Based on Santos and Tielemans, predict Utds third midfield signing

Annihilate Now! said:
I'd be very happy with Lewis-Skelly - be interesting to see if a deal can be done there.

I think our order of preference is

Tchouameni
Lewis-Skelly
Baleba
Sander Berge


I do think we'll sign someone - just waiting for the dominoes to fall.
Click to expand...

I think it'll be Skelly, once Bruno G arrives he'll be off and on a pretty nice deal for us I would assume. Low wages. Low miles on the clock but PL and CL experience and joining a few other previously London based players here who've been getting settled and doing alright. He can also play LB. Perfect utility player with potential to be more

I also believe the pressure is majorly off now since we got Tielemans. We've lost one important starter and signed another. Clutch goals aside it's an upgrade to general midfield play and athleticism and composure. Santos is a massive upgrade to Ugarte and could become our best midfielder

I've been banging the drum that this season the team needs to develop ways to win games without Casemiros headed goals. With Tielemans we will in theory have more control and creativity and our forwards will kick on as a unit. We just have to win ugly until we find a new way (not saying that was beautful football last season either but the pragmatic use of players and the results were very Fergie) we are starting to realise again that we don't need to reinvent the wheel.

We already have better players than most teams in the PL. If we work harder than opponents all over the pitch then we will win more often than not, even if it's not always pretty. Too many average teams came here way more up for it than us and came away with points. Thats criminal
 
Last edited:
Ali Dia said:
I think it'll be Skelly, once Bruno G arrives he'll be off and on a pretty nice deal for us I would assume. Low wages. Low miles on the clock but PL and CL experience and joining a few other London players here who've been getting settled and doing alright. He can also play LB. Perfect utility player with potential to be more

I also believe the pressure is majorly off now since we got Tielemans. We've lost one important starter and signed another. Clutch goals aside it's an upgrade to general midfield play and athleticism and composure

I've been banging the drum that this season the team needs to develop ways to win games without Casemiros headed goals. With Tielemans we will in theory have more control and creativity and our forwards will kick on as a unit. We just have to win ugly until we find a new way (not saying that was beautful football last season either but the pragmatic use of players and the results were very Fergie) we are starting to realise again that we don't need to reinvent the wheel.

We already have better players than most teams in the PL. If we work harder than opponents all over the pitch then we will win more often than not, even if it's not always pretty. Too many average teams came here way more up for it than us and came away with points. Thats criminal
Click to expand...
Based on what I posted above (a link to some excited Arse), and the fact they're our direct rivals, I just have no idea why we think we'd be able to nick a young midfield talent off them? A life long Arsenal fan and youth player, being trusted to start the CL final for the league champions no less. Have I missed something?
 
Lennon7 said:
Based on what I posted above (a link to some excited Arse), and the fact they're our direct rivals, I just have no idea why we think we'd be able to nick a young midfield talent off them? A life long Arsenal fan and youth player, being trusted to start the CL final for the league champions no less. Have I missed something?
Click to expand...

Just a hunch. We seem to be looking for someone left sided who may be able to play LB in a pinch. Centrally there's less players ahead of him here and Shaw will pick up a knock or be rested in plenty of games. We are in the CL too. He'll get a raise here. I can see it happening. I hadn't seen your post tbh when I was replying to the other poster. Im just speculating but I think the little bit of noise around this since last season there might be something in it. They'll surely want to sell some players too if they are going for Bruno G and Vinicius and whoever else. I'd say their wage bill is going to take a serious hammering if they get both. Bit like Santos. A player you don't want to lose but if there's a decent offer you gotta keep the cash flowing
 
Last edited:
So it turns out that the player we're waiting for is most likely Camavinga, who can play as a midfielder and left back. If we get him, or potentially MLS, then we'll probably get Hall next season.

I just personally wouldn't feel comfortable going into the season with Shaw being the only specialist left back, assuming we allow Amass to leave.
 
