• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Summer Transfers 2025 (rumours and incomings)

pssguy said:
Thanks for pointing out my error. The contract would be extended by a year. Guehi would earn an extra 2.5 million and Palace 17.5 million compared with him running down his contract assuming he still leaves in summer 2026
Click to expand...

It's a very logical solution, not dissimilar to the Olise situation a couple of years ago where we doubled his salary but increased his release clause.

However, i think MG's agent has told him to sit on his hands to get a mega contract when he does leave. Having a release clause will eat into that.

MG's agent could have asked Palace to double his £50k wages at any time in the last 12 to 18 months and we would have almost certainly agreed - as the contract would be extended and possibly with a decent release clause added.

I suspect as a current England international MG could command a £150k weekly wage from one of the top clubs. However, MG's agent probably wants a weekly wage of at least £200k p.w if/when he moves, for say a 5 year contract. Life changing money.

Any transfer fee would eat into that figure and i notice teams like Chelsea are now refusing to pay 'silly' basic weekly wages.

That £20m fee you are suggesting is essentially £4m a year over 5 years, so c£80k a week.

I can see his agent agreeing maybe £150k a week plus that £80k as a bosman bonus. This is what Sol Campbell did about 20 years ago (his agent got a £10m 'fee' paid over 5 years , so £40k a week on top of his salary.

Liverpool will already know what MG's agent wants as a salary, hence why the reports are they are not prepared to pay a silly transfer fee.

Personally with the 20% due to Chelsea it would not be a disaster if MG stayed next season as we are a better team when he plays.
 
Eaglecoops said:
Guehi having all the cards in these negotiations is not strictly true.

If he refuses to be sold in an attempt to force a move to Liverpool on a free after his contract ends, Palace always has the option of refusing to play him next season.

It is a business after all and if he refuses a new contract with us and will not accept a sale other than to someone on his terms then this will rile both the fans and our management and the only stick we have to beat him with is to not play him, thereby restricting his chance of going to the World Cup.

It sounds like shocking behaviour by a club to do this, but it is a business, and we simply cannot afford to let him go on a free in a years time. Getting sent to play with the “stiffs” is something that has happened to numerous players over the years.

I’ll temper this by saying I sincerely hope this does not transpire, however losing him for nothing is not a good option for Palace.
Click to expand...

Well, treating a player this way for effectively honouring their contract wouldn't be a very good message to send to new signings would it?

And paying our best defender not to play out of spite seems a bit counterproductive as well, thus making ourselves weaker on the pitch.

I'm sure he'll go this summer but, if not, he remains at the heart of our defence until he leaves.
 
Canterbury Palace said:
Well, treating a player this way for effectively honouring their contract wouldn't be a very good message to send to new signings would it?

And paying our best defender not to play out of spite seems a bit counterproductive as well, thus making ourselves weaker on the pitch.

I'm sure he'll go this summer but, if not, he remains at the heart of our defence until he leaves.
Click to expand...
In a business, I reckon spite has very little to do with anything and when it comes to paying players to sit on the bench we have had more richly paid bottoms warming seats in the past, Benteke for one. That however is just an aside.

The alternative to selling now is we have to accept the loss of £40/£50m income, perhaps more because of a player wanting to move, but only on his own terms. On a rough calculation that would mean Palace will be effectively paying him (even with 20% deductible to Chelski) around £700,000 a week on top of the salary he currently receives for his last season. Surely that is not good business, more particularly as we are hopefully securing a high quality player to play in that position who needs to be playing on a regular basis rather than warming a seat for someone who is going to leave?

I’m not a great lover of taking an aggressive financial approach to this as Guehi is obviously a nice guy however the practicality of it says we must do what is best for the team and the team’s finances and that is definitely that he has to go. If he wants to stay and pushes against leaving he shouldn’t be guaranteed a starting place.

Guehi will not be the first player to refuse to sign a new contract and wish to wind down the existing one. This has caused issues at lots of clubs over the years and the only time it gets the sentimental approval of the club is when the player is towards the end of his career and has no real sell on value which is clearly not the case here.

If Guehi’s main concern is wanting to play for England and be continually playing football, (which could be his worry if he went to Liverpool now), then he should sign a 1 year extension with Palace on double wages with say a £50/£60m release clause thereby protecting his value to Palace but still making him available for Liverpool or whoever the following year.

