25 Jan 2020 11:40:13
Leeds Utd got to be the equivalent of promising to bring your bird to The Ivy for all out no expenses spared meal +drinks .
Then you end up getting her a takeaway pizza +a bottle of blue nun wine in Lidl .
A match made in heaven.
25 Jan 2020 12:20:02
How much did he cost RBL when they bought him? Expect well pay around the same.
What do you want us to spend? Just enough to get a points deduction?
25 Jan 2020 12:51:08
He cost RBL 11 million quid.
So in our price range. but how good is he?
If very good, “it’s a deal, it’s a steal, it’s sale of chuffing century†but then why wouldn’t RBL be saying “chuff it nick I think I’ll keep him for myselfâ€.
Hope Orta knows what he is doing? Very odd that he’s a very different player to lad who was our top target, Che Adams.
25 Jan 2020 13:09:18
Well said Canada!
25 Jan 2020 14:34:00
Ah yes the old points deduction chestnut, Leeds have signed a very big financial deal with Adidas, Leeds have sold an awful lot of players, Leeds have huge income stream, Leeds pay out very little for a very long time on players. According to a lot on here Leeds are going up to the EPL so your argument may fall flat because if Sky's millions don't balance out. the FFP every team in the prem is getting a deduction so using your logic
Adams wasn't left leave because they wanted him, why is Augustine left you have to ask so if he's the next big thing?, Very hopeful that he will be by the way
Also Costa cost 15 so does that make him a top player? Because his price is a bit high?
It's always the same with Radz all the big talk counts for small actions in the end.
25 Jan 2020 15:23:02
We won't get a penny from Adidas until next season so can't spend it this season, so that's a useless argument.
Costa being 15 mill is no reflection on actual ability as you say so why do you clamouring for a big spend?
So you say RBL would keep him if any good? Wouldn't that argument apply to any purchase? So we shouldn't buy anyone as they can't be any good.
25 Jan 2020 15:50:10
Thought FFP rules were calculated over a three year period so Adidas is really a useful argument. Last year we were fine and guess next accounts will be fine so if we spent 20mill now and Adidas pump in 20mill next season guess we will be fine.
25 Jan 2020 16:42:00
No because we have to be clear for the last 3 years, not the last 2 plus next year (that would be then end of next season)
Adidas starts next so won't be on this season's books.
That's probably why we are only spending so much now with the rest at the end of this season, it only appears on the 3 years plan from next season on.
25 Jan 2020 17:02:58
Over 3 years, how else can you explain Villa spending inexcess of 70 million 2 year ago in 1 season I think .
I know their now in the spotlight but it's because accumulative over a few seasons not 1 season.
25 Jan 2020 17:12:44
From now on, the assessment will be made over a rolling three-year period.
The above is taken from BBC explaining FFP from the 8th mar 2018
So there you go Canada.