Lennon7 said:
Based on what I posted above (a link to some excited Arse), and the fact they're our direct rivals, I just have no idea why we think we'd be able to nick a young midfield talent off them? A life long Arsenal fan and youth player, being trusted to start the CL final for the league champions no less. Have I missed something?
Click to expand...
If he asks to leave and prefers to come here I think they'll have a tough time keeping him I guess. But they can also ask for 70m
Red in STL said:
I'd rather they were sensible, we need to buy the right players, not just sign players for the sake of it or because they're the siny, expensive signing that a lot of fans seem to want, they've bought 2 that they feel are right and none of us knew anything about them beforehand, that's the way to do business, there's still several weeks of the transfer window to go, and I fully expect that there will be further signings before it closes
Click to expand...
Not a single United fan wants us to "sign expensive players for the sake of it". They want to sign the best players. This constant aversion to making any sort of competitive/statement signing just because Sancho or Alexis were flops years ago makes no sense to me. We are one of the biggest clubs in the world and yet our fans prefer we acted like Brighton in the transfer window. There's nothing wrong with being shrewd (it's actually important to do so), but a well run club will also not be scared away by a big price tag when a top player is available. INEOS seems to be petrified of that though.
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
So it turns out that the player we're waiting for is most likely Camavinga, who can play as a midfielder and left back. If we get him, or potentially MLS, then we'll probably get Hall next season.

I just personally wouldn't feel comfortable going into the season with Shaw being the only specialist left back, assuming we allow Amass to leave.
Click to expand...
Where you hearing that or just your own opinion?
 
pcaming said:
He’s not very good at either.

At this point I have a greater chance of being the 3rd midfielder than anyone else. Not sure if we even in the market still
Click to expand...
Nonsense, Lewis Skelly is a really talented young player and well rounded, and suit our squad needs and his own development. He wouldn't be an instant starter at either, but an important squad guy in both to rotate Shaw or midfield depth. He started the CL final and had a solid game just a few months ago which is big at his age.

Just because Arsenal went down the route of center backs all over the pitch doesn't mean he isn't a big talent himself.
 
croadyman said:
Where you hearing that or just your own opinion?
Click to expand...

Just my opinion, but after hearing a few people talk about it on YouTube, it's starting to make a lot of sense to me.

I'm actually leaning more towards MLS now. Prem proven, young, hungry to improve and a high ceiling.

Maybe United were waiting for Bruno G's sale to go through before making a move? Arsenal are stacked in both midfield and defence, so as talented as MLS is, there's no guarantee he gets the minutes he'll want.

At United, he'd rotate with Shaw at left-back while also getting opportunities in midfield. I'd probably have him as fifth-choice midfielder initially, but he'd still get plenty of game time across both positions.

That would leave us with Santos, Mainoo, Tielemans, Mount and MLS as midfield options, while also giving us quality depth at left-back with Shaw and MLS (and Dorgu if needed).
 
bosnian_red said:
Nonsense, Lewis Skelly is a really talented young player and well rounded, and suit our squad needs and his own development. He wouldn't be an instant starter at either, but an important squad guy in both to rotate Shaw or midfield depth. He started the CL final and had a solid game just a few months ago which is big at his age.

Just because Arsenal went down the route of center backs all over the pitch doesn't mean he isn't a big talent himself.
Click to expand...

Agreed. When you look at the way Carrick wants to play, with players comfortable popping up in different positions, MLS seems like a perfect fit. He can drop into the back line when we're building with a three, invert into midfield to form a double pivot, or stay wide when the situation calls for it. Shaw offers a lot of those same qualities, which is why I actually think MLS would be a really smart signing.

The big question is the fee. If Arsenal are genuinely open to selling, you'd think he shouldn't cost an outrageous amount.
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
Agreed. When you look at the way Carrick wants to play, with players comfortable popping up in different positions, MLS seems like a perfect fit. He can drop into the back line when we're building with a three, invert into midfield to form a double pivot, or stay wide when the situation calls for it. Shaw offers a lot of those same qualities, which is why I actually think MLS would be a really smart signing.

The big question is the fee. If Arsenal are genuinely open to selling, you'd think he shouldn't cost an outrageous amount.
Click to expand...

