Aurelien Tchouameni | signs new contract til 2031, to be official after the World Cup

[Zed 101]

Berge is 28, and A.Robinson is 29 yet we are interested. Think age is a nonfactor if the deal is cheap for INEOS

I agree but I also support this thinking, we need additional players to raise the floor of the team and the squad depth (players like Tielemans are also raising the ceiling), right now in this market we cannot afford to buy 6 WC 22 YOs (especially EPL proven as seems to be the preference), but buying a 29 YO for a 3rd or less of the comparative price gets us a player for 1-5 years, okay they probably don't have a sell on value, and we will have the cost of replacing them in a short space of time, but in that time we will hopefully have been back in the CL for 5 years, will be in a much better financial position, will have time to shop around, will hopefully have brought some youth players through, and our current younger players will have matured.

I think also (to the poster you replied to) the Casemiro signing was not about the age in isolation it was the age + the transfer fee + the high wages, if Case had been signed for half the fee and was on half the wages I don't think there would have been any issues, besides Jim had to get some new broom sound bites when he came in

It is also important to have the right blend of youth and experience in a squad, Alonso isn't bringing Welbeck and Henderson in to transform their 1st 11, it is to control the dressing room, a reason we kept Evans and Heaton around.

Whoever we buy as long as it is the right profile for the right price, right now age is not the major factor

TBH buying players we don't have to try to sell and can just keep on 1 year extensions until we retire them seems like the smartest business plan right now as we are still abjectly shite at selling players

 

[Crimson King]

I doubt that's true. We were looking to sign Tielemans before we knew he had a clause? His agent just didn't mention it when discussing a potential move? I agree we wouldn't have known about it until we engaged with his team, but even in the article says we have a good relationship with his agent. He's totally against the profile we would want to sign, until you factor in the clause. He's only a year younger than Casemiro who was deemed as not the signings we want to do, by Jim.

We paid nearly double for Casemiro and made him one of the best paid players in the country.

 

[devilish]

Bollocks - we were enquiring after Santos last summer. We’ve had interest in Tielemans for years. The chronology of signings in a window doesn’t neatly match with some master list of priorities or some universal ranking of abilities - there are all sorts of other variables in a window which determine the order of things.

And if you think Tielemans is an inferior player to Tonali then you need your head checked.

Your cleaner analogy is awful btw - doesn’t even make sense.

Just because we inquired for a player before that doesn't mean he's our first priority. Would United have preferred to sign Santos over Anderson? We know the answer. Regarding Tielemans he's a very different player to Tonali. Tielemans is a superb passer of the ball, Tonali on the other hand has a huge engine, he's not injury prone and he's extremely mobile and fast for a CM.

It's a shame that you didn't understood the cleaner analogy. First of all because it a true story and secondly because it fits perfectly to our situation. Let's hope that INEOS journey with us doesn't end up in the same way it did with OGC Nice. In 2019 they promised "a sensible, measured investment, we want to establish Nice as a team that competes in European club competition on a regular basis" They also admitted that "We made some mistakes at Lausanne, but we are fast learners, these have been rectified and we are already seeing the benefits. Clubs need to be successful off the pitch, as well as on it, and OGC Nice will be no different, as we look to take the club from strength to strength in all aspects over the coming years" and they also ensured that "“Patience is also important and the work we do here will be built on solid foundations. We have a plan in place and we will follow it. I am adamant we will not be the dumb money,”

Since then Lausanne got relegated (2022), Manchester United ended 15th in 2024-2025 and last year OGC Nice came at the cusp of relegation as well. Fast learners indeed.

 

[devilish]

I doubt that's true. We were looking to sign Tielemans before we knew he had a clause? His agent just didn't mention it when discussing a potential move? I agree we wouldn't have known about it until we engaged with his team, but even in the article says we have a good relationship with his agent. He's totally against the profile we would want to sign, until you factor in the clause. He's only a year younger than Casemiro who was deemed as not the signings we want to do, by Jim.

I find that hard to believe it tbh. There again we all know that the Athletic are fed by the club. Now according to the guys at Stretford Paddock (who got great links with many journalists) there were instances a journalist close to the club had to push an agenda driven by the club even though he didn't believe that it was true.

