- Thread starter
- #7,801
You'll have another £100m for the ring-fenced new stand plan when City get hold of Olise and Eze
Ollyball? The one where you have 30% possession and give up 20+ shots but occasionally fluke a win?I will say that I’m liking ollyball and next season should be more exciting
It is completely different. Royball only garnered a point a game.Ollyball? The one where you have 30% possession and give up 20+ shots but occasionally fluke a win?
Sounds a lot like Roy-ball to me.
To be fair to Palace they do seem to be able to hold onto their better players (Zaha for instance) for longer than us. I suppose they pay them grossly inflated wagesBut Eze and Olise more than likely won’t be with you then, let’s face it their the only shining lights in a very poor and boring Palace lineup so I would have thought nothing to be excited about for your lot next Season
To be fair to Palace they do seem to be able to hold onto their better players (Zaha for instance) for longer than us. I suppose they pay them grossly inflated wages
To be fair to Palace they do seem to be able to hold onto their better players (Zaha for instance) for longer than us. I suppose they pay them grossly inflated wages
If one player who has cost the club £60m over 9 years and has ( as you all like to infer) kept palace in the premier league I would say that is bloody good business TBH.Well they did sell him once but he stunk out Old Trafford and they signed him back for a lot less than United paid which is a good bit of business. But they then probably paid him north of £60m in wages over the next 9 years which isn't.
To be fair to Palace they do seem to be able to hold onto their better players (Zaha for instance) for longer than us. I suppose they pay them grossly inflated wages
If one player who has cost the club £60m over 9 years and has ( as you all like to infer) kept palace in the premier league I would say that is bloody good business TBH
I think those days are over, it’s flipped in the last couple of years.
Surely that £60m was easily covered when they sold him?Well they did sell him once but he stunk out Old Trafford and they signed him back for a lot less than United paid which is a good bit of business. But they then probably paid him north of £60m in wages over the next 9 years which isn't.
Pah! You can prove anything with facts.I think those days are over, it’s flipped in the last couple of years.
Maybe, but that isnt a given, apart from this season palace have been comfortably mid table with a FA cup final and semi final thrown in the mix which is not to shabby for a club that’s spent most of it’s history in lower divisions.It may have kept you in the PL but did it really progress you? Could keeping him for so long on such high wages actually have stopped you from signing other players which may have given you more depth and enabled you to challenge further up the table.
FatiI think they still pay inflated wages to certain individuals, whereas we probably pay a more realistic rate, across the squad. I'd imagine the gap between or highest paid and lowest paid is closer than Palace's?
Fati who is on a one year loan where all we're paying is a percentage of his wages equaling around £140k a week isn't bad value at all (unless you look at his non Europa League performances)Fati
But isn’t that the whole reason to get to the prem? Ie stay in it as long as you can. Fans have said that over and over again and if you get in Europe or progress in some sort of cup ( knowing the big 6 will win everything as usual) then that’s a bonus.It may have kept you in the PL but did it really progress you? Could keeping him for so long on such high wages actually have stopped you from signing other players which may have given you more depth and enabled you to challenge further up the table.
Fati
Not sure where you're getting this info from, the companies house reports show Palace have higher total wages, wage per week and wages as a percentage of income than Brighton.I think those days are over, it’s flipped in the last couple of years.
TouchéFati