Matej Vydra - Signed for Burnley

[jimbobram]

FFP should be scraped. It has so many loop holes and the punishments are so crap. Just focus on fit and proper owners

[i-Ram]

3 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

Yeah, but surely that makes a mockery off the whole thing. The line is about sustainability, so how can paying off a contract, effectively taking a massive hit on a player, not be sustainable especially if you don’t tie it in with a loan? 

I’d personally suggest that should be fine & should be void from the FFP target like the academy. 

FPP I suspect, in its current form, is close to being dead in the water. The QPR fudge has put considerable strain on the framework, particularly the “punishment” that the owners must convert some of their loans to capital. Why should owners who want to put capital into clubs now be punished when it is part of the EFL’s problem solving? Madness.

[RamLad1884]

Just now, Rab a dab doo said:

Does anybody really know how FFP works. 

Everyone you ask as thier own take on it.  Where's an expert when you need one

General consensus is you can only spend what you bring in with up to £13 Mill a season in losses. If you're a profit making club then you can pretty much afford to spend £13 mill on transfers/wages. 

Here I think the ffp probably won't be breached as most the players we've signed are relatively low 'actual' fees. 

Marriott £3/4 million rising 

Jozefzoon probably somewhere around the £2 Mill Mark. No way we've paid everything upfront. 

Evans £500k? 700k at most? Unlikely to be the full million upfront. 

Mount/Wilson neglible, probably cost us alot more if we don't play them. 

Possibly Waghorn reportedly £4 Mill upfront. 

So that's somewhere between the £9-11 mill mark. Let's say we've saved a million (possibly more) from high earners that have left, I'd expect none of these to be on their wages. £2 mill from Weimann, £2 mill from Rowett plus some for Ince. Leaves us with about £5 mill to make up from 8/9 players? 

[Carnero]

Just now, i-Ram said:

FPP I suspect, in its current form, is close to being dead in the water. The QPR fudge has put considerable strain on the framework, particularly the “punishment” that the owners must convert some of their loans to capital. Why should owners who want to put capital into clubs now be punished when it is part of the EFL’s problem solving? Madness.

Agreed.

Spend what you like as long as 90% is converted into equity and only 10% loaded onto the club as debt. Failure to meet this simple criteria should result in immediate relegation.

[Rab a dab doo]

I suppose everything is guesswork until the transfer windows for loans and permanent signings shuts. 

Then the club can totup the monies in and out.

We have made additional money GR and his boys comp, Ince's sell on and new shirt sponsorship. 

Does that count?

[Rev]

15 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

Yeah, but surely that makes a mockery off the whole thing. The line is about sustainability, so how can paying off a contract, effectively taking a massive hit on a player, not be sustainable especially if you don’t tie it in with a loan? 

I’d personally suggest that should be fine & should be void from the FFP target like the academy. 

It's not the wages that are the main problem FFP wise, as someone has already said even if we pay them up it still comes from the same pot if they are out of contract at the end of the season.

It's the residual values of those out of contract players that could cause more issues come season's end.

[Rampage]

20 minutes ago, Carnero said:

 

 

22 minutes ago, Carnero said:

 

My view exactly.

Look, if we are spending money then either we have it or we can raise it. Get the players already. 

 

[RamsSong]

52 minutes ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

Mate don't want to be dismissive but most of your comments are pure speculation so I'm not sure why you have concluded it's an excellent plan by lampard

In respect of vydra,I'd agree,I can't see how he fits into the formation.....he's not a striker in the Nugent/Marriott mould and he's no winger...

It's a shame rowett doesn't want him at Stoke,in fact I'm amazed he hasn't gone to them.

I concluded it’s an excellent plan by Lampard based off truths, not any speculation. 

Surely you agree Lampard has planned all this???

Selling Weimann & Vydra and buying Marriott & Jozefzoon: That is 100% a planned and thought out decision based on how he wants to play (4-1-2-3)

Then the only reason we got Mount and Wilson was because of Lampard. Mount was going to Bremen on a 2 year loan until Lampard called him. Lampard literally picking up the phone, calling Mount and persuading him to come here has to be part of Lampard’s plan surely mate? 

At least we agree on Vydra not fitting Lampard’s chosen style.

 I think every single piece of business we have done this summer has been meticulously planned out by Lampard, if you disagree fair enough. 

[Rampage]

47 minutes ago, RamLad1884 said:

General consensus is you can only spend what you bring in with up to £13 Mill a season in losses. If you're a profit making club then you can pretty much afford to spend £13 mill on transfers/wages. 

Here I think the ffp probably won't be breached as most the players we've signed are relatively low 'actual' fees. 

Marriott £3/4 million rising 

Jozefzoon probably somewhere around the £2 Mill Mark. No way we've paid everything upfront. 

Evans £500k? 700k at most? Unlikely to be the full million upfront. 

Mount/Wilson neglible, probably cost us alot more if we don't play them. 

Possibly Waghorn reportedly £4 Mill upfront. 

So that's somewhere between the £9-11 mill mark. Let's say we've saved a million (possibly more) from high earners that have left, I'd expect none of these to be on their wages. £2 mill from Weimann, £2 mill from Rowett plus some for Ince. Leaves us with about £5 mill to make up from 8/9 players? 

