Alejandro Garnacho (out) | Chelsea make enquiries

Escobar said:
As if 60m gets you 3 decent players. This sale makes zero sense and 60m is a joke when you look that Dibling would cost 55m
Click to expand...

From a PSR perspective its's 60M in the accounts now whereas £55m for Dibbling would be spread across five years.

It's the same strategy that Chelsea have been using.
 
MaMa given red said:
From a PSR perspective its's 60M in the accounts now whereas £55m for Dibbling would be spread across five years.

It's the same strategy that Chelsea have been using.
Click to expand...
Once you need to make decisions like that purely on finances and regulations, you're fecked
 
Escobar said:
As if 60m gets you 3 decent players. This sale makes zero sense and 60m is a joke when you look that Dibling would cost 55m
Click to expand...
Surely we aren't still debating this.

60m profit for garnacho is for right now. If we signed players their cost is spread over the duration of their contract.
 
ErikElevenHag said:
Surely we aren't still debating this.

60m profit for garnacho is for right now. If we signed players their cost is spread over the duration of their contract.
Click to expand...
Yes true but who could we realistically afford that is so much better? Cashflow is still a problem, not just regulations
 
Escobar said:
Yes true but who could we realistically afford that is so much better? Cashflow is still a problem, not just regulations
Click to expand...
They don't have to be so much better than Garnacho though do they?

They need to be competent to play one of the roles in this current set up, which Garnacho appears incapable of doing so far.
 
MaMa given red said:
From a PSR perspective its's 60M in the accounts now whereas £55m for Dibbling would be spread across five years.

It's the same strategy that Chelsea have been using.
Click to expand...
Please stop spreading this, it doesn't matter how you account for it, it will still need to be paid, we will just have a smaller and smaller window each year and we will be sell to before in the summer if we carry on.

If Mount was 55, Dibling is 60 than 60 for Garnacho who is more experienced, proven, Argentinian regular and most goal involvements for anyone his age - 60m for him is AWFUL business.
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
Only because we’re in the same European competition, come the summer deals like this will be back on the table as I can’t see us finishing in any European places this season.
Click to expand...
Fair point. Wouldn't be shocked if we were the first club done for it though.

Edit: think we're only allowed to do business with Nice after the summer window closes
 
ErikElevenHag said:
They don't have to be so much better than Garnacho though do they?

They need to be competent to play one of the roles in this current set up, which Garnacho appears incapable of doing so far.
Click to expand...
Garnacho made crucial assists lately, was one of the better players last season and is a top talent. If we want to improve as a team, we need players who make us better
 
JonesyUk said:
I know this is probably a bit simplistic, but we then surely need to sell a player for £50m profit every year to balance the books across the 5 years?

So who is the sacrificial lamb next year?

It's all so stupid. Like living your life on the credit card.
Click to expand...

The club makes money in more ways than just transfers.
 
Garnacho has loads of potential but he’s been poor this season. We’ve squandered many chances and he’s clearly not a right fit for 343. There are many others I’d shift before him if we thought possible but they aren’t pushing for moves. The club has been forced to sell and there is nothing we can do about it. This ain’t the fault of Ineos it’s old decisions coming home to bit us in the ass. I do think we could replace with a more suitable player though.
 
Irrational. said:
Seems like it’s edging closer which is really disappointing.

For £60 million to Chelsea, we’ve essentially swapped him for Mount.

What does £60 million even get you thesedays?
Click to expand...
That's an absolute travesty. We get a crock on higher wages and a lesser talent while they get one of our most exciting attacking talents. Sickening.
 
Replacing Garnacho with Dibling would be a bit dumb. The point of selling him is to buy someone a bit more established who fits and works in the system now. Dibling isn't that.

I can see Cunha/Mbuemo but Dibling for me shouldn't be a priority.
 
Berbaclass said:
Replacing Garnacho with Dibling would be a bit dumb. The point of selling him is to buy someone a bit more established who fits and works in the system now. Dibling isn't that.

I can see Cunha/Mbuemo but Dibling for me shouldn't be a priority
Click to expand...
He's an excellent talent and I wouldn't mind going for him in the summer as a rotation with Amad. He absolutely has the traits required to play as an inside 10.

Cunha would elevate the entire teams attacking threat. I don't see why he'd want to come though.
 
dubplate warrior said:
He's an excellent talent and I wouldn't mind going for him in the summer as a rotation with Amad. He absolutely has the traits required to play as an inside 10.

Cunha would elevate the entire teams attacking threat. I don't see why he'd want to come though.
Click to expand...
I like him as a player but I don't think he is an upgrade on Garnacho currently. Potential is a different discussion but we need players to come in and perform immediately.
 
Ali Dia said:
Season is a write off
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be as that attitude last season lead us to where we currently are. Plus Garnacho is 20 years old. He would have many seasons here.

United selling a promising young Academy product and a winger at that is a sign of where the club is headed I suppose.
 
Escobar said:
Once you need to make decisions like that purely on finances and regulations, you're fecked
Click to expand...
Tbh Chelsea has been buying and selling young players/academy players since the deep of Abramovic era and that's why they have got away with murder in their previous squad rebuilds. They took one transfer ban still once they got too greedy. But this tactic in general helps a team whose academy can produce.

Refresh my memory, outside of Elanga in recent times, who we have sold from academy in the north of 10m?
 
SparcMac said:
Tbh Chelsea has been buying and selling young players/academy players since the deep of Abramovic era and that's why they have got away with murder in their previous squad rebuilds. They took one transfer ban still once they got too greedy. But this tactic in general helps a team whose academy can produce.

Refresh my memory, outside of Elanga in recent times, who we have sold from academy in the north of 10m?
Click to expand...
Greenwood, McTominay, Pereira, Garner, you'll be able to lump Rashford in there too soon.
 
I don't mind if the price is right.

But how do we get a replacement in at this stage of the window. Might as well keep him until the summer if it's purely for PSR. He will not have a lack of suitors come July and we can't possibly drop his value any further than this
 
Berbaclass said:
Replacing Garnacho with Dibling would be a bit dumb. The point of selling him is to buy someone a bit more established who fits and works in the system now. Dibling isn't that.

I can see Cunha/Mbuemo but Dibling for me shouldn't be a priority.
Click to expand...
Eze or Cunha or for me.
 
hellhunter said:
Do you expect us to have more income next year that this year?
Click to expand...

Well considering PSR is only based on the last 3 years, and the club is doing what they can to make cuts then yes.

I am expecting Rashford and Casemiro to leave in June, Eriksen and Evans are at the end of their contracts also, thats a lot of money saved in wages. Plus the former 2 will probably go for a fee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.