James Trafford

Scotty Doesn't Know

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 21, 2025
Messages
385
He's going to Leeds. 50m fee apparently.

That's twice now that City will be making a 20m profit on Trafford after spending his entire City career sat on the bench (yes, I know they had a cheap-ish buyback clause last summer). 40m combined profit in the 2023 and 2026 sales of Trafford. He must've really shone in those FA Cup matches last season, or when he was out on loan in League 1 the first time around...
 
Scotty Doesn't Know said:
He's going to Leeds. 50m fee apparently.

That's twice now that City will be making a 20m profit on Trafford after spending his entire City career sat on the bench (yes, I know they had a cheap-ish buyback clause last summer). 40m combined profit in the 2023 and 2026 sales of Trafford. He must've really shone in those FA Cup matches last season, or when he was out on loan in League 1 the first time around...
Click to expand...
That’s actually a fecking joke :lol: what the feck
 
3rd most experienced keeper behind Kepa and Alison.

Believable.
 
Make it make sense. Paid just over 30 million for him. Barely played a game, never getting in over Donnaruma and clearly wants to leave for that reason. Leeds pay 40 million plus, somehow giving City a profit. As if :lol:
 
It’s only City and Chelsea who can have a player on the bench, barely playing and yet he goes up in value
 
Done feck all and somehow his value risen. So, who is City buying from them?
 
I actually don't think this is that crazy.

He's a very good keeper, only a year into his contract and city would have wanted to keep him, means leeds have to pay top dollar.

He was on the bench and he still made the England squad (Shit squad but Tuchels got keepers right.)
 
SalfordRed18 said:
I actually don't think this is that crazy.

He's a very good keeper, only a year into his contract and city would have wanted to keep him, means leeds have to pay top dollar.

He was on the bench and he still made the England squad (Shit squad but Tuchels got keepers right.)
Click to expand...
It’s the 5th highest fee ever paid for a goalkeeper.
 
Solius said:
It’s the 5th highest fee ever paid for a goalkeeper.
Click to expand...
yeah fair but context, keepers don't tend to move as often as outfield players and clubs more often will get someone up and coming, so you simply don't see that many big transfers for them.
 
Might not be bad for us if we end up moving on vitek (which sounds like it will be the case)
 
I've never understood the hype around James Trafford. Always looked mediocre to poor when I've seen him in action.

So in transfers that will be around: £15m (Burnley) + £30m (City) + £40m (Leeds). Is this some sort of money laundering scheme?
 
What an utter joke of a transfer. Everyone saw this coming except Trafford. He made the same mistake twice signing for those cheats (got replaced the moment they saw a new flavour of the month) and never learnt his lesson.
 
We should definitely loan Vitek rather than selling now and try to get this sort of money for him next year.
 
Solius said:
How does this happen so often. It’s fecking bizarre.
Click to expand...
crime-secret.gif
 
Robbo* said:
We should definitely loan Vitek rather than selling now and try to get this sort of money for him next year.
Click to expand...
He already has essentially the same positive resume as what got people to rate Trafford highly in the first place. One fantastic Championship season. He's just not English. Trafford does have a great youth Euro campaign under his belt, but he also had one of the all time worst PL goalkeeping campaigns as well.

One more Championship season for Vitek won't make much of a difference. Need to be loaning him to a PL side or at least somewhere in the top 5 leagues where he'll be a starter. But regardless, teams will happily pay through the nose for City players and drive hard bargains with United.
 
Robbo* said:
We should definitely loan Vitek rather than selling now and try to get this sort of money for him next year.
Click to expand...

ValenciasDrilledCrosses said:
He already has essentially the same positive resume as what got people to rate Trafford highly in the first place. One fantastic Championship season. He's just not English. Trafford does have a great youth Euro campaign under his belt, but he also had one of the all time worst PL goalkeeping campaigns as well.

One more Championship season for Vitek won't make much of a difference. Need to be loaning him to a PL side or at least somewhere in the top 5 leagues where he'll be a starter. But regardless, teams will happily pay through the nose for City players and drive hard bargains with United.
Click to expand...
Guiu is being quoted at 25m by Chelsea after warming their bench.
 
We should offer Leeds Vitek in loan for a season free if charge to ruin that deal and get him experience in the Prem.
 
Solius said:
How does this happen so often. It’s fecking bizarre.
Click to expand...
The easiest explanation is to call it a conspiracy, but honestly, I don't think that's the reason.

City and Chelsea have built a reputation for selling players well. They also don't publicly advertise the players they want to sell. They don't go around saying, "For sale, for sale, hurry before they're gone." Because of that, buying clubs don't come in offering half the asking price or asking for a loan with an option to maybe buy later. They always behave like - we might sell him but we don't mind keeping him.

United, on the other hand, has built a reputation for letting players go below market value. And whenever we want to sell someone, our own journalists leak that the club urgently needs to offload that player because he's no longer part of the manager's plans. We're basically driving down our own players' value.
 
I honestly don't think 40m for James Trafford is crazy. The guy would have been first choice at City had Donnarumma not suddenly appeared in the transfermarket.

He's simply a very good shotstopper and goalkeeper. Had Lammens not signed for us, I would bite my hand off for a deal like this. 23 years old, many great years in him.

Had City not signed Donnarumma, he'd probably have been at the World Cup competing for the first goalkeeper spot with Pickford.
 
ROFLUTION said:
I honestly don't think 40m for James Trafford is crazy. The guy would have been first choice at City had Donnarumma not suddenly appeared in the transfermarket.

He's simply a very good shotstopper and goalkeeper. Had Lammens not signed for us, I would bite my hand off for a deal like this. 23 years old, many great years in him.

Had City not signed Donnarumma, he'd probably have been at the World Cup competing for the first goalkeeper spot with Pickford.
Click to expand...
I feel like he started the season quite poorly, which may have pushed City a bit more towards signing Donnarumma.
 
sebsheep said:
I feel like he started the season quite poorly, which may have pushed City a bit more towards signing Donnarumma.
Click to expand...
Thought he was quite good. Wasn’t his fault that City as a team started out last season bad if I remember correctly.

Donnarumma is in his own league however.
 
sebsheep said:
I feel like he started the season quite poorly, which may have pushed City a bit more towards signing Donnarumma.
Click to expand...
Guardiola is not a patient man. Trafford had few blunders in August (if i remember correctly) and Pep said - "feck that, give me top class gk. I can't work in these conditions".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.