Sergio Reguilón

Status
Not open for further replies.

HJ12

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2016
Messages
624
As many have pointed out, the substance of this deal is essentially a loan, unless the player becomes a dud, in which case you can reclassify it as a purchase by Spurs. On top of that, the "loan" has cost them a big chunk of their transfer kitty in an already challenging Covid transfer window. Very surprised Spurs never haggled for an outright loan rather, and then opt to use that cash for their Kane back-up.
 

TheMod

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
254
I don't understand some of the comments in this thread with people getting so angry and annoyed that we didn't sign Reguilon.

Looking at the terms of the deal it makes sense that we pulled out and didn't offer what Spurs have. Spurs are paying €30m + € 5m in add ons and have included a €40m buy back and first refusal clause valid for 2 years.

Real Madrid have basically "loaned" out Reguilon for 2 years and if he turns world class they will only have to pay €10m (excl add ons) more than what they sold him for. This is basically covered by the 2 years in wages that Real do not have to pay him for.

Also Real have got instant cash flow from this sale which they are desperate for right now due to Covid. This is a great deal for Real and not so much for Spurs, if he turns world class real will take him back, if he stays average he will remain at Spurs and we would have dodged a bullet.

Woodward whether you like him or not is right to have pulled out of this deal on these terms. We are not a selling club and never will be.
 

InLevyITrust

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
9,233
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham
I don't understand some of the comments in this thread with people getting so angry and annoyed that we didn't sign Reguilon.

Looking at the terms of the deal it makes sense that we pulled out and didn't offer what Spurs have. Spurs are paying €30m + € 5m in add ons and have included a €40m buy back and first refusal clause valid for 2 years.

Real Madrid have basically "loaned" out Reguilon for 2 years and if he turns world class they will only have to pay €10m (excl add ons) more than what they sold him for. This is basically covered by the 2 years in wages that Real do not have to pay him for.

Also Real have got instant cash flow from this sale which they are desperate for right now due to Covid. This is a great deal for Real and not so much for Spurs, if he turns world class real will take him back, if he stays average he will remain at Spurs and we would have dodged a bullet.

Woodward whether you like him or not is right to have pulled out of this deal on these terms. We are not a selling club and never will be.
Do you see how lopsided you view is on this? If he turns out to be awesome we have him for 2 years (still not quite sure of the detail in the buy back clause) , after that we get our money back plus interest to reinvest. If he is average to meh we still have played well below the market rate for a promising fullback, yes I would have liked a bigger fee back but you cant have it all.
 

Panther

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
1,177
I don't understand some of the comments in this thread with people getting so angry and annoyed that we didn't sign Reguilon.

Looking at the terms of the deal it makes sense that we pulled out and didn't offer what Spurs have. Spurs are paying €30m + € 5m in add ons and have included a €40m buy back and first refusal clause valid for 2 years.

Real Madrid have basically "loaned" out Reguilon for 2 years and if he turns world class they will only have to pay €10m (excl add ons) more than what they sold him for. This is basically covered by the 2 years in wages that Real do not have to pay him for.

Also Real have got instant cash flow from this sale which they are desperate for right now due to Covid. This is a great deal for Real and not so much for Spurs, if he turns world class real will take him back, if he stays average he will remain at Spurs and we would have dodged a bullet.

Woodward whether you like him or not is right to have pulled out of this deal on these terms. We are not a selling club and never will be.
So, having an injury prone and inconsistent Shaw at left back is better than "loaning" Reguilon for two years? We could've taken the deal, bought a good young left back as a long term option next summer and then when Reguilon leaves, we have someone ready to replace him.
 

UpWithRivers

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
1,390
Its actually a not that bad of a deal.....for Spurs. Who else would they be able to get thats this good for 30 mil? Yeah they might need to sell him back to RM but I would guess RM would only buy him if he turns out to be a super star. In that case Spurs would probably loose him anyway. Yeah probably make more money but in that case they would also need to pay an extra 20 mill for him. Similar to Chillwell. They will get a good player for 2 years similar to a loan. The only risk is they are stuck with a sht player but the odds that will happen are quite low. Even if hes not that good and RM dont buy him I guess they could easily sell him for 15/20 to someone.

Its a great deal for Mourinho - He looks at a 2 year window. Hes not a long term manager. Reguilon and Bale and a few others if he can - Cavani, Perisic? and he will be laughing.

