Lallana's Left Peg

Great signing - ticks a lot of the boxes we needed ticking and gives us extra leverage in the summer if any club is interested in Pelle and when clubs make formal approaches for Mane. Can't argue with that price. Great work from the club.

So basically it is highly likely that the summer we make ground in commercial income that any advantage we may otherwise get from that will be dwarfed by the new TV deal which will cause a change in FFP budgets Yep

So if that £4m limit is raised to £8m (for example), that would apply to every club to in the league with a wage bill over a certain amount, but we could still make decent gains in wage budget through our new commercial deals and getting rid of those three players highlighted?

I think it has for clubs in Europe but not for the Premier League. They are two different sets of FFP.

FFP has greatly affected how clubs build their squads now. There are limits on how much you can increase your wage bill each season no matter how much spare cash you have in the bank. These limits have in part impacted how Saints have spent their money the last few seasons. There are many scenarios based on a clubs situation but a summary of Saints' case is that we can only increase our wage bill by £4m (80k a week) a season plus any increase in commercial revenue. There are a few weeks left of the transfer window but lets assume at the start of this month we had the maximum wage bill possible that we are allowed (which is highly likely). This means in the summer we only have the following money that can be allocated to wages for new players or new contracts: 1. Players freeing up wages who leave the club 2. £4m allowed as per the rules 3. Increase in commercial revenue It's worth calling this out for Saints because I see this summer as a big opportunity for the club. Every club will see an increase in TV money but TV money does NOT count towards commercial income which can be used against wages. Therefore whilst lots of clubs will have spare money for transfer fees, the amount they will have to spend on wages will greatly differ. My own interpretation of Saints' position: 1. Players freeing up wages who leave the club I predict the following leaving the club (and wages are pure guesses): Martin Stekelenburg (£40k a week) Stephen Caulker (£30k a week) Gaston Ramirez (£60k a week) We have the added bonus that all three will leave the club with no issues for replacements - the first two were loan cover and the third never plays. So that's an estimated £130k a week back in the kitty which is a good start. 2. £4m allowed as per the rules Any club that does not take advantage of this is stupid. The new TV money will more than cover the extra cost and this must be used. That's another £80k a week in the kitty. 3. Increase in commercial revenue This is where Saints could have a real advantage. Our current commercial income is so bad (despite the recent improvements post-Cortese) that anything over and above we get now (even just to get to average for a club of our size in this league) can be spent on wages for new players under the rules. We know that this summer we will be getting a new shirt sponsor, and a new kit manufacturer. The average sponsorship deal is worth £5m a season. Our current one pays £1m. Assuming we get an average deal that is an extra £4m in revenue and another 80k a week towards wages. Onto kit manufactuer - it's hard to pitch what an average deal would be but back in 2014 Underarmour did a deal with Spurs for 5 years for £50m. We are nowhere near as big as Spurs but lets say we signed a deal for £5m a year there. Not sure how much we get from Adidas today but lets be generous and say we get £2m. The new deal is guessed at giving us £3m more a season (60k a week for wages). Overall these rough estimates (and you can argue against the reasoning behind any of them which is fair enough) give us an estimated £350k a week that can be spent on wages. Some of that figure must be amended for wage increases for players already at the club. I suspect a decent amount of that could already be accounted for within contracts for young players and recent signings. Lets say another £80k a week of that has gone. That still leaves £270k a week within the FFP rules for players purchased by a club with no transfer debt and a massive increase in TV money. That gives us massive potential to attract some good players to improve our team and that is why I am excited about this summer. Other clubs will be at it of course - any club that doesn't already have a wage bill of £60m has extra space and the promoted clubs will have unbelievable spending power (but will have a big quality gap in their current team to one they need to have at the start of the season) but as a Saints fan this is a huge summer where we can spend big without compromising the security of the club and it will be interesting to see what we choose to do. From my perspective - if we talk about ambition then this is the summer to prove it as we won't have many financial handicaps. And that is before any other outgoings.

Be interesting to see how / where he fits in at Everton as I'd imagine he would like to play but only days ago Martinex claimed Coleman was one of the best players in the world (or something like that).

If they pay us shedloads I don't care too much. The extra £100k a week to spend on wages would be more important to us I think.

Any time a football club (no matter what the level) spends 10% of its turnover on a football player it is a big fee. You are arguing it is not a big fee relative to the market and you raise some fair points. Others are saying that regardless of the market £12m is a big fee for Southampton and it is true. If Saints spend £10m+ on a player then the expectation is going to be big for him because that is a big fee for us. There are two sides to the argument and I always look at the club and not the market. But that is just my preference.

No idea. I doubt it is very much given it was a rush deal for just one year.

It's all but confirmed that it is Under Armour. What will interest me is what it is worth to the club. Anything over and above what we received from Adidas this season can go on increasing the wage budget under FFP and that is key to us pushing on.