 

[Zumbi]

Just because we inquired for a player before that doesn't mean he's our first priority. Would United have preferred to sign Santos over Anderson? We know the answer. Regarding Tielemans he's a very different player to Tonali. Tielemans is a superb passer of the ball, Tonali on the other hand has a huge engine, he's not injury prone and he's extremely mobile and fast for a CM.

It's a shame that you didn't understood the cleaner analogy. First of all because it a true story and secondly because it fits perfectly to our situation. Let's hope that INEOS journey with us doesn't end up in the same way it did with OGC Nice. In 2019 they promised "a sensible, measured investment, we want to establish Nice as a team that competes in European club competition on a regular basis" They also admitted that "We made some mistakes at Lausanne, but we are fast learners, these have been rectified and we are already seeing the benefits. Clubs need to be successful off the pitch, as well as on it, and OGC Nice will be no different, as we look to take the club from strength to strength in all aspects over the coming years" and they also ensured that "“Patience is also important and the work we do here will be built on solid foundations. We have a plan in place and we will follow it. I am adamant we will not be the dumb money,”

Since then Lausanne got relegated (2022), Manchester United ended 15th in 2024-2025 and last year OGC Nice came at the cusp of relegation as well. Fast learners indeed.

I have no doubt Anderson would have been our top target in an ideal world, but it was pretty obvious from early on that he was City bound and that we were looking at lots of options. Our interest in Santos seemed more sustained and genuine than any interest in Tonali over the past year. My concern going into this window is that our CM rebuild would leave us short on progressive, expansive passing, and my concerns on that front have been greatly assuaged by the type of CM we’ve ended up with. We still need to add someone with a bit more of an engine and mobility, but there’s absolutely no need to spend 100 million on Tonali to get that - what you’re bemoaning as an example of the sort of “elite” signing we missed out on would have been absolutely terrible business in my opinion. Spurs can have him - I’m pretty confident our midfield will now hold its own against Spurs when we play them.

In the cleaner analogy he goes home with his old lada. We haven’t done that - we’ve brought two new cars back, and we still have money left and there’s still a month to go.

 

[Woziak]

Not Manchester united signings for me personally. If we have ambitions to make an impact in Europe and go for the title; those type of signings won't accomplish that. We're still very far off competing with the big boys.

I agree and in a perfect world we should sign Tchouameni, Lewis Hall and go get Ollie Watkins or try for Endrick on loan to compete with Sesko but we have two owners who are just playing games with each other, SJR wants all the plaudits but won’t truly invest because he’s not comfortable with the real figure of £6 billion to sort the club out and the fact he only owns 28.9%

The Glazers are just trying to work out when is the best time to sell for their next payday. While the club continues with this ownership model things are never going to improve.

This market has been the best one in living memory to totally rebuild your midfield and maybe add a few marquee stardust players.

If we had an owner, a DOF and CEO that were held accountably for true success, then we would have no debt, no transfer legacy debt and the new Stadium would be starting work in September 2026, scheduled to be complete in 2030.

A competent billionaire who is a true fan of the club and never had a Chelsea Season Ticket would have come out this summer and looked at Buying one of Tchouameni, Bruno G, Tonali or Elliot Anderson as their marquee midfielder and then the other two players that we have signed would have looked like good business.

A competent Owner would have said to the DOF go get the Paraguayan Goalkeeper for £15m to compete with Sene Lamens so we have genuine competition for the number 1 throughout the season.

We would have sent Newcastle £65m five weeks ago and they would have caved in before they completed selling Tonali and Bruno G.

United should be buying a new CB like Lacroix and then going and getting an elite number 9 like Osimhen to compete with Sesko!

The players who could have really moved the needle this summer were available and we lacked the ambition throughout the club to go get them, it might still work out but United never ever give their managers a realistic chance simply by bringing in so many players over so many windows, at the very end of the window, so those players can’t interact with the squad and always start poorly!

So yes I’ll take Antonee Robinson and Sander Berge because it’s clear the owners are delighted with a finish of 5th or above to qualify for CL.

 

[devilish]

I have no doubt Anderson would have been our top target in an ideal world, but it was pretty obvious from early on that he was City bound and that we were looking at lots of options. Our interest in Santos seemed more sustained and genuine than any interest in Tonali over the past year. My concern going into this window is that our CM rebuild would leave us short on progressive, expansive passing, and my concerns on that front have been greatly assuaged by the type of CM we’ve ended up with. We still need to add someone with a bit more of an engine and mobility, but there’s absolutely no need to spend 100 million on Tonali to get that - what you’re bemoaning as an example of the sort of “elite” signing we missed out on would have been absolutely terrible business in my opinion. Spurs can have him - I’m pretty confident our midfield will now hold its own against Spurs when we play them.