They may be opening to selling, but at an amount we’re willing to spend? With the market the way it is I’m not sure why they’d be willing to cut us any kind of deal. It’s not like they’re desperate to offload him.
 
Zumbi said:
They may be opening to selling, but at an amount we’re willing to spend? With the market the way it is I’m not sure why they’d be willing to cut us any kind of deal. It’s not like they’re desperate to offload him.
Click to expand...
Yeah feels like another deal too rich for our blood although highly doubt Arsenal are willing to sell anyway
 
According to Neville it’s Tchou that Carrick wants - he says he spoke with Carrick and he explained why he prefers AT over Baleba - all to do with knowing how to control a big Prem or UCL game - when to press when to slow the game when to push to break the lines

Seems clear from that reported discussion we are in a Madrid holding pattern waiting for Rodri to Madrid and then we push for Tchou and if it’s all true surely behind the scenes the deal has been done on personal terms and the Club know if Rodri arrives AT is willing to move to UTD - maybe mkre than just willing
 
Zumbi said:
They may be opening to selling, but at an amount we’re willing to spend? With the market the way it is I’m not sure why they’d be willing to cut us any kind of deal. It’s not like they’re desperate to offload him.
Click to expand...

I don't think Arsenal are desperate to sell him, but I'd be surprised if conversations haven't already happened, or won't happen soon, about his game time.

At left-back, you've got Hincapie and Calafiori ahead of him, while in midfield he'd have to compete with Rice, Zubimendi, Merino and now Bruno G for one of the pivot spots. That's a tough pathway into the team.

I also wouldn't be surprised if he's looked at Heaven's situation. I'd imagine they're pretty close, having come through Arsenal's academy together, and he's seen Heaven getting plenty of first-team opportunities at United. That could easily make him think he'd have a better chance of establishing himself here.
 
FlyingTrotter said:
According to Neville it’s Tchou that Carrick wants - he says he spoke with Carrick and he explained why he prefers AT over Baleba - all to do with knowing how to control a big Prem or UCL game - when to press when to slow the game when to push to break the lines

Seems clear from that reported discussion we are in a Madrid holding pattern waiting for Rodri to Madrid and then we push for Tchou and if it’s all true surely behind the scenes the deal has been done on personal terms and the Club know if Rodri arrives AT is willing to move to UTD - maybe mkre than just willing
Click to expand...

Where did he say this?
 
FlyingTrotter said:
According to Neville it’s Tchou that Carrick wants - he says he spoke with Carrick and he explained why he prefers AT over Baleba - all to do with knowing how to control a big Prem or UCL game - when to press when to slow the game when to push to break the lines

Seems clear from that reported discussion we are in a Madrid holding pattern waiting for Rodri to Madrid and then we push for Tchou and if it’s all true surely behind the scenes the deal has been done on personal terms and the Club know if Rodri arrives AT is willing to move to UTD - maybe mkre than just willing
Click to expand...

Have you got a source please?
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
I don't think Arsenal are desperate to sell him, but I'd be surprised if conversations haven't already happened, or won't happen soon, about his game time.

At left-back, you've got Hincapie and Calafiori ahead of him, while in midfield he'd have to compete with Rice, Zubimendi, Merino and now Bruno G for one of the pivot spots. That's a tough pathway into the team.

I also wouldn't be surprised if he's looked at Heaven's situation. I'd imagine they're pretty close, having come through Arsenal's academy together, and he's seen Heaven getting plenty of first-team opportunities at United. That could easily make him think he'd have a better chance of establishing himself here.
Click to expand...

I'm not questioning any of that - I questioned whether Arsenal would be willing to let him go for a fee that we would be willing to pay. Doesn't matter if the player wants to come here if we're not willing to pay a high fee for him - same situation as we're in with Hall. I'm sure Hall wants to come to us, but that doesn't mean Newcastle will sell him for an amount we're willing to pay.

Even if MLS isn't getting regular game time, why wouldn't Arsenal place a high value on him in this market? He's got a contract till 2030. I don't see how or why we'd be able to get him for any less than Newcastle would want for Hall.
 
Has anyone actually predicted no 3rd signing?
Seems the favourite?
 
