Summer Transfer Window 2025 Thread

We signed Lukaku aged 21 so not sure the relevance. If all the better teams are signing younger players then there’s usually something in it.

In any event I think that talking about 27-29 being peak anymore isn’t true. Most of the players are playing much better and earlier in their career.
Totally disagree. Players are playing far longer past 30 nowadays than they ever have before.
 

We paid £8m for Gueye - not the same. Juve paid £42m for him last year. Will they really be selling for £27m less a year later
The fee reported is 15m euros. We don’t know if that’s true, just have to wait and see. And the fee paid for gueye is totally irrelevant. If we’d paid 40 million for Gueye at 27, would you now be saying that was poor value? We got a bargain simply because he had a low release clause.
 
We signed Lukaku aged 21 so not sure the relevance. If all the better teams are signing younger players then there’s usually something in it.

In any event I think that talking about 27-29 being peak anymore isn’t true. Most of the players are playing much better and earlier in their career.

Yes, he was, but was it his resale value you immediately thought about or were you happy we were signing a decent player?

The better teams are more likely to attract the younger players due to the modern conception of chasing Champions League football amongst other factors. I mean, look at the players we've had to sell due to that very factor. Onana is a recent example.
 

We shouldn't get to hung up on ages, we have to get what required, plus these young players liverpool and Chelsea ate buying are already playing amazing and we cant afford that.
if moyes finds us a great player who can fill our gaps then I don't care how old he is.
 
Jeez. Here we go again. Now we shouldn’t be signing players who are only 27 years old. Even if they’d be great for us. Absurd.

You can’t have us simultaneously sign young players with potential and also make a quantum leap up the league table next season. Some signings can be made that don’t offer everything. In this instance we could certainly disregard the resale value option.

Sure, City, Liverpool, sign younger players… but those players are also the best because they are sufficiently attractive as clubs. Plus it wasn’t always like that. They had to build. And Brighton? Well it’s their schtick. A selling club, though. I don’t want that for us; I want us to become a destination for big names rather than (exclusively) a place players come to build a reputation before vanishing.

Which means…. this summer - and for a few more summers - we want a MIX of players. Some young, dripping with potential / future value… and yes some established for whom the end of their time with us won’t bring with it a windfall.

So sick of the various - multiple -hurdles some of our fans obsessively impose upon any potential signings. Sounds wise, but IMHO is ludicrously one dimensional.
I agree on buying a mix of players but the older players should be on low fees. Their wages are usually much higher which I assume Luiz’s are too.

It’s not just Brighton is it. It’s also Bournemouth and Brentford.

We shouldn’t be trying to have a quantum leap up the table like Moshiri tried. We should be building each year. Top half should be the aim next year, Europe the year after.
 
Yes, he was, but was it his resale value you immediately thought about or were you happy we were signing a decent player?

The better teams are more likely to attract the younger players due to the modern conception of chasing Champions League football amongst other factors. I mean, look at the players we've had to sell due to that very factor. Onana is a recent example.
Brighton, Brentford and Bournemouth aren’t top teams. All buying younger players and developing them. That’s what we should be doing the next few years until we get a foot hold in the top half
 
Yes, he was, but was it his resale value you immediately thought about or were you happy we were signing a decent player?

The better teams are more likely to attract the younger players due to the modern conception of chasing Champions League football amongst other factors. I mean, look at the players we've had to sell due to that very factor. Onana is a recent example.

Yes we bought Onana at a young age. He wasn’t even that good for us and we made money on him. Kind of proving my point
 

Yes, he was, but was it his resale value you immediately thought about or were you happy we were signing a decent player?

The better teams are more likely to attract the younger players due to the modern conception of chasing Champions League football amongst other factors. I mean, look at the players we've had to sell due to that very factor. Onana is a recent example.
I get his point to a degree. You do need these youngsters with high ceilings and resale. Signing the likes of Lukaku for 27 million and selling for 90m is clearly of huge benefit to the football club. We picked up Branthwaite for 1 million, we’ll make an even bigger profit on him. It’s generally the way you should go, but that doesn’t mean every signing has to be that way. Turning your nose up at a player because he’s just turned 27 is quite frankly bonkers.
 
Brighton, Brentford and Bournemouth aren’t top teams. All buying younger players and developing them. That’s what we should be doing the next few years until we get a foot hold in the top half

We have done similar to them, though, mate. Look how we found Branthwaite and what his value is now. The other side of the argument is that you need the slightly older heads in the squad more often than not. I say older when I'm almost 40, Luiz is 27!
 
I get his point to a degree. You do need these youngsters with high ceilings and resale. Signing the likes of Lukaku for 27 million and selling for 90m is clearly of huge benefit to the football club. We picked up Branthwaite for 1 million, we’ll make an even bigger profit on him. It’s generally the way you should go, but that doesn’t mean every signing has to be that way. Turning your nose up at a player because he’s just turned 27 is quite frankly bonkers.

Just made my post before reading yours. Spooky!
 
It's based on more than recent history, though. It's also based on current finances and, looking ahead, potential for growth.

There are at least 7 teams, possibly 8, who are way ahead of us on both these measures and other teams whose current budgets are healthier than ours. Barring the odd Leicester or Forest having a cracking season, financial clout is the best predictor of league position. It has almost zero to do with how good we were for a few seasons 40 years ago.

Any Blackburn fans who said they weren't satisfied with finishing 7th in the Prem and not winning a trophy because they were the best British team for a year in the 90s and were a good team in the 50s would rightly be derided as lunatics.

We have a rich history, but it's history and it isn't a reasonable standard by which to judge what this team should be capable of. I regret it as much as you that we lost our way in the 90s, but regret doesn't alter the truth.
You are right but I still expect us to win every game we play and always will.
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top