So Paul, you've formed your opinion on him based on 2 games? Fair enough, I won't pretend I know anything about him. All I know is every journo I follow on twitter is saying we have got a bargain and a lot of Southampton fans seem very upset/angry that they are selling him so I will wait and see how he turns out.
comment by He's French, He's Flash... (U9335)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 4 minutes ago
What makes people think that Luke Shaw being here for 10 years plus factual?
I assume some people can see into the future...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably why people precede it with the word 'if.'
What about those who say he is too expensive? Also fortune tellers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, 'if' he doesn't stay for 10 years, will he be an 'expensive' buy that the club was naive to pay?
comment by Wenger has signed someone and it is Alexis feckin Sanchez!! (U10012)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Paulpowersleftfoot #wewentagain (U1037)
posted 35 minutes ago
Overpriced certainly but an excellent left back nonetheless. Will be England's first choice for many years and I would rather pay £30m for him than the quite ridiculous fee of £16m that Arsenal are looking like stumping up for the bang average Chambers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fee are supposedly £12M + ads on. Then the wages likely to be less than 40k so how on earth can you compare both players?
And this is irony at its best, a City fan talking about overpaying for an unproven player!
Enjoy
http://talksport.com/football/manchester-city-poised-sign-ps30m-french-defender-140712101397
----------------------------------------------------------------------
128 first team games for liege & Porto inc CL experience
23 France U21 and now played 3 times for the French national side
Top player ready for the step up to the premier league
Little bit more proven than a kid in his first year out of the saints/arsenal academy
Yes but rooney had the raw ability to create and score goals, with a bit of magic that could influence games which comes at a higher cost than the likes of a defender. Shaw does not posses that offensive ability. He's a good defender which is a essential quality in a LB, but he won't change games with a moment if magic. So for me, does not justify his fee. Perhaps if he had consistently been the worlds best LB for 4-5 seasons, not the best of a bad bad in the EPL for 2 seasons.
..........................................
Well we are not sure on the wages but lets just concentrate on the transfer fee for the moment....
He's a pretty good LB, I am sure we would all agree, even to be the best of a 'bad bad EPL' is pretty impressive (EPL probably at minimum 3rd best league in the world) and at only the age of 18!
(he turned 19 after the season ended)
So we have a (now) 19 year who was the best LB in the league last year and you would imagine barring significant injuries or some dramatic loss of form he is going to show at least a little progress and probably give us 11 years good service (or a decent transfer fee should we sell him)
That would work out as £2.7M a season. Consider this for example against Man City's Kolarov, they have already had him for 4 seasons and have another 3 until he is 31 (the cut off age I set for shaw)
At a cost of £19M (all figures are from wiki) with 7 seasons he also works out as £2.7M
I have never really thought that much off Kolarov either, I am very much expecting Shaw to be a better player.
Lets look at Luis, Chelsea's latest signing. £15.8M 3 seasons until he turns 31. £5.2M a season!
When you are signing a young player you do really have to take into the years you will get out of him (or the future sell on value) Kolarov and Luis were far cheaper but have far less years left in them and worked up per season are actually similar (or more)
Obviously their quality degrades at a certain point and unless you have some academy graduate to take their place then you will have to buy a replacement!
comment by SAF_The_Legend 20 times #SupportMoyes (previously 7_The_Arab) (U5768)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yes but rooney had the raw ability to create and score goals, with a bit of magic that could influence games which comes at a higher cost than the likes of a defender. Shaw does not posses that offensive ability. He's a good defender which is a essential quality in a LB, but he won't change games with a moment if magic. So for me, does not justify his fee. Perhaps if he had consistently been the worlds best LB for 4-5 seasons, not the best of a bad bad in the EPL for 2 seasons.
..........................................
Well we are not sure on the wages but lets just concentrate on the transfer fee for the moment....
He's a pretty good LB, I am sure we would all agree, even to be the best of a 'bad bad EPL' is pretty impressive (EPL probably at minimum 3rd best league in the world) and at only the age of 18!
