Again there is no evasion you asked for one I brought it up.
The evasion I speak of in that instance is your side-tracking bringing my 100m comment into question despite it being (at best) secondary to the core of this exchange. You've been exercising a similar tactic throughout.
....Either you have A.D.D. or you are being purposely evasive.
I don't need to try harder I gave you an example of a deal Levy fucked up, just because you want to blame AC doesn't change what actually happened.
Just because you want to blame Levy despite the story that circulated at the time being contrary to your personal, unfounded "allegation", more like...... So yes, if you expect to be taken seriously within the context of this debate then substance (or at least links to somewhat plausible sources) IS called for.
I know this is the tactic of Levy apologists to expect people to ignore his past behaviour and make common sense applications to his current behaviour but when we have seen that he has fucked up deals in the past and then we are once again special cases that can't move out deadwood while others can then it is fair to ask what makes us so special? And when all arrows point to Levy there is no reason to try and bury our heads in the sand to pretend it isn't him.
Again, grow up.... And drop the Levy apologist bullshit.
I'm refuting your "give them away" silliness. The core this has nothing to do with who is or isn't our chairman.
I wouldn't include Foyth in the deadwood calculations he is in a different category.
Semantics.... He would have appeared on many people dregs lists.
Again, you're nit picking to avoid my perfectly reasonable original assertion made about the achievable value of such a list.
As for the others, yes there is the potential to get money for them as high as 20m but whether Levy will accept it or not is another thing.
So why waste my fucking time arguing the toss about it not being worth the effort to try and recoup that money then????
....Signs are good; but you'd rather ignore said signs. Telling.
The point still remains that at the end of the summer none of them should be on our team whether by sale, contract termination, loan or them just flat out quitting.
Well until then perhaps just spare the rest of us your pre-emptive whining on the matter.... Especially at a time when SO FAR (1 week into the tenure of our new DOF, ffs!) things look encouraging (especially considering our chairman appears to be taking a back-seat on such matters).
(p.s. Players simply don't "quit" when they're under contract.... If you were anywhere near as smart as you think you are, you'd know this.)