| The last time 11:01 - Aug 5 with 7932 views | TheAlpineShrew |
Who were the last team we went behind against before coming back to win? |  | | |  |
| The last time on 15:31 - Aug 6 with 1050 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 15:22 - Aug 6 by jack247 |
By deeming a player ‘good’ you are subconsciously comparing him to his peers. There is no debate about that. |
Well there is debate about it because it is not my thought process at all, if someone is fast then I see it with my eyes. I don’t need to see him race anyone. If someone scores 25 yard screamers I know he can strike the ball well regardless of a comparison. If he is tackling well or showing a good engine then I see it and note it, I don’t need to compare to anyone else to know if it is a correct deduction.
In fact the most impressed I have been with a sportsman was watching Derek Jeter in batting practice for the Yankees. He was out in the field alone with a pitcher. I was not a baseball fan at the time so had nothing to compare with, yet could tell instantly what a talent he was. Turns out he was one of the best Yankees of all time. |  |
| |
| The last time on 16:27 - Aug 6 with 1030 views | BobbyBacala |
| The last time on 15:31 - Aug 6 by E20Jack |
Well there is debate about it because it is not my thought process at all, if someone is fast then I see it with my eyes. I don’t need to see him race anyone. If someone scores 25 yard screamers I know he can strike the ball well regardless of a comparison. If he is tackling well or showing a good engine then I see it and note it, I don’t need to compare to anyone else to know if it is a correct deduction.
In fact the most impressed I have been with a sportsman was watching Derek Jeter in batting practice for the Yankees. He was out in the field alone with a pitcher. I was not a baseball fan at the time so had nothing to compare with, yet could tell instantly what a talent he was. Turns out he was one of the best Yankees of all time. |
I agree it's difficult to compare players because it depends on so much - form, confidence, the system, how settled they are, their team-mates, the league they play in, but in your example here, you're still making a comparison. If 90% of players run the 100m in 12 seconds, someone who runs it in 12 seconds isn't 'fast', they're average, despite what your eyes are telling you. Similarly, if every player is scoring 25 yard screamers with every shot, then your example is just someone doing what's expected of them.
You think Clucas is a good player because you've seen him do things better than other players.
Can't we just all agree on the following:
Clucas is a decent lower-to-midtable Premier League midfielder
Swansea probably overpaid for him
He didn't perform very well last season
He was not alone in this
He'd be a massive help to us this season | | | |
| The last time on 16:41 - Aug 6 with 1017 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 15:31 - Aug 6 by E20Jack |
Well there is debate about it because it is not my thought process at all, if someone is fast then I see it with my eyes. I don’t need to see him race anyone. If someone scores 25 yard screamers I know he can strike the ball well regardless of a comparison. If he is tackling well or showing a good engine then I see it and note it, I don’t need to compare to anyone else to know if it is a correct deduction.
In fact the most impressed I have been with a sportsman was watching Derek Jeter in batting practice for the Yankees. He was out in the field alone with a pitcher. I was not a baseball fan at the time so had nothing to compare with, yet could tell instantly what a talent he was. Turns out he was one of the best Yankees of all time. |
I think Bobby sums it up very well. You can tell if someone is fast because you’re comparing him to other players, deliberately or otherwise. They don’t have to be running alongside him. Same goes for shooting, tackling and any other attributes. | | | |
| The last time on 17:58 - Aug 6 with 991 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 16:41 - Aug 6 by jack247 |
I think Bobby sums it up very well. You can tell if someone is fast because you’re comparing him to other players, deliberately or otherwise. They don’t have to be running alongside him. Same goes for shooting, tackling and any other attributes. |
No I’m not. You said “peers” not people. I know what fast looks like, there are fast rugby players, school kids, athletes, postmen (and women).
I take it back to the baseball example, there were no peers for me to compare to but I knew he was amazing by his physical ability, timing, strength, accuracy and eye coordination. This was not a comparison to his peers.
