That was based on another agent saying West Ham wanted him - yet Sarr says he isn't committed to an agent.
Again, clubs don't see 2 years as the black hole that fans do in terms of contracts. And lets be honest, with the squad we have, Sarr walks into the starting XI regardless of system in the Championship. Again, I doubt it's a huge problem for Edwards. I can see why, but I think fans think there's a bigger issue with Sarr than there is in reality.
Where was the West Ham link? Newcastle's priority is for a RW, so Sarr would still have the edge on that. I'm not sure Dennis is enough of a specialist in that role for them to really consider him for it.
I’m not sure it was based on agency links although I saw that mentioned in a couple of tweets. I think that was information added to just sort of beef out the report but from what I’ve seen (and obviously I don’t subscribe to Ex WHU Employee’s Patreon) sounds more like something he’s heard from a club recruitment source.
Something Ex WHU Employee said on his podcast/patreon. Don’t subscribe so can’t speak too much to it but something to the effect of West Ham are now ready to make an offer for him.
Kim Min-Jae likely to head to Napoli for €20m. Another one who would have massively upgraded us at the back, cost less than €3m and then made Gino the huge profit he supposedly made the keystone of the recruitment model. But no.
Is it not just basic economics though? A players value declines the nearer they get to the end of their contract, and for a club like Watford and with our financial situation there is something to be said for the £20m odd we would get for selling Sarr now, Vs the lower amount we’d get later on. I’m not sure fans see the situation any differently to the clubs really, it is what it is.
Didn’t he play in the Chinese Super League? Ok the fee was low, but there may be millions of reasons why he chose them not us. I remember us being in for him twice and also Spurs coming close to, but not signing him. The model WFC has used has been frustrating and fitfully effective for a while, but it isn’t the answer in every instance.
Yes. But football doesn’t use basic economics, hence why nearly all clubs run at a loss - and you have to take into account the money the player can make you by staying against what you can sell him for. I’m very critical of the owner and the recruitment model. But I do not believe they are simply reckless with simple matters all the time, especially when there are millions at stake. If they have a value on the player and no one comes near, I’m sure they’ve done the maths on what the risk is of keeping him and hoping he can contribute to promotion. In which case, it’s a risk worth taking and what we may lose by selling him with a year left is overtaken by what we get rewarded with financially by going up. It’s a risk, sure - and one they may not take. But I really don’t believe they are going to lower the price again and again just to get him gone because they are worried about him having 2 years left. In fact, from everything I’ve been told, I’m certain they won’t. 1 year left on his deal is a different matter. I’m not saying his current contract length isn’t a consideration - but I do think some on here think it’s a bigger consideration than it is right now. There’s plenty of factors in play. Watford won’t be selling him for £20m when we still owe £9m of that to Rennes.
On the face of it it seems a pretty huge gamble, it’s not inconceivable that we end the window having only bought in the cash from the Cucho sale, leaving a shortfall of around £50m+ from last year when you consider we’ve already spent £5m of it on Bayo. Relegation clauses may cover that, but it seems unlikely. We’ve been lead to believe we’ve borrowed against every penny of future income so something doesn’t add up to me. I’d like to believe they know what they’re doing though, but I’m not sure anyone can say that with any confidence.
I do agree that the depreciation over the last two years of a contract is not “straight line” depreciation but rather concentrated in that second year. If he has a good season and/or World Cup and or/we get promoted, we’d be looking at £20m or so next summer too. That said, he wouldn’t fit the system as well as Dennis and in contrast, if Dennis does well this season and/or we get promoted, his value will appreciate. Given Dennis’ fit to the system, I think he’d be likelier to have a good season than Sarr too. I really think Dennis would score 20+ and can’t say the same for Sarr, especially in a system to which he isn’t suited.
I don’t disagree with the second part - I’m just talking from a position of who is likelier to stay. Dennis will be cheaper and easier to sell - play we don’t owe anything on him so it’s not a consideration. Whatever we sell him for is profit. And as I said earlier, if Sarr stays, there’s no way he doesn’t get picked regardless of what system Edwards plays. I imagine Edwards accepts he could lose him and isn’t planning a style based around Sarr. But there’s simply no chance he wouldn’t get him in the team if he’s here at the end of the window.
Just regarding what we owe Rennes, is that really relevant? That’s just money from the €35m we haven’t yet paid out, and will presumably fall due when it’s due, and and need to be paid regardless of of whether we’ve sold Sarr or not? Would seem a bit daft if that’s a reason for not selling him, because that’s money we’ll need to pay them regardless.
With our history of paying debts, especially with Sarr, I would think it’s probably quite relevant, even if it shouldn’t be.
Burnley set to complete a deal for Coventry’s Callum O’Hare next week. Another quality player we could’ve gone for. But don’t worry, we’ll end up with some average midfielder from the Swiss league instead.
He’s one I knew nothing about apart from watching him play vs us and he caused us all sorts of issues and I liked him straight away. No idea on his metrics or his pedigree but he certainly passed the eye test that day, surprised it’s taken so long for him to get a move.
Edwards is after home grown players but are the club as a whole ? https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/20281069.watford-head-coach-knows-needs-balance-squad/
The club as a whole hasn't really got room for any more non-homegrown players in the squad, so most of any remaining signings will surely have to be HG.
The problem is HG usually means crap, certainly when you're shopping in the bargain bin as we are. They are very few HG bargains to be found.....or maybe there were, but we missed the boat on many of the out of contract EFL players we could have signed early on. I suspect, if we sign a HG player it will have to be on loan. If we sign one permanently, it will be someone who is probably a fair way down the football pyramid and will be another punt. I can no longer see Watford signing a top quality HG midfielder. We may get someone in, but for the level to be better than all our other midfielders, he's going to cost a lot of money as a HG player. I really can't see Pozzo doing that. Maybe we can get a loan from Udinese or one of the Arsenal kids on loan.....who knows, but I think it unlikely now we'll improve the midfield sufficiently on the cheap. It's getting a bit late in the day to sign a first team player, who is going to be fundamental to the team, which makes me think we're not intending to do too much in the market. Maybe a couple of HG forwards on loan to replace Dennis and Sarr, as and when they go.
I'm sure it will be stressed that Rob specifically requested both and the recruitment team on hearing this, pulled out all the stops to beat off competition from top premier league sides to secure them.
If the wages are low enough I’d absolutely take him for a year. Didn’t play at all last season, but the season before he was very good (when he played - only 1000 mins) at Monaco. Also it’s always fun to get a genuine legend to come and play with us.