In the cleaner analogy he goes home with his old lada. We haven’t done that - we’ve brought two new cars back, and we still have money left and there’s still a month to go.

My biggest concern was that INEOS will put 'sustainability' as our main priority and they'll try to beat the system by acting 'clever'. It still too early to full judge this transfer window but unfortunately I suspect that' we've reverted in doing that this summer. From a data analysis perspective Santos and Tielemans make full sense. You only have to plug their names (alongside Ederson's) into a data analysis website and you can see the pattern were one seems complimenting the other. However there's a very valid reason why the likes of City, Arsenal and co are opting to spend more money for other players instead just as there's a very valid reason why owners don't hire people from other industries (cycling and formula 1) in senior roles in football. Back to our transfers Santos has huge potential but he's inexperienced while Tielemans is good but he's 29, he's been playing since he's 16 years of age and there's plenty of wear and tear in him. I repeat they are not bad players quite the contrary. However they have clear 'issues' which had kept other top clubs from making them their first priority.

It's time for INEOS to acknowledge that they aren't as clever as they think they are. They are 18b in debt and they tanked two football clubs. Don't get me started on the Glazers.

 

[sp_cgb]

I agree in a perfect world we sign Tchouameni, Lewis Hall and go get Ollie Watkins or try for Endrick on loan to compete with Sesko

That sort of window would pretty much ensure we get Champions League football again for the next few seasons. Misguided frugality this summer though could easily lead to us missing out again and then any notion of a long-term plan would be dispelled in term. If Champions League money is the be all and end all of football finance, then you absolutely have to make sure you have all bases covered. Half-measures won't get us where we need to be.

 

[croadyman]

I agree and in a perfect world we should sign Tchouameni, Lewis Hall and go get Ollie Watkins or try for Endrick on loan to compete with Sesko but we have two owners who are just playing games with each other, SJR wants all the plaudits but won’t truly invest because he’s not comfortable with the real figure of £6 billion to sort the club out and the fact he only owns 28.9%

The Glazers are just trying to work out when is the best time to sell for their next payday. While the club continues with this ownership model things are never going to improve.

This market has been the best one in living memory to totally rebuild your midfield and maybe add a few marquee stardust players.

If we had an owner, a DOF and CEO that were held accountably for true success, then we would have no debt, no transfer legacy debt and the new Stadium would be starting work in September 2026, scheduled to be complete in 2030.

A competent billionaire who is a true fan of the club and never had a Chelsea Season Ticket would have come out this summer and looked at Buying one of Tchouameni, Bruno G, Tonali or Elliot Anderson as their marquee midfielder and then the other two players that we have signed would have looked like good business.

A competent Owner would have said to the DOF go get the Paraguayan Goalkeeper for £15m to compete with Sene Lamens so we have genuine competition for the number 1 throughout the season.

We would have sent Newcastle £65m five weeks ago and they would have caved in before they completed selling Tonali and Bruno G.

United should be buying a new CB like Lacroix and then going and getting an elite number 9 like Osimhen to compete with Sesko!

The players who could have really moved the needle this summer were available and we lacked the ambition throughout the club to go get them, it might still work out but United never ever give their managers a realistic chance simply by bringing in so many players over so many windows, at the very end of the window, so those players can’t interact with the squad and always start poorly!

So yes I’ll take Antonee Robinson and Sander Berge because it’s clear the owners are delighted with a finish of 5th or above to qualify for CL.

You make very valid points about most things apart from the Osimhen one. Don't you think a club who weren't crippled by debt would have moved for him by now. His wage demands are clearly too much even for those clubs. Anyway getting it back on topic I don't see any movement on this guy until he returns from post World Cup holiday at end of next week.