So yes I know footballers and know their abilities but as the above example shows, I do not need to (and indeed don’t) compare players in order to determine if they are good or not. I know by watching them. You may do though, great. There are massive flaws in that though as there are too many variables, the above post touches upon a few of those although it doesn’t even scratch the surface.
[Post edited 6 Aug 2018 18:03]
| |
| |
| The last time on 18:24 - Aug 6 with 977 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 17:58 - Aug 6 by E20Jack |
No I’m not. You said “peers” not people. I know what fast looks like, there are fast rugby players, school kids, athletes, postmen (and women).
I take it back to the baseball example, there were no peers for me to compare to but I knew he was amazing by his physical ability, timing, strength, accuracy and eye coordination. This was not a comparison to his peers.
So yes I know footballers and know their abilities but as the above example shows, I do not need to (and indeed don’t) compare players in order to determine if they are good or not. I know by watching them. You may do though, great. There are massive flaws in that though as there are too many variables, the above post touches upon a few of those although it doesn’t even scratch the surface.
[Post edited 6 Aug 2018 18:03]
|
Yes, but when you’re saying Clucas is a good player, or even fast, you’re talking in context. You’re not comparing him to rugby players or school kids. That’s even more relevant when you’re talking about shooting, tackling, heading, positioning etc.
Using your baseball example, I have a similar knowledge of the game to you. I don’t know what he was doing, but I’d guess it was some variation of striking or pitching a ball. I’d be prepared to bet, that to an untrained eye, most professional baseball players would look very impressive doing that at close quarters. There must be minute differences between the very elite and the rest.
I’m not disputing that you know footballers and their abilities. Surely you can see that you’re subconsciously comparing them though, otherwise you have no context and nothing to base how ‘good’ he is on. | | | |
| The last time on 22:00 - Aug 6 with 947 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 18:24 - Aug 6 by jack247 |
Yes, but when you’re saying Clucas is a good player, or even fast, you’re talking in context. You’re not comparing him to rugby players or school kids. That’s even more relevant when you’re talking about shooting, tackling, heading, positioning etc.
Using your baseball example, I have a similar knowledge of the game to you. I don’t know what he was doing, but I’d guess it was some variation of striking or pitching a ball. I’d be prepared to bet, that to an untrained eye, most professional baseball players would look very impressive doing that at close quarters. There must be minute differences between the very elite and the rest.
I’m not disputing that you know footballers and their abilities. Surely you can see that you’re subconsciously comparing them though, otherwise you have no context and nothing to base how ‘good’ he is on. |
It is in context with what I see. Not his peers, I am not comparing him to Premier League players is the point. If you go to a circus and see someone juggling daggers while walking on the back of a bucking bronco - you can know he is good at it without having seen anyone do it before.
Baseball - agreed. But I wasn’t comparing him to his peers, which is the point. So no, don’t agree. I don’t think comparisons are helpful so don’t use them when I can avoid, certainly not in deciding if someone is good or not. | |
| |
| The last time on 06:32 - Aug 7 with 922 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 22:00 - Aug 6 by E20Jack |
It is in context with what I see. Not his peers, I am not comparing him to Premier League players is the point. If you go to a circus and see someone juggling daggers while walking on the back of a bucking bronco - you can know he is good at it without having seen anyone do it before.
Baseball - agreed. But I wasn’t comparing him to his peers, which is the point. So no, don’t agree. I don’t think comparisons are helpful so don’t use them when I can avoid, certainly not in deciding if someone is good or not. |
You don’t need silly examples to make your point. If you genuinely think you can judge how good a player is without any form of deliberate or subconscious comparison to other players, your prerogative. I think it’s nonsense. My prerogative.
The point with baseball is that if you’d seen a bang average MLB player doing the same drills, you’d probably have been equally impressed. | | | |
| The last time on 06:39 - Aug 7 with 919 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 06:32 - Aug 7 by jack247 |
You don’t need silly examples to make your point. If you genuinely think you can judge how good a player is without any form of deliberate or subconscious comparison to other players, your prerogative. I think it’s nonsense. My prerogative.
