Anything about midfielders? I feel that's more important to address than CB.
Transfer Tweets - 2019/20 | Check the OP for blacklisted sources before posting
- Thread starter KM
- Start date
- Status
Nothing.
We seem to be the only club who are given these ridiculous valuations for players. For anyone else the price would be half that.
Strangely, he claims Ole is interested in a midfielder in an article released just before the Aston Villa game. In this article, interest in a midfielder was replaced with interest for someone "up front". I'm assuming he means a striker, but not sure.
No surprise to me, was reading of £70-80m and maybe cheaper if they got relegated yet people on here seemed to think we would get him under £40m if they were relegated. One star player they havehad for a very long time and selling him they would need to invest the money. NO way they let him go for under £60m I think
Fabrizio Romano wrote an article on Guardian summarising a bunch of Chelsea-related transfer news over the past few days.
Key points:
Key points:
- All that remains RE: Havertz is a price agreement between Leverkusen & Chelsea
- Chelsea are hoping for 80 million Euros (add-ons included)
- Havertz was offered a 5-year contract
- Willian's chances of a 3-year extension are slim; Arsenal are likely to be his new club
- Chelsea are also looking for a Kepa replacement
- Targets: Onana, Oblak
- Sevilla & Valencia are interested in Kepa
- Chelsea are also looking for a new left back
- Targets: Chilwell (1st choice), Tagliafico (available for 22.4 million pounds)
Summarised translation: Sevilla player Rony Lopes will be loaned out to Nice with an option to buy for 20 million Euros. The player will arrive at Cote d'Azur tomorrow and will have his medical on Wednesday morning.
More info on the Sancho transfer: United have a 20 million pound difference to negotiate with Dortmund. That's a significant difference in valuations.
The way our negotiation goes, we would end up paying the asking price in six month time or next summer...
Dortmund know that all too well. We did exactly that with Wan-Bissaka, Maguire, and Fernandes. Even if Sancho skips training and causes them a ton of pain, I doubt Dortmund would budge from their asking price (if I recall correctly, they faced those issues with Dembele but still got the money that they asked for).
It's all kicking off nicely
Notice the difference in how the Sancho and Havertz news are presented. With Sancho, it's all about how difficult this would be because of the high price ("20 million pound difference", "Dortmund won't budge"). With Havertz, despite his high price and Leverkusen's strong stance on that, the news is presented more positively ("all that's left is the price agreement", "player interested in joining").
Javi Gracia, new coach of Valencia
It’s been like that for years. Very annoying.
Simon Stone becomes the first somewhat-reliable British journalist to break the Ferran-Torres-to-City news. This comes a few days after Spanish media reported that Ferran agreed to join City. I wonder if Yangel Herrera will still go the other way; Simon didn't report on that.
Key point: Valencia want 40 million pounds for Ferran Torres, who has 1 year left on his contract.
Key point: Valencia want 40 million pounds for Ferran Torres, who has 1 year left on his contract.
I don't think it's about the presentation of the news. It's been well known, every clubs would try to negotiate, however, it's us that letting the saga drag on, just to pay the asking price. It's not about how better Chelsea is at negotiating for cheaper fee. It's about timing. See how Chelsea got Pulisic from Dortmund in before they went through the transfer ban. Overpaying even if one may say, Chelsea got what needed to help their season. In comparison, our season suffered before ending up having to pay what we were asked (Bruno, even paid more for Maguire one season later)!
Yeah, it is. You'd think that Stone & Laurie would report the news more positively for us, but both are too keen on disclosing key details instead of sugar-coating them. This'll just make United fans more frustrated and annoying to talk to.
That's a fair point; on certain transfers, we've acted after going through a period of pain. Still, it's not like Chelsea's transfers were swift. The Pulisic transfer was a proper saga that was going on for a year to two years. Havertz' transfer to Chelsea is also a full-blown saga; it's just not being reported like that.
What's annoying is that these so called United supporters take that in as gospel and use it to insult the club they love.
If only they would be a little patient and in the meantime grow some brain cells.
Lille president Gerard Lopez confirms negotiations over Alfredo Morelos.
Translated quote:
Translated quote:
Can people stop believing this myth that we negotiated forever just to pay the asking price.
Because in all of those cases it’s simply not true.
In Maguires case its true
Are Havertz and Grealish similar? Haven't seen either play but surely the hype suggests Havertz would be the one to go for (Bayern, Real and Chelsea in for Havertz whereas the biggest club in for Grealish was Spurs and ourselves?) If they're going for the same price.
