I believe I've seen it written that he likes using 4-3-3, but I'm in no position to watch their games so I can't say that's from experience at all.
2015 Offseason Megathread
- Thread starter FootyLovin
- Start date
- Status
I believe I've seen it written that he likes using 4-3-3, but I'm in no position to watch their games so I can't say that's from experience at all.
Only if NYCFC has ~$250K of cap space available (or allocation money to buy it down)
That's what I mean. So let's say we like a young player (or old player) on decent wages. A purchase would put us into DP territory. So Man City buys him and loans him.
I am not understanding the scenario. Are you asking if MC can buy a player and them loan him to us with MC paying part of his salary? The answer to that would be no or Demichelis would be here already.
No. Read what I said. MCFC goes and buys a player. We can't buy the player because the transfer fee would be added to his salary.
Let's use a very hypothetical. Bobby Wood makes 250k. Can MCFC buy him and loan him to us? We pay his salary, but not the transfer fee.
I thought, as I'm sure several people have said in this thread, the whole point of why this doesn't work is that the loanee club has to record the player's full salary against the cap, making them an automatic DP regardless of how much NYCFC is actually paying?
Also, while the PL is not a salary-capped league per se, and while many people simply aren't aware of it, the PL has implemented their own salary control recently as part of their own FFP rules (not the same ones UEFA uses) which state that clubs are only allowed to increase their overall salary spending by a maximum of something like £1m every year. That means MCFC would have to actively offload their own players in order to arrange this deal for NYCFC.
You're probably correct that MCFC would not want to go out on a limb because of the EPL FFP, but to answer Kjbert 's question, the transfer fee would not be part of the equation, only the salary. If NYCFC buys him outright, then the transfer fee is added in, but not for a loan.
Again - the question was if MCFC pays the transfer fee for a player making $250k - and then loans said player to NYCFC - is that legal? Can we just pay wages and not be responsible for the transfer fee?
Let's say Nemec required a $1 Million transfer fee but only made $300k. Could MCFC have bought the player and loaned him?
Let's say Nemec required a $1 Million transfer fee but only made $300k. Could MCFC have bought the player and loaned him?
I don't see why not, though it would cost one of our four loan spots, of course. It seems like a good strategy.
Last edited:
Calmness Personified
Registered
It's £4m per year however I believe that's limited to the extra TV money starting next season, if a clubs revenue increases in other areas they will be allowed to increase their wage bills by more than £4m.
Last edited:
I'm hoping that not having Angelino constantly bombing up the left will make it a little easier for Iraola's quality to show on the right. I'd have to go back and look to see if RJ played any LB for us last year, but agree he's earned some run.
I believe the loophole is that the owner can contribute as much capital as the owner wants, as long as the owner doesn't impose a debt burden on the club.
i.e., Man City could pay Messi $1 Million a week if the Sheikh paid for it out of his pocket. It just can't add debt to the balance sheet.
i.e., Man City could pay Messi $1 Million a week if the Sheikh paid for it out of his pocket. It just can't add debt to the balance sheet.
-------------new GK---------------
Iraola--new CB---Mena---new LB--
--------Mix------Pirlo-------------
-------------Lampard------------
---------------Poku----------------
------Taylor or new ST---Villa------
Iraola--new CB---Mena---new LB--
--------Mix------Pirlo-------------
-------------Lampard------------
---------------Poku----------------
------Taylor or new ST---Villa------
da fuck did i just watch
a good summary but im still sure there are rules and stipulations not mentioned. Guess well have to see how it goes
Is this a creative 4-2-1-1-2, or a 4-2-2-2 or 4-3-3 mocked up oddly?
Generally I agree though with those players in approximately those positions. I predict Brandon Barker will be that new forward, playing at LW, and Villa shifts over the RW. Shelton and Taylor as backups on the wing and Mullins backing up Poku at CF.
I call it the X offense
Mix-------Pirlo \ /
----Lampard-- \ /
------Poku--- /\
ST----------Villa / \
Just kidding. Still no width, hard to fit Lampard, , Mix, Poku and Pirlo on the same team
Edit: those slashes were supposed to be an x
Mix-------Pirlo \ /
----Lampard-- \ /
------Poku--- /\
ST----------Villa / \
Just kidding. Still no width, hard to fit Lampard, , Mix, Poku and Pirlo on the same team
Edit: those slashes were supposed to be an x
I wonder, at this stage, what Villa's work rate could be. He alone provides width.
When you watch Everton, Deulofeu plays similarly from the LW.
If you could get Villa to play some defense (and last year, he constantly paced back into midfield to get the ball, no reason he can't provide some of an outlet) but have him covered by a less offensive fullback, you get width there. Poku plays as a false 9. Shelton or Mullins can play as a RW. I prefer Shelton there because of his speed. Poku can hold the ball up from the Striker position. You play 4-3-3.
When you watch Everton, Deulofeu plays similarly from the LW.
If you could get Villa to play some defense (and last year, he constantly paced back into midfield to get the ball, no reason he can't provide some of an outlet) but have him covered by a less offensive fullback, you get width there. Poku plays as a false 9. Shelton or Mullins can play as a RW. I prefer Shelton there because of his speed. Poku can hold the ball up from the Striker position. You play 4-3-3.
- Status