Did we waste €200 million this summer?

[Andycoleno9]

How do you rate this transfer window? I just can't stop thinking that we completely missed out in this transfer window and made our team worse instead going forward.

Don't get me wrong; on paper all players look good and their qualities in general are not in question. Onana is the best ball playing gk in the world, Mount is very good attacking midfielder, Hojlund is Europe's top prospect and Amrabat is excellent backup for Casemiro. But except Amrabat, did we need any of those 3 players THIS season? It seems to me that all those transfers are done season or two too early.
Onana's top class ball playing ability is useless so far because we don't have a midfield who can keep the ball, Mount is not a central midfielder who dictates tempo (type which we needed) and Hojlund is not ready yet to lead a line (so we are again without lethal striker in attack).

I don't want to go in debate how we could have spend that 200 mil. There are 100 combinations how you can spend 200 mil. I am now just talking about these names. Did Erik looked more for next season already or he just overrated these players?

 

[Scandi Red]

Ye, I think we gone done did.

 

[TheReligion]

How do you rate this transfer window? I just can't stop thinking that we completely missed out in this transfer window and made our team worse instead going forward.

….

I don't want to go in debate how we could have spend that 200 mil. There are 100 combinations how you can spend 200 mil. I am now just talking about these names. Did Erik looked more for next season already or he just overrated these players?

?

 

[Amir]

If they were done a season too early, then it wasn't really wasted.

 

[ScholesyTheWise]

little fings what you find annoying...

(anyway, we spent terribly, and I'm not sure this should be in the transfer forum or be in a,
separate thread to the multiple ones where this topic is already discussed)

 

[AltiUn]

Yes, Mount was a poor signing and Hojlund would've been a gamble for £30m and we spent over £70m on him.

 

[Berbaclass]

Yes, Mount was a poor signing and Hojlund would've been a gamble for £30m and we spent over £70m on him.

You're writing Mount off after what 2.5 games?

 

[Ayoba]

Fo sho, we did. More than you know it.

 

[Andycoleno9]

little fings what you find annoying...

(anyway, we spent terribly, and I'm not sure this should be in the transfer forum or be in a,
separate thread to the multiple ones where this topic is already discussed)

. Grammar? Yeah, i do struggle sometimes with damn past tense. Sorry. I know that can cause eyes and ears bleeding to someone who is English.

 

[Rojofiam]

No, we didn't.

By the way, hilarious that it's October 2023 people still debate whether we needed a technical goalkeeper or not. It was already obvious in August 2022.

Onana was also one of the best options out there with probably the least amount on question marks around him.

 

[tenpoless]

We couldn't do much, the market set the price. If we didn't spend we'd be way worse now with all the injuries.

 

[Utd heap]

Ask in a year.

 

[ScholesyTheWise]

. Grammar? Yeah, i do struggle sometimes with damn past tense. Sorry. I know that can cause eyes and ears bleeding to someone who is English.

Was just a reference to the thread in the general forum
this one

 

[V.O.]

We'll probably need to wait a long time to find out whether Hojlund was worth it or not, but I think the overall business is solid enough.

Mount, at worst, is a very good utility player with many years at the top level ahead of him.
Amrabat might not be prime Busquets, but he's exactly the kind of midfielder we've been missing for a long time.
Onana is a great all-round keeper and a big upgrade over 2023 De Gea.

More importantly, I think all of our signings under Ten Hag, both this season and last, seem to have the right mentality. Every single one seems to at least have a good level of determination and on field work rate, with Casemiro, Martinez and Onana being absolute lions. In the long run, I think this will make a massive difference to us.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Surely it’s too early to tell?

 

[bond19821982]

Dont think so. Mount and Onana will be excellent signings. Give some time.

No comments on Hojlund and Amrabat. Amrabat is still a loan and so we can chose not to sign him albeit paying 10m.

Hojlund is a kid and we paid for his potential.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

For me, yes. Every £50m plus transfer we make has just left huge questions marks and made us worse. Feel this year, the profile of player is all wrong.

 

[Catt]

Why not have a little bit of patience?

This forum has gone to pots

 

[AshRK]

Did we even spend 200m this summer, genuine question?

Hojlund 64
Onana 47
Mount 55

Definitely that's not 200m, unless I am missing someone.

 

[PoTMS]

At the moment, it's not looking great. Still early days for all of our signings but buying Mount looks to be a massive feck up while you can sort of justify the others.

