cover our losses. Saying it's reinvested may be technically correct, but it's just spin. It doesn't make us any better off as a club, it just changes how much Evans has to cover. If Evans put in a fixed amount every season regardless of player sales, then the manager would have something to work with.
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:41 - Jun 27 by soupytwist
Presumably he has to play every game for the next 4 seasons, win the Champions League, play for England and negotiate a Brexit deal that pleases everyone in order for us to get to £8m?
Probably. I'd certainly weight a deal for him like that. Sounds similar to the Cresswell deal where we were due further payments every 30 games.
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:49 - Jun 27 with 4833 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:46 - Jun 27 by PhilTWTD
Probably. I'd certainly weight a deal for him like that. Sounds similar to the Cresswell deal where we were due further payments every 30 games.
Me too. I still think that of the three clubs in this arrangement - us, Pompey and Bristol City we've somehow come out worse by letting Clarke go (unless his value in the deal was similar to the cash amount paid, which it won't be), having Webster for 53 games and only getting £3.5m to spend now.
Pompey have had a quality defender for two seasons who has got better and would probably cost Bristol City only a bit less than what they've paid for Webster. Bristol have got a good defender who probably won't be as unlucky with injuries as he has been recently.
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:49 - Jun 27 with 4834 views
There were times where Webster genuinely excited me. Those lofted balls that oddly became hoofs to some, were so great to see and totally reinvigorated us. The game at Hillsborough where Lawrence got his goal and we hit that run springs immediately to mind.
He also didn't always sit comfortably at this level. I think it was when partnered with Berra early on and he was caught out of position often enough to cost us goals, which never improved enough for me. Likewise, when he came back from injury he was very ginger on the ball and took a while to get going again.
There's no doubt he has talent and when Mick spotted him, he was an evolution on what we had. There's a reading of this that Bristol are now much bigger than us, but I think it's more a reality that are just bigger spending.
Added to the fact they've got £7m for a player it cements us as behind them in the pecking order financially. There's every chance Webster could be rued, he has the talent to go on. If he does it, before Ipswich get promoted then people will be upset and predictably so.
However, as a replacement for Flint it is an odd move. He's chalk and cheese so I assume either Bristol are reshaping their squad, or someone else will fulfil the corners and clattering role Flint is good for.
Despite the hope and possibilities that Hurst brings, it's hard to believe Evans will bring enough to the table to really push us on. We've had years of being starved, if we don't see it soon from him and the team improves then it'll be just another move to keep us standing still. Which isn't good enough.
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:43 - Jun 27 by SouperJim
For a number of years, but not every year? So Evans will cover a loss at the end of the year if there is one, but how much this is will depend on any fees coming in?
If that is correct, there's the problem. Any fee we receive for a player makes us no better off in the eyes of supporters, as it just reduces what Evans will need to put in to cover our losses. Saying it's reinvested may be technically correct, but it's just spin. It doesn't make us any better off as a club, it just changes how much Evans has to cover. If Evans put in a fixed amount every season regardless of player sales, then the manager would have something to work with.
I can see that but I think the way it's looked at is they have a set wage bill - which has grown year on year recently although not by much - to work to within essentially regardless - although I think it grew a bit more than it would otherwise in the year Murph was sold - of additional income from sales.
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 17:07 - Jun 27 with 4745 views
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 16:49 - Jun 27 by soupytwist
Me too. I still think that of the three clubs in this arrangement - us, Pompey and Bristol City we've somehow come out worse by letting Clarke go (unless his value in the deal was similar to the cash amount paid, which it won't be), having Webster for 53 games and only getting £3.5m to spend now.
Pompey have had a quality defender for two seasons who has got better and would probably cost Bristol City only a bit less than what they've paid for Webster. Bristol have got a good defender who probably won't be as unlucky with injuries as he has been recently.
Someone at the club said to me at the time that they believed that Clarke was the better prospect and does seem to be working out that way, although to a great degree due to Webster's fitness problems. I'm not sure he's been unlucky, unlike McGoldrick and Hyam, for example, most of his injuries have been the same ankle which was rebuilt, rather than a number of unrelated problems.
0
Happy with £5m for Adam Webster? on 17:12 - Jun 27 with 4693 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