(he turned 19 after the season ended)
So we have a (now) 19 year who was the best LB in the league last year and you would imagine barring significant injuries or some dramatic loss of form he is going to show at least a little progress and probably give us 11 years good service (or a decent transfer fee should we sell him)
That would work out as £2.7M a season. Consider this for example against Man City's Kolarov, they have already had him for 4 seasons and have another 3 until he is 31 (the cut off age I set for shaw)
At a cost of £19M (all figures are from wiki) with 7 seasons he also works out as £2.7M
I have never really thought that much off Kolarov either, I am very much expecting Shaw to be a better player.
Lets look at Luis, Chelsea's latest signing. £15.8M 3 seasons until he turns 31. £5.2M a season!
When you are signing a young player you do really have to take into the years you will get out of him (or the future sell on value) Kolarov and Luis were far cheaper but have far less years left in them and worked up per season are actually similar (or more)
Obviously their quality degrades at a certain point and unless you have some academy graduate to take their place then you will have to buy a replacement!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well put sir!
However if he is going to be as good as the hype machine would lead us to believe, yes he is good, but not the world beater he's made out to be....then I would expect Madrid to be able to lure him away, so 11 years service, perhaps not. At least in that case you'd expect us to recoup the fee.
Thinking about it if Shaw is on £100,000 a week and Luis is on £80,000 then the difference a year would be...
£1.04M
(taking into account their transfer fees and assuming they both get to 31 and then retire)
Would actually still make Luis the more expensive purchase per season....
Infact even if we go for the higher estimate of Shaw being on £120,000 a week that would still only make him £2.08 more a season in wages than Luis
Which would mean a cost of £4.78M per season (minus 80k a week) for Shaw
and still a cost of £5.2M a season for Luis...
It doesn't actually look all that bad when you look at it this way....
but Chelsea are in Champeens League
However if he is going to be as good as the hype machine would lead us to believe, yes he is good, but not the world beater he's made out to be....then I would expect Madrid to be able to lure him away, so 11 years service, perhaps not. At least in that case you'd expect us to recoup the fee.
..............................................
Well yeah basically, even if he is only pretty good, thats still not too bad.
If he's great and doesn't leave thats awesome, if hes great and we get a brilliant fee for him that benefits us in the long run...
Shaw looks too chunky for a long career
comment by TheChameleonProject (U1847)
posted 27 seconds ago
Shaw looks too chunky for a long career
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not hampered fat frank too much
Midfield you dont need pace
TBH I actually made a mistake, all the Shaw figures have an extra £200,000 as I said 31 retirement age but only gave Shaw 11 years instead of 12...
Shaw looks too chunky for a long career
.......................................................
31 is pretty damn short by modern day standards....
Not if you play every week from 17yrs old
Well Rooney looks like he'll tick onto at least 31 and Shaw looks like a whippet compared to him and he's played a pretty punishing schedule his whole career, hell like someone mentioned earlier, Lampard!
Is Rooney still fast and running around all game ?
No, hes burnt out by Fergie
Still looks like a £2.7M a season player to me...
Hell considering how much Torres must be per season Rooney would be a bargain at that price a season...
Thinking on it your very own manager was going to offer us a very tidy sum worked out per season for the rest of his playing career to obviously opposition managers believe he is at least worth a bit now...
How much you still paying Moysey ?
comment by TheChameleonProject (U1847)
posted 15 minutes ago
How much you still paying Moysey ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know it is incorporated in your DNA to be a WUM - and a píss poor one at that - but try to stay on track.
Many thanks.
Comment deleted by Article Creator
Putting club allegiances aside I really think that Jose makes a good point and I'm glad that we're not parting with that kind of huge transfer fee and wages for Shaw.
It's obvious Shaw went for the money
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
Putting club allegiances aside I really think that Jose makes a good point and I'm glad that we're not parting with that kind of huge transfer fee and wages for Shaw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With Chesea's new found financial prudence, you might just nick that 'net-spend' trophy off the claws of Arsenal.
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
Honestly you couldn't make it up
Sign in if you want to comment
Would Shaw Kill Manchester United?
Page 2 of 5
posted on 26/7/14
So Paul, you've formed your opinion on him based on 2 games? Fair enough, I won't pretend I know anything about him. All I know is every journo I follow on twitter is saying we have got a bargain and a lot of Southampton fans seem very upset/angry that they are selling him so I will wait and see how he turns out.
posted on 26/7/14
comment by He's French, He's Flash... (U9335)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 4 minutes ago
What makes people think that Luke Shaw being here for 10 years plus factual?
