2022/23 Anthony Gordon

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's a serious call for the club to make, and I'd be interested to know who'll have the final say. My first reaction was to hope that he'll stay, but then if you'd told me in 2016 that Barkley would end up leaving for the amount he did, I'd never have believed it.

I properly rate him, but perhaps this is the peak of his value. I don't know.

We should have sold Barkley earlier. We have not got a good track record of turning very talented 18-22 year olds into world class players. Theres obviously a number of structural reasons why (mainly terrible culture from top down filled with losers) but that's where we are at. Theres nothing wrong with taking a fee, even in the acceptance that he may go on to be better.

What we have done with Gordon feels a sweet spot for us. We got similar with Barkley and he sort of stagnated. Not sure if Gordon will, but I'm happy cashing the 40-50m insurance policy now that says he doesnt go on to the next level.
 
We absolutely could Tim, but we just wouldn't be able to spend another £40-50m in the market if we did keep him. We'd be restricted to limited spending/loans.

Which, btw, I'd be fine with, as I think we'd still have enough to stay clear of danger.

But I'd be a lot more confident if we were able to spend another £50m.

See your point on MGW though I don't think it's right to write him off as 'not a goalscorer at this level'. For one he is more of a versatile attacking mid/second striker type so we wouldn't be wanting him as the striker, and he does have a lot of talent. But yes, £40m would be too much.
There are an awful lot of other players we really needed to move on so its disappointing that there's no movement on that and instead we may lose Gordon.

We are dealing with Chelsea so we need to push them as far as we can. We need to be prepared to hold out for the very best possible deal and use the precedent they set this summer in our favour.

I think we've put ourselves in a bad position with the daft McNeil deal. That money needed to go on a goalscorer. Now we have no goals and may need to sell ANOTHER important first team player to fix it.

Its pretty depressing stuff. Especially the fact our future would then be in the hands of the recruitment team and I have next to no faith in them.
 

Thing is like we hadn't sold our best players for 3 years before this season Matty and we were still crap

FWIW, Gordon isn't one of our best players, he has a lot of work to do. But, we do not absolutely HAVE to sell.

However, if Chelsea want to offer £50m for a lad with 4 PL goals, one of which was an inadvertent clip of his heal off a Richarlison shot, and what - 2 assists? - then honestly, we have to seriously think about it don't we?

it sends out all the wrong messages mate as an actual club. sell your best players not build a team around them
 
I'm not on the fence mate. He should go if those figures are made.

The point is more that people seem to underplay his performance level.
I think generally he has performed well all things considered but ultimately his end product has left a lot to be desired.

But, of course as you rightly say, that's been in a struggling team with other poorer players (although we've downgraded from last season as that's when he was playing with Richarlison and now he's starting with McNeil)
 
There are an awful lot of other players we really needed to move on so its disappointing that there's no movement on that and instead we may lose Gordon.

We are dealing with Chelsea so we need to push them as far as we can. We need to be prepared to hold out for the very best possible deal and use the precedent they set this summer in our favour.

I think we've put ourselves in a bad position with the daft McNeil deal. That money needed to go on a goalscorer. Now we have no goals and may need to sell ANOTHER important first team player to fix it.

Its pretty depressing stuff. Especially the fact our future would then be in the hands of the recruitment team and I have next to no faith in them.

were going backwards
 

We need more Gordons not to be getting rid.

Gana back and a decent forward cover for DCL, whilst keeping Gordon is what we need.

We are a club that makes bugger all money, Richarlison fills last year's hole - Gordon could do this year and Kean the following one. Else we are selling DCL with our trousers down as everyone knows we need the cash.

Might mean we can shift others like Allan from a position of strength too.
 
I want both.

For FFP scam wise.

60m Gordon
30m each for their boys

Take it or go pester somebody else, would be my stance.

Theres an FFP fiddle to be done, and partly why it alarms me to see Batshuayi mentioned (who has no value and is not someone I want to see on a long term deal). I hope that is just Chelsea's end though.

One issue with Gallacher/Broja is how we value the. I'm not sure we value either at as high as 20m. Maybe we do though, and it becomes quite easy to conclude.
 
it sends out all the wrong messages mate as an actual club. sell your best players not build a team around them
That's fine, I see the point.

But he's not actually that good. So if we got an offer of £50m, it could be too good to turn down.

I like Gordon, he'd be a miss and we'd need to replace him quickly but we would have money to do it and frankly, you can get far more productive players (and talented) for much less than £50m.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top