Zumbi said:
I'm not questioning any of that - I questioned whether Arsenal would be willing to let him go for a fee that we would be willing to pay. Doesn't matter if the player wants to come here if we're not willing to pay a high fee for him - same situation as we're in with Hall. I'm sure Hall wants to come to us, but that doesn't mean Newcastle will sell him for an amount we're willing to pay.

Even if MLS isn't getting regular game time, why wouldn't Arsenal place a high value on him in this market? He's got a contract till 2030. I don't see how or why we'd be able to get him for any less than Newcastle would want for Hall.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point, and if Arsenal were completely against selling him then I'd agree. For me though, the big difference between MLS and Hall is that the reports suggest Arsenal are at least willing to listen to offers, whereas Newcastle don't seem to have any intention of selling Hall and, financially, they don't really need to. Hall is also Newcastle's first choice left back.

Arsenal's situation feels different. They've already spent heavily on Bruno G and there's still talk of them wanting to bring in a top class winger. If that's the case, raising funds through the sale of a player whose pathway to regular football is becoming increasingly difficult would make a lot of sense.

Cole Palmer is a good example. City rated him highly and had him tied down to a long contract, but once it became clear he wanted regular football and City couldn't guarantee it, they agreed to sell for a fee they were happy with. They didn't just keep him on the bench to stop another club benefiting from his talent.

I'm not saying MLS is definitely leaving or that Arsenal would let him go cheaply. My point is simply that there's a difference between valuing a player highly and being completely unwilling to sell. If Arsenal receive a fair offer, I don't think it's unrealistic that both parties could reach an agreement that works for everyone.
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
The big question is the fee. If Arsenal are genuinely open to selling, you'd think he shouldn't cost an outrageous amount.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced this is true but there was some report saying discussions are around 37 mil, which to me in this market doesn’t feel like a correct fee for someone like him.

Would love it if that was true but surely he’d be closer to 50 or even above.
 
Andersons Dietician said:
I’m not convinced this is true but there was some report saying discussions are around 37 mil, which to me in this market doesn’t feel like a correct fee for someone like him.

Would love it if that was true but surely he’d be closer to 50 or even above.
Click to expand...

I think it'd be the same as Santos - 50 mill - as you said.
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
That's a fair point, and if Arsenal were completely against selling him then I'd agree. For me though, the big difference between MLS and Hall is that the reports suggest Arsenal are at least willing to listen to offers, whereas Newcastle don't seem to have any intention of selling Hall and, financially, they don't really need to. Hall is also Newcastle's first choice left back.

Arsenal's situation feels different. They've already spent heavily on Bruno G and there's still talk of them wanting to bring in a top class winger. If that's the case, raising funds through the sale of a player whose pathway to regular football is becoming increasingly difficult would make a lot of sense.

Cole Palmer is a good example. City rated him highly and had him tied down to a long contract, but once it became clear he wanted regular football and City couldn't guarantee it, they agreed to sell for a fee they were happy with. They didn't just keep him on the bench to stop another club benefiting from his talent.

I'm not saying MLS is definitely leaving or that Arsenal would let him go cheaply. My point is simply that there's a difference between valuing a player highly and being completely unwilling to sell. If Arsenal receive a fair offer, I don't think it's unrealistic that both parties could reach an agreement that works for everyone.
Click to expand...

But Arsenal are in a stronger financial position than Newcastle - they’re one of the strongest in the league in that regard. Financially, they have no need to sell a player like him to a rival to fund incomings.

Sure, selling him might make sense if he’s not a part of their plans (big if - there’s an argument for them keeping him for CM rotation), but selling him to rivals for below market value!? That doesn’t make any sense.

Because again, I’m not questioning whether they would sell him - although that remains a valid question with the latest reports saying they’re not going to. I’m questioning whether they’d sell him for a low enough amount that we would be willing to buy him.
 
Zumbi said:
But Arsenal are in a stronger financial position than Newcastle - they’re one of the strongest in the league in that regard. Financially, they have no need to sell a player like him to a rival to fund incomings.