The point with baseball is that if you’d seen a bang average MLB player doing the same drills, you’d probably have been equally impressed. |
Nothing silly about it, I am taking it away from the situation as you are clouded by your own thought process regarding it. Taking it away to a situation where you may reach my thought process is utterly relevant and not in any way “silly”. Your whole point is that you are suggesting that when I say he is good, I am comparing him agains Premier League players. That’s not true.
Your point regarding baseball is nonsense. You reckon I would be equally impressed by a bang average MLB player than one of the greatest of all time?? Again, I refer you to the circus. I have never seen anybody juggle daggers while standing on a bucking bronco, there is no peer to compare with yet I would instantly be blown away by the skill level.
I don’t think you entered this debate knowing what your point was, you have now decided that your point is that I am comparing to Premier League footballers, I am telling you I am not and absolutely don’t think it is helpful in order to form any sort of judgement. I think you have lost your train of thought and become bogged down in a ludicrously ridiculous viewpoint. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The last time on 16:03 - Aug 7 with 864 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 06:39 - Aug 7 by E20Jack |
Nothing silly about it, I am taking it away from the situation as you are clouded by your own thought process regarding it. Taking it away to a situation where you may reach my thought process is utterly relevant and not in any way “silly”. Your whole point is that you are suggesting that when I say he is good, I am comparing him agains Premier League players. That’s not true.
Your point regarding baseball is nonsense. You reckon I would be equally impressed by a bang average MLB player than one of the greatest of all time?? Again, I refer you to the circus. I have never seen anybody juggle daggers while standing on a bucking bronco, there is no peer to compare with yet I would instantly be blown away by the skill level.
I don’t think you entered this debate knowing what your point was, you have now decided that your point is that I am comparing to Premier League footballers, I am telling you I am not and absolutely don’t think it is helpful in order to form any sort of judgement. I think you have lost your train of thought and become bogged down in a ludicrously ridiculous viewpoint. |
Of course it’s silly. You are making up irrelevant examples to illustrate basic points that simply don’t need it.
My point is that you seem to have no reference point for ‘good’. Clucas in the Swansea senior league would look sensational. If you stuck him in el Classico, he would look out of his depth, yet he’d still be the same ‘good’ player. It has no context.
With the baseball, yes, I absolutely do if they weren’t actually playing. The difference between the elite and the rest is minimal, especially to someone new to the game watching them do drills. The same could be said for sprinters, or any kind of athlete really. It’s an irrelevant tangent, but I’ve answered your question.
The original point I disputed was about clubs not being in for him and the same applying to Siggurdson and Llorente. Ok,Llorente isn’t going to have a lot of resale value and possibly hasn’t got a full season in him. I can pretty much guarantee that if Siggurdson was available for £8m, clubs all over Europe would be falling over themselves to sign him. | | | |
| The last time on 02:01 - Aug 8 with 827 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 16:03 - Aug 7 by jack247 |
Of course it’s silly. You are making up irrelevant examples to illustrate basic points that simply don’t need it.
My point is that you seem to have no reference point for ‘good’. Clucas in the Swansea senior league would look sensational. If you stuck him in el Classico, he would look out of his depth, yet he’d still be the same ‘good’ player. It has no context.
With the baseball, yes, I absolutely do if they weren’t actually playing. The difference between the elite and the rest is minimal, especially to someone new to the game watching them do drills. The same could be said for sprinters, or any kind of athlete really. It’s an irrelevant tangent, but I’ve answered your question.
The original point I disputed was about clubs not being in for him and the same applying to Siggurdson and Llorente. Ok,Llorente isn’t going to have a lot of resale value and possibly hasn’t got a full season in him. I can pretty much guarantee that if Siggurdson was available for £8m, clubs all over Europe would be falling over themselves to sign him. |
It’s being viewed as silly by you and deemed irrelevant because it is showing that your point is not accurate. The reality is they are entirely relevant examples highlighting the point. You keep saying my examples are silly and then continuing the same point even though they have already made them redundant.
