City having a bid of £38m turned down for Bonnuuci apparently.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I do think people should read @The Esk thread on wage cost implications to probably understand the bigger picture on the Stones front. I don't think it can be put into the Rooney/Rodwell/Arteta/Lescott/Jeffers/Ball camp where we reluctantly sold our best young talent. This is a means to an ends.
Nobody at the club would want to lose John Stones of that I'm certain. We certainly don't need to sell him to make up our transfer kitty that is there anyway and Koeman can sign pretty much any player he likes providing he can convince them to come. However there are real complications when it comes to wages. These are not restrictions placed on the club internally from lack of drive or ambition by the board but external factors from the Premier League. We can only raise wages 7 million a year.
In order to add the 4/5/6 top class international players we want too we need the funds and also a way to get around the wage restrictions. The funds are in place from Moshiri but the wages issue is thorny. We want to be a top 4 team and to do so we will have to probably double our wage bill to be in line with them. We are prevented from doing so. A short term solution is selling Stones for 50 million as it will allow us to raise our wages by 40 million this season on top of the 7 million allowance.
It really is a means to an end. There is a sadness to it but trading at the right moment is an important part of any business. Even if he does go on to be as good as Bobby Moore and captain England is the trade the right one for us to do now, to allow us to add an additional 40 million to our wage bill (IE 6 players on circa 140k per week?). That is the dilemma we are left with.
I understand people saying just trade our squad players. I have no problem with that and I would happily move on half a dozen squad players (for different reasons, mainly to allow a pathway for younger players but also to get rid of the ethos of failure). However we do have to be realistic in that it won't be easy to shift these lads on and we may end up making a loss on them (which defeats the object). The days when we could offload of squad players to poorer premier league teams is diminishing. All teams have lots of money and most would not be massively enthused about players such as Oviedo, Kone, Cleverley & Lennon. The money all the clubs have have opened doors to the foreign market. More foreign managers have also aided this process.
I see people plucking numbers for players we can sell, but there needs to be somebody willing to pay that figure otherwise it is irrelevant. We know somebody is willing to pay around 50 million for Stones so it becomes a concrete decision not one based in hopes or ambition.
I also appreciate some may look at some transfers and say Stones is undervalued. I would urge caution on this. Particularly in this window it is going to be crazy. There will always be examples of players going which will make Stones look cheap. There will also be players going that will make him look overpriced. Everyone will use Troy Deeney as their example. That's fair enough. However you can also get international Centre backs for half of the 50 million of what we'd get for Stones. I do think we shouldn't lose site of the end goal with Stones though, which is allowing us to trade more effectively.
Interesting thought i had mate, with us having to pay Barnsley 15% of the profit we make - so around the 6.6-7.5m mark depending what figures you believe for a final sale price, what's the odds that we are going to try to sort a payment of equivalent value to Barnsley to wave their sell on clause ...
If we are selling to free up wage space within the STCC guidelines then i would think that it would make perfect sense for us to go about it that way
@The Esk , would that actually be legal and do you think it's something the club has actually been trying to sort out?
Good summary. I think the decision on Stones depends entirely on how radical a transfer window we aim to have. We can't know right now what Koeman and Moshiri intend - whether we recruit six top level players like you hypothesise or not - and it should only be when Koeman has fully assessed the squad that a decision is made re. Stones.
On top of the £7m allowance we have to remember that Osman, Pienaar, Howard and Hibbert have been released. A conservative estimate would have their collective salaries at around £7.5m (probably a bit more). The potential sales of 1-2 other players (a £5m sale of Cleverley, for example, isn't beyond imagination and would free up another £7m for wage increases) would be enough to make 3-4 top (~£100-140k per week) acquisitions.
It would be tight, but there's certainly a way of improving the squad significantly without selling Stones or Lukaku. Selling Stones only makes sense if, on top of Mata and Witsel, we sign another three or four players of comparable quality. It's debatable whether or not we require such a huge overhaul.