And finally its a frigging awesome deal for RM. Genius

For us its not a god deal for the simple fact we should never be a feeder club for anyone. As soon as you do that you announce to the world that we are a smaller club than the big boys and we would never recover. It will just be in everyones minds that we are Real Madrids btch. They will never think that way about Tottenham. No offence to Tottenham. They are a big club. Its just how people relate to United. Its always a friggin drama.
 

Scarecrow

Having a week off
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
11,763
Seems like a pretty good deal for Spurs. I don’t really get this aversion to the buy-back. You are getting a player that can help you now, on a discount, and worst case you’ll sell him on a profit in a couple of years.
 

Rajat Jain

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 15, 2018
Messages
85
Do you see how lopsided you view is on this? If he turns out to be awesome we have him for 2 years (still not quite sure of the detail in the buy back clause) , after that we get our money back plus interest to reinvest. If he is average to meh we still have played well below the market rate for a promising fullback.
Yeah I do understand the way of thinking like this and hope United thought on similar lines but the club doesn't seem to be thinking like that. It is rather a decision I feel that is based on principle and long term planning.

They don't want to set bad precedent that they are buying players to fill gaps for couple of season and not fully committed to the cause and having a move on your mind while playing for us.

Also Madrid would have a leverage on us in this case and he can be used as a pawn in any future transfer negotiations.

But I do hope we thought of this like a stopgap and not let principles get involved because I feel he is a player we need as a backup or in games against teams sitting back.
 

Rajma

Full Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
5,662
Location
Vilnius
Seems like a pretty good deal for Spurs. I don’t really get this aversion to the buy-back. You are getting a player that can help you now, on a discount, and worst case you’ll sell him on a profit in a couple of years.
No, worst case is the player for 30M flops for you and you will struggle to shift it for a comparable sum. Best case is he plays well for two seasons and then you need a replacement again.
 

peridigm

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
9,234
As many have pointed out, the substance of this deal is essentially a loan, unless the player becomes a dud, in which case you can reclassify it as a purchase by Spurs. On top of that, the "loan" has cost them a big chunk of their transfer kitty in an already challenging Covid transfer window. Very surprised Spurs never haggled for an outright loan rather, and then opt to use that cash for their Kane back-up.
As opposed to the reality of which is the deal is a purchase by Spurs unless the player becomes world class and RM take him back?
 

krautrøck

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
616
Supports
FC Bayer 05 Uerdingen
No, worst case is the player for 30M flops for you and you will struggle to shift it for a comparable sum. Best case is he plays well for two seasons and then you need a replacement again.
No, best case is he plays well and the market changes so much that Real can't or don't want to pay the 40m anymore.
 

TheMod

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
254
Do you see how lopsided you view is on this? If he turns out to be awesome we have him for 2 years (still not quite sure of the detail in the buy back clause) , after that we get our money back plus interest to reinvest. If he is average to meh we still have played well below the market rate for a promising fullback.
How is it lopsided, so you are looking at a short term fix vs long term. United now are looking to invest for the long term since Ole came in. This goes against their transfer policy right now.

Reguilon is not world class and at least a couple of years away (if at all) from it and by that point Real would bring him back. It's not as if he comes straight into our team and is world class...many months will pass for him to adapt.

I would rather we go for a player who would be our left back for a long time without having the risk of Real having a chance to take the player back after we have developed him. Move on and look at alternatives.


So, having an injury prone and inconsistent Shaw at left back is better than "loaning" Reguilon for two years? We could've taken the deal, bought a good young left back as a long term option next summer and then when Reguilon leaves, we have someone ready to replace him.
Woah i didn't realise that Reguilon is the only left back in the world that we can buy.

The second sentence is just pure Utd fan fantasy land and not realistic.....who is this young left back that we would bring in? I mean we have Brandon Williams already but go ahead name this good young left back you want?

Why don't we buy this good young left back right now?

Also there are other areas of the team which need improvement moreso than LB. We need a CB & RW as more of a priority.
 

pratyush_utd

Full Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
1,611
Lock this thread.

They wanted to do buy back, we didn't want that. Quite rightly so. This would have been like 30m for a loan and then potentially have no money for other signing. We don't do that no matter what is the current status.

For LB we can promote youngsters if we need.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
29,758
Glad we didn’t get him if it’s buy back included. If he did well, Madrid would buy him back and sell him for a higher price regardless if they needed him in their team or not.
 

Machine Elements

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
180
This is a rubbish deal for Spurs. Embarrassing even.
If I remember correctly, Juventus bought Morata from Real Madrid after accepting a buy-back clause. And they made it to the Champions League final that season(14-15) with Morata’s semi final goals in both legs against Real Madrid. Was it embarrassing for them too?

