Its an odd deal, especially for Levy to do but at the end of the day we get a good, attacking left back below the market value. Yes I hate the idea of Madrid profiting from the deal but feck it, its an exciting player il go with it. I wouldnt be surprised if it was liked to the Bale deal.
Sergio Reguilón
- Thread starter Skills
- Start date
- Status
Not necessarily. Real don't want to resign every player that leaves them within two years. That doesn't mean they were flops or weren't available to Real.
I didn’t think it was the right deal for United. But if the worst happens, you make a £7m profit, and you would have had someone clearly performing well to warrant Real coming back on for him. A little odd, but means you can ditch Rose now. That’s got to be a bonus.
I concur. I can definitely see why United wouldn't like the idea of fattening a calf, I don't much either, but if he preforms for 2 years to the level he did last season or indeed improves I will be happy.
If he shows anything Madrid will take him back. Hell be young and they wouldn't want to miss out on him at a cheaper price and let the clause expire. Theres a reason he has that clause in the first place. They took Morata back to sit him on the bench after he was a hit at Juve.
Plus he can be used in player swaps etc. Say he is a hit and they come after Bruno in 2 years. We can say take him back and sign him over to us and we'll talk since Spurs would never sell to us.
Its a very dynamic situation if you think about it.
ho exactly damaging for manutd is that he has buy back clause ?
The worst is that he flops and Spurs wasted €30m.
The second worst is that it takes him 12 months to get going, and then RM buys him back for €5-10m. So Spurs do all the player development and RM gets to reap the benefits.
The best case is that player is neither a flop nor a success, and he stays at Spu
Not even the best case is great.
You for real?
It's small time to allow a club to do that to you, we're Manchester United not some second rate football club.
Let's say that in 2 years we lose Shaw because of an Injury and Real come back and buys him . It will leave us in a weak position because of all the other clubs would know that we are in desperate need of a new LB. In a few words , we wouldnt be able to have control of the future of Sergio.
If there is a locking period of 5 years and then buy back clause is fine. Buy back any time is a huge risk for a team that is under rebuilding process. For jose it is fine because he wants instant and temporary success. He can then move on to another club.
I wouldn’t be happy then but we still would’ve had one of the best left backs in the league for a couple of years and got paid for it.
Right - is that really the mentality we have? It’s not is it?
True, I was being a bit unfair.
That’s fair, although of course any player can flop.
I'm not sure what that even means in practical terms. Bayern just won the CL with three loaned players. It doesn't necessarily need to be a central part of your transfer strategy - but being open and taking advantage of good opportunities is not a bad thing.
What are the odds on that thought? If the player doesn't agree to it then it can't be included in the deal, and by agreeing to it they obviously hope it comes to pass!
I don't know how many similar deals Real Madrid have done but i'd hazard a guess in most cases they expect to sign the players back, either to go in the first-team, or sell on for an even higher fee(Casemiro/Morata)
But going forward it's open to abuse as well, say Madrid have a dud they want to get rid of, they'll always get interest in them because they were at Madrid in the first place, they get few clubs sniffing around, Madrid quote a figure the clubs are prepared to pay but add a buy-back clause with no intention of actually activating the clause, and the interested clubs think we'll they(Madrid) only add clauses to players they plan to bring back so he might be even better than we thought he was and pay more for the player than they initially planned too to get the deal done ahead of other interested clubs.
Got paid 7m for all that? It's a kick on the balls if you develop a young player into world class, then need to sell him for cheap. Just imagine the suffering we might have during his "adaptation" period.
Edit: Bayern was loaning a ready made players in Coutinho and Perisic. I don't think any sane fans in here would be against it.
Good for Spurs. They've stengthened a fair bit this summer. Two new attacking fullbacks, Bale and a DM too. But this chap wasn't for us. It's essentially a loan.
I thought we were nailed on to sign him until I read that Real Madrid insist on a buy-back clause. I thought it's pretty petty and despicable to put such a clause but they have to do what is best for them. Maybe Spurs could ask him to pretend to be shit in these 2 years. 