With Fernandes, even though we got a decent deal, we still paid more than his release clause last summer if I remember correctly.
With Wan-Bissaka, didn't we eventually agree to pay something like 50 million pounds at the end? Wasn't that what Crystal Palace always wanted? Still, those were 3 cases only. Beyond them, I'm not sure if we made deals that were far away from what we were willing to pay.
Not necessarily. Grealish is more of a playmaking AM who'll drop deeper to pick up the ball and distribute it. He'll also often pick up the ball in wider areas. Havertz plays more centrally and higher up the pitch; he offers more of a goalscoring threat as well as the ability to create chances for his teammates. From what I've seen, I've found Havertz to be a bigger attacking threat, but Grealish is still good as a playmaking influence for his teams.
Am I right in thinking the only way Grealish’s price would come down is if he tried to force a move? Even if Villa were relegated they’d get the parachute payments which would enable them to refuse offers either way. He’d obviously be more likely to want to leave if relegated. How long is left on his deal?
Probably. Bit thuggish from Villa to demand 80m after they have him to thank for being in the PL in the first place let alone staying up. You'd think they'd let him go for a reasonable fee i.e. 40m or so.
Yeah pretty much. He would need to really force Villa's hand which is probably difficult to do when everyone's on holiday.
Don’t get me wrong there is some truth in what he said but he acts like what he’s writing is fact. One signing changed our entire season. Who’s to say if we don’t make the right signings our team becomes challengers. It’s no different to how solid Liverpool became once they signed Van Dijk and then Alisson.
Last edited:
Bahrain are now entering the football scene with their investment in Paris FC.
Translations:
Note: according to the announcement, Bahrain are purchasing a 20% minority stake in the club. Loic Tanzi has also revealed that the budget could be increased by 30% and that more investment could come in at 2021 (particularly if they are promoted to Ligue 1).
Translations:
Note: according to the announcement, Bahrain are purchasing a 20% minority stake in the club. Loic Tanzi has also revealed that the budget could be increased by 30% and that more investment could come in at 2021 (particularly if they are promoted to Ligue 1).
Last edited:
I don't think Grealish will happen. It doesn't look like Pogba will be leaving now and Villa staying up will likely make the fee prohibitive.
If we are intent on signing an attacking midfielder/playmaker, we will surely now look somewhere else.
If we are intent on signing an attacking midfielder/playmaker, we will surely now look somewhere else.
It's business. They have to get as much money as possible so they can reinvest to try to stay in PL. Just because of a player contribute however significantly, doesn't mean the club would just let go easy. By your logic, Ronaldo would have been allowed to go without any transfer fee involved by Real Madrid?
oh feck off Villa
Just not going to happen is it. £160-£200m for two players. And Grealish plays in Bruno and Pogba’s position. It’s not going to happen unless Pogba is sold, again I can’t see that happening now.
Think Leverkusen had a previous expectation of around £90m (and this was reported by Athletic) and Chelsea are hoping for £70m (with Leverkusen now likely to settle for closer to £80m). So I don't think Leverkusen are staying strong, no. They also don't have much to persuade Havertz, no CL etc.
Havertz looks like he's completely set on going. It's more of a done deal than Sancho is.
Except originally it was 100 million, then 90, then 85.
Havertz being interested in Chelsea makes sense, but what about Sancho's apparent homesickness? Is that not a factor in why we're going for him?I doubt we'd pursue Sancho unless he was interested in joining us. Otherwise, this'd be like Fabregas, C. Ronaldo, or Bale to us 6-7 summers ago.
Also, I don't think Chelsea have budged on their price the whole time, which'd complicate matters, no?
Anyways, that's my point: why isn't anyone presenting the news in a more negative connotation? At this time, only smaller Twitter accounts have come out and reiterated that the Havertz transfer still has a way to go and that the price agreement may still be a stumbling block.
With Fernandes, there was no release clause. Sporting president himself said he was disgusted (or something similar) by Tottenham's offer which almost the same as what United got him for.
With Wan-Bissaka, Palace wanted 60m plus removing Zaha's sell-on clause. We ended up paying 45m+add ons and kept the Zaha's sell-on clause.
Again, these are all from reports I read around the time and its validity is just that of those reports.
Now that you mention it, yeah, I remember reading those things, too. Fair enough, I guess we did a good job in both deals, but of course, they'd get reported negatively. Regarding Maguire, though, I don't recall a price set on him with high prices coming from various less-than-reliable journalists. I think the 85 million pound valuation was the first one reported by more reputed journalists.
- Status