I assume some people can see into the future...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably why people precede it with the word 'if.'
What about those who say he is too expensive? Also fortune tellers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, 'if' he doesn't stay for 10 years, will he be an 'expensive' buy that the club was naive to pay?
posted on 26/7/14
comment by Wenger has signed someone and it is Alexis feckin Sanchez!! (U10012)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Paulpowersleftfoot #wewentagain (U1037)
posted 35 minutes ago
Overpriced certainly but an excellent left back nonetheless. Will be England's first choice for many years and I would rather pay £30m for him than the quite ridiculous fee of £16m that Arsenal are looking like stumping up for the bang average Chambers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fee are supposedly £12M + ads on. Then the wages likely to be less than 40k so how on earth can you compare both players?
And this is irony at its best, a City fan talking about overpaying for an unproven player!
Enjoy
http://talksport.com/football/manchester-city-poised-sign-ps30m-french-defender-140712101397
----------------------------------------------------------------------
128 first team games for liege & Porto inc CL experience
23 France U21 and now played 3 times for the French national side
Top player ready for the step up to the premier league
Little bit more proven than a kid in his first year out of the saints/arsenal academy
posted on 26/7/14
Yes but rooney had the raw ability to create and score goals, with a bit of magic that could influence games which comes at a higher cost than the likes of a defender. Shaw does not posses that offensive ability. He's a good defender which is a essential quality in a LB, but he won't change games with a moment if magic. So for me, does not justify his fee. Perhaps if he had consistently been the worlds best LB for 4-5 seasons, not the best of a bad bad in the EPL for 2 seasons.
..........................................
Well we are not sure on the wages but lets just concentrate on the transfer fee for the moment....
He's a pretty good LB, I am sure we would all agree, even to be the best of a 'bad bad EPL' is pretty impressive (EPL probably at minimum 3rd best league in the world) and at only the age of 18!
(he turned 19 after the season ended)
So we have a (now) 19 year who was the best LB in the league last year and you would imagine barring significant injuries or some dramatic loss of form he is going to show at least a little progress and probably give us 11 years good service (or a decent transfer fee should we sell him)
That would work out as £2.7M a season. Consider this for example against Man City's Kolarov, they have already had him for 4 seasons and have another 3 until he is 31 (the cut off age I set for shaw)
At a cost of £19M (all figures are from wiki) with 7 seasons he also works out as £2.7M
I have never really thought that much off Kolarov either, I am very much expecting Shaw to be a better player.
Lets look at Luis, Chelsea's latest signing. £15.8M 3 seasons until he turns 31. £5.2M a season!
When you are signing a young player you do really have to take into the years you will get out of him (or the future sell on value) Kolarov and Luis were far cheaper but have far less years left in them and worked up per season are actually similar (or more)
Obviously their quality degrades at a certain point and unless you have some academy graduate to take their place then you will have to buy a replacement!
posted on 26/7/14
comment by SAF_The_Legend 20 times #SupportMoyes (previously 7_The_Arab) (U5768)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yes but rooney had the raw ability to create and score goals, with a bit of magic that could influence games which comes at a higher cost than the likes of a defender. Shaw does not posses that offensive ability. He's a good defender which is a essential quality in a LB, but he won't change games with a moment if magic. So for me, does not justify his fee. Perhaps if he had consistently been the worlds best LB for 4-5 seasons, not the best of a bad bad in the EPL for 2 seasons.
..........................................
Well we are not sure on the wages but lets just concentrate on the transfer fee for the moment....
He's a pretty good LB, I am sure we would all agree, even to be the best of a 'bad bad EPL' is pretty impressive (EPL probably at minimum 3rd best league in the world) and at only the age of 18!
(he turned 19 after the season ended)
So we have a (now) 19 year who was the best LB in the league last year and you would imagine barring significant injuries or some dramatic loss of form he is going to show at least a little progress and probably give us 11 years good service (or a decent transfer fee should we sell him)
That would work out as £2.7M a season. Consider this for example against Man City's Kolarov, they have already had him for 4 seasons and have another 3 until he is 31 (the cut off age I set for shaw)
At a cost of £19M (all figures are from wiki) with 7 seasons he also works out as £2.7M
I have never really thought that much off Kolarov either, I am very much expecting Shaw to be a better player.
