But no one offered 40-45, they offered 30 and moved on. Logically in a year his worth should be lower so maybe 15-20 or 20-25 basically less than what West Ham were willing to pay?
Scott McTominay | Transfer discussion not performance discussion
- Thread starter Reapersoul20
- Start date
- Status
But no one offered 40-45, they offered 30 and moved on. Logically in a year his worth should be lower so maybe 15-20 or 20-25 basically less than what West Ham were willing to pay?
This fecking narrative again. It just won’t die. Shamelessly brought up time and time again from some posters like Mctominay benched Casemiro because of performances. Nothing to do with us just signed Casemiro late in the window so trying to gradually introducing him to a new team in a new league. No, Mctominay just benched Casemiro. That’s it. It’s such a disingenuous deceitful narrative used conveniently to prove a point.
There is some truth to it. McTominay was playing very well for that short spell. It gave us a bit of time to bed Casemiro in.
If McTominay was playing poorly, as he can do, you think he'd have still been starting with Casemiro on the bench?
Well we'll see. Chelsea are playing a similar risk re: Gallagher's price.
I am ok keeping McT. He does bring energy and has an eye for goal with great strikes of the ball. Can he work on showing more for the ball? Why not? Especially with an experienced and details oriented coach like EtH. Who knows, McT might just surprise us this season. No selling him on the cheap.
Why don’t we call them back and say hey- 30 is good!
Feel like IF West Ham came back in for him then we might look at signing an upgrade on Amrabat but who is the question
Lavia?
Amrabat is better currently.
Looking to sign Kudus if Paqueta leaves. Think this is done. Don't mind keeping him.
People thinking WHU would replace Paqueta with McT were delusional. Makes much more sense to get Kudus. It was always JWP vs McT. Now we are stuck with him..
Yes he did bench casemiro. He played very well for those first few games and ensured there was no need to throw casemiro in the deep immediately. However that was a rare purple patch and shouldn't be used as the baseline for anything. I don't even know why it's being brought up. He had the whole season to show his real level so the first few games became a distant irrelevant memory. Reminds me of those about 3 games of Anderson and cleverly that we never heard the end of.
Think the West Ham ship has sailed unfortunately. Sigh. Stuck with this guy again for another season.
Was just reading quotes from De Zerbi saying Brighton definitely need another midfielder. Could this be a possible landing spot for McTominay?
"Stuck with him."
You'd think he was a Weghorst type the way people go on.
He's a good player. Use him correctly and he'll be useful this season.
Just don't play him as a 6.
You'd think he was a Weghorst type the way people go on.
He's a good player. Use him correctly and he'll be useful this season.
Just don't play him as a 6.
Just set up a Michael Owenesque promo brochure and brand him a DM and he will sell for a fortune, DM's so hot right now
Extremely unlikely. Their style of play means they want players who are good on the ball and suited to possession football. Scott isn't suited to them for the same reason he isn't suited for us.
Crazy that we turned down 30m for him. Absolutely nuts. Turning 27 this year and clearly not going to get any better. Even 25m should have been acceptable.
I think Newcastle may come in for him in the last few days of the window
He doesn't have a role in this team where he can be used correctly. Back up 6 is really the only spot up for minutes and if he isn't that he isn't of much help to us this season.
I like the guy and he has been a good professional at United. I just struggle to see where exactly we would use him if he were to stay.
We're more likely than not going to be playing with something that resembles a midfield of Casemiro + Eriksen + Bruno. Eriksen and Mount will be the ones vying for the same spot. So, unless we're thinking that Scott is rotated in with those two, then he has to be playing in either spot occupied by Bruno or Casemiro. I can't see us using him in Bruno's spot, and he doesn't really have the qualities for Casemiro's spot either.
I've said it once already in this thread, but I honestly think we're more likely to keep him if we don't get any cover for Casemiro. It seems to hinge around whether or not we end up with Amrabat or not. If Amrabat comes, then there's a bigger chance of Scott going.
My preference would be to move Scott on and get in at least one other midfielder. E.g. someone to cover Casemiro.
Delusional?
Moyes likes Mctominay and he obliterated Spain with his 2 goals for Scotland and he is experienced in PL and have a good work ethic so i think Moyes still want him.
If he was a good player a number of clubs would be in for him. He's an average player that has been at the club far too long for the ability he has.
He was also destroyed by an Irish midfield. Let's not pretend international football gives us an idea of the quality of players. Fecking Gibraltar gave irelands midfield a tough time a few years back.
We won't sell him because we won't be able to replace
There isn't more anti-brighton midfielder than Scott McTominay in the PL.
Swap with Bruno G
Moyes wants him that is all know. So i am clinging to that hope.
*Wanted him.
Can you please let me have hope atleast without crushing it ?
yeah unfortunately it looks like they went for Ward Prowse and Alvarez instead due to our asking price.
We are talking about Moyes here mate, as a defensive minded coach he will probably see Mctominay as a striker
He'll leave next year for 15 million. It's almost guaranteed as we always hold onto players far too long.
He can share the role of the back up 8 with Eriksen. We'd need 2 of those anyway as we'll want to play with two 8 most of the time. The best way to use McTominay is as a box-to-box. He may not be the most suited to the way we think ten Hag wants to play, but he offers a different skillset to our other options and EtH is definitely pragmatic, when he has to. By the way Scotty is certainly better than van de Beek and he is also homegrown and on moderate wages.
There is a lot in his favour and I totally understand that we only sell him for a good offer. Still, I'm hopefull that he would loose his place to Hannibal or Mainoo at some point during the season.
Yes, after a season of rarely being selected for match day squad (let alone playing) he won’t generate higher fee.
Going off pre season it looks like we're playing with two 8's. Which is his correct role. So there's no problem on that regard.
I think our starting midfield is Casemiro, Bruno and Mount. So McTominay can slot on for tge latter two as and when required. Which is where he should be playing.
Eriksen, I don't think anybody really knows what version of him will turn up this season.
I never really get that as the measure of a player.
How many were in for Hojlund? One or two? Is he not a good player then?
Gallagher is better and younger than Scott, easily 10m more expensive, maybe even 20.
Wasn't even aware Mctom was already 26 years old. Was thinking he was much younger than that which is why I was okay with the rejection of West Ham's bid. I'll be surprised if we see another £30m+ bid for him ever again.
Hojlund had psg after him. Scott barely had west ham. Yes, there is a difference
He is the most anti-Brighton player I can think of. Hides from the ball and not good at passing.
I think the only teams interested on him are teams managed by dinosaurs like Moyes. Unfortunately, he is probably the last dinosaur in EPL so we are likely stuck with McTom cause we became too greedy.
But you said the number of clubs chasing a player says how good they are. At best Hojlund had two. In reality probably just us given how vague the PSG rumours were.
By your own reasoning Hojlund can't be all that.
How many are after Amrabat? Seems like just us. He must be no good either.
- Status