Mateus Fernandes | Spurs player

Status
Not open for further replies.
dinostar77 said:
Because he's 28 and turns 29 in November. Also Newcastle will want £100mil + for him. After all he's one of the best in CMs in the league and their captain.

It's just too expensive a deal.

I'd sign him if it were possible, but the last player Utd signed who was over 27 years old was Casemiro.
Click to expand...

And he was our best midfielder for much if his tenure here. I am all for buying young talent but you surely need players in their prime besides them?
 
dinostar77 said:
Because he's 28 and turns 29 in November. Also Newcastle will want £100mil + for him. After all he's one of the best in CMs in the league and their captain.

It's just too expensive a deal.

I'd sign him if it were possible, but the last player Utd signed who was over 27 years old was Casemiro.
Click to expand...
If we're spending that much you sign Elliot Anderson.

Fernandes and Anderson and we're sorted, need to carry on buying prem proven talent instead of Ederson etc.
 
VP89 said:
Supposedly they'd accept 40m
Click to expand...
That's not true. The athletic said they have to pay Southampton 15% sell on.

They also said West Ham want £60-70mil even if they are relegated.

Also there is no relegation release clause in his contract.

The fee has to be around £60-70mil for West Ham to make a profit and also not make a PSR loss.
 
I could see us bidding a 50+5 to start and it settling for either 55+5 or 60+5
 
I'd take him for £60m. Anything more, I'd rather spend a little extra on Wharton or Tchouameni.
 
Lash said:
Where's this coming from? I'd be extremely surprised if they would.
Click to expand...

dinostar77 said:
That's not true. The athletic said they have to pay Southampton 15% sell on.

They also said West Ham want £60-70mil even if they are relegated.
Click to expand...

Of course it's true. Operating word is supposedly.

If we are supposing bollocks like 100m why are calling out rational numbers like 40m?

Their financial state is an absolute mess, and this was briefed when relegation didn't look as likely as it does today.

Championship football is really going to hurt them and Fernandes will more than likely push for an exit if they try hard ball. There's a lot more reason to suggest the figure is closer to 40 than 100.
 
If the likes of Cunha and Mbeumo are worth around £70m, a quick deal for Fernandes for around £60m sounds reasonable to me.
 
VP89 said:
Of course it's true. Operating word is supposedly.

If we are supposing bollocks like 100m why are calling out rational numbers like 40m?

Their financial state is an absolute mess, and this was briefed when relegation didn't look as likely as it does today.

Championship football is really going to hurt them and Fernandes will more than likely push for an exit if they try hard ball. There's a lot more reason to suggest the figure is closer to 40 than 100.
Click to expand...
Either choose to believe the The Athletic article or don't. There is zero chance he leaves for £40mil. Not when us, PSG and Arsenal are circling like vultures.
 
It’s the Bruno at Newcastle that we have to sign, not this lad. We are playing in the CL next season and we need quality players in their prime. Bruno G and the French lad at Madrid would be a great pair of midfield signings
 
VP89 said:
Of course it's true. Operating word is supposedly.

If we are supposing bollocks like 100m why are calling out rational numbers like 40m?

Their financial state is an absolute mess, and this was briefed when relegation didn't look as likely as it does today.

Championship football is really going to hurt them and Fernandes will more than likely push for an exit if they try hard ball. There's a lot more reason to suggest the figure is closer to 40 than 100.
Click to expand...
Oh right, fair enough. I would be very surprised considering there's going to be plenty interested in him. They have loads they can sell to be honest. Even players like Taty will get their agents on the case straight away.
 
dinostar77 said:
That's not true. The athletic said they have to pay Southampton 15% sell on.

They also said West Ham want £60-70mil even if they are relegated.

Also there is no relegation release clause in his contract.

The fee has to be around £60-70mil for West Ham to make a profit and also not make a PSR loss.
Click to expand...

Remember it’s 15% of profit. So 15% on anything above the original £42m they paid.

So assuming he’s on a 5 year contract they could sell him for £34m and not make a PSR loss.