They're possibly moving on from Stones.
he just said u dont sell your best player think he meant our best player. theres potential but hes not improving at all this year was a waste for stones we lost min 10 points because of stones faultThink he meant ONE of our best players
For me he has the potential to be the best though
We wont win the treble we all crave if our centre back cant do cruyff turns and panenkas and swan out of the defence with the ball at his feet
Move with the times everybody
hes so slopy manUnder Koeman, I'm very confident he would seriously excel. With his natural talent and learning from one of the best defenders I've seen in my time in Koeman, Stones would be a silly boy to look elsewhere....
That's a great post.
I for one don't think we need a massive squad overhaul either - if we can get Rom to stay and Stones to stay, then bar a first choice keeper and back up striker we're pretty much set should the Mata and Witsel deals be all wrapped up.
Good summary. I think the decision on Stones depends entirely on how radical a transfer window we aim to have. We can't know right now what Koeman and Moshiri intend - whether we recruit six top level players like you hypothesise or not - and it should only be when Koeman has fully assessed the squad that a decision is made re. Stones.
On top of the £7m allowance we have to remember that Osman, Pienaar, Howard and Hibbert have been released. A conservative estimate would have their collective salaries at around £7.5m (probably a bit more). The potential sales of 1-2 other players (a £5m sale of Cleverley, for example, isn't beyond imagination and would free up another £7m for wage increases) would be enough to make 3-4 top (~£100-140k per week) acquisitions.
It would be tight, but there's certainly a way of improving the squad significantly without selling Stones or Lukaku. Selling Stones only makes sense if, on top of Mata and Witsel, we sign another three or four players of comparable quality. It's debatable whether or not we require such a huge overhaul.
Or, someone work hard over the next 12 months and find 40m in sponsorship? There's a thoughtThe problem i this lies in the figures mate though
Mata and Witsel - wages have been estimated at 140k pw each (14.56m combined)
Dowell and Davies signing contracts and Stekelenberg joining the three prob come in about 50k pw (2.6m)
Extension for Lukaku 75k going to 140k pw (3.38m)
Extension for Barkley 60k going to 110k pw (2.6m)
and if he sin't sold we'd need to extend Stones as well or risk losing him for nothing 30k going to 110k pw (4.68m)
27.82m increase in the wage bill from just those activities alone, going off your suggestions (7.5m available from the currently releasd players +7m annual allowed increase to wages by prem rules + 7m freed up from the sale of Cleverley (if we managed to get a buyer for that price) would see us allowed by the rules to increase it by 21m
we'd be in breach of the wages limitation rules by 6.82m already at that juncture...
Even assuming none of the academy lads receive contracts (highly unlikely to be the case) and that no other existing players will be pushing for improved contracts (Mori, Deulofeu, Coleman etc) - also highly unlikely we would need to find 6.82m reduction in wages further than what we already had managed at that point, and thats without even factoring in that at that point we would still need to bring in a starting keeper and a second striker at a bare minimum - for purpose of the example say Begovic arrives (currently on 80k pw at Chelsea and say Pelle - let's say 70k pw) thatd be another 7.8m wages on top of the 6.8m we are already over - meaning we'd now have to reduce the wage bill by another 14.8m in total or roughly 285k pw we'd need to shed in wages from the already trimmed down squad...
It just isn't a feasible thing for us to do mate, honestly we will need to sell Stones, the fact we are trying to get both Witsel and Mata in has already showwn that we are selling him IMO.
Or, someone work hard over the next 12 months and find 40m in sponsorship? There's a thought
If they up the bid and sign Bonucci you can bet they wont be signing Stones.If you can get Bonucci for a penny less than Stones then I'd well go for it if I was Pep. Proven quality with years left in him.
If they up the bid and sign Bonucci you can bet they wont be signing Stones.
Bonucci, Kompany ,Ottamendi ,Mangala & Di Michellis cant see Pep wanting any more .