Transfer discussion thread

[chef]

 

[wadistance]

Would be cautious of a guy going to his third club in three seasons


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Would be cautious of a guy going to his third club in three seasons


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

who is his agent? Someone is cleaning up

 

[pantskyle]

Wouldn't read too much into it, was on loan at Dortmund as he had no spot at Madrid. Madrid cashed in and Inter now need to sell.

 

[Bradesmaen]

who is his agent? Someone is cleaning up

Surprisingly... not Raiola.

 

[joop]

If you get him what does that mean for James?

 

[DBAH0]

Very generous to Kaveh this.

 

[chef]

If you get him what does that mean for James?

Hakimi can play either side and James also plays CB and CM.

Plenty of games and spots for both of them.

 

[jod23]

City apparently, nek minute they buy Kane and Grealish instead

I'd rather Haaland than Kane and Grealish.

 

[Memphis]

Jeepers no ones paying that for him

*cough* Real madrid.

 

[drd23]

*cough* Real madrid.

They don't have the money to do that this year

 

[Memphis]

They don't have the money to do that this year

Varane could leave and a couple others I believe it was reported hazard was on the list too.

 

[moomba]

£170m isn't that much for the richer clubs to manage if they're in a reasonable financial state.

The transfer fee will be amortised over the length of the contract (say five years) so you're looking at a £34m hit on your profit or loss for the next five years.

I would have thought most clubs would be able to raise that through sales of fringe players.

Wages for Haaland will be a big issue, and that's where maybe a club that gets him will have to shed a big name salary to balance things out.

Whether they think that is vfm for Haaland is another thing and there is a risk of committing that much to one player who may or may not fit in. Might be better off spending that transfer fee on 2 or 3 players instead.

 

[Bradesmaen]

£170m isn't that much for the richer clubs to manage if they're in a reasonable financial state.

The transfer fee will be amortised over the length of the contract (say five years) so you're looking at a £34m hit on your profit or loss for the next five years.

I would have thought most clubs would be able to raise that through sales of fringe players.

Wages for Haaland will be a big issue, and that's where maybe a club that gets him will have to shed a big name salary to balance things out.

Whether they think that is vfm for Haaland is another thing and there is a risk of committing that much to one player who may or may not fit in. Might be better off spending that transfer fee on 2 or 3 players instead.

Stop trying to talk as if you're not one of the richest clubs in the world.

 

[moomba]

Stop trying to talk as if you're not one of the richest clubs in the world.

I wasn't. If we want him we'd have no problem paying the going rate.

I just think we prefer Kane (I'd prefer Haaland)

 

[Magma]

the big problem with transfers like haaland's is the people you're paying who arent dortmund or haaland. those amounts of money aren't going down and clubs arent actually gaining anything from it.

 

[Oshka]

United to switch their focus to Zaha

 

[pantskyle]

United have agreed terms with Sancho. Now talking with Dortmund.

 

[wadistance]

United have agreed terms with Sancho. Now talking with Dortmund.

They agreed literally last summer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wadistance]

I’ve seen this story before..





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[chef]

It'll get done.

 

[pantskyle]

They agreed literally last summer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And now they have agreed again this year.

 

[pantskyle]

It'll get done.

Yep without a doubt.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Varane said to be going to psg. Chelsea. Or utd.

 

[SM]

What number will Sancho have at United?