Sofyan Amrabat | signs for United on loan

Status
Not open for further replies.
JPRouve said:
And in that case you address the list and not make a silly point about the amount of games someone can watch or not, especially since unless you yourself haven't watched these players regularly, aren't in a position to criticize it. Surely you spot the contradiction?
Click to expand...

I know nothing about engineering, if I started waffling on about engineering processes and you believed you could clearly tell it was nonsense then you would be completely fair to point out that you don't believe I am making points from a place of knowledge.

Feel free to believe it is silly, I would argue that believing the above to be a contradiction is quite silly. Ironically what you are suggesting would actually have been far more hypocritical if that had been my chosen course of action.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
Delighted with this. We needed desperately soneone like him.
But why is 10 mil loan fee? Avoiding FFP with that?
Click to expand...
Isn't a 10 million loan fee for 1 year worse for FFP in the short term than a normal purchase?

25 million on a 5 year deal would only be 5 million a year in the accounts.
 
Dominos said:
Isn't a 10 million loan fee for 1 year worse for FFP in the short term than a normal purchase?

25 million on a 5 year deal would only be 5 million a year in the accounts.
Click to expand...

Would Fiorentina have accepted that installment plan?
 
JPRouve said:
You don't have to watch teams weekly to be familiar with them and their players. And keep in mind that you just made a post where you shared your opinion on all these players, is it based on watching them weekly or should we consider that you are full of it?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's fair. No, I would never think of watching all of these teams weekly - especially not rewatching matches. I don't really find that equally as entertaining as watching it live. I watch a lot of games myself, but I'm not going to pretend that I watch 20 games a week. I do watch at least one Serie A game every weekend, though, particularly Napoli, Atalanta, Inter Milan and AC Milan, and Juventus occasionally.

I wasn't trying to say that no one watches these matches, but confidently listing a bunch of midfielders that, coincidentally, is the same list that appears on google of the best midfielders in Serie A, are better than Amrabat, when Amrabat clearly is superior in terms of passing was just funny to me.
 
ThinkTank@Cafe said:
2. Fbref shows he in the 98 percentile (or higher) for passes attempted, accuracy, and progressive passes.
Click to expand...
I don't know if Amrabat is the right signing, but these high volume passers should have been what we targeted over Mount.

We need a reliable high volume passer to play Eriksen's role as our go-to ball player in midfield. Not someone who frequently has very low amount of touches and passes like Mount.
 
Lebowski said:
You're entitled to your opinion and obviously I hope he goes on to have a great season for us despite it looking like a deadline day desperation deal.

Put it this way though, if he was a top target for us since June, then don't you wish the club had got him in on a permanent deal months ago rather than paying £10m on deadline day to get him on loan?

It was widely reported that Forest had a bid of £17m accepted for him a few days ago - wouldn't it have made more sense to pay the extra £7 million and buy him on a permanent deal weeks earlier so he's ready for the start of the season?
Click to expand...

So let's think this through. Let's even say we could have got him for 30m£ in June, so with a 5 yr contract, that's amortized to 6m£ a year. But now we are paying a 10m€/8.5m£ loan fee, which obviously for this year's FFP is higher. So why would we do this and make our FFP numbers? Why do you think that could be?
 
OverratedOpinion said:
I know nothing about engineering, if I started waffling on about engineering processes and you believed you could clearly tell it was nonsense then you would be completely fair to point out that you don't believe I am making points from a place of knowledge.

Feel free to believe it is silly, I would argue that believing the above to be a contradiction is quite silly. Ironically what you are suggesting would actually have been far more hypocritical if that had been my chosen course of action.
Click to expand...

But it's not what you did. you said that it was impossible to watch all those teams. If it's impossible then how can you judge his list. The issue is that instead of addressing the list and share your thought, you made the silly point that the list wasn't correct because no one follow that many teams and have a clue which is two things, not correct and also prevents you from giving your opinion because by your own logic you have no clue.