Should be possible. Can we agree early end to Contracts and save money that way at a push? 

[Rampage]

So if no Waghorn then we are  about even now? 

[Rab a dab doo]

Let's leave at that then everyone's happy. Yes 

[nogbad van 50]

5 hours ago, Cam the Ram said:

If we were planning to sign Waghorn after Vydra left then we're not miles away from the FFP limit by the looks of things. Hopefully we can bring in Evans, get some of the fringe players out (easier said than done) like Jerome, Butterfield, Anya, Martin, Blackman etc. and hold onto our key players, then it will have been a bloody brilliant window

Best of luck to Frank choosing the front 3 from Vydra, Marriott, Nugent, Thomas, Bennett, Wilson, FloJo and Lawrence. Nice problem to have though

Three from the five highlighted for me with FloJo and Nugent on the bench.If Waghorn comes in for Vydra then out goes Nugent for me as well and we have Marriott,Waghorn,Wilson,Lawrence and FloJo to pick from.That gives us two very good alternatives on the bench.

 

 

 

 

and we have Marriott,Waghorn,Wilson,Lawrence and FloJo to pick from.

[Carl Sagan]

 Just seen the Phil Hay news. The way we've played against Saints and Wolves, Vydra could fit seamlessly into the Nugent role and we'd have all the skill, pace, firepower and creativity of him, Wilson, Mount, Lawrence and Josefzoon. What a prospect with Marriott, Bennett and Thomas also fighting to get into our forward line. 

I say bring it on!

[Comrade 86]

1 hour ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

It's a shame rowett doesn't want him at Stoke,in fact I'm amazed he hasn't gone to them.

I'd be amazed if he did - Rowett dropped him for the games that could have led us to the premiership and Vyds hardly looked that enamoured with the way we set up last year even when he was playing every week. I'm not sure Vyds is going anywhere, least not in this window. Appreciate I'm in the minority here but I'm ok with that tbh.

[Millenniumram]

Now this is an interesting dilemma to be sure. I’m in a few minds over this. On the one hand, Vydra is a fantastic player who you’d keep hold of, if finances were no issue, but regardless of ffp they are at any football club. On the other hand, if rumours are to believed and we have very little budget without sales, then perhaps the only way to balance the books is to sell him, in which case this news puts us in trouble. But then have we really spent that much? Then we have to consider whether we’d rather have Vydra or Waghorn? Vydras better technically imo but does Waghorn suit the system better? Or can Vydra play that lone striker role in this system? I think he might be able to but it’s a risk.

In summary, I’ve literally no idea what to think and have just wasted everyone’s time. You’re welcome

[Bad Sheep]

1 hour ago, Millenniumram said:

Now this is an interesting dilemma to be sure. I’m in a few minds over this. On the one hand, Vydra is a fantastic player who you’d keep hold of, if finances were no issue, but regardless of ffp they are at any football club. On the other hand, if rumours are to believed and we have very little budget without sales, then perhaps the only way to balance the books is to sell him, in which case this news puts us in trouble. But then have we really spent that much? Then we have to consider whether we’d rather have Vydra or Waghorn? Vydras better technically imo but does Waghorn suit the system better? Or can Vydra play that lone striker role in this system? I think he might be able to but it’s a risk.

In summary, I’ve literally no idea what to think and have just wasted everyone’s time. You’re welcome

I agree with you ?

[Rample]

12 hours ago, dajstrawb said:

Got a feeling we will end up letting him go for around £7-8m close to deadline day. The reduction in fee subsidising his wages. 

That's my belief too, he will go but we will either drop the fee or subsidise his wages for a year. Surprised we didn't agree the latter to push through the Leeds move if that is what scuppered it. 

[Woodley Ram]

I think Vydra would play the mount role rather than the Nugent role, even then he is a very different player 

[Sparkle]

7 hours ago, Millenniumram said:

Now this is an interesting dilemma to be sure. I’m in a few minds over this. On the one hand, Vydra is a fantastic player who you’d keep hold of, if finances were no issue, but regardless of ffp they are at any football club. On the other hand, if rumours are to believed and we have very little budget without sales, then perhaps the only way to balance the books is to sell him, in which case this news puts us in trouble. But then have we really spent that much? Then we have to consider whether we’d rather have Vydra or Waghorn? Vydras better technically imo but does Waghorn suit the system better? Or can Vydra play that lone striker role in this system? I think he might be able to but it’s a risk.

In summary, I’ve literally no idea what to think and have just wasted everyone’s time. You’re welcome

Just a mute point but no one is playing a lone striker role this season by the looks of it - we have lots of folk in forward positions 

[PistoldPete2]

8 hours ago, 86 points said:

I'd be amazed if he did - Rowett dropped him for the games that could have led us to the premiership and Vyds hardly looked that enamoured with the way we set up last year even when he was playing every week. I'm not sure Vyds is going anywhere, least not in this window. Appreciate I'm in the minority here but I'm ok with that tbh.

Rowett signed TOm ince for Stoke having forced him out at derby. Weird.