Bit premature to call Rice a success?
How often do big money transfers actually work?
- Thread starter MegadrivePerson
- Start date
With the most recent signings it's difficult to judge if they are or aren't a success yet.
I think Kane, Hojlund and Nunez will all eventually be considered a success.
I think Kane, Hojlund and Nunez will all eventually be considered a success.
Yeah I agree about De Jong. I will amend it at some point.
Good list.
I'd argue that Isak is good value for money, he seems like a great player and they'd already make a return on him.
I'd also reluctantly add Grealish as he played a solid part in their Treble last season despite partying ever since
I'd argue that Isak is good value for money, he seems like a great player and they'd already make a return on him.
I'd also reluctantly add Grealish as he played a solid part in their Treble last season despite partying ever since
Rice is too early to judge, same with Bellingham even after a decent 8 months.
Agree with the rest, big transfers almost never actually work.
Agree with the rest, big transfers almost never actually work.
I don't understand the correlation between the success of a transfer and the transfer fee. Put the definition of "success" aside, does it mean player with low transfer fee "often" success?
I think trophies should be some measure of whether a high profile, high money transfer worked. Not the be all end all, but it should factor in.
The weirder thing is saying how a transfer has been a success midway through a season! Look at us signing Hojlund or Onana - if you asked Man Utd fans at Christmas if it was a success they'd think you're bonkers, if you'd ask them now I'd wager most would say yes...but you're better off assessing the season as a whole when its come to an end.
Yea, the logic is genuinely all over the place.The list is just very bad. Really bad. I know it is a personal opinion but certain players objectively can only be seen as a succes.
I dont think winning is any way to decide if a player is a succes but why are Bellingham and Rice a succes but Kane isnt? Kane is also with his new club and doing fantastic but he isnt a succes?
Kane is a great example of the above - a definite success going by his numbers but could end up trophyless. Although, I'd bet on him winning a trophy or two before his time at Bayern has come to an end.
You have to expect more, the more people were willing to give up of course. Veron would be considered and ok-signing and not be on any flop lists if Lazio let him go for a dollar I suspect. But he cost the same in 2001 as Arsenal paid for Odegaard in 2022, and that is why he has been on most flop lists over the years.
Excellent post.
Shame United barely follow any of your guidelines.
For high priced transfers, it is especially important to understand the role they played for their previous team and the contribution of their supporting cast who do all the dull, boring stuff like winning possession, making off the ball runs to create space for the star and so on. Incredibly, United have a track record of clearly ignoring all this.
Pay As You Play by Paul Tomkins and Graeme Riley has a chapter on the success rate of high priced transfers. It was published in 2010. Crucial reading for anyone who wants a serious understanding of transfers.
Last edited:
Successes
Good, ultimately not worth the money/worth the money, not good enough/didn't live up to expectations
Still too early to tell
Antony = still early but looks like a guaranteed bust already
James = ultimately a failure but damn if he wasn't fantastic at first
Fixed
Well, you would say that, as a Chelsea fan.
Someone should have given this list to Clearlake...Well, you would say that, as a Chelsea fan.
Of course our best to signings, Gusto and Palmer were both not mega money and also largely only got because of injury to RJ and Nkunku.
Anything bellow 80m is not big money these days
Anything above £60 million makes it one of the biggest 50 transfers of all time!
If there was unlimited subs in football, pretty sure everytime there was a right corner kick or right side free kick, James would get in to take them.
Yeah, agree with this revised criteria much more than the original list. It seems a bit much to label players straight up busts or successes 7 months after a transfer.
Also, I'd say not living up to the transfer fee isn't the same as being a failure. A player could play very well for a couple of season, contribute well to the success of the team but still not come close to justifying the original overpay by the club because the fee was just too damn high.
Yeah this is a better way of doing it.
It will be interesting to revisit in a few years to see which deals have aged well and which haven't.