I didn't expect it to be an actual back and forth but to summarize, by targetting the poster you targetted yourself
 
reddevilz007 said:
Would Fiorentina have accepted that installment plan?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how you actually pay the money. All incoming transfers go on the books as if they were paid there and then and the outgoings are spread evenly over the length of the contract. It's an accounting trick to make your books look better.
 
mav_9me said:
So let's think this through. Let's even say we could have got him for 30m£ in June, so with a 5 yr contract, that's amortized to 6m£ a year. But now we are paying a 10m€/8.5m£ loan fee, which obviously for this year's FFP is higher. So why would we do this and make our FFP numbers? Why do you think that could be?
Click to expand...

Hmmm you're right there, this don't make no sense.
 
Withnail said:
It doesn't matter how you actually pay the money. All incoming transfers go on the books as if they were paid there and then and the outgoings are spread evenly over the length of the contract. It's an accounting trick to make your books look better.
Click to expand...
The only catch to the incoming transfers going fully into the books is that the remaining amortisation also fully goes into the books, which can result in a net loss if the player isn't sold for a high-enough fee.
 
JPRouve said:
But it's not what you did. you said that it was impossible to watch all those teams. If it's impossible then how can you judge his list. The issue is that instead of addressing the list and share your thought, you made the silly point that the list wasn't correct because no one follow that many teams and have a clue which is two things, not correct and also prevents you from giving your opinion because by your own logic you have no clue.

I didn't expect it to be an actual back and forth but to summarize, by targetting the poster you targetted yourself
Click to expand...

I pointed out that it was unlikely that he was talking from a place of knowledge, it is pretty easy to extract from that how I view his list.

Don't worry, I don't feel targeted and I haven't watched Milinkovic Savic in about 5 years.
 
mazhar13 said:
The only catch to the incoming transfers going fully into the books is that the remaining amortisation also fully goes into the books, which can result in a net loss if the player isn't sold for a high-enough fee.
Click to expand...

Good point - I think that could have been why we didn't sell Maguire. I was reading somewhere that with his payout we'd have ended up worse off for FFP after selling him to West ham.
 
Xire01 said:
One of the best things about this signing is hopefully that it puts an end to seeing Bruno at right wing
Click to expand...
When Mount is back we'll definitely try a midfield 3 of Mount-Casemiro-Amrabat and Bruno on the right wing so I'm not really sure you're right there.
 
zaafi said:
Yeah, that's fair. No, I would never think of watching all of these teams weekly - especially not rewatching matches. I don't really find that equally as entertaining as watching it live. I watch a lot of games myself, but I'm not going to pretend that I watch 20 games a week. I do watch at least one Serie A game every weekend, though, particularly Napoli, Atalanta, Inter Milan and AC Milan, and Juventus occasionally.

I wasn't trying to say that no one watches these matches, but confidently listing a bunch of midfielders that, coincidentally, is the same list that appears on google of the best midfielders in Serie A, are better than Amrabat, when Amrabat clearly is superior in terms of passing was just funny to me.
Click to expand...

Honestly that list of midfielder isn't special, they are all well known and if you watch a bit of Serie A and UEFA competitions you will know them fairly well. The issue with the list is that these players are very different, it makes little sense to have all of them in the same list when they don't really compete with each others. Now to be honest I barely watched Serie A last season, so my point can only be about their profiles and not their forms, so I have doubts about the list for different reasons.
 
Suv666 said:
It is Seria A tbf
Smalling was doing decent there, having an impressive record in Italy means feck all
Click to expand...
Alisson, Salah, Bruno Fernandes (before Sporting he played for Udinese and Sampdoria), Kulusevski, Bentancur, Marcos Alonso, Jorginho (people like to shit on him, but he played a vital role in Chelsea's UCL title, he was the player with most interceptions and tackles in the tournament) all did fairly well or great in the Prem, no?

Smalling also did well in Europa League.
 
OverratedOpinion said:
I know nothing about engineering, if I started waffling on about engineering processes and you believed you could clearly tell it was nonsense then you would be completely fair to point out that you don't believe I am making points from a place of knowledge.

Feel free to believe it is silly, I would argue that believing the above to be a contradiction is quite silly. Ironically what you are suggesting would actually have been far more hypocritical if that had been my chosen course of action.
Click to expand...
I thought your comments were perfectly fine, if it’s worth anything to you. It was a shit list and couldn’t have come from watching football.
 