So again, I have no reference point for someone juggling on the back of a bucking bronco do I? Yet if someone did it and showed immense composure, balance and coordination then by default you would know he was good at it. Yet no reference point.
You didn’t dispute the initial point 247, read the thread again. The initial point was that if clubs not lining up for Clucas means he isn’t good then clubs not lining up for Llorente and Sigurdsson must, by default, meant they aren’t either - yet by the sounds of it, that isn’t the case.
If Sigurdsson was available for £8m then that would mean he was avilable for 20% of what his transfer fee was, people would almost blindly be queuing up. Same with Clucas, make him available for 20% if the 14.75m - so £2.9m and doubt he would be on the market longer than a few hours.
Offer Gylfi at around 45% discount which is what we are with Clucas, making him available for around £25m depending on what figures you believe - interest would be similarly low, I have no doubt about it. | |
| |
| The last time on 06:22 - Aug 8 with 804 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 02:01 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
It’s being viewed as silly by you and deemed irrelevant because it is showing that your point is not accurate. The reality is they are entirely relevant examples highlighting the point. You keep saying my examples are silly and then continuing the same point even though they have already made them redundant.
So again, I have no reference point for someone juggling on the back of a bucking bronco do I? Yet if someone did it and showed immense composure, balance and coordination then by default you would know he was good at it. Yet no reference point.
You didn’t dispute the initial point 247, read the thread again. The initial point was that if clubs not lining up for Clucas means he isn’t good then clubs not lining up for Llorente and Sigurdsson must, by default, meant they aren’t either - yet by the sounds of it, that isn’t the case.
If Sigurdsson was available for £8m then that would mean he was avilable for 20% of what his transfer fee was, people would almost blindly be queuing up. Same with Clucas, make him available for 20% if the 14.75m - so £2.9m and doubt he would be on the market longer than a few hours.
Offer Gylfi at around 45% discount which is what we are with Clucas, making him available for around £25m depending on what figures you believe - interest would be similarly low, I have no doubt about it. |
Percentages of previous fees have nothing to do with it. You’ve said that yourself, it may affect expectation, but not the players quality. It’s not about whether their values have fallen, they clearly have in all three cases. If a good PL player was available for £8m, there would be a lot of interest in him, looks like we finally agree on that.
The other point, is you need some kind of metric or yardstick to assess how good a player is. From my point of view, comparing him against peers is easily the most logical.
If you see someone riding a bucking bronco, you may well be impressed with his skills, but you’d have no idea if he’s the best or worst rider at that event. The Clucas in the Swansea senior league/El Classico was a better example. It’s a tangent anyway and a moot point because you have seen plenty of footballers and aren’t in the same position as your bronco/baseball examples. | | | |
| The last time on 08:42 - Aug 8 with 791 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 06:22 - Aug 8 by jack247 |
Percentages of previous fees have nothing to do with it. You’ve said that yourself, it may affect expectation, but not the players quality. It’s not about whether their values have fallen, they clearly have in all three cases. If a good PL player was available for £8m, there would be a lot of interest in him, looks like we finally agree on that.
The other point, is you need some kind of metric or yardstick to assess how good a player is. From my point of view, comparing him against peers is easily the most logical.
If you see someone riding a bucking bronco, you may well be impressed with his skills, but you’d have no idea if he’s the best or worst rider at that event. The Clucas in the Swansea senior league/El Classico was a better example. It’s a tangent anyway and a moot point because you have seen plenty of footballers and aren’t in the same position as your bronco/baseball examples. |
Of course it does. Fees don't affect if someone is good or not but they certainly play a part in an interest driven market, which is what you are talking about.
You are confusing your view, with my view and then expecting me to change it. Who should I compare the juggler on the bucking bronco with then? Or shall I tell him I will reserve judgement until I have seen a few more?
