Jaybomb
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2016
- Messages
- 4,459
If he doesn't come this summer, he'll never come.
That doesn't really make any sense. His cost would probably be the same either in January or after next season. Either way he wouldn't be playing for us in Europe, but in one option he does play in all our domestic matches for an extra half a season.I doubt we pay out the ass for Griezmann - no matter how good he is - in January when he wont even be eligible to play for our Champions League squad. If he comes to United, it will either be this window or next summer's window.
Yes, he just signed a new contract in this last 12 months.Did he sign a new contract?
Goodbye, sweet princeTweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Exactly. He'll move next yearIf true I suspect no more than a pay bump for his loyalty
I think the salary, If he's to move A higher release clause is against his future ambitions.Atletico offered him a new contract because they wanted to increase his release clause and that's not a new thing. They are at it since April.
I don't know what you mean.I think the salary, If he's to move A higher release clause is against his future ambitions.
You're talking about Liverpool, yes? *White text*we got our pants pulled down...again
lolzy
Quite the opposite actuallyNo doubt there'll be an increase in his buyout clause. Nailed on certainty.
You believe his buyout clause will decrease?Quite the opposite actually
Not necessarily. He isnt being rewarded a new contract for "loyalty" per say. He has no choice but to stay for at least another 6 months. No big team is going to spend close to 100m to sign you mid season and not use your services in Europe. So essentially he is stuck till next summer. In a bid to keep your best player happy since he cant move, they give him a bigger salary but not essentially increasing his release clause. He has made it clear to wants to leave Athletico to win trophies. So he isnt going to agree for a bigger release clause.I don't know what you mean.
The reports were that Atletico offered him a higher wage for a higher release clause.
Assuming he's staying out of loyalty, why would Atletico bother extending the contract and bumping his wages if the release clause remains the same? They'd just be losing more money since he'd leave for the same price in the end (assuming he actually is joining us next season).Yeah, I can understand the salary bump - that's a sweetener for staying with them for the extra year, but no need for him to agree to an increase in his buyout clause too.
I just assumed that was part of the agreement (i.e. you stay for another year to see us through the transfer ban period and we'll pay you more).Assuming he's staying out of loyalty, why would Atletico bother extending the contract and bumping his wages if the release clause remains the same? They'd just be losing more money.
That sounds realistic to me. It just contradicts all of this loyalty talk if money was needed to convince him to stay.I just assumed that was part of the agreement (i.e. you stay for another year to see us through the transfer ban period and we'll pay you more).
Griezmann has been offered a contract in April, he has been negotiating with Atletico since that time. The rest is speculation from football fans.Not necessarily. He isnt being rewarded a new contract for "loyalty" per say. He has no choice but to stay for at least another 6 months. No big team is going to spend close to 100m to sign you mid season and not use your services in Europe. So essentially he is stuck till next summer. In a bid to keep your best player happy since he cant move, they give him a bigger salary but not essentially increasing his release clause. He has made it clear to wants to leave Athletico to win trophies. So he isnt going to agree for a bigger release clause.
That was probably part of the agreement, in case the transfer ban was upheld to sweeten the deal and ensure that Griezmann stays for another year at least.Assuming he's staying out of loyalty, why would Atletico bother extending the contract and bumping his wages if the release clause remains the same? They'd just be losing more money since he'd leave for the same price in the end (assuming he actually is joining us next season).
I was referring to your nailed on certainty claimYou believe his buyout clause will decrease?