OrcaFat said:
I thought your comments were perfectly fine, if it’s worth anything to you. It was a shit list and couldn’t have come from watching football.
Click to expand...

Thanks mate, I see the point that it is better to address the list directly. Just a pet peeve of mine that everyone on football forums is an expert on every league.
 
Dominos said:
Isn't a 10 million loan fee for 1 year worse for FFP in the short term than a normal purchase?

25 million on a 5 year deal would only be 5 million a year in the accounts.
Click to expand...
You are right. Then this 10 mil doesn't have any sense.
 
He’ll bring the balance to our midfield that we were seriously lacking. Pity he won’t be able to feature against Arsenal as he’d be very useful in that game but looking forward to seeing him after the international break.
 
Dorris said:
Not sure how minor historical breaches are relevant? Explain to me why we’ve gone for a loan which is more expensive in FFP terms rather than buy him? We can’t be that close to breaching can we
Click to expand...
It's not more expensive. As there's an option to buy attached, this can be accounted as though it's a transfer, and so amortised over (up to) 5yrs, as long as there's "reasonable certainty" that the option will be taken up. The same (obviously) applies if and when the option is taken up.

The only way this goes down as a €10M cost on this years books is if we don't take the option at the end of the year. Of course, if we're doing that, then it probably hasn't worked out too well with the player and we're better off not being committed to paying the remaining €20M.
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
He’ll bring the balance to our midfield that we were seriously lacking. Pity he won’t be able to feature against Arsenal as he’d be very useful in that game but looking forward to seeing him after the international break.
Click to expand...

Works better this way, he hasn't had a pre-season. He can get match-fitness over the break and be ready for the fixtures upon return.
 
Dominos said:
Isn't a 10 million loan fee for 1 year worse for FFP in the short term than a normal purchase?

25 million on a 5 year deal would only be 5 million a year in the accounts.
Click to expand...

It's better (or more expedient) if you only have 10m available / financed / backed by revenue than 30. Maybe not strictly in FFP terms but certainly as a general rule.
FFP also audits general spending versus revenue, not just transfers in isolation at least so far I can claim to understand it.

But yes in a general sense United is earmarking/spending some of next year's budget.
 
the_cliff said:
When Mount is back we'll definitely try a midfield 3 of Mount-Casemiro-Amrabat and Bruno on the right wing so I'm not really sure you're right there.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt Bruno will go right wing full time. ETH loves Antony and for all his faults he is very press resistent which Bruno is not.

I think it will be a battle between Mount and Amrabat for who starts in the 8 role but tbh they are such different midfield profiles I can see us using Mount at home against non Top 6 sides and Amrabat next to Casemiro in Big fixtures and away matches.
 
mav_9me said:
So let's think this through. Let's even say we could have got him for 30m£ in June, so with a 5 yr contract, that's amortized to 6m£ a year. But now we are paying a 10m€/8.5m£ loan fee, which obviously for this year's FFP is higher. So why would we do this and make our FFP numbers? Why do you think that could be?
Click to expand...

Yeah, the FFP excuse doesn't really make sense. The most likely 2 options are therefore either 1) there literally wasn't enough cash in the bank for anything close to the up-front fee a decent quality midfielder would cost to buy outright. The most recent accounts showed the cash in the bank was really low and we still owe about a quarter of a billion pounds for previous transfer fees paid in instalments. This would also explain why the club waited so late in the window (hoping a player sale would raise funds), and why they turned down some bids for players they wanted rid of and accepted others (because they were insisting on more cash up front and less in instalments).

Option 2 is that the club is just as poorly run and short-term in their business as they usually are. Paying £10m for a 1 year loan vs £17-30m for a permanent move means a 'saving' for the financial year in pure cash terms, even though much like the Casemiro deal, it's a panicked short-term midfield bandage after a poor start rather than a permanent cure.
 
I'm fairly certain the starting XI still is: Casemiro, Mount, Bruno, Rashford, Antony, Hojlund.

Amrabat will be used situationally (shoring up a lead, rotation with Casemiro etc.)
 
I think Nicolas Dominguez who Forest just signed from Bologna for 10 million euros is better. Will be interesting to see how they both do in the premier league coming in at a similar age from serie A
 
Status
Not open for further replies.