Like our club, people here are too proud to admit we missed another player we seriously needed as the drop in quality between Shaw and Williams is massive. I’d be okay with this if I exactly know Shaw will be fit throughout the season as he’s a quality LB but there’s question marks over his fitness and we’ll probably be forced to play Williams in most of the season which is disastrous.

Also who knows what will happen in 2 years? There’s no guarantee Real will buy reguilon back having spent so much on Mendy and with the economic situations. People are too worried about “long term planning” to the point they don’t worry what will happen NOW which is absurd to say the least. This is a great deal for Spurs. 30 million for a quality LB and even if they lose him 2 years later they have the time to find replacements.
 

Panther

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
1,177
Woah i didn't realise that Reguilon is the only left back in the world that we can buy.

The second sentence is just pure Utd fan fantasy land and not realistic.....who is this young left back that we would bring in? I mean we have Brandon Williams already but go ahead name this good young left back you want?

Why don't we buy this good young left back right now?

Also there are other areas of the team which need improvement moreso than LB. We need a CB & RW as more of a priority.
Obviously not the only left back but obviously we were in pretty advanced negotiations with him and haven't been linked with anyone else aside from Telles (by the Sun and other rags). It's looking pretty unlikely that we will get anyone else.

As for the 2nd sentence, of course it's realistic. A left back could easily emerge in the next season or two like Reguilon in the past one, or Chilwell. Two years ago, a top team would have been unlikely to have considered either of them for their first team. Brandon Williams? he's not exactly amazing and he's also a right back who we've just been shifting to left back because of Shaw's injuries, he's not a viable option for left back in the long term.

I agree with the last sentence though, but I'd say CB & LB are equal in terms of priority. RW is very necessary, but we haven't signed one of those either.

This was a great opportunity to improve our squad and starting 11 but we just let it go, that's the most frustrating part. Spurs are stronger now as a result, a direct league rival.

This of course, all on the presumption that Madrid will actually want to buy Reguilon back, which isn't really an inevitability with Mendy in their team.
 

Panther

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
1,177
Lock this thread.

They wanted to do buy back, we didn't want that. Quite rightly so. This would have been like 30m for a loan and then potentially have no money for other signing. We don't do that no matter what is the current status.

For LB we can promote youngsters if we need.
Which youngsters do we have that can compete for a spot at left back?
 

HJ12

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2016
Messages
624
As opposed to the reality of which is the deal is a purchase by Spurs unless the player becomes world class and RM take him back?
Basically a purchase if he turns out to be average/bad, else a loan. You'd think @30m you're talking about someone better than average i.e. more likely to end up being a better player?
Then again, recent transfers have shown that's not always the case I suppose.
 

Highfather_24

Full Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
382
The only thing I will say regarding the lack of activity is that I’d rather we buy the right player rather than a player for the sake of it.

This happened under previous managers and we are left with so much deadwood, some of which we can’t shift still.
If we cant find any Left back in the world which can compete with Shaw and doesnt exceed our budget, the blame goes to the scouting department.

The issue is not whether we should have bought Reguillion or not. Most would agree not under that clause.

The issue is we are NOT going to buy a LB this summer when we need one, and it WILL cost us this season.
 

Mb194dc

Full Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
2,125
Supports
Chelsea
Seems like a pretty good deal for Spurs. I don’t really get this aversion to the buy-back. You are getting a player that can help you now, on a discount, and worst case you’ll sell him on a profit in a couple of years.
Don't want to be in the habit of being a feeder club... Imagine he's plays amazing for the next 2 years you then have to give him back to Madrid....

Would have liked him at Chelsea but can see this is not a road the club want to go down.
 

Offside

Euro 2016 sweepstake winner
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
18,695
Location
Yorkshire
The only thing I will say regarding the lack of activity is that I’d rather we buy the right player rather than a player for the sake of it.

This happened under previous managers and we are left with so much deadwood, some of which we can’t shift still.
I’d agree with this and said the same last Summer but then we were scrambling round at the end bidding for random players and trying to get people in on loan just for extra numbers. Same in Jan, same in Summer 2018. Will be the same this Summer.
 

Offside

Euro 2016 sweepstake winner
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
18,695
Location
Yorkshire
Seems like a pretty good deal for Spurs. I don’t really get this aversion to the buy-back. You are getting a player that can help you now, on a discount, and worst case you’ll sell him on a profit in a couple of years.
This is such short-sighted nonsense though. Imagine he had an amazing couple of seasons for us and we were talking about him as the best LB in the league, then at the age of 25 where he could have 7-8 more years and be part of a really successful spine for us Real Madrid just come back for him and we’re powerless? Don’t think you’d be happy then because we’d made a profit.
 

