Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Barclays Premier League- 2018/19 Season Thread


Ja  Rhule

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, ARSEN said:

Arsenal in purge mode.  Looks like Ramsey and Ozil are goners.  Banega and Pepe on verge of joining.

Wait.. why? I thought Ozil was a long-term answer? Ramsey, when he's not being a dumb ass, can actually play pretty decently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Raskle said:

Wait.. why? I thought Ozil was a long-term answer? Ramsey, when he's not being a dumb ass, can actually play pretty decently.

Ozil does not fit Emery system very well.  Emery likes fast attacking wingers.  Ozil is super slow.  Ozil also plays hot and cold.  Ozil makes a ton of money and his production is just ok.  With Terreira, Gundiozi and Xhaka all proven to be first team quality this season, Ozil and Ramsey are an excess.  Emery tried to get Dembele from Barca in summer but Barca refused to sell... so now Emery is going for Pepe.  Lilie wants £70M for Nicolas Pepe which is a bit crazy but Pepe is just as good if not better than Dembele.  Arsenal need someone with a blazing speed at RW.

Can Arsenal sell Ozil who’s 30 and making $350k a week is a different story.  Ozil did have a good game against Burnley and created all 3 goals but now he’s injured again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chelsea have bid for Pulisic in what I consider a strange move...we are stacked in midfield...

http://www.espn.com/soccer/soccer-transfers/story/3738287/chelsea-make-50m+-pulisic-bid-as-dortmund-await-rival-offers-sources

BTW: I would pay huge money to keep Kovacic...he is a great talent.

Also, there is more Higuain talk which would be a massive move for us.  He is old, and not the guy he was but he puts it in the net.  Would love that move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shocker said:

Chelsea have bid for Pulisic in what in consider a strange move...we are stacked in midfield...

http://www.espn.com/soccer/soccer-transfers/story/3738287/chelsea-make-50m+-pulisic-bid-as-dortmund-await-rival-offers-sources

BTW: I would pay huge money to keep Kovacic...he is a great talent.

Also, there is more Higuain talk which would be a massive move for us.  He is old, and not the guy he was but he puts it in the net.  Would love that move.

Pulisic more of a winger.  He plays same position as Hazard.  He’s a great dribbler and very fast so my guess is Hazard might be for sale?  Pulisic gave hell to Liverpool here in friendly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ARSEN said:

Pulisic more of a winger.  He plays same position as Hazard.  He’s a great dribbler and very fast so my guess is Hazard might be for sale?  Pulisic gave hell to Liverpool here in friendly.

Well, that was my point.  He is not Eden Hazard (LOL) but how does he get on the field at Chelsea.  A new Hazard deal is in the works...I doubt he is going anywhere.  Hazard is a midfielder btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Shocker said:

Well, that was my point.  He is not Eden Hazard (LOL) but how does he get on the field at Chelsea.  A new Hazard deal is in the works...I doubt he is going anywhere.  Hazard is a midfielder btw.

Hazard plays RM.  difference between RM and RW are a couple feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Shocker said:

That’s fair.  Shoot Hazard has played some mid striker lately, Chelsea needs a center forward so bad.

I use Hazard as False 9 in FIFA and he just destroyed other teams.  His performance much better as False 9 than RM in FIFA lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, MillionDollarCam said:

Make that 4 goals and 3 assists for Pogba in the last three games, even Lukaku is scoring!

Ole's at the wheel, tell me how good does it feel!

Lukaku always scores against crappy teams.  His problem always was scoring against quality teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...