Clearly not suggesting they are selling him for that, but making a PSR loss is not a consideration.
 
Remember when apparently Southampton wanted 100m for Dibling? He went for 35m +5m.

Reckon it'll be done for 50ish plus 5-10 in add ons. Wham need to be careful with only having players that want to be there next year or they'll languish and all their expensive players will be crippling them.
 
dinostar77 said:
Either choose to believe the The Athletic article or don't. There is zero chance he leaves for £40mil. Not when us, PSG and Arsenal are circling like vultures.
Click to expand...
Im choosing to go by all reports. Including this :

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7076476/2026/02/28/west-ham-accounts-record-loss-wage-revenue/

Obviously West ham will try to get us to fork out as much as we can. But they are in such a bad state they can't afford to really pick the terms as much as they'd like. They'd be relegated, the player would push, and they'd need funds to help their balance sheet. This isn't a Forrest demanding 100m+ for Anderson situation.
Lash said:
Oh right, fair enough. I would be very surprised considering there's going to be plenty interested in him. They have loads they can sell to be honest. Even players like Taty will get their agents on the case straight away.
Click to expand...
We will have to see. If he wants a certain club the negotiation is straight forward.
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
Remember it’s 15% of profit. So 15% on anything above the original £42m they paid.

So assuming he’s on a 5 year contract they could sell him for £34m and not make a PSR loss.

Clearly not suggesting they are selling him for that, but making a PSR loss is not a consideration.
Click to expand...
I went back and looked at the article and it said 15%. It didn't say profit. If you've found that elsewhere then fair enough. Obviously 15% of the actual fee is a better deal for the original selling club than 15% of the profit.

I can only go by what The Athletic said a day or two ago.

Anyway we will see what his final fee will be, hopefully before the world cup starts.
 
VP89 said:
Im choosing to go by all reports. Including this :

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7076476/2026/02/28/west-ham-accounts-record-loss-wage-revenue/

Obviously West ham will try to get us to fork out as much as we can. But they are in such a bad state they can't afford to really pick the terms as much as they'd like. They'd be relegated, the player would push, and they'd need funds to help their balance sheet. This isn't a Forrest demanding 100m+ for Anderson situation.

We will have to see. If he wants a certain club the negotiation is straight forward.
Click to expand...
Maybe, I don't think we'd be his dream destination though and if it was £40m, the amount PSG could offer "on the side" would be sickeningly more than we could. I'll happily eat my words if it's anywhere near £40m.
 
Lash said:
Maybe, I don't think we'd be his dream destination though and if it was £40m, the amount PSG could offer "on the side" would be sickeningly more than we could. I'll happily eat my words if it's anywhere near £40m.
Click to expand...
PSG will reportedly focus on attack first. And we cant really speak to what his dream will be, but I'd imagine he'd adore playing in the Premier League with greater chances of starting and that too alongside Bruno Fernandes.
 
Elliot Anderson
Mateus Fernandes
Ederson
Touchameni
Velverde
Baleba
ManuKone
Alex Scott
Adam Wharton
Tonali
Kees Smit


We have a very good list to choose from, hope we can get 2 or 3 from this
 
dinostar77 said:
I went back and looked at the article and it said 15%. It didn't say profit. If you've found that elsewhere then fair enough. Obviously 15% of the actual fee is a better deal for the original selling club than 15% of the profit.

I can only go by what The Athletic said a day or two ago.

Anyway we will see what his final fee will be, hopefully before the world cup starts.
Click to expand...

It’s almost always a % of profit. That’s the usual default.

They are almost certain to go down now, and I expect that to be confirmed on Tuesday. Obviously mathematically they aren’t down with a draw, but that would of course be the reality.

One to get wrapped up early, as I can’t see West Ham wanting to drag it out, not being a starter for the national team.
 
I don't think any midfielder really fills me with confidence, we seem to really struggle to buy there overall.