Reynoldo

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
4,168
Location
Dublin
No, best case is he plays well and the market changes so much that Real can't or don't want to pay the 40m anymore.
Yes exactly, it’s not as black and white as some are making out. He could turn out to be excellent for Spurs but it’s just that Real have found someone else who is wc in that position in that time and then they might not make the move.

(yes I realize they could still take him back just to sell)
 

Ishdalar

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
3,237
Location
Spain
Supports
Barcelona
Do you see how lopsided you view is on this? If he turns out to be awesome we have him for 2 years (still not quite sure of the detail in the buy back clause) , after that we get our money back
So, basically a loan, but you risk investing 30M on a player that maybe doesn't work for you, while with a loan the player goes back and you spent 0$

plus interest to reinvest.
0 interest, your "interest" is basically the salary you pay him, best case scenario you enjoy a good LB for 2 years and break even, now you need to look for another LB in 2022 when the market will probably be higher. There's a reason why "feeder" clubs go for these buyback options while big teams don't, and it's because when you sign the right player you want to keep him, if you want to push for titles you can't be looking for replacements every two years.

If he is average to meh we still have played well below the market rate for a promising fullback
If you're paying 30+5 you're not paying below market rate, Real sold Hakimi for 40M without buyback, both of them have 2 whole seasons at elite level but Hakimi is 2 years younger. Your deal is way worse than the one Inter got, if the transfers end up being bad, Inter will at least have a younger player (by the time your buyback ends, Hakimi will be the same age as Reguilon today) to try to get rid of, if the transfer goes good, Inter at looking at either keeping a world class full back or a big payday, not just recoup two years of salary.

And being almost 24 y/o you're not paying for "promising" either, you pay for what you saw at Sevilla, that's probably what you'll get, which is probably good enough to be top 20 in the world, you're not signing Alphonso Davies' potential, he's not going to turn into prime Marcelo or current Robertson in the next 2 years, and the kicker, even if he did, you'll lose him.

yes I would have liked a bigger fee back but you cant have it all.
Not all, but you can have it better, like Inter.

You just need to focus on one thing, Real Madrid don't really have a backup to Carvajal (28) since Odriozola's time is done with them yet they let go of one player they already had that could potentially challenge the spot without a buyback clause. Their backup to Mendy is Marcelo, who will leave in the next two years. So, tell me, do you think you got anything closer to a good deal when you just solved their LB situation for probably the next 8 years while you pay 30M on a tight market window for a 2 year patch?.
 

monosierra

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
201
No, worst case is the player for 30M flops for you and you will struggle to shift it for a comparable sum. Best case is he plays well for two seasons and then you need a replacement again.
Exactly. If he does come good, then Madrid will want him back - and the player most likely will want to go home. Then we'd have to start all over again, the work being all the harder if he had become intgeral to our team by then. The lingering cloud of whether he will leave may affect the team too.
 

InLevyITrust

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
9,233
Location
Northern Ireland
Supports
Tottenham
So, basically a loan, but you risk investing 30M on a player that maybe doesn't work for you, while with a loan the player goes back and you spent 0$



0 interest, your "interest" is basically the salary you pay him, best case scenario you enjoy a good LB for 2 years and break even, now you need to look for another LB in 2022 when the market will probably be higher. There's a reason why "feeder" clubs go for these buyback options while big teams don't, and it's because when you sign the right player you want to keep him, if you want to push for titles you can't be looking for replacements every two years.



If you're paying 30+5 you're not paying below market rate, Real sold Hakimi for 40M without buyback, both of them have 2 whole seasons at elite level but Hakimi is 2 years younger. Your deal is way worse than the one Inter got, if the transfers end up being bad, Inter will at least have a younger player (by the time your buyback ends, Hakimi will be the same age as Reguilon today) to try to get rid of, if the transfer goes good, Inter at looking at either keeping a world class full back or a big payday, not just recoup two years of salary.

And being almost 24 y/o you're not paying for "promising" either, you pay for what you saw at Sevilla, that's probably what you'll get, which is probably good enough to be top 20 in the world, you're not signing Alphonso Davies' potential, he's not going to turn into prime Marcelo or current Robertson in the next 2 years, and the kicker, even if he did, you'll lose him.



Not all, but you can have it better, like Inter.