Sure, selling him might make sense if he’s not a part of their plans (big if - there’s an argument for them keeping him for CM rotation), but selling him to rivals for below market value!? That doesn’t make any sense.

Because again, I’m not questioning whether they would sell him - although that remains a valid question with the latest reports saying they’re not going to. I’m questioning whether they’d sell him for a low enough amount that we would be willing to buy him.
Click to expand...

City didn't need to sell Cole Palmer either, but they still did because they couldn't guarantee him the minutes he wanted.

MLS is in a similar position. He started just five Premier League games last season, and with Arsenal strengthening again this summer, it's hard to see that number increasing. If anything, you'd expect it to decrease. That's why I think Arsenal would at least consider offers if the player wanted more opportunities.

Top clubs sell to rivals all the time, so I'm not sure why that's being treated as some impossible scenario. City sold Palmer to Chelsea, Jesus and Zinchenko to Arsenal. United signed Mount from Chelsea and, more recently, Santos. There are plenty of examples.

As for "below market value", I'm not sure where that's come from because I never mentioned it. My original question was what Arsenal would value him at.

The reality is that MLS isn't a starter and, from what we've seen, doesn't appear to be first-choice backup at either left-back or in midfield. His minutes reflect that. Because of that, it would be difficult to justify demanding an outrageous fee. It's no different to when clubs were looking at Mainoo for around £40m while he wasn't starting regularly under Amorim.

As for the price, I genuinely don't know. If I had to estimate based on everything we've discussed, I'd probably say somewhere in the £50–60m region. Whether you think that's below market value is subjective. Personally, I think the Santos deal is a fair benchmark. He's every bit as good and played similar minutes last season
 
Walters_19_MuFc said:
City didn't need to sell Cole Palmer either, but they still did because they couldn't guarantee him the minutes he wanted.

MLS is in a similar position. He started just five Premier League games last season, and with Arsenal strengthening again this summer, it's hard to see that number increasing. If anything, you'd expect it to decrease. That's why I think Arsenal would at least consider offers if the player wanted more opportunities.

Top clubs sell to rivals all the time, so I'm not sure why that's being treated as some impossible scenario. City sold Palmer to Chelsea, Jesus and Zinchenko to Arsenal. United signed Mount from Chelsea and, more recently, Santos. There are plenty of examples.

As for "below market value", I'm not sure where that's come from because I never mentioned it. My original question was what Arsenal would value him at.

The reality is that MLS isn't a starter and, from what we've seen, doesn't appear to be first-choice backup at either left-back or in midfield. His minutes reflect that. Because of that, it would be difficult to justify demanding an outrageous fee. It's no different to when clubs were looking at Mainoo for around £40m while he wasn't starting regularly under Amorim.

As for the price, I genuinely don't know. If I had to estimate based on everything we've discussed, I'd probably say somewhere in the £50–60m region. Whether you think that's below market value is subjective. Personally, I think the Santos deal is a fair benchmark. He's every bit as good and played similar minutes last season
Click to expand...

You seem to be misunderstanding me still. I am not saying they wouldn’t sell him. I have never claimed that’s an impossible scenario.

What I have very clearly said is that I’m sceptical they would sell him for an amount we’re willing to pay. The current market is very inflated and Arsenal will almost certainly take that into account with any valuation. We do not seem willing to spend the money on Hall or countless other players because of their cost, so I’m struggling to see why MLS would be any different. Arsenal have no incentive to do us a cut price deal, which seems to be what we’re looking for in this window.
 
Zumbi said:
You seem to be misunderstanding me still. I am not saying they wouldn’t sell him. I have never claimed that’s an impossible scenario.

What I have very clearly said is that I’m sceptical they would sell him for an amount we’re willing to pay. The current market is very inflated and Arsenal will almost certainly take that into account with any valuation. We do not seem willing to spend the money on Hall or countless other players because of their cost, so I’m struggling to see why MLS would be any different. Arsenal have no incentive to do us a cut price deal, which seems to be what we’re looking for in this window.
Click to expand...

Im understanding you perfectly clear but yet again, you keep mentioning a cut deal which I havent mentioned.

Out of interest, how much do you feel MLS would go for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.