Transfer Window Thread

[Hong Kong Phooey]

He's a genuine quality player who would probably cost a fee in excess of 10 mil.

Take that into consideration, then look deep, deep down.

There is your answer.

I'm trying not to be overly negative as Yarmolenko, on the back of yesterdays superb win and performance, would give everyone at the club a massive lift.

But we were supposedly in for Shaqiri, but wouldn't/couldn't match Stoke's 12 million and only offered a loan so he went there instead.

If we have the money for Yarmolenko, then why didn't we stump it up for Shaqiri last week instead of only offering a loan?

I fear we can't afford him, unless we're selling a player to generate funds..

 

[royalblue66]

the Echo, scraping the barrel here.

 

[Furey1878]

I'm trying not to be overly negative as Yarmolenko, on the back of yesterdays superb win and performance, would give everyone at the club a massive lift.

But we were supposedly in for Shaqiri, but wouldn't/couldn't match Stoke's 12 million and only offered a loan so he went there instead.

If we have the money for Yarmolenko, then why didn't we stump it up for Shaqiri last week instead of only offering a loan?

I fear we can't afford him, unless we're selling a player to generate funds..

In the mystical dreamland/hopefully true scenario in which we're genuinely in for Yarmolenko. It could well be that we cooled down our interest in Shaqiri after hearing Yarmolenko was available. Yarmolenko is currently more experienced and proven than Shaqiri who is currently largely potential.

 

[bluestevon]

I'm trying not to be overly negative as Yarmolenko, on the back of yesterdays superb win and performance, would give everyone at the club a massive lift.

But we were supposedly in for Shaqiri, but wouldn't/couldn't match Stoke's 12 million and only offered a loan so he went there instead.

If we have the money for Yarmolenko, then why didn't we stump it up for Shaqiri last week instead of only offering a loan?

I fear we can't afford him, unless we're selling a player to generate funds..

cos theirs major doubts about shaqiri's character mate, none of that applies to Yarmolenko

 

[bluestevon]

In the mystical dreamland/hopefully true scenario in which we're genuinely in for Yarmolenko. It could well be we cooled down our interest in Shaqiri after hearing Yarmolenko was available. Yarmolenko is more experience and proven than Shaqiri who is currently largely potential.

Character issues dictated that we would only want to loan shaqiri to see how he worked out mate

 

[Furey1878]

Character issues dictated that we would only want to loan shaqiri to see how he worked out mate

Yeah, I recall reading something about that. Apparently we made enquiries back in Jan as well with regards to Shaqiri's character.

 

[PhilEFC]

100%.
Ive seen two very good sources have said its a lot more along than just 'considering a move'.

1 Privately messaged me earlier.
The other on the Everton Forum from the main man.

Hope so mate. He would be a great signing.

 

[Professor Toffee]

I'm trying not to be overly negative as Yarmolenko, on the back of yesterdays superb win and performance, would give everyone at the club a massive lift.

But we were supposedly in for Shaqiri, but wouldn't/couldn't match Stoke's 12 million and only offered a loan so he went there instead.

If we have the money for Yarmolenko, then why didn't we stump it up for Shaqiri last week instead of only offering a loan?

I fear we can't afford him, unless we're selling a player to generate funds..

Yarmolenko is a better player and a better fit

 

[tonka1878]

5 year deal on £450k a week!

We agreed a £150m transfer fee

They also have to relocate to Skem as part of the deal.

 

[The Mighty Quint]

We are in for Yamelenko 100%.

Stones is going to be sold to Chelski or Man U.

 

[bluebud]

I'm trying not to be overly negative as Yarmolenko, on the back of yesterdays superb win and performance, would give everyone at the club a massive lift.

But we were supposedly in for Shaqiri, but wouldn't/couldn't match Stoke's 12 million and only offered a loan so he went there instead.

If we have the money for Yarmolenko, then why didn't we stump it up for Shaqiri last week instead of only offering a loan?

I fear we can't afford him, unless we're selling a player to generate funds..

My guess on things is that Roberto originally wanted two players, an attacking mid and a centre back, then when Kone was gash in preseason he probably thought we needed another striker as well, signing Shaquiri on loan would have freed up funds to do this, which ties in with the Austin rumours at the time as well. Since then Kone has looked ok so maybe he has shifted back to plan A, to buy a playmaker, Shaquiri might have been a good option on loan but if we're spending proper money then it might of been seen as to bigger risk or he might just see Yarmolenko as a better option, which he his.

 

[TheFinnFan]

We are in for Yamelenko 100%.

Stones is going to be sold to Chelski or Man U.

No he's not. You really think we would let him go now...lol

 

[blue4eva77]

So Yarmolenko is the next player to fume over when he moves to a club that's not Everton, despite yet again, no actually real link.

Payet, then shaqiri. So is it this lad next?

 

[Hibbertinho]

In the mystical dreamland/hopefully true scenario in which we're genuinely in for Yarmolenko. It could well be that we cooled down our interest in Shaqiri after hearing Yarmolenko was available. Yarmolenko is currently more experienced and proven than Shaqiri who is currently largely potential.

I'm extremely hopeful, gullible and confident of said scenario and can't wait to bitterly rip into Stoke fans when 'qiri is frustrating/pales in comparison to 'Yarmz'.

But surely that was part of Shaqiri's selling point - that he is very experienced 23-yr-old, playing at Bayern and Inter and winning trophies? Still think Yarmolenko will be better, though.

 

[Bainesy's Left Peg]

We are in for Yamelenko 100%.

Stones is going to be sold to Chelski or Man U.

Really like part 1 of that, not so keen on part 2...