You just need to focus on one thing, Real Madrid don't really have a backup to Carvajal (28) since Odriozola's time is done with them yet they let go of one player they already had that could potentially challenge the spot without a buyback clause. Their backup to Mendy is Marcelo, who will leave in the next two years. So, tell me, do you think you got anything closer to a good deal when you just solved their LB situation for probably the next 8 years while you pay 30M on a tight market window for a 2 year patch?.
There is always risk in a move and if this deal helps the Bale deal get over the line so what. He is young and just had a very promising breakthrough season, he would have to have an absolute mare for this deal to turn out wrong. I couldn't care less about RM tbh, they are an utter shithouse of a club.
 

harms

Shining Star of Paektu Mountain
Staff
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
21,009
Location
Moscow
It’s a shame, as he would’ve been a nice addition to the squad, but the decision not to accept the buy-back clause was the right one.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
2,912
Location
DKNY
Good deal for both Madrid and Spurs. Of course in the zero plus sum world of online debate, people will always want to point out winners or losers, but the fact is both teams did well. Tottenham didn't overpay and Madrid keeps an option on the player if he turns out to be world class.
 

Reynoldo

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
4,168
Location
Dublin
Good deal for both Madrid and Spurs. Of course in the zero plus sum world of online debate, people will always want to point out winners or losers, but the fact is both teams did well. Tottenham didn't overpay and Madrid keeps an option on the player if he turns out to be world class.
Yes and we were right not to go for it. All these things can be true and no need for the total meltdown, blame game and finger pointing going on.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
2,912
Location
DKNY
Yes and we were right not to go for it. All these things can be true and no need for the total meltdown, blame game and finger pointing going on.
Agree completely. But its just so difficult in this "tough guy on the internet" world. There can never not be a "winner" and a "loser" in such a deal.
 

Bastian

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
10,571
Can be applied to any team of the top 6 bar Chelsea, and to a certain extent to literally all football teams post-Covid to be honest.
Well, if your starting 11 has 6 world class players, it's a bit different. And City will end up solidifying their defense too. So it's really just ourselves, Spurs and Arsenal. If Arsenal get Aouar and Partey (unlikely I know) that would be an incredible window for them.

If we get who we weem to be getting you will be hard pushed to find a Spurs fan underwhelmed. Bale and Son can play striker, plus we may not be quite finished.
Yeah, he'll offer you plenty, not sure about the striker role though. I did predict this earlier in the summer, mind. I will no doubt dig out my post once it's completed and gloat over my Nostradamus efforts.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
5,588
If we cant find any Left back in the world which can compete with Shaw and doesnt exceed our budget, the blame goes to the scouting department.

The issue is not whether we should have bought Reguillion or not. Most would agree not under that clause.

The issue is we are NOT going to buy a LB this summer when we need one, and it WILL cost us this season.
Agree with this.

We need a backup option, the fans are not even calling for anything special, someone who is left footed and plays LB. The scouting is so poor at our club.

Regulion became an option after the Europa league, before that nothing mentioned, shows they just target whoever is in form at the time, which obviously makes the players price too high.

The board is so incompetent, I cannot believe how this can even be allowed to run.

We spent 2 weeks negotiating this deal, spurs come in within 2 days he will be a Spurs player.
 

Catt

Ole's at the wheel!
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
20,790
Location
Norway
Regulion became an option after the Europa league, before that nothing mentioned, shows they just target whoever is in form at the time, which obviously makes the players price too high.

We spent 2 weeks negotiating this deal, spurs come in within 2 days he will be a Spurs player.
The club were definitely targeting him?
 

Gandalf

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
876
There is no smoke without fire..

Alot of reputable journalists reported this, we were definitely in contact.
The bulk of those stories seemed to be clear that Real offered him to us rather than us going looking. Leaving aside the buy back clause it also seems that we never thought he was worth the 30m and were really only interested at a lower price. There may have been discussions but this does appear to be a classic example of United being used to pump up the price for someone else.
 

Vidyoyo

Self-confessed coffee shop chat-up expert
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
4,950
If that’s true I don’t see a problem either £30m is a lot of money, Jamal Lewis went for £15m and I’d have preferred him..
£30m is a lot when you're not trying to back the manager and doing things on the cheap.

(assuming Sancho isn't coming)
 

kkengvib

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
86
Location
Basel, Switzerland
I like him as a player but the deal wasn't right and it wasn't for a position that we desperately needed to upgrade. Plus it seems it is his dream to play for Real Madrid.
Not worth investing in developing a player in what is essentially a loan (if he does well).
Spurs are taking a risk but it's a position they needed to fill at the very least in the short term.

Not too disappointed. I just hope negotiations for Reguilon did not hinder our progress on other deals (namely Sancho)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.