It’s all my opinion of course but the way I see it, you can’t just totally cave in to a player’s wants because he’s a nice guy. He must also understand the financial ramifications to Palace of him seeing out his contract.
 
Eaglecoops said:
In a business, I reckon spite has very little to do with anything and when it comes to paying players to sit on the bench we have had more richly paid bottoms warming seats in the past, Benteke for one. That however is just an aside.

The alternative to selling now is we have to accept the loss of £40/£50m income, perhaps more because of a player wanting to move, but only on his own terms. On a rough calculation that would mean Palace will be effectively paying him (even with 20% deductible to Chelski) around £700,000 a week on top of the salary he currently receives for his last season. Surely that is not good business, more particularly as we are hopefully securing a high quality player to play in that position who needs to be playing on a regular basis rather than warming a seat for someone who is going to leave?

I’m not a great lover of taking an aggressive financial approach to this as Guehi is obviously a nice guy however the practicality of it says we must do what is best for the team and the team’s finances and that is definitely that he has to go. If he wants to stay and pushes against leaving he shouldn’t be guaranteed a starting place.

Guehi will not be the first player to refuse to sign a new contract and wish to wind down the existing one. This has caused issues at lots of clubs over the years and the only time it gets the sentimental approval of the club is when the player is towards the end of his career and has no real sell on value which is clearly not the case here.

If Guehi’s main concern is wanting to play for England and be continually playing football, (which could be his worry if he went to Liverpool now), then he should sign a 1 year extension with Palace on double wages with say a £50/£60m release clause thereby protecting his value to Palace but still making him available for Liverpool or whoever the following year.

It’s all my opinion of course but the way I see it, you can’t just totally cave in to a player’s wants because he’s a nice guy. He must also understand the financial ramifications to Palace of him seeing out his contract.
Click to expand...

you say "financial ramifications to Palace of him seeing out his contract" like it's his duty to be sold for top dollar, and allow Palace the opportunity to be paid.

That's not how contracts work. There was a time when Silly offers were a all the rage, and clubs were happy to pay whatever to get a Player. The financial landscape is changing. clubs (such as Real Madrid) are struggling with the cost of players, so they have found a way round it, which (critically) suits the player - by encouraging them to wait out their contracts and in turn get a bigger signing on fee.

It wasn't so long ago players were being slated for not seeing out their contract, now they're being slated for doing just that.

Contracts are just that, we've given our Players 4 year contracts (for example). they've every right to see it out, if that is what is right for them. I get the "we don't get anything for them" argument but maybe this will bring a level of sensibility back to the transfer fees, as any club won't want to pay a big sum, as they may not recoup any of it when the contract ends.
 
Eaglecoops said:
In a business, I reckon spite has very little to do with anything and when it comes to paying players to sit on the bench we have had more richly paid bottoms warming seats in the past, Benteke for one. That however is just an aside.

The alternative to selling now is we have to accept the loss of £40/£50m income, perhaps more because of a player wanting to move, but only on his own terms. On a rough calculation that would mean Palace will be effectively paying him (even with 20% deductible to Chelski) around £700,000 a week on top of the salary he currently receives for his last season. Surely that is not good business, more particularly as we are hopefully securing a high quality player to play in that position who needs to be playing on a regular basis rather than warming a seat for someone who is going to leave?

I’m not a great lover of taking an aggressive financial approach to this as Guehi is obviously a nice guy however the practicality of it says we must do what is best for the team and the team’s finances and that is definitely that he has to go. If he wants to stay and pushes against leaving he shouldn’t be guaranteed a starting place.

Guehi will not be the first player to refuse to sign a new contract and wish to wind down the existing one. This has caused issues at lots of clubs over the years and the only time it gets the sentimental approval of the club is when the player is towards the end of his career and has no real sell on value which is clearly not the case here.

If Guehi’s main concern is wanting to play for England and be continually playing football, (which could be his worry if he went to Liverpool now), then he should sign a 1 year extension with Palace on double wages with say a £50/£60m release clause thereby protecting his value to Palace but still making him available for Liverpool or whoever the following year.

It’s all my opinion of course but the way I see it, you can’t just totally cave in to a player’s wants because he’s a nice guy. He must also understand the financial ramifications to Palace of him seeing out his contract.
Click to expand...