 

[pascell]

Should've kept de Gea on a 1 year rolling contract, bought a CB with the Onana money, not gone ahead with signing Mount and bought a young CDM.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Mount - I think there's a good player in him, but unnecessary one for us. We already have Bruno, and young Hannibal as backup. Unless we want to try something different, maybe as long term replacement for Bruno so that we can start to play more build up football? Anyway, Mount and Bruno just won't work together, its so plain obvious to everyone, except ETH.

Hojlund - He has the potential and I feel he is right long term signing for us.

Onana - Well, I am not sure about this, he seems to be good ball playing type of sweeper keeper, who would help to brings the ball out from our back. But I didn't see much improvements from the way we've played so far this season, so maybe we have overrated the need for this type of keeper, or maybe just simply still early days. His ball saving/handling has not been very impressive, leaking goals everywhere, but that's not his fault most of the time though. But I think he deserves more time to settle in the team.

Amrabat - I think he would be a decent signing for us, and much needed one for our current squad. We need high volume passer in midfield and someone who could also partner or backup for Casemiro in midfield when needed, I think he is quite decent for that kind of role.

Evans - Don't see much logic behind that, but he is 5th choice CB and comes cheap, so why not.

 

[Rojofiam]

Did we even spend 200m this summer, genuine question?

Hojlund 64
Onana 47
Mount 55

Definitely that's not 200m, unless I am missing someone.

Our net spend was around 130-135m GPB

 

[Oranges038]

Why not have a little bit of patience?

This forum has gone to pots

Nah, you have to totally write players off after a few games. So if they do turn out to be shit, you can at least be happy knowing that you were proven right.

It's that whole self fulfilling prophecy thing.

 

[PSV]

We could have signed better players for much, much less.

 

[Don_Johan14]

The signings for those prices seem excessive to me.

Onana a year earlier was free. As a starting goalkeeper he seems inconsistent.

Amrabat - I haven't seen him enough. I don't think he's a player who changes the dynamics of the team.

Mount - You have signed a player with a tremendous overprice to an opponent who had trouble getting rid of him. He is no better than Bruno. To put him in a more backward position is to waste his qualities.

Hojlund - I haven't seen him enough. In Italy his scoring records were quite low. He is still very young.

These players for half the price to have roster depth would be aceptable. To be starters in the team I see them insufficient to fight for titles.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Hojlind - No. Very young player in the most premium position on the pitch. Was always going to cost a lot.

Onana - Personally I think yes considering we could have got Raya for like £20m less.

Mount - Massive overpay for a player that Chelsea wanted to sell. Reckon if we'd held firm we could have got him for £15m/£20m cheaper... though free next year would have been better

Amrabat - No, so far he's cost us £7m, which is nothing

Evans - Free,

Bayindir - ????

So did we waste £200m? No, I'd say we wasted about £30/40m

 

[DWelbz19]

I don't think we even spent £200m in total?

I think we definitely could have obtained players who actually complement the strengths of our players better -- I'm thinking Mount in particular. I'd have happily taken a more 'average' signing over him if it meant their main strengths were things like ball retention in the middle of the field and being a little bit better at circulating the ball around without instantly thinking to launch the forward pass to Rashford.

 

[jasT1981]

Yes, Hojlund for near £70m was a complete fleecing. He is nowhere near that, £25m would have been too much. He should have been bought as a back-up striker, not a £70m main striker.
Mount - Another waste, I don't think he was really needed for £55m
Onana - Massively overpaid because GK suddenly became a massive priority due to our shambles over De Gea when money should have been used elsewhere

Yes, I think we wasted the money. Could have gotten better, cheaper.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Did we even spend 200m this summer, genuine question?

Hojlund 64
Onana 47
Mount 55

Definitely that's not 200m, unless I am missing someone.

206 mil euros according to transfermarkt.

 

[CM]

I think it would be a touch dramatic to say we've wasted £200m but it's poor squad planning. Mount underlines that more than anyone. He's not a bad player individually but we needed to redress the balance of our midfield and instead doubled down on another attacking midfielder who occupies even higher areas of the pitch than Eriksen, who we were already struggling with last season.

I think Onana and Hojlund will both be fine. Both of them look good players but they're a product of their environment. The defensive structure in front of Onana is horrible and most of our key players are out of form. It's difficult for two new signings to make much of an impression under those circumstances.

Hojlund is also lacking that little bit of luck - he changed the course of the game against Arsenal but we didn't get the result we deserved, he had the goal disallowed against Brighton and had the keeper beaten against Palace before Mitchell made the recovery clearance. Those little moments would likely change the lens through which people view him if they went a different way.