 

[Zumbi]

My biggest concern was that INEOS will put 'sustainability' as our main priority and they'll try to beat the system by acting 'clever'. It still too early to full judge this transfer window but unfortunately I suspect that' we've reverted in doing that this summer. From a data analysis perspective Santos and Tielemans make full sense. You only have to plug their names (alongside Ederson's) into a data analysis website and you can see the pattern were one seems complimenting the other. However there's a very valid reason why the likes of City, Arsenal and co are opting to spend more money for other players instead just as there's a very valid reason why owners don't hire people from other industries (cycling and formula 1) in senior roles in football. Back to our transfers Santos has huge potential but he's inexperienced while Tielemans is good but he's 29, he's been playing since he's 16 years of age and there's plenty of wear and tear in him. I repeat they are not bad players quite the contrary. However they have clear 'issues' which had kept other top clubs from making them their first priority.

It's time for INEOS to acknowledge that they aren't as clever as they think they are. They are 18b in debt and they tanked two football clubs. Don't get me started on the Glazers.

Well they should be trying to act "clever" - our recruitment has been monumentally dumb for the past decade+. That contributed to our financial difficulties whilst also leaving us with a squad that wasn't fit for purpose, which sparked a vicious cycle of us not qualifying for Europe which further negatively affected our finances.

It doesn't make much sense for us to compare ourselves to Arsenal and City right now. They've both been in Europe consistently and both have built strong, deep, title-challenging squads over time. They already have the strength, depth and finances to be able to supplement already strong squads with some big money purchases. Like it or not, that just doesn't apply to us currently - we've been recovering from the nadir of finishing 15th with a squad which was all over the place. A more sensible comparison would be with Spurs - also rebuilding from lower table finishes and managerial upheaval - especially when 2/3 of the "elite" big money CMs you've compared our signings to have gone there. Now have Spurs really done better with us this window with their CM rebuild? I'm not remotely convinced, although we'll know a lot more once the season is properly underway. On the face of it 185 million on Tonali and Fernandes doesn't seem like more clever bits of business than 85 million on Tielemans and Santos - if we'd have done that I think there would have been plenty of complaints that it was a poor use of funds and very underwhelming. None of us know who will do better this season, but I'm not going to go into our games against them worried that our midfield can't hold its own. Spurs will also have to live with the financial implications of those deals whatever happens on the pitch, and as we have first hand experience of, that itself can turn into a weight around your neck, both in terms of squad management and future contractual and transfer negotiations. With regards to the footballing side of things, Fernandes is also inexperienced and there are lots of question marks over Tonali's ability (running a lot aside). But you seem to have a double standard with our players versus targets we've lost out on, ready to jump all over the ostensible flaws of ours whilst ignoring similar question marks over theirs, simply because they cost a lot more. As we saw from Liverpool's window last year, spending a lot isn't in itself a job well done when it comes to transfer business. Being "clever" does go a long way.

Going back to your "beating the system" narrative - what have done in the past two years is undergo a much needed overhaul of our recruitment, scouting and data teams. That's included bringing football people like Vivell and Macauley in. From the limited data we have available, those changes seem to be bearing fruit - we've had more hits and fewer misses last summer window than the one before it. We have done very clever bits of business like Dorgu and Heaven, even if some fans slated some of those moves at the time because they weren't the big money signings fans often crave. I'm actually reassured by the profile of CM we've gone for this summer as I was worried we wouldn't be able to bring some strong passers in - with us having desperately missed that technical ability in the middle of the park for such a long time.

You seem to find it impossible to separate the very valid criticisms of the parasitic nature of our ownership under Ineos and the Glazers (which I think almost every fan shares), with some of the positive changes which have been taking place with regards to recruitment. For all the criticism there was last summer, we had a relatively successful season jumping from 15th to 3rd, and our signings played a large part in that. If we can keep acting "clever", then we might be able continue improving our squad even if we are hamstrung financially by our ownership situation. Smart recruitment is certainly the best chance we've got, not spunking hundreds of millions overpaying for players on massive contracts just because rivals are.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

Are we at that stage where it's management's fault again then?

 

[croadyman]

Are we at that stage where it's management's fault again then?

Nope it's the Yankee leeching scum who is at fault, otherwise we could go all out to sign him

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

Nope it's the Yankee leeching scum who is at fault, otherwise we could go all out to sign him

There are lot of people on here blaming ‘management’ for things that happen in their own heads.

Which is, frankly, bizarre.

 

[croadyman]

There are lot of people on here blaming ‘management’ for things that happen in their own heads.

Which is, frankly, bizarre.