I didn't say Clucas was the best or worst player, I said he was a good player. That isn't necessarily comparing him to Premier League players, that is an assessment of what I see from him. His engine is excellent as is his passing. I make that deduction simply because I know the game, not necessarily at PL level, all levels. You aren't making much sense I am afraid. | |
| |
| The last time on 09:48 - Aug 8 with 783 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 08:42 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
Of course it does. Fees don't affect if someone is good or not but they certainly play a part in an interest driven market, which is what you are talking about.
You are confusing your view, with my view and then expecting me to change it. Who should I compare the juggler on the bucking bronco with then? Or shall I tell him I will reserve judgement until I have seen a few more?
I didn't say Clucas was the best or worst player, I said he was a good player. That isn't necessarily comparing him to Premier League players, that is an assessment of what I see from him. His engine is excellent as is his passing. I make that deduction simply because I know the game, not necessarily at PL level, all levels. You aren't making much sense I am afraid. |
A good PL player will attract a lot of interest at £8m. Particularly one who can cover a number of positions. You can’t dispute that. I notice you are now adding the ‘not necessarily at PL level’ caveat. If you’d said that at the start I’d have agreed. Like I said, he’d look a world beater playing for West End.
The juggler is irrelevant as it’s part of a discussion about being able to judge ability without a reference point. You know football at all levels. You have a reference point. | | | |
| The last time on 09:58 - Aug 8 with 780 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 09:48 - Aug 8 by jack247 |
A good PL player will attract a lot of interest at £8m. Particularly one who can cover a number of positions. You can’t dispute that. I notice you are now adding the ‘not necessarily at PL level’ caveat. If you’d said that at the start I’d have agreed. Like I said, he’d look a world beater playing for West End.
The juggler is irrelevant as it’s part of a discussion about being able to judge ability without a reference point. You know football at all levels. You have a reference point. |
Not necessarily. We bought Gylfi for 10m without much fuss, you reckon if that was 8m then we would have been gazumped by a queue of clubs? Doubtful.
PL level is what you said, his peers. It is no caveat to continue the theme you put forward. I made that clear with my ''you said peers not any humans'' response. I know someone is fast because I know what fast is I don't have to compare to PL level to know that. Same with engine, shooting etc etc etc
The juggler is absolutely relevant because it shows you are capable of making a judgement without a comparative thought process. Which I don't have regardless of if I know the game. You point was specifically comparing against PL players - which is wrong, because I don't. | |
| |
| The last time on 10:13 - Aug 8 with 776 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 09:58 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
Not necessarily. We bought Gylfi for 10m without much fuss, you reckon if that was 8m then we would have been gazumped by a queue of clubs? Doubtful.
PL level is what you said, his peers. It is no caveat to continue the theme you put forward. I made that clear with my ''you said peers not any humans'' response. I know someone is fast because I know what fast is I don't have to compare to PL level to know that. Same with engine, shooting etc etc etc
The juggler is absolutely relevant because it shows you are capable of making a judgement without a comparative thought process. Which I don't have regardless of if I know the game. You point was specifically comparing against PL players - which is wrong, because I don't. |
I’m talking about Gylfi now, not when we bought him, which you well know.
Do you think Clucas is a good Premier League player, or just good compared to ‘any humans’ or the average professional footballer? | | | |
| The last time on 10:46 - Aug 8 with 767 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 10:13 - Aug 8 by jack247 |
I’m talking about Gylfi now, not when we bought him, which you well know.
Do you think Clucas is a good Premier League player, or just good compared to ‘any humans’ or the average professional footballer? |
Why does that matter? That's you just wanting to shoehorn your point. Was he not a good player back then? You said any good PL player would have clubs queuing up at that price.
I haven't seen him enough in the Premier league to make a judgement - he only played for us about 20 times, I think it's too broad a term. As I told you, Salah and De Bruyne were deemed not good enough for the Premier League, turns out they are among the best players to ever play there. Far too early to make league specific comparisons or judgements.
