The idea that we shouldn’t buy a player from a club, because of who they may buy with the money...

[Adam-Utd]

We get linked because woody is like a naive child in a sweetshop when it comes to transfers...all he has to do is hear...."and city are interested" and he is running around with his little briefcase of cash to splash.

I bet he is loved at his favourite car dealership....he'll be paying for all the extras, paint detailing, chip protection coating all just because he heard the salesperson recommend it.

He doesn't have the footballing connections to actually find out if an offer from another club is serious or not so is easily played by the seller or the players agent.

Absolutely ridiculous. So many people genuinely believe Woodward is some sort of bumbling idiot that's just fallen into the job by luck.

I'd say connections are exactly what he has.

 

[Rozay]

Whilst you keep ignoring mine. No one signs players in isolation. You take everything into account. Including your competition.

It is definitely of our concern if we sign a player from a given opponent, whilst making them much stronger, specifically negating any gain we could get from adding the said player.

If a given player makes you at par with your competition, regardless of who they get to replace him. By all means, sign the player. If they don't, sign them at your own peril.

It’s not a valid point that’s why. And a team does sign a player in isolation. A team signs a player based on how he will help his team. That’s all you can control. Trying to not only control your own comings and goings, but to control the movements on the entire market is a mugs game. Chances are, the selling club will simply find another way to raise the money if they need it, and you will just sign your second choice player (unless you’re scared about who his club will sign, then you will probably move down the list again).

If you so badly wanted a player who your rival may sign, then sign him yourself. Oh, you can’t? Then if he’s a top player like De Ligt, he will go to another top club, that’s the way of the market. Trying to control that is a mugs game. Perhaps not buying Rakitic so that Barca can’t buy De Ligt, which in itself is internet fan hypothesis anyway, may ultimately mean he just signs for City instead. Or Liverpool. But not Manchester United, because you already tried that. If he doesn’t join Barca, where do you think he will go instead? Parma? Then to add to him joining City, you also don’t get Rakitic who you may have identified as the one you want. Maybe Spurs buy him instead for good measure.

 

[flappyjay]

How about saying buying a 31 year old stop-gap midfielder when we need long-term solutions is wrong regardless of what we pay and what they use the money for?



As for the argument itself, i agree fully. We cannot avoid buying a quality player because whoever we buy the player from will invest in a more wanted player. Some will be out of reach, and other times you can work on multiple transfers.
If we could get Varane, but it resulted in De Ligt going to Real, then I'd still want Varane.

What are you on about, I have no interest in us signing stop gaps either. The topic here was about financing other teams transfers. If Malcolm or Semedo were available and we got them I would be happy but we would still be financing their move for a target of ours

 

[finneh]

I wouldn't take it literally. It's merely a strange and convoluted way of saying "I don't want to sign x player, I'd prefer to sign y player instead".

 

[youmeletsfly]

Well, if we're in for DeLigt, of course we should not buy Barca players.(knowing they have a huge debt, banks are refusing their loans and they need to sell).

But if we're not in for DeLigt, who the feck cares? It's not like we're going to compete with Barca for the UCL in the near future. Our primary goal should be adding quality players, disregarding who we'd be helping, that's how far behind we are.

 

[AgentP]

If he is a player that we need, then we shouldn't worry about what the other team does with the money. The Rakitic example is a bad one though as he is a player that we should not be buying because he is not the right profile for us. It would end up like the Schweinsteiger and Sanchez deal.

Something I actually hate is when someone says that we shouldn't buy a player because "he will anyway move to Madrid or Barca later". That's an absurd argument. If we get a player and he gives us a few good years and then moves to some other club for a huge fee, how is that bad? For example, Pogba came here and has been our best player in the last few years (despite all the criticism). Now if he leaves for a profit, it's still good business for us.

 

[Ødegaard]

What are you on about, I have no interest in us signing stop gaps either. The topic here was about financing other teams transfers. If Malcolm or Semedo were available and we got them I would be happy but we would still be financing their move for a target of ours

Read the whole thing and you'll grasp what I'm on about.

 

[Number32]

I honestly think we shouldn't worry about what other clubs might do, and focus on our business if that business is right for the club, for Ole, and the football we want to play next season. If we get the players we want, who cares?

But All managers post Fergie era had been moaning they barely got the players they want

 

[Rozay]

Well, if we're in for DeLigt, of course we should not buy Barca players.(knowing they have a huge debt, banks are refusing their loans and they need to sell).

But if we're not in for DeLigt, who the feck cares? It's not like we're going to compete with Barca for the UCL in the near future. Our primary goal should be adding quality players, disregarding who we'd be helping, that's how far behind we are.

Well if we are in for De Ligt, we should just buy De Ligt. If we cannot, because he will not come here, then he’s no longer an option for us. The next option may be Samuel Umtiti for example. Barcelona may also be in the market for a defender, and perhaps want De Ligt too. If he wants to join them, and not us, what can we do? Focus on our own side by signing Umtiti if that’s what we feel is best. Umtiti himself may only be available because his team want De Ligt. Perhaps it’s a good thing then, as it enables us to get our second choice, as we can’t get our first.

 

[Needham]

To put it politely, can’t say there’s many cafisms I ‘strongly disagree’ with as much as this. It’s frankly ridiculous. ‘Ed will probably buy Varane from them and fund their signing of x, the fool’, or stuff to that effect. Can we just stop this?!

When buying a player, surely it should go without saying that if we feel he’s the right player for us, then that should be all that matters? Not concerning ourselves with what a player who does not want to come to us may do later in the window!

Agreed. It's completely fallacious and an only an idiot would advance the argument. As if such clubs, especially the big ones, wouldn't be able to source the funds elsewhere.