Anderson is the standout, but any combination of Baleba, Fernandes, Tchouameni, Ederson, Tonali, etc, may be great, or may be crap, I'd have no idea.
 
FootyGirl88 said:
I dunno I wasn’t that impressed by him today
Click to expand...
Didn’t see the match but that’s not exactly surprising in a stop-start side going against Guimaraes.

Should still be our #1 target. Could fill a number of midfield roles for us next season.
 
The highest fee paid for a relegated player is 50 m that chelsea paid to southampton for lavia. Others are around 40 m mark ( maddison,ake, barnes)

I dont think we should pay more than 50 m for him. Whu can want 60-70 m, the thing is no club will be willing to pay that much .
 
Garethw said:
Sky sports a couple of days ago. Their sources said that West Ham wanted £100 million regardless of whether they stayed up or went down.
Click to expand...

Who cares. Southampton wanted £100m for Tyler Dibbling. I don’t think that’s what they got for him…
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
Who cares. Southampton wanted £100m for Tyler Dibbling. I don’t think that’s what they got for him…
Click to expand...
Exactly. We should set a valuation based on all conditions around him. Whu arent in great shape financially and he will be agitating for a move . 50 m is max we should go for .
 
VP89 said:
PSG will reportedly focus on attack first. And we cant really speak to what his dream will be, but I'd imagine he'd adore playing in the Premier League with greater chances of starting and that too alongside Bruno Fernandes.
Click to expand...
Sure. But the idea that it will be a simple negotiation is predicated on him having one destination in mind. Could just as easily love the idea of playing with Vitinha, Neves and Mendes. under a super coach. Fingers crossed he does though.
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
Who cares. Southampton wanted £100m for Tyler Dibbling. I don’t think that’s what they got for him…
Click to expand...
Tyler Dibling wasn’t wanted by the top clubs in the world. What did or didn’t happen with him makes no odds to what happens with a player like Fernandes who will have offers to sit down and decide on left, right and centre.
 
Fortitude said:
Tyler Dibling wasn’t wanted by the top clubs in the world. What did or didn’t happen with him makes no odds to what happens with a player like Fernandes who will have offers to sit down and decide on left, right and centre.
Click to expand...

You’ve missed the point, and I’m sure you know that.

It doesn’t matter what West Ham release to the press about what fee they might want.
 
He’ll go for £60-70m and we shouldn’t blink at ponying up that fee for him. Potentially one of the best midfielders in Europe in the coming years.
 
Last edited:
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
You’ve missed the point, and I’m sure you know that.

It doesn’t matter what West Ham release to the press about what fee they might want.
Click to expand...
I haven’t? Interest sets the market and from there even a relegated club has some leverage unless the player is dead set on a specific club.

For an example, see Lavia, who was a £53m purchase from relegated Southampton.

Of course West Ham can’t go overboard, but they can certainly get a bigger fee than some seemingly expect him to go for*


*Excluding PSG who will no doubt look like they got a bargain as half the deal is then prepared off/under the table.
 
Fortitude said:
I haven’t? Interest sets the market and from there even a relegated club has some leverage unless the player is dead set on a specific club.

For an example, see Lavia, who was a £53m purchase from relegated Southampton.

Of course West Ham can’t go overboard, but they can certainly get a bigger fee than some seemingly expect him to go for*


*Excluding PSG who will no doubt look like they got a bargain as half the deal is then prepared off/under the table.
Click to expand...

You think that West Ham are getting £100m?
 
Fortitude said:
The broader point is West Ham not having a leg to stand on. They will have a lot to say if it’s an actual open market and the player has no preference.
Click to expand...

This pretty much, and being down in the championship you need to free up wages and move on players too.

They'll have to sell players regardless.
 
Fortitude said:
The broader point is West Ham not having a leg to stand on. They will have a lot to say if it’s an actual open market and the player has no preference.
Click to expand...
They would’ve needed to sell Fernandes this summer even if they’d stayed up. Finances are in an absolute state. They’ll milk this transfer for whatever they can get bidding war or not you can be sure of that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.