They have bled us dry for twenty years so how is it not their fault, also appointed that Toy Story puppet as well

 

[Uncle Mainoo]

They have bled us dry for twenty years so how is it not their fault, also appointed that Toy Story puppet as well

I 100 percent hear this but we have to stop acting like they are the only reason we don’t get players over the line.

I grew up in an era where I’ve watched us fail to get Ronaldinho, Kluivert, Shearer, Salas.

I’m convinced in my head at one point Del Piero and Patrick Vieira were real possibilities. Most of those signings failed for the same reasons we moan about now. It’s just how transfers work.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

They have bled us dry for twenty years so how is it not their fault, also appointed that Toy Story puppet as well

I’m not denying that though.

I’m pointing out that they’re not accountable / responsible for made up scenarios in people’s heads.

That’s just wild, and frankly difficult to fathom. Unless you write it off as some form of PTSD.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

I 100 percent hear this but we have to stop acting like they are the only reason we don’t get players over the line.

100% this.

The furore in the ST thread, from some, is another example.

 

[Hammondo]

My biggest concern was that INEOS will put 'sustainability' as our main priority and they'll try to beat the system by acting 'clever'. It still too early to full judge this transfer window but unfortunately I suspect that' we've reverted in doing that this summer. From a data analysis perspective Santos and Tielemans make full sense. You only have to plug their names (alongside Ederson's) into a data analysis website and you can see the pattern were one seems complimenting the other. However there's a very valid reason why the likes of City, Arsenal and co are opting to spend more money for other players instead just as there's a very valid reason why owners don't hire people from other industries (cycling and formula 1) in senior roles in football. Back to our transfers Santos has huge potential but he's inexperienced while Tielemans is good but he's 29, he's been playing since he's 16 years of age and there's plenty of wear and tear in him. I repeat they are not bad players quite the contrary. However they have clear 'issues' which had kept other top clubs from making them their first priority.

It's time for INEOS to acknowledge that they aren't as clever as they think they are. They are 18b in debt and they tanked two football clubs. Don't get me started on the Glazers.

City have been making poor transfers for a while now, I wouldn't look at them ass good example.

 

[Highfather_24]

My biggest concern was that INEOS will put 'sustainability' as our main priority and they'll try to beat the system by acting 'clever'.

It does feel like this summer they are going for their 3/4th choice in every position and just because its cheaper/easier. Feels like the kind of thing Tottenham would historically do.

I remember when we made the VdB deal or Zirkzee or Ugarte, just because it was more convenient. These deals borne out of convenience or agent pushes, is something I'm really against.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

The club are spending the money they can afford, on players who are available within that range, in an attempt to improve the team.

Like any sane business would do.

It’s not rocket science and there’s no conspiracy.

 

[Who gives a...]

Im really not sure about him. A low fee and low wages then definitely. But the cost just seems out of kilter to what he will possibly give us.

 

[Berbasbullet]

It does feel like this summer they are going for their 3/4th choice in every position and just because its cheaper/easier. Feels like the kind of thing Tottenham would historically do.

I remember when we made the VdB deal or Zirkzee or Ugarte, just because it was more convenient. These deals borne out of convenience or agent pushes, is something I'm really against.

Anderson 130 million or whatever and didn’t want to join.

Fernandes offered 80 with good wages by the sounds of it. Spurs offered more and he chose them.

Then we ended up where we are, doesn’t feel much wrong with that.

 

[Sandikan]

The club are spending the money they can afford, on players who are available within that range, in an attempt to improve the team.

Like any sane business would do.

It’s not rocket science and there’s no conspiracy.

It is a smart approach resources wise.
But may not see us even stand still and match last season's position, let alone have any chance of pushing on.

Clearly jumping in with 180m on Fernandes and Tonali might not have pushed us on anyway, no guarantees.

 

[Mr. Burns Tuchel]

Even in this preseason game its obvious the last player we need is a player like Tchouameni.

He's got no ability to play the football that Santos, Mainoo, Tielemans,Mount & Fernandes do.

I think Carrick wants all his midfielders to be 8's that have different strengths. For example Santos is our best defensive midfielder but he isn't much different to Tielemans who is our best passer on the ball or Mainoo our best ball progressive midfielder.