I think he's a good player though and would happily have him in our squad, how much he went for doesn't make him a worse or better footballer. [Post edited 8 Aug 2018 10:48]
| |
| |
| The last time on 11:02 - Aug 8 with 758 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 10:46 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
Why does that matter? That's you just wanting to shoehorn your point. Was he not a good player back then? You said any good PL player would have clubs queuing up at that price.
I haven't seen him enough in the Premier league to make a judgement - he only played for us about 20 times, I think it's too broad a term. As I told you, Salah and De Bruyne were deemed not good enough for the Premier League, turns out they are among the best players to ever play there. Far too early to make league specific comparisons or judgements.
I think he's a good player though and would happily have him in our squad, how much he went for doesn't make him a worse or better footballer. [Post edited 8 Aug 2018 10:48]
|
Because he would easily command £8m now, it’s a more timely and relevant comparison. He went for £40m or whatever 12 months ago, there wouldn’t have been a PL club who wouldn’t have paid £8m for him then, bar the very elite who just wouldn’t need him. And you accuse me of shoehorning to suit my point!
There’s nothing to say Clucas won’t fetch the same kind of money in the future if he goes to Wolves or Burnley and has the impact Gylfi did here.
I’m not talking about how much he went for, I’m talking about how much interest there is for him at a fairly modest price for a PL player.
If you’re just saying he is ‘good’ with no parameters, then you could easily apply that to any professional footballer, because they are.
I’d happily have him in our squad too, but I’d sooner sell him for £8m. | | | |
| The last time on 11:09 - Aug 8 with 755 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 11:02 - Aug 8 by jack247 |
Because he would easily command £8m now, it’s a more timely and relevant comparison. He went for £40m or whatever 12 months ago, there wouldn’t have been a PL club who wouldn’t have paid £8m for him then, bar the very elite who just wouldn’t need him. And you accuse me of shoehorning to suit my point!
There’s nothing to say Clucas won’t fetch the same kind of money in the future if he goes to Wolves or Burnley and has the impact Gylfi did here.
I’m not talking about how much he went for, I’m talking about how much interest there is for him at a fairly modest price for a PL player.
If you’re just saying he is ‘good’ with no parameters, then you could easily apply that to any professional footballer, because they are.
I’d happily have him in our squad too, but I’d sooner sell him for £8m. |
So would De Bruyne and Salah, hardly the point you were making though is it. You said a good player would have Premier League clubs lined up for a player at that price, you cant shoehorn that into a specific time parameter, surely that statement is timeless not one that only works today. Why is that statement true today but not in the past?
So was Gylfi not a good player 3 years ago or whatever it was?
We will disagree on the thought process behind how I deem someone good then as we are going around in circles. You seem to have a different thought process to me. Something you will have to deal with I think mate. | |
| |
| The last time on 11:22 - Aug 8 with 750 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 11:09 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
So would De Bruyne and Salah, hardly the point you were making though is it. You said a good player would have Premier League clubs lined up for a player at that price, you cant shoehorn that into a specific time parameter, surely that statement is timeless not one that only works today. Why is that statement true today but not in the past?
So was Gylfi not a good player 3 years ago or whatever it was?
We will disagree on the thought process behind how I deem someone good then as we are going around in circles. You seem to have a different thought process to me. Something you will have to deal with I think mate. |
All three of them would fetch substantially more than £8m in today’s market. Salah and DeBrunye left Chelsea for a lot more than £8m at the time.
As I said, same may happen with Clucas. In fact I guarantee it will if he reaches their level, or even Gylfis.
Agree with your last paragraph. I can’t understand how you can judge a footballer without at least subconsciously comparing him to peers. If it works for you it works for you. | | | |
| The last time on 11:40 - Aug 8 with 738 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 11:22 - Aug 8 by jack247 |
All three of them would fetch substantially more than £8m in today’s market. Salah and DeBrunye left Chelsea for a lot more than £8m at the time.
