2022/23 Anthony Gordon

[Bez2k2k]

Crazy though how reports spread. Yesterday it was a dead cert that Chelsea had bid 42million for him. Now, today, less than 24 hours later, Everton have said, this is untrue. I think these journo’s should be called out and made to explain themselves. It really is fake news if it’s made up!

 

[navidson]

We'll end up not selling him and getting relegated

Everton that

 

[BlueToff]

It seems the way alright - or people just like the drama of the window and the hope we will improve, transfers become exciting and addictive even if they arent good - that subjective hope that we will pull that plumb and change our fortunes.

You wouldn't sell your house this year for 500k, if you backed yourself with a reasonable chance to sell for 800k next year. if you look after it, do some work in improving it and making it a greater asset. The lad hasnt even had a full season as a starter and he cost us next to nothing. Thats the other thing, he holds no amortisation and his wage isnt even the annual canteen budget. While he is the lad we are anointing to replace the player we got 60 mill for. He enables an awful lot in terms of value. If you cross reference that with say a McNeill - its 4 mill a year in amortisation and 3-4 mill in wages, taking on about 7-8mill in costs for him.

£50 mill isn't an isolated figure, you have to take into account the replacements costs and what that adds to our already dire balance sheet - you see how much a McNeill costs us, Anthony is like hitting the jackpot, its the whole reason we have an academy.

Thing is I don't actually think Gordon will go on to ever be worth more than £50m mate

 

[NorthernBlue]

He’s done nothing to suggest that he’s currently worth 40 million or 120k a week. So file this under silly season and move on as it all just obvious bull. He’ll stay here to develop which is what he needs. If he does and someone comes in with a big bid in a year or two then he’ll go. If he doesn’t develop he’ll just be another youngster in a long line who never quite became what we hoped.

 

[Neiler]

Well we know that it'd likely be in instalments so it would appease next year's accounts etc.

Honestly think we'd be mad to turn it down if - big if mind - they do offer that.

But if he stays I'm happy too.

No mate, because his contract is terminated it all goes into the same year, your right it would be paid in installments but for the accounting it all fits in the same financial year as players are valued as assets. For Chelsea he will go in yearly for ammortisation and wages on the cost of the deal.

 

[Jcr1878]

Some people saying Gordon has deleted some posts off insta and cleared his bio

 

[Tony’s Carp]

Ok then we better concentrate in getting the original targets then.

I don’t know why the club would bother briefing that they are not entertaining offers. Chelsea could be back within hours with an offer we can’t refuse and they just look silly. The club should just stay quiet and see what comes in.

 

[Death]

It must be something to do with the bid spurs through in for z and now its snowballed.

 

[Jcr1878]

 

[Death]

Oh no, dont kid yourdelf I'm kneejerk like you and most of the rest of the pitchforkers....I dont wont Lampard out. I just withdraw any goodwill toward him and if we have a run of bad form I wont be there fighting his corner for him as I do with all managers.

That's me done with FL if this sale goes ahead....and there will be many many more who'll turn their backs on Lampard altogether if we go on a bad run...like you I expect.

I am eagerly anticipating post 'losing to forest' Davek

 

[BlueToff]

No mate, because his contract is terminated it all goes into the same year, your right it would be paid in installments but for the accounting it all fits in the same financial year as players are valued as assets. For Chelsea he will go in yearly for ammortisation and wages on the cost of the deal.

That's fine then, it would mean we are still in for help with P&L as it goes into the accounts this year and this year can count in the 3-year accounting period.

Basically, it'd be huge.

But we don't NEED to do it. It's not vital. However, if Chelsea did offer £50m then IMO that's much more than he's worth right now and ultimately I think is peak he'll ever be worth.

He's a talent, but I don't think he's going to be an £80m player.

 

[GoldenToffee]

Get him sold.

 

[Jcr1878]

Get him sold.

I've accepted it in my own mind, if they bid 50, pull the trigger imo

 

[Drico]

We're toothless with him...

He's scored four goals, 1 of which wasn't intentional and 2 of which were massive deflections, and he doesn't really create great chances.

I think he'll improve in all of those things but if Chelsea offer £50m we can easily reinvest it in players who will give us some bite, to stick with the nashers analogy.

It's hilarious, isn't it? "We can't afford to lose him". Ha ha. We can't afford to keep him! If there is a bid in excess of 40m - and if we can drive it closer to 50m - then it's a no-brainer to cash in and reinvest. We are, basically, wondering whether or not we should accept a fee in the same ballpark as was received for Richarlison for a player with a negligible end product. It's incredible that people think we have a choice here.

The club would be very brave to reject such business because if we continue our poor run of form and there are not some serious attacking incomings between now and the close of the window, the manager, director of football, and the board will all be in the crosshairs of an irate fanbase.

If Lampard wants to keep Gordon, that's his call. But he will be judged on that. If results continue to fall off a cliff, well, the Super Frank stuff won't be long for this world.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

“Could reach” is a very key part of any offer. We need a huge proportion of any deal to be guaranteed up front money because we’re now looking at needing every penny for a full attacking rebuild. Add ons won’t help.