 

[saik]

As I did with Antony, I am willing to give Onana and Hojlund the first year because they are new to the country and new to the league and still might be adjusting and in Hojlund's case he is still a kid. Mount though, 6 months tops as he has already played in this league for most of his career and should not have much trouble.

 

[Stadjer]

. Grammar? Yeah, i do struggle sometimes with damn past tense. Sorry. I know that can cause eyes and ears bleeding to someone who is English.

As long as English speaking people cant figure out the difference between their and there, we non-english people shouldnt worry too much about grammar

 

[100]

Depends on the direction of the squad.

Hojlund - no
Onana - no
Mount - I don’t think he’s a bad player but doesn’t seem compatible with our midfield issues and Bruno in particular. If he replaces Bruno long term then no. If he doesn’t then it’s likely a yes.

 

[Stadjer]

Yes, Hojlund for near £70m was a complete fleecing. He is nowhere near that, £25m would have been too much. He should have been bought as a back-up striker, not a £70m main striker.
Mount - Another waste, I don't think he was really needed for £55m
Onana - Massively overpaid because GK suddenly became a massive priority due to our shambles over De Gea when money should have been used elsewhere

Yes, I think we wasted the money. Could have gotten better, cheaper.

25m too much for a young striker that was breaking through in the Serie A and scoring goals? Are you still living in 1990 or something? Prices went up quite a bit since...

Real Madrid is paying 60m for a 16 year old out of Brazil these days.

What exactly would have been those better cheaper options?

 

[JB7]

206 mil euros according to transfermarkt.

So we didn't spend £200m then.

 

[RedorDead21]

As I did with Antony, I am willing to give Onana and Hojlund the first year because they are new to the country and new to the league and still might be adjusting and in Hojlund's case he is still a kid. Mount though, 6 months tops as he has already played in this league for most of his career and should not have much trouble.

But doesn’t the amount of time you give them also depend on where the manager chooses to play them…how the team in general is performing around them etc. if you’re playing out of position and the team isn’t creating chances for you it’s harsh to make any real judgement.

 

[Rojofiam]

maybe we have overrated the need for this type of keeper

Is that why all of Pep, Klopp and Arteta binned their GKs for new options that are way better with their feet than their predecessors?

Hell, Arteta has even replaced Ramsdale with Raya it seems, because the Spaniard is even better in this regard, even though Ramsdale himself was signed as a technical goalkeeper after they got rid of Leno and Martínez.

I firmly believe that Onana will be great for us for many years, and if there's one thing that's clear it's that De Gea had to go, even though he somewhat improved his passing throughout last season compared to the first few weeks (when we lost to Brighton and Brentford).

It was still way off of what is needed for a team that wants to control games, though. You can already see it several times with Onana in a match, he provides a genuine passing option for the CBs by stepping up to the edge of the penalty area and his passing is way better than DDG's ever was. This makes a huge difference (and is essential) for our build-up...but it's still lacking. Onana isn't the issue, though.

 

[Bosnian_fan]

As most people pointed out, Mount seems to be the only questionable one. Not going to comment on Evans, Reguillon, and Bayindir obviously, they were mostly brought in in need of bodies.

 

[JB7]

Hojlind - No. Very young player in the most premium position on the pitch. Was always going to cost a lot.

Onana - Personally I think yes considering we could have got Raya for like £20m less.

Mount - Massive overpay for a player that Chelsea wanted to sell. Reckon if we'd held firm we could have got him for £15m/£20m cheaper... though free next year would have been better

Amrabat - No, so far he's cost us £7m, which is nothing

Evans - Free,

Bayindir - ????

So did we waste £200m? No, I'd say we wasted about £30/40m

Just on Onana, in fairness at the time Brentford were insisting on a similar amount to what we paid for Onana. There was a Brentford poster on here who kept saying "if we don't get £40m+ he'll stay" even though they had already signed his replacement. Spurs walked away because of the price. Ultimately as the season got closed, the demands dropped and Arsenal paid a £3m loan fee, with the option to purchase next year for £27m. So Arsenal will end up paying £30m, which is only around £13m less than we paid for Onana and while I do rate Raya and Onana wouldn't have been my first pick as goalkeeper, I don't think paying £13m more for him than Raya is bad business on the back of last season. There is also the fact that we were into the season before Brentford lowered their demands for Raya, whereas Onana was with us in time to go on the pre-season tour, which while it hasn't had the impact it usually would, we would have been very thin on the goalkeeper front without that early signing.