I think the difference in our viewpoints stems from you perhaps believing that he ought to take our financial health into consideration whereas I don't believe he owes us anything.

When you sign a player, the contract demands that they stay at the club for the length of that deal, unless they get sold in the meantime. There is no obligation for them to leave earlier than they want to.

He clearly wants a big move but obviously only to a club that will challenge for silverware. If the correct offer comes in from a club like Liverpool, Arsenal or City I am sure he will take it and want to leave. However, if it's someone like Spurs or Villa where there is no guarantee of title contention, he is well within his rights to say no, regardless of how it affects Palace.

In terms of spite, I would argue that saying to a player "take a move you don't want or we're effectively going to bench you and ruin your chances of playing in a World Cup" would come across exactly like that. The main selling point of our club at the moment is that we have demonstratable evidence that we can enhance players' careers. This would be the exact opposite and would be terrible optics.

Especially for a player who has been unbelievable for us, is clearly a great role model and mentor and has never caused a fuss in the way that Zaha did, for example, who chucked in a transfer request on the eve of the season.

The difference between Guehi and Benteke sitting on the bench is that Guehi is our best defender. We talk of financial obligations but, should we be allowed into Europe, we'll find the league tough and the risk of a relegation battle is real. Any financial loss from him leaving on a free would pale in significance the losses we'd incur by going down because we decided to bench one of our best players just for refusing a move he doesn't want.

Additionally, if he plays and plays well, we always have the January window to try and claw back 15/20m for him.

I am in total agreement that we need to sell him if he won't sign a new deal but, should that not happen, doing anything other than keeping him as a key player in our team is just mutually destructive behaviour that benefits nobody.
 
Eagleman13 said:
Helpful tho
Click to expand...
Half the players to move so far are either destined for "so-called" bigger clubs and the other half really add little value to our squad. Over the past 3 years we have "probably" had the best recruitment policy in the PL bar none.

Glasner, Olise, Eze, Guehi, Wharton, Lacroix, Munoz, Kamada and Lerma combined don't even equal a Grealish for example in transfer budgets.

Even if you throw in a Franco and Nketiah minus Olise, Anderson and Ayew, it is stellar business by any metric.

Looking forward to seeing how this window plays out!
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Wiki reckons £18 m.
It also shows his first names as Addji Keaninkin Marc-Israel - the first two are quite Star Wars.
No comment on the last.
Click to expand...
He is a Christian, but with Addji, Keaninkin and Israel he is covering all bases, Islam, Catholicism and a bit of Hebrew thrown in 😎
 
Stirlingsays said:
This is all nicely argued back and forth stuff.

BUT CAN WE FRIGGING BUY SOMEBODY ALREADY! OR AT LEAST SELL SOME BUGGER.

And I don't mean buy a reserve keeper on a free.
Click to expand...
Yes it's very frustrating Hrolf but I don't see any movement in or out until the Uefa saga is sorted and whilst we hope that will happen this weekend, the relegation of Lyon could prolong matters as they're bound to appeal and probably take the matter to the highest court they can.

Could be a long summer of uncertainty
 
doombear said:
Yes it's very frustrating Hrolf but I don't see any movement in or out until the Uefa saga is sorted and whilst we hope that will happen this weekend, the relegation of Lyon could prolong matters as they're bound to appeal and probably take the matter to the highest court they can.

Could be a long summer of uncertainty
Click to expand...

Speaking on behalf of Hrolf I'd just like to admit to the world that Tiswas was better than Swapshop and that it'll always be 'Opal Fruits' and not fecking 'Starburst'.

As for the footy....I think the Lyon appeal means that it probably doesn't factor into any Uefa decision....but that I think we will be allowed to stay in.
 
kingdowieonthewall said:
my brother inlaw has it from a reliable contact, we'll be signing a couple of Glentoran Fc players for a family size bag of Tayto crisps and a crate of Brown lemonade.
(both goalkeepers)
Click to expand...
football-special.com

Football Special - Soft Drinks from Donegal, Ireland by McDaids & Sons.

McDaid’s & Sons, Ramelton, Co.Donegal Home of the World Famous in Donegal Football Special Buy Online Our Story We’re a 4th generation family soft drinks business that all started with the Original Football Special. We aim to brighten your day, adding some fizz and flavour to create good times...
football-special.com football-special.com

Red lemonade - here's the original.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top