As I said, same may happen with Clucas. In fact I guarantee it will if he reaches their level, or even Gylfis.
Agree with your last paragraph. I can’t understand how you can judge a footballer without at least subconsciously comparing him to peers. If it works for you it works for you. |
That's because they have a host of Premier League experience now, doesn't mean they were not good before however. As I said, your stance should be timeless, it was a pretty broad statement - you can't shoehorn it, makes the point invalid.
Gylfi went to us for 10m without many dramas or competition. There are a host of good PL players that clubs aren't queuing up for at his price bracket. We signed Jonjo Shelvey for 5m and sold for 10m - neother time were clubs clamouring for his signature, yet he went on to represent England and is key part of the newcastle PL side.
Were they not good players? | |
| |
| The last time on 11:54 - Aug 8 with 729 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 11:40 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
That's because they have a host of Premier League experience now, doesn't mean they were not good before however. As I said, your stance should be timeless, it was a pretty broad statement - you can't shoehorn it, makes the point invalid.
Gylfi went to us for 10m without many dramas or competition. There are a host of good PL players that clubs aren't queuing up for at his price bracket. We signed Jonjo Shelvey for 5m and sold for 10m - neother time were clubs clamouring for his signature, yet he went on to represent England and is key part of the newcastle PL side.
Were they not good players? |
Why should a stance be timeless when you have more current data? All three of those players subsequently sold for substantially more than £8m more recently than your examples.
Anyway the discussion was about Sam Clucas. If you think he’s a good player by Premier League standards, I disagree. If you just think he is good with no context, I can’t argue because in my view you need context. | | | |
| The last time on 12:00 - Aug 8 with 726 views | E20Jack |
Data has nothing to do with it.
It is a broad statement, not a specific one. Why is it that only a good PL player will have clubs queuing up for them in that price bracket this season, but 2 or 3 seasons ago the same is not true?
I just don't understand the point you are making at all, should matter if its this season, next or last - if your statement is true, then it has always been true - except it isn't, and it hasn't been. | |
| |
| The last time on 12:08 - Aug 8 with 723 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 12:00 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
Data has nothing to do with it.
It is a broad statement, not a specific one. Why is it that only a good PL player will have clubs queuing up for them in that price bracket this season, but 2 or 3 seasons ago the same is not true?
I just don't understand the point you are making at all, should matter if its this season, next or last - if your statement is true, then it has always been true - except it isn't, and it hasn't been. |
You can compare 2 or 3 years ago. It’s more accurate than looking back and seeing what Maradona and Pele fetched in the transfer market, but it’s less accurate than using last season or this one.
Anyway, it’s not the topic. Sam Clucas is. | | | |
| The last time on 12:15 - Aug 8 with 717 views | E20Jack |
| The last time on 12:08 - Aug 8 by jack247 |
You can compare 2 or 3 years ago. It’s more accurate than looking back and seeing what Maradona and Pele fetched in the transfer market, but it’s less accurate than using last season or this one.
Anyway, it’s not the topic. Sam Clucas is. |
We aren't comparing to Maradonas era, we are comparing to an era where the expenditure was roughly the same as it is now, 2 years ago. Yet you seem to be saying that the notion only kicks in at a shoehorned specific time.
You made the statement.
If the debate is only about Sam Clucas then why are you bringing up all good PL players for and then backing away from it when it is explored? | |
| |
| The last time on 12:20 - Aug 8 with 714 views | jack247 |
| The last time on 12:15 - Aug 8 by E20Jack |
We aren't comparing to Maradonas era, we are comparing to an era where the expenditure was roughly the same as it is now, 2 years ago. Yet you seem to be saying that the notion only kicks in at a shoehorned specific time.
You made the statement.
If the debate is only about Sam Clucas then why are you bringing up all good PL players for and then backing away from it when it is explored? |
Which Premier League players have I brought up? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