Camavinga or even more expensive Valverde is useful as Real Madrid players than Tchouameni. I doubt even young potential players like Chema Andres would fit an 8 type midfielder either.

No 8 Players like Wharton, Scott are the more likely PL alternatives. I'd add Baleba but I've not watched him enough to know how good he is on the ball.

If Mount keeps this form up, I'm not even sure it's fair to keep him as our 5th place midfielder either.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

It is a smart approach resources wise.
But may not see us even stand still and match last season's position, let alone have any chance of pushing on.

It might not, but it might be all that’s in budget.

Or all that’s available, player wise, of the type the club thinks will improve the team.

Looking forward to seeing if anything else happens. If not, it’s always nice to see new players come into the team.

 

[aeh1991]

Even in this preseason game its obvious the last player we need is a player like Tchouameni.

He's got no ability to play the football that Santos, Mainoo, Tielemans,Mount & Fernandes do.

I think Carrick wants all his midfielders to be 8's that have different strengths. For example Santos is our best defensive midfielder but he isn't much different to Tielemans who is our best passer on the ball or Mainoo our best ball progressive midfielder.

Camavinga or even more expensive Valverde is useful as Real Madrid players than Tchouameni. I doubt even young potential players like Chema Andres would fit an 8 type midfielder either.

No 8 Players like Wharton, Scott are the more likely PL alternatives. I'd add Baleba but I've not watched him enough to know how good he is on the ball.

If Mount keeps this form up, I'm not even sure it's fair to keep him as our 5th place midfielder either.

This is a weird take. We should aim for tactical versatility and that's exactly what a no. 6 like Tchouameni would bring. We could play well against certain types of teams with the current CMs but against the strongest teams we could be too exposed defensively. Also to make this conclusion after one friendly is a stretch. Mount is injury prone, so we shouldn't rely on him as 5th CM in a season where we play Champions League.

 

[Zumbi]

It does feel like this summer they are going for their 3/4th choice in every position and just because its cheaper/easier. Feels like the kind of thing Tottenham would historically do.

I remember when we made the VdB deal or Zirkzee or Ugarte, just because it was more convenient. These deals borne out of convenience or agent pushes, is something I'm really against.

I'm not sure - look at Santos. We were enquiring about him last summer. Wherever you put him in our list of priorities, he seems like a player we've scouted thoroughly and been after for a while, and although it's early, it's looking like it could be a really smart piece of business. He clearly adds valuable things our midfield was lacking.

 

[Zed is not dead]

City have been making poor transfers for a while now, I wouldn't look at them ass good example.

We should what Liverpool did last summer, it brought so much success.
Or Tottenham. Or Chelsea.

Spending big doesn’t equal success, we have been the case study for the best of the last 15 years.

 

[Hammondo]

We should what Liverpool did last summer, it brought so much success.
Or Tottenham. Or Chelsea.

Spending big doesn’t equal success, we have been the case study for the best of the last 15 years.

I agree, I am very happy with how this summer is going (assuming we get a couple more players). I don't jump on hype often and I don't understand the argument that any club should rush into buying a big name or big price tag.

Put it this way, no other club in the PL has done better than us imo so far.

 

[Uncle Mainoo]

This is a weird take. We should aim for tactical versatility and that's exactly what a no. 6 like Tchouameni would bring. We could play well against certain types of teams with the current CMs but against the strongest teams we could be too exposed defensively. Also to make this conclusion after one friendly is a stretch. Mount is injury prone, so we shouldn't rely on him as 5th CM in a season where we play Champions League.

Why do we need tactical versatility if that’s not going to be our intention of play?

It’s like signing a big 9 to launch the ball to as an alternative option to relieve pressure when our intent is possession football.

 

[quadrant]

This is a weird take. We should aim for tactical versatility and that's exactly what a no. 6 like Tchouameni would bring. We could play well against certain types of teams with the current CMs but against the strongest teams we could be too exposed defensively. Also to make this conclusion after one friendly is a stretch. Mount is injury prone, so we shouldn't rely on him as 5th CM in a season where we play Champions League.

I wouldn’t consider it weird. You don’t bring a player in like Tchouameni and use him in a utility role. He would be first team and our entire gameplan would be built with a screening DM instead of someone who wants to affect the game with their passing range and quality. I agree we need some pure tackling and screening quality in the squad, but not as a first choice.

