John Stones transfer saga

[kenada_blue]

Cahill is a massive whopper who got lucky.

Chelsea bought him as cover for Luiz and Ivanovich, when he was 25, after playing over 100+ times for Bolton who were fighting relegation.

 

[By god I'm blue]

Sell Stones for 40M

8M for Evans
8M for another second rate defender
4M on some new blue gravel
10M OOC
5M to Barnsley
5M to mysteriously evaporate into thin air

Easy this football lark!

 

[toffeestillidie]

i bet you jagielka wasnt the defender we should go for when we signed him, or lescott before him. Heitinga came for a small fee in retrospect, distan as well.


point is all low amounts and all (perhaps not johnny) scouted to know how good they were before we signed them. So just saying there is noone to replace him is just silly.

Especially as i had not heard of lescott, not fancied jags and heitinga was one of those defenders who, as i have been replied to on here recently saying, 'would not come to a club like us'.

Jagielka was 25 when he signed, Lescott 24, Heitinga 26. Stones is 21 and is MILES ahead of where any of them were when they signed, and is already arguably on par with where each was in their respective peaks.

I'm sure, as you say, we could find someone serviceable to replace him, but that won't justify selling someone who could be a once-in-a-generation talent IMO.

 

[ijjysmith]

i bet you jagielka wasnt the defender we should go for when we signed him, or lescott before him. Heitinga came for a small fee in retrospect, distan as well.


point is all low amounts and all (perhaps not johnny) scouted to know how good they were before we signed them. So just saying there is noone to replace him is just silly.

Especially as i had not heard of lescott, not fancied jags and heitinga was one of those defenders who, as i have been replied to on here recently saying, 'would not come to a club like us'.

Wait.....what?!

 

[Ashtonian]

Have you forgotten that Moyes left two years ago and was replaced by Martinez?

whats that got to do with it? the issue was who could we sign, there is 4 examples of centre halves we signed who were good, two were mainstays for years, one international and the other we sold for 24 million!

 

[Ashtonian]

Wait.....what?!

Shocking i know. He was decent in the league below us when i was what 17ish? so wasnt following championship football too closely at the time .

then wolves came up and he was injured all year!

So yeah, hands up, had not really heard of the guy until we were linked with him

 

[toffeestillidie]

whats that got to do with it? the issue was who could we sign, there is 4 examples of centre halves we signed who were good, two were mainstays for years, one international and the other we sold for 24 million!

Right but those were all considered incredible signings, demonstrations of Moyes' prowess in the transfer market. There is NO guarantee we could repeat that feat.

 

[Alex Hindmarsh]

We've just got to hold out and not cave in, unless Stones himself comes out and says he wants out.

In a years time we'd get 50-60 mill post Euros and that could finally replace all the dross in the squad with some actual quality.

 

[davek]

Cahill is a massive whopper who got lucky.

Chelsea bought him as cover for Luiz and Ivanovich, when he was 25, after playing over 100+ times for Bolton who were fighting relegation.

I dont like what he's said there today. He's forgotten where he comes from and all this talk of big clubs is pathetic...another one who should have a read of the record books. However, I do rate Cahill. He's been every bit as crucial to Chelsea's recent success as Ivanovic and Terry. I'd have him over Jagielka that's for sure.

 

[Ashtonian]

Jagielka was 25 when he signed, Lescott 24, Heitinga 26. Stones is 21 and is MILES ahead of where any of them were when they signed, and is already arguably on par with where each was in their respective peaks.

I'm sure, as you say, we could find someone serviceable to replace him, but that won't justify selling someone who could be a once-in-a-generation talent IMO.

the thing is stones isnt miles aghead of them now, he is pretty much a young defender. Only difference is he is one that is clearly better than 90% of the rest.

This thread is rose tinted specs, we love him so we dont see that in fact he is still a fair bit away from the finished article. We spout valuations we put on his head simply on the basis of being a young english talent with a bit of a bright future.

And no we shouldnt sell him but if we get what we want in treturn then we will. Same as rooney, same as lescott, arteta etc

id say barkley would be the man in demand this summer if he didnt have a bad season.

 

[Goat]

I dont like what he's said there today. He's forgotten where he comes from and all this talk of big clubs is pathetic...another one who should have a read of the record books. However, I do rate Cahill. He's been every bit as crucial to Chelsea's recent success as Ivanovic and Terry. I'd have him over Jagielka that's for sure.

Get out.

 

[ijjysmith]

@Ashtonian hates John Stones. I can't beleive it.

 

[Ashtonian]

Right but those were all considered incredible signings, demonstrations of Moyes' prowess in the transfer market. There is NO guarantee we could repeat that feat.

so we might not repeat that feat? Well we did it 4 times there! all the same position as Stones!

Well that will fall on the manager and scouts surely? if they are doing their job then we should already know who we want. We can speculate on a forum all we like but they are the ones who know who they want to sign.

 

[Ashtonian]

@Ashtonian hates John Stones. I can't beleive it.

TBH my third favourite player actually

 

[terraloon]

Earlier someone posted about things not being as rosy in the garden as some would think and that reminded me of something that I read tucked away in the clubs accounts

You need to remember it was in relation to the previous years accounts but after the three major signings made in the summer 2104 transfer window

I won't quote word for word but we were told that there were on going discussions with the clubs bankers and whilst they couldn't give any guarantees it was hoped that the bank would provide similar facilities subject to a major review and dependent on player trading

Everton had turnover of about £120 million in 2013/14 with a wage bill of about £70 million sounds a lot £50 million left but that has to pay for everything else including servicing the debt, paying players upkeep of the ground etc etc and don't forget in that £120 million there was a £28 million surplus from player trading.

If people don't think a fee of £30. + million is a lot of money then it really has become a strange world

Again people talk about a war chest where will that be funded from?