Lets look at Luis, Chelsea's latest signing. £15.8M 3 seasons until he turns 31. £5.2M a season!
When you are signing a young player you do really have to take into the years you will get out of him (or the future sell on value) Kolarov and Luis were far cheaper but have far less years left in them and worked up per season are actually similar (or more)
Obviously their quality degrades at a certain point and unless you have some academy graduate to take their place then you will have to buy a replacement!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well put sir!
However if he is going to be as good as the hype machine would lead us to believe, yes he is good, but not the world beater he's made out to be....then I would expect Madrid to be able to lure him away, so 11 years service, perhaps not. At least in that case you'd expect us to recoup the fee.
posted on 26/7/14
Thinking about it if Shaw is on £100,000 a week and Luis is on £80,000 then the difference a year would be...
£1.04M
(taking into account their transfer fees and assuming they both get to 31 and then retire)
Would actually still make Luis the more expensive purchase per season....
Infact even if we go for the higher estimate of Shaw being on £120,000 a week that would still only make him £2.08 more a season in wages than Luis
Which would mean a cost of £4.78M per season (minus 80k a week) for Shaw
and still a cost of £5.2M a season for Luis...
It doesn't actually look all that bad when you look at it this way....
posted on 26/7/14
but Chelsea are in Champeens League
posted on 26/7/14
However if he is going to be as good as the hype machine would lead us to believe, yes he is good, but not the world beater he's made out to be....then I would expect Madrid to be able to lure him away, so 11 years service, perhaps not. At least in that case you'd expect us to recoup the fee.
..............................................
Well yeah basically, even if he is only pretty good, thats still not too bad.
If he's great and doesn't leave thats awesome, if hes great and we get a brilliant fee for him that benefits us in the long run...
posted on 26/7/14
Shaw looks too chunky for a long career
posted on 26/7/14
comment by TheChameleonProject (U1847)
posted 27 seconds ago
Shaw looks too chunky for a long career
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not hampered fat frank too much
posted on 26/7/14
Midfield you dont need pace
posted on 26/7/14
TBH I actually made a mistake, all the Shaw figures have an extra £200,000 as I said 31 retirement age but only gave Shaw 11 years instead of 12...
posted on 26/7/14
Shaw looks too chunky for a long career
.......................................................
31 is pretty damn short by modern day standards....
posted on 26/7/14
Not if you play every week from 17yrs old
posted on 26/7/14
Well Rooney looks like he'll tick onto at least 31 and Shaw looks like a whippet compared to him and he's played a pretty punishing schedule his whole career, hell like someone mentioned earlier, Lampard!
posted on 26/7/14
Is Rooney still fast and running around all game ?
No, hes burnt out by Fergie
posted on 26/7/14
Still looks like a £2.7M a season player to me...
Hell considering how much Torres must be per season Rooney would be a bargain at that price a season...
Thinking on it your very own manager was going to offer us a very tidy sum worked out per season for the rest of his playing career to obviously opposition managers believe he is at least worth a bit now...
posted on 26/7/14
How much you still paying Moysey ?
posted on 26/7/14
comment by TheChameleonProject (U1847)
posted 15 minutes ago
How much you still paying Moysey ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know it is incorporated in your DNA to be a WUM - and a píss poor one at that - but try to stay on track.
Many thanks.
posted on 26/7/14
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 26/7/14
^^ You are off track.
posted on 26/7/14
Putting club allegiances aside I really think that Jose makes a good point and I'm glad that we're not parting with that kind of huge transfer fee and wages for Shaw.
posted on 26/7/14
It's obvious Shaw went for the money
posted on 26/7/14
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 4 minutes ago
Putting club allegiances aside I really think that Jose makes a good point and I'm glad that we're not parting with that kind of huge transfer fee and wages for Shaw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With Chesea's new found financial prudence, you might just nick that 'net-spend' trophy off the claws of Arsenal.
posted on 26/7/14
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
Honestly you couldn't make it up
Page 2 of 5