 

[Andycoleno9]

We should what Liverpool did last summer, it brought so much success.
Or Tottenham. Or Chelsea.

Spending big doesn’t equal success, we have been the case study for the best of the last 15 years.

You said it well. We're, unfortunately, a case study—in other words, the exception.

Generally speaking, in football, the clubs that spend the most on transfers and wages are the ones that dominate. PSG in France, Real Madrid and Barcelona in Spain, Bayern in Germany, Manchester City in England, and Inter in Italy. In smaller leagues, it's even more obvious, with the same clubs dominating for a decade or more because they outspend everyone else.

Of course, every now and then there's a fluke season where a club that spends less wins the title, but that's the exception, not the rule. Just look at Spain. Atlético Madrid, a club that also spends heavily, has won only one league title in the last ten years. It's a similar story with Borussia Dortmund in Germany.

We can comfort ourselves with the idea of "smart" transfers, but the long-term reality of football is pretty clear: money equals success. Everything else is the exception, not the rule.

 

[criticalanalysis]

You said it well. We're, unfortunately, a case study—in other words, the exception.

Generally speaking, in football, the clubs that spend the most on transfers and wages are the ones that dominate. PSG in France, Real Madrid and Barcelona in Spain, Bayern in Germany, Manchester City in England, and Inter in Italy. In smaller leagues, it's even more obvious, with the same clubs dominating for a decade or more because they outspend everyone else.

Of course, every now and then there's a fluke season where a club that spends less wins the title, but that's the exception, not the rule. Just look at Spain. Atlético Madrid, a club that also spends heavily, has won only one league title in the last ten years. It's a similar story with Borussia Dortmund in Germany.

We can comfort ourselves with the idea of "smart" transfers, but the long-term reality of football is pretty clear: money equals success. Everything else is the exception, not the rule.

Comparing our spending to 2 leagues whose clubs' income are massively unbalanced in comparison to the rest of their competition is silly. That's without mentioning how 2 of the bolded are state backed.

Several things can be true.

Ours owners are parasites. We have to spend 'smartly' due to a decade of being poorly run and because they will not inject more money into the club beyond what it earns. Our competitors in this league are not the same of those clubs you've mentioned where they have a stranglehold on it. We do not have 115 charges to our name or have to pay fines for skirting rules like Chelsea, Everton, Villa etc have.

Spending a lot of money isn't the issue. It's spending money within our constraints yet still being able to compete against our competitors. Rivals that can spend £180+ on two midfielders after placing 17th.

 

[Dominos]

This is a weird take. We should aim for tactical versatility and that's exactly what a no. 6 like Tchouameni would bring. We could play well against certain types of teams with the current CMs but against the strongest teams we could be too exposed defensively. Also to make this conclusion after one friendly is a stretch. Mount is injury prone, so we shouldn't rely on him as 5th CM in a season where we play Champions League.

The more I think about it, the potential problem with a Tchouameni signing at this stage would be about hierarchy for me. At the moment we kind of have 3 CMs on equal playing field in terms of status, leaving Carrick completely free to rotate a lot and base his midfield selection on form and tactical preference for any given game, without causing major controversy on "why isn't x player starting".

Tchouameni comes in from Real Madrid for £80m and £300k a week, he basically has to play, and everyone else becomes a B side as a competition for who partners Tchouameni emerges. That might not be a problem if he comes in and looks like our best player, but I can imagine a scenario he isn't impressing everyone and fans start saying they prefer Santos in the team for his incisive quick passing through the lines. If he does find himself out the team on merit it starts to look like a bit of a disaster signing.

 

[Rainy nights in Stoke]

Even in this preseason game its obvious the last player we need is a player like Tchouameni.

He's got no ability to play the football that Santos, Mainoo, Tielemans,Mount & Fernandes do.

I think Carrick wants all his midfielders to be 8's that have different strengths. For example Santos is our best defensive midfielder but he isn't much different to Tielemans who is our best passer on the ball or Mainoo our best ball progressive midfielder.

Camavinga or even more expensive Valverde is useful as Real Madrid players than Tchouameni. I doubt even young potential players like Chema Andres would fit an 8 type midfielder either.

No 8 Players like Wharton, Scott are the more likely PL alternatives. I'd add Baleba but I've not watched him enough to know how good he is on the ball.

