Victor Osimhen

Ish said:
Yeah. Luckily for us we have those high earning - little to no contribution players in abundance. Martial and Sancho, and I’d guess all his wages are covered, and then some.

It’s raising the transfer fee I’d worry about as our high wages generally means we’re unable to shift players on successfully.
Click to expand...

If Ratcliffe were to lavish this £325m when he is confirmed, would we still have to get rid of those guys for FFP?
 
Loon said:
If Ratcliffe were to lavish this £325m when he is confirmed, would we still have to get rid of those guys for FFP?
Click to expand...
My understanding is very high level but I’d think we’d have to. FFP is based on revenue/earnings and a cash injection from owners/sale of shares doesn’t qualify as revenue - its a capital contribution, per se. Now it would make us more liquid and could assist us on spending on infrastructure but our revenue levels would remain, and so would our expenditure capabilities on players/wages etc.

My high level understanding anyway.
 
Ish said:
My understanding is very high level but I’d think we’d have to. FFP is based on revenue/earnings and a cash injection from owners/sale of shares doesn’t qualify as revenue - its a capital contribution, per se. Now it would make us more liquid and could assist us on spending on infrastructure but our revenue levels would remain, and so would our expenditure capabilities on players/wages etc.

My high level understanding anyway.
Click to expand...

Right. Thanks.
 
Osimhen wouldn't make a huge difference here, as he also relies on chances created for him. He is not very good at linking up with his team mates, and isn't one to create for himself, so it wouldn't make sense to sign him for like €150m.
 
Ish said:
Yeah. Luckily for us we have those high earning - little to no contribution players in abundance. Martial and Sancho, and I’d guess all his wages are covered, and then some.

It’s raising the transfer fee I’d worry about as our high wages generally means we’re unable to shift players on successfully.
Click to expand...
I don’t think we’re getting anything worth shouting about for Sancho, Martial or Donny. Not even sure we can afford to lose Maguire or McTominay now, and those were the main potential sources of income last summer - until we needed to rely on their goals! I think it’ll all rest on the owners.
Loon said:
If Ratcliffe were to lavish this £325m when he is confirmed, would we still have to get rid of those guys for FFP?
Click to expand...
I’m sure I read that your FFP threshold can be extended if your owners decide to add a one off cash injection - which obviously the glazers never have. Not sure how much that is, or whether it’d be enough to land Osimhen. But we’re broke otherwise.
 
Osimhen would instantly make us better. Sure he would also need supply from the midfield or wingers, but compared to Hojlund who - with all respect - is not a clinical CF yet, he would win games by himself by just doing the simple goal scoring. Hojlund misses too many chances imo and would be much better as a joker. Too bad we spent so much on him that we will unlikely bench him though...
 
aeh1991 said:
Osimhen would instantly make us better. Sure he would also need supply from the midfield or wingers, but compared to Hojlund who - with all respect - is not a clinical CF yet, he would win games by himself by just doing the simple goal scoring. Hojlund misses too many chances imo and would be much better as a joker. Too bad we spent so much on him that we will unlikely bench him though...
Click to expand...

Huh? Højlund doesn't get nearly as much service as Osimhen does, and Osimhen misses a lot of big chances as well. He would improve us, sure, but not at all worth €150m.
 
zaafi said:
Huh? Højlund doesn't get nearly as much service as Osimhen does, and Osimhen misses a lot of big chances as well. He would improve us, sure, but not at all worth €150m.
Click to expand...
I agree that 150m would be too much for any player at our current state, but you cant deny that Hojlund is not even half the player as Osimhen who is likely a top 3 CF currently after Haaland and Kane.
 
aeh1991 said:
I agree that 150m would be too much for any player at our current state, but you cant deny that Hojlund is not even half the player as Osimhen who is likely a top 3 CF currently after Haaland and Kane.
Click to expand...

Lewandowski is quite comfortably better than Osimhen as well, and I think the biggest reason Osimhen is even talked about in the same league as these strikers is because of the extreme lack of great strikers these days. I also think he is overrated because of how he has done in Serie A, as he hasn't really shown he can do it at a much higher level, and I think it's important to remember that most of the opposition he faces are very poor sides. There is no guarantee he would do anywhere near as good in the Premier League. Belotti, Immobile and Lukaku are all strikers that have had exceptional seasons in Serie A.
 
2 man midfield said:
I’m sure I read that your FFP threshold can be extended if your owners decide to add a one off cash injection - which obviously the glazers never have. Not sure how much that is, or whether it’d be enough to land Osimhen. But we’re broke otherwise.
Click to expand...
For the Premier League.

UEFA doesn't count that
 
Ish said:
My understanding is very high level but I’d think we’d have to. FFP is based on revenue/earnings and a cash injection from owners/sale of shares doesn’t qualify as revenue - its a capital contribution, per se. Now it would make us more liquid and could assist us on spending on infrastructure but our revenue levels would remain, and so would our expenditure capabilities on players/wages etc.

My high level understanding anyway.
Click to expand...
Isn’t there an allowance of ~30 million a year from owners?
 
From our perspective, injuries would be the only concern I'd have. Some of his absenses over recent years have been down to bad luck (like getting Covid twice or randomly getting his face smashed in) but he's had enough problems that adding him to our cursed team would be a recipe for disaster.

If Chelsea are still in a position to throw money around he'd make a lot of sense for them, unfortunately.
 
sullydnl said:
From our perspective, injuries would be the only concern I'd have. Some of his absenses over recent years have been down to bad luck (like getting Covid twice or randomly getting his face smashed in) but he's had enough problems that adding him to our cursed team would be a recipe for disaster.

If Chelsea are still in a position to throw money around he'd make a lot of sense for them, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Selling Broja is an instant FFP cash machine. If we went in for him, I doubt Broja would want to stay.
 
Murder on Zidane's Floor said:
He will flop at Chelsea
Click to expand...

That says more about Chelsea than Osimhen to be fair. I can't shake the feeling he'd be a another big money striker flop if he came to us. He could flourish at Arsenal though, or almost literally any other big club.
 
2 man midfield said:
I don’t think we’re getting anything worth shouting about for Sancho, Martial or Donny. Not even sure we can afford to lose Maguire or McTominay now, and those were the main potential sources of income last summer - until we needed to rely on their goals! I think it’ll all rest on the owners.

I’m sure I read that your FFP threshold can be extended if your owners decide to add a one off cash injection - which obviously the glazers never have. Not sure how much that is, or whether it’d be enough to land Osimhen. But we’re broke otherwise.
Click to expand...
90m I believe
 
Don’t see him coming here. We’ve spent too much on Hojlund for him to be a bench player.
 
Bwuk said:
Don’t see him coming here. We’ve spent too much on Hojlund for him to be a bench player.
Click to expand...
If you believe reports, were after Timo Werner anyway. Sort of makes sense as he’s more versatile and a bit older, makes less sense when you factor in that he’s shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.