October 17, 2019, 07:34:24 PM

Author Topic: Bid rejected for Lookman  (Read 45606 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

July 13, 2018, 06:48:16 PM
Read 45606 times
Offline

van der Meyde


Nah, heíll not be on much that we need to sell him. Weíre clearly just trying to shift out the expensive/not working out players. We donít need to raise money per se in order to buy as you seem to be suggesting.

Beside Brands is a fan, so I donít think heís heading out anywhere.
Aye. Fairly sure it's a wage bill and squad numbers thing, rather than cash flow.
...


July 19, 2018, 09:34:58 PM
Reply #1
Offline

van der Meyde


One other point is that I've seen no actual indication from anywhere that we want to sell him. So I remain hopeful.
Don't know about that. I think making a third bid would be a fairly clear indication Leipzig have not been told point blank that he's not for sale. At a minimum that would suggest Everton might be open to selling him (at the right price), even if we don't necessarily 'want' to.
...

July 20, 2018, 04:52:07 PM
Reply #2
Offline

van der Meyde


He is not for sale, the club have said this at least 3 times.
They probably need to use the actual phrase "not for sale" for me to believe it personally.

The fact that Leipzig have come in with bids of £12m, £14m and are apparently readying another one suggests to me they haven't said those words to Leipzig either.
...


July 21, 2018, 08:05:59 PM
Reply #3
Offline

van der Meyde


What more can we do than say youíll be in with a shot of the first xi?

He can either believe that or not.
Not look to spend big money on someone who plays in his position?

(This argument is obviously dependent on the order of events, like.)
...

July 30, 2018, 07:50:54 PM
Reply #4
Offline

van der Meyde


£20m's not a bad fee for him, people making out we're selling him for less than we paid. Even with inflated prices, outside of the Premier League and the European super rich, clubs aren't paying massive fees for players so quoting prices paid between English clubs a fairly irrelevant, especially for a player with so little appearances.
Fees inside the Premier League absolutely are relevant because, as a Premier League club, we have to pay inflated fees.

The fees we demand in return should really reflect that for players we want to keep.
...

July 30, 2018, 08:39:31 PM
Reply #5
Offline

van der Meyde


But teams outside of the Premier League, bar a handful, can't pay those fees. We have to be realistic when faced with situations that aren't ideal.
So does Lookman though.

If Everton aren't offered a fee with which we he can be adequately replaced, he shouldn't be sold.

If Brands and Silva think they can? Crack on then. But swapping Lookman for Richarlison, and paying an extra £20m for the privilege, is not what we should be looking to do.
...


July 30, 2018, 08:54:57 PM
Reply #6
Offline

van der Meyde


Unless we think Richarlison is twice as likely to make it to the top ;)
Transfer fees are exponential, not linear, G! ;)
...

August 13, 2018, 04:21:39 PM
Reply #7
Offline

van der Meyde


Not that Iím aware of and Iím sure we would have heard if an English club were in for him, strange really, you would have thought that his agent would have put it out there to generate some interest ?
Not if the reason he wants to move is because he thinks not only is he likely to get more minutes at Leipzig but also that he's moving to a better team which will regularly compete in Europe.

There's no team in England that fulfils both of those requirements. Clubs lower down the table will know that he's not interested in moving there permanently. Similarly for most of the clubs above us because he's not at that level yet.

It's not really unusual that there aren't links/rumours of other teams really.
...

August 13, 2018, 06:21:30 PM
Reply #8
Offline

van der Meyde


Given I rate the lad, I'd like to see the club make a stand on this one.

Show the likes of Richarlison and Pickford etc that kicking up a fuss isn't enough to get you a move.

The buying club actually needs to offer enough money first.
...

August 14, 2018, 02:15:29 PM
Reply #9
Offline

van der Meyde


It doesn't cost a penny. You don't need to replace a player who has a handful of starts and hasn't played in the first team in 2018 other than brief run out a preseason.
No way. Young players who are potentially very, very good definitely need to be replaced.

You may not need to replace their performance in the immediate term. We're well stocked with Richarlison, Lookman and Onyekuru all playing down the left too, so you might not need to spend that money in the same position either.

But we do need to replace that potential *somewhere* and that does cost a pretty penny. Long term we need to be maintaining/increasing our number of under 23 players, not reducing it, and that will involve spending plenty of money. It's short-sighted not to.
...

August 14, 2018, 05:31:23 PM
Reply #10
Offline

van der Meyde


I agree with most of that but that's not really the same. Of course we need to keep bringing on young players whether that's through our academy or going down the leagues and getting other young players with potential but that's just the cycle of any team sport. As an individual though Lookman doesn't need replaced as there's nothing there to replace.
Yeah, we might be arguing about replacing from two different sides here. It's certainly not a Lukaku situation, where we've suddenly got to find 25 goals+assists a season.

I do firmly belive that his potential needs to be replaced though. We don't really have anyone in the academy with that kind of buzz around them right now either, so it's going to involve spending £20m+ (e.g. the Maddison and Torreira fees) on someone who's played plenty of games at a decent level.

If we've ultimately ended up spending money to swap Richarlison (whom I'm very happy with, don't get me wrong) for Lookman, the summer ends up looking worse and less intelligent for me. That's why I'm arguing for us holding out for more money because it's the market that we, as a Premier League club, have to operate in that should be important to us.
...

August 15, 2018, 09:54:05 PM
Reply #11
Offline

van der Meyde


If I remember correctly you were right along with me saying something similar.

Iím only going off the Paul Riley tweet, not listened to the pod yet but I can understand where theyíre coming from (mins per goal contribution maybe? The fact Lookman looks like a potentially elite finisher vs richarlisons profilagacy in front of goal).

I donít know if itís connected to the fact weíve now signed richarlison but I now disagree strongly. Haha.
I'm not sure you can judge with any real degree of confidence whose ceiling is higher.

Lookman's performance, purely on numbers, looks better on the face of it. It's confounded by so many of Lookman's minutes (and half his goals) over the past couple of years coming off the bench though.

...

August 15, 2018, 10:08:20 PM
Reply #12
Offline

van der Meyde


Broadly agree.
I'm also not sure how you would weight Richarlison having a bit more about him physically versus Lookman probably being able to create more for others.
...

August 15, 2018, 10:44:20 PM
Reply #13
Offline

van der Meyde


Yeah I agree with that as well.

Not sure about creating because you can measure that.

But richarlison is physically a monster. Boss in the air, good 1v1, good outball on the break..
Yeah, I can sort of be talked into the idea that Lookman might be decent on the right/centrally too - if Understat's position data can be believed anyway.

God knows. Still hope we keep him and he works his way in to the team.
...