If Mount keeps this form up, I'm not even sure it's fair to keep him as our 5th place midfielder either.

He is actually a quite underrated passer. Considering the profile of midfield signings so far (as well as who our coach is), I’d be surprised if an ability to pass the ball wouldn’t be a big priority for any midfield signing.

 

[Sky1981]

People need to differentiate between buying players with a high price vs buying the wrong player with a high price.

The act of spending 100M on player isnt wrong in isolation.. it's a matter of who we bought.

If we get another Rio or Carrick in their mid 20s it's a money well spent regardless of the outlay and the wage.

ETH and Amorim era is a cluster mess not because we spent, but because we spent on the wrong player based on nothing but two charlatans who knew jackshit about player.

 

[RegisteredToSayOneThing]

World Cup has been over for like 4 months and he hasn't signed the deal. Smells fishy to me.

 

[Mr. Burns Tuchel]

This is a weird take. We should aim for tactical versatility and that's exactly what a no. 6 like Tchouameni would bring. We could play well against certain types of teams with the current CMs but against the strongest teams we could be too exposed defensively. Also to make this conclusion after one friendly is a stretch. Mount is injury prone, so we shouldn't rely on him as 5th CM in a season where we play Champions League.

He is actually a quite underrated passer. Considering the profile of midfield signings so far (as well as who our coach is), I’d be surprised if an ability to pass the ball wouldn’t be a big priority for any midfield signing.

• Mainoo as the deepest midfielder CDM​
• Santos playing as a 3rd ball playing CB​
• Mount moving as high as an AM from a CM position​
• Dorgu as a RW from playing as a LW​
• Mbeumo playing on the left, centre & right.​
• Bruno & Lacey are all across the pitch as the central AM providing crosses as wingers​
• Heaven, Shaw, Dalot & Yoro turning from back 4 to back 3 and sometimes play like wingbacks​
• Full backs also become temporary wingers for maximum width​
• Zirkzee as a false 9 from ST​
• Cunha occupying LW, LM, CAM & CF positions.​

This is somethings I've sometimes seen happen all in the same game.

I don't know if you recognise how our team is flexible and versatile that we now don't play with a player stuck in to a single position of the pitch anymore.

Bruno Fernandes said Carrick was giving them tactical freedom. It completely breaks the balance of our team to have a player that is predominantly good at some things but lacks the ability to be synergistic with the rest of team around him. Tchouameni would give us height & the ability to capture the ball but has low to medium ability to progress it or rotate positions with his other team mates which stops our flow because Tchouameni sticking to one position of the pitch means that the players around him are less capable of rotating positions with Tchouameni.

Il give you a future predicted example.

In a game where Tielemans plays alongside Santos or Mainoo : you will see Tielemans play as high as an AM whilst Santos & Mainoo play as a CDM to cover

& in the same game

Iyou will see a period of time that Tielemans plays as the makeshift CDM & its Mainoo or Santos that is further up the pitch.

You saw this with Casemiro that he would never just be a defensive 6 & with Casemiro's superior passing ability and aerial ability that Mainoo would routinely take the temporary position as the deepest midfielder so Casemiro can utilise his strengths further up. When we needed Mainoo to instead be progressing the ball to the 2/3 of the pitch with his dribbling ability, Casemiro would take the position of the deepest CDM.

My biggest fear about Tchouameni in comparison to Santos, Mainoo, Mount is his lack of versatility of his style. If Tchouameni play like constant 6, Tielemans will play more like a constant 8 when Tielemans has the ability to influence the game as a CAM, CM and a CDM DLP.

Our free flowing football will be slowed down due to our team being more stuck to a system again if we buy players that excel predominantly in one area of the pitch.

Maybe I'm wrong because Tchouameni does have experience playing as a CB; but I do think that's are sign of how he actually plays football aswell.

 

[zenith]

Maybe I'm in a minority but really don't want us to sign Tchouameni. He's a proper defensive screener and our entire game will need to be built around him, which will negate the early signs of how we seem to want to play. The balance in the current midfield is perfect and it means a certain degree of fluidity, forward passing and unpredictablilty.

Would much prefer a signing like Berge, who can provide depth at no. 6 with a strong height presence and good passer, than Tchouameni.

 

[Eplel]

Berge is not a better passer than Tchouameni, and Tchouameni is not as one dimensional as some present it here.