I'm sort of confusing myself really

but what I'm trying to siphon in my brain is the idea that a player is sold for a value that is not just equivalent to a contract value - eg what we paid for Crofts to Brighton probably isn't the equivalent of his contract value, but contract plus perceived value. Whereas I'm not sure that this is quite the same here, as the original argument was about approach and agreed compensation, not about how well Norwich would do cf Colchester.

I'm almost certainly wrong - it just seems a bit odd if there were something so concrete in terms of future success as I can't think that would have formed an initiial discussion.

Posted By: camcan, Jun 1, 11:34:35