I've watched Williams for the U18 and as far as I remember he was always the LB, if there was a switch before in younger levels I don't know really. There are certainly people who are more into youth team football who can elaborate, maybe you are one of them. And also I am aware that Laird is more talented and it was always evident, but while Laird was and still is very often injured, Williams was constantly putting very solid performances for the u18. The kid got the jump to senior football because he was standing out, and yes playing for Manchester United at the age of 19 I think you need to be extremely talented, even though he is not the level of talent of Greenwood and Laird.
I also agree that he is not as good as Shaw nor is the talent Luke was at the same age, but that's not a stick to beat Williams. The 20 year old Shaw we had before the injury was supposed to be the best LB in the country and maybe in the world, I am not disputing that, but we are comparing him to Reguilon who himself isn't even close to that level.
You know I thought that but then saw the difference. If he fails you can't send him back.
If it was just a loan I wouldn't mind it. This way risk is all yours, some reward for 2 yrs. If that risk reward ratio is OK for you then well and good. It was for spurs but understandably not for us given our LB is ok.
Im glad we didnt sign him as he said a week or so ago he wanted to play for RM in a few years time. We need to sign players who are happy to come here without an agenda already planning their next step. We shouldnt be a stepping stone for a young player who hasnt even made it yet.
Thats how I see it as well - Spurs are desperate for a good fullback. We are building for the future, and it would be stupid to sign a player Real can take back in 2 years
It seemed like his agents or RM were pushing this transfer to us more than we pursued it, and the existence of a buy back clause and his desire to return to Madrid, made this one a non starter. As soon as you heard his dream was to go back to Madrid, even without a buy back clause, you pass in this kid.
I think we were interested in the player. Shaw's injury record is pretty terrible and the rumours were all along that we were looking for an LB to come in because of that. The deal doesn't work for us though.
i think if we’d really wanted him we’d have paid an extra 5m or so, or some add ons to eliminate the buy back clause. I reckon this deal was ruled out a while ago, but media outlets kept it alive. Waiting for season 2 of the Spurs doc when their head of recruitment can claim again that they beat elite clubs to his signature.
The player wanted the buy-back as he wants to return to Madrid.
That's true. So if he does badly they'll have spent money on a bad player. If he does well, they'll have a very good player for 2 years. It's not a bad deal for Spurs as, you never know, he could help them get CL football these next two seasons. But I think we're better than them regardless of this signing and have a better we left back than they do already part of our squad so developing someone only to sell is a waste of our time.
You know what... this is another major feck up. Well done, Ed
Reguilon was cheap for 30 mill euros. If United really wanted him they could avoid the buy back clauses by offering 5-10 mill euros more. I guess United is struggling with the funds like many other clubs.
No it’s not that simple. The kid has his heart set on a return to Madrid. I think that was more of a sticking point for us, especially Ole. He wants to sign players who WANT to play for United.
Not really. I hate the Glazers and their cronies as much as anyone but not getting this guy is the right move. We'd essentially develop their player for a few years and if it goes well they'll pay us a few millions for the trouble and get him back. If he fails, we get to keep another piece of deadwood and Real keep a cool 30mil +
whichever way you look at it, it's not a good deal for us. Even a feckup like Ed isn't that stupid
We are negotiating for a 100m player after spending 40m on VDB!
yes if you count bidding as 2p and a can of coke...
Well, if itd the structre of the deal and not the 108m thats the problem then thats some can of coke
No it really isn't.
Signing a young talented player for 30m euros with a 35-40m euro buyback, knowing full well he wants to go back as well, is a massive bit of cuckery from Spurs. Short termism and potentially very embarrassing if he turns into a worldie.
How does the saying go? “Lads, it’s Spurs.”
Guess Madrid are playing it a bit like Odegaard, they know he's good and close to Madrid standard already but they've still got Marcelo around and also Mendy so it's a case of having him somewhere else until Marcelo is about 34 and declining significantly so they can move him out.
Good player, could Sevilla not afford him full time as I thought he might stay there and continue his development.
Good player, could Sevilla not afford him full time as I thought he might stay there and continue his development.
Great deal for Spurs tbh. Regulion could help them getting back to the Champions League and right now that's priority number 1. If Madrid bought him back after 2 years and they're back playing ECL then it's mission accomplished with extra 10 million for their troubles. By then they can plan more for the longer future with ECL money.
It's win win for either party on the best case scenario.
It's win win for either party on the best case scenario.
- Status