I know what you are getting at but we often don't deploy a purely attacking midfielder in that position. We expect / need them to do a lot of other things that purely creative players do not offer. Davis absolutely needs more end product to his game, but even if he did develop that I don't think he's going to be your 10 goal / 10 assist man as it's just not the way he plays. Whenever we play Mane behind Pelle or Long it's often with a far more defensive midfield behind him (or with Davis on the right) as Koeman is always playing with his defensive shape in mind. We do need more goals from midfield in general, but I wouldn't be looking to one position in particular to be providing them.

Basically you think he should have the same goalscoring and assist record as David Silva despite being not as good and despite playing with inferior players?

Strong team for us. Not sure on the team Liverpool have out but they are usually very good and I imagine we'll be seeking to defend well and make the most of our chances.

Net spend of £12.5m a season is quite impressive to stay in the Premier League to be fair. Even moreso to have an 8th place and 7th place finish.

He's missed a lot of games this season to be fair. QPR have played 28 games and he has played 16 of them. He may have been rested for cup games. He's missed the equivalent of over two months of the season. 10 in 16 in the league. Lots of interest in Austin because he scores goals and even in a crap team last year he scored loads. Plus he is English and his transfer fee won't be much because of his contract running down. But then on the other hand his contract situation means he will command more in wages and couple that with his injury record there are issues for any club that wants to sign him. Plus he'll want to be first choice...hard to make someone with his injury record first choice as you're putting a lot of money into a player who may not play more than 60% of your games. I can see him going somewhere in the summer.

I agree - I do think all the money we recoup via sales is invested in the team one way or another. I don't think any money over and above that is though which is a concern. And my view right now is that the money we had in the summer was poorly invested.

No because any ticket money they receive is greatly dwarfed by other revenue streams and I know they would be taking the ******. Would gladly pay more once we had proved we had a better team and could keep players. But as that is unrealistic it won't happen.

Live on YouTube on the Saints channel.

The timing of this given recent threads on the Board I predict the internet breaking.

It is, just as your opinion about Koeman not walking and the board not wanting to change him is. Everything on here is! I'm just of the opinion that when you look at Koeman's comments (which may be in relation to questions asked rather than opinions he offered without prompting - but he has enough media nous to know what he is doing) then I think he is positioning himself in the media somewhat.

Well from my perspective within the last 5-6 weeks we've had Koeman do the following in press conferences: 1. Let the media know we're the only team who doesn't have a net spend in the league (along with words along the lines of 'come on, come on') 2. Be very forthright in his opinion on our Academy prospects 3. State we're not likely to make signings, to may sign a striker, to will look to sign a striker (and also used the word 'signings'). I'd say he is protecting himself and putting some pressure on the Board.

I think you're right but I also think Koeman is protecting himself through the media which points to me that not all is well somewhere.

If we have a fit and in form squad I'm completely comfortable with Koeman saying 'Ryan Seager isn't good enough for my team'. But right now the scenario is our two best strikers are injured and the only other one we've got (on average) hits the back of the net 5-7 times a season in the top flight. I can understand why Koeman wants another striker. But until he arrives I don't know what else about this circumstance says 'Seager still doesn't deserve a chance'. Cause if it is because he isn't good enough then I'll use that as a stick to beat Koeman with when he plays Yoshida and Martina - exactly the same applies.

It's not about packing your team full of U21's. It's about giving those players a chance if your senior professionals aren't doing the business for you. If our squad is stretched and the results have been awful and it means that the next in line are our U21's then so be it. But I noticed Chelsea played some U21's yesterday, Watmore is now starting for Sunderland ahead of international players, Man Utd have given debuts to youth team players this season (and one played on Saturday), and Aston Villa have now brought Grealish back into the fold. I suppose it depends on what your definition of how good the U21's are - I believe the players many have identified as being able to help us this season have the credentials and have earned the right to be given an opportunity in the right circumstance. Ryan Seager has done nothing but score goals for the U18's and U21's the last three years. That doesn't mean he is good enough for the first team (Sam Hoskins anyone?) but in this circumstance: 1. Pelle injured 2. Jay Rod injured 3. Shane Long's finishing being what we always know it to be - erratic and below average 4. Juanmi incapable of playing up front You have no other forward to play. And Seager still doesn't get a look-in. For me this is exactly the sort of circumstance you look at a bloke who scores goals for fun and say 'this is your opportunity' and if he doesn't take it and if he doesn't impress then at least we know and at least he was given a chance. But if only having one senior striker fit means you still don't get a chance then it's wrong - because Seager has done everything asked of him and he has a professional contract and we're saying 'no chance for you'. Weird.

Saints have looked at Shelvey in the past and stayed well away as he failed pretty much every 'character' criteria they have for signing players these days. Of course, it didn't stop him shoving one past Forster from 25 yards last season but Saints insist in this off the field checks and hold them in high regard so it is what it is.