• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Marcos Senesi

Raziel said:
I would like to believe that, but unfortunately, I'm with GB, looks like our owners are going for minimum net spend, Johnson money went to Gallagher, Romero money will probably go to Savino (so attack I guess, but not a CF), Robertson is a swap for Davies
Click to expand...
Tbh I don't care how much we spend. I don't particularly think we need to break our transfer records to get ourselves on the correct footing. I think how and what you spend on is more important and let's not forget the timing of that spend (something we failed a under Levy season after season) are more relevant than how much you spend.
 
Worth saying Senesi is pretty comfortable with his right foot and would be comfortable playing RCB with VDV LCB. Just does not happen a lot because of the shortage of left footed players. But he is as controller both feet as a Ledley King was as an example. Not two footed like Son. But passing and receiving the ball no issue.
 
Bishop said:
Tbh I don't care how much we spend. I don't particularly think we need to break our transfer records to get ourselves on the correct footing. I think how and what you spend on is more important and let's not forget the timing of that spend (something we failed a under Levy season after season) are more relevant than how much you spend.
Click to expand...

Yes, but lets all assume we want better than Levy, and we want some kind of honesty from our owners.

If after 5 years of spending 100M-150M net every summer, we suddenly go (the two windows after Levy's departure) to net spend zero, it tells you a lot.

I similarly don't put a ton into costs of players (Harry was free, Son/Eriksen/Bale were "cheap"), but if we end up at net spend zero it only means the owners have lied, and the real reason this have stepped in is to asset strip club and sell.
 
Bishop said:
It's an ego thing. A lot of fans want to be Billy big gonads and make claims about a players quality and an easy but lazy way of doing that is to hark on about the size of the transfer fee.

fudge that, the aim is to buy right and improve. Sometimes thats a freebie, sometimes that a mid cost players and sometimes that might be a world record fee. Suitability is what actually matters not the cost.
Click to expand...

No one cares if they are free as long as they are good IMO
 
robp135 said:
Worth saying Senesi is pretty comfortable with his right foot and would be comfortable playing RCB with VDV LCB. Just does not happen a lot because of the shortage of left footed players. But he is as controller both feet as a Ledley King was as an example. Not two footed like Son. But passing and receiving the ball no issue.
Click to expand...
Same with Vuskovic. He's very King like, even preferring LCB.
 
Gutter Boy said:
If the last say 10 have all failed because they've been too old or injury prone or unwanted for a reason, that's a good reason to have caution
Click to expand...
We rarely make intelligent transfers period, free or paid. That's the issue. If you make intelligent additions then then the cost or not isn't an issue.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I don't get the 'if we must make free transfers' bit? Why on earth shouldn't clubs make free transfers? Does a player become better just because we spend big money on a transfer fee?
Click to expand...

Yes lol

Bishop said:
It's an ego thing. A lot of fans want to be Billy big gonads and make claims about a players quality and an easy but lazy way of doing that is to hark on about the size of the transfer fee.

fudge that, the aim is to buy right and improve. Sometimes thats a freebie, sometimes that a mid cost players and sometimes that might be a world record fee. Suitability is what actually matters not the cost.
Click to expand...

The moment Robertson & Senesi are not on top form the moans about their wages will begin. Robertson meant to be on £150k pw and Senesi £100k. But they won’t consider there has been no transfer fee and the way the club will calculate the cost of the player is fee + wages over the course of the contract.
 
robp135 said:
The moment Robertson & Senesi are not on top form the moans about their wages will begin. Robertson meant to be on £150k pw and Senesi £100k. But they won’t consider there has been no transfer fee and the way the club will calculate the cost of the player is fee + wages over the course of the contract.
Click to expand...

Nope, Its different because of the age, onc injury and thats them pretty much done with you and any type of upside they may have had at 32, you end up having someone sat on a large wage even without the transfer fee.

At 29, there is still plenty of upside even if they miss 6 months through injury.

There is a difference
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Nope, Its different because of the age, onc injury and thats them pretty much done with you and any type of upside they may have had at 32, you end up having someone sat on a large wage even without the transfer fee.

At 29, there is still plenty of upside even if they miss 6 months through injury.

There is a difference
Click to expand...

Robertson is on a 2 year contract and Senesi is on a 4 4 year contract. So they are both off the books at 33/34.
 
robp135 said:
Robertson is on a 2 year contract and Senesi is on a 4 4 year contract. So they are both off the books at 33/34.
Click to expand...

The point I am making is there is a downside to Robertson that doesn't exist with Senesi which comes with age. Having a 32 year old sat on a large wage does you no favours if he is injured, fee or no fee.

With Senesi that risk is lower because even if he had a year out he comes back at 30/31/32 and you get some of the peak time out of him
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
The point I am making is there is a downside to Robertson that doesn't exist with Senesi which comes with age. Having a 32 year old sat on a large wage does you no favours if he is injured, fee or no fee.

With Senesi that risk is lower because even if he had a year out he comes back at 30/31/32 and you get some of the peak time out of him
Click to expand...

Ok makes sense. Cost of doing business though right. We need some experienced players in the squad. Everyone does. And that risk goes across any type of transfer.

We also have insurance to cover long term injuries. Of the gets ignored. Will have covered most of Kulusevski wages this season.
 
robp135 said:
Robertson is on a 2 year contract and Senesi is on a 4 4 year contract. So they are both off the books at 33/34.
Click to expand...
Most outfield EPL players struggle after 30 these days. Bentancur and Maddison are our oldest players and they both look on the decline. Solanke and Richy too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back