I'm fine with Manchester United not buying a player that has to come with a buy-back clause. If Spurs are happy with that kind of deal good for them.
Sergio Reguilón
- Thread starter Skills
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
- Status
Late to see this but hasn't Romano said for weeks now that that reported bid was an offer via intermediaries and that Dortmund won't sell unless the price is met. Also, we have closed in on Sancho. He's ours if we pay the price...?
Nothing wrong with a buyback or loan. Esp if it solves a temporary problem like backup for Shaw. Can also structure a 30m payment to make it feel more like a loan.
Yall need to wake up. Being a "big club" means nothing. All these hypothetical arguments are BS.
The fact is, Bayern Munich won the treble with loan players like Peresic and Coutinho.
We need immediate results and reguilon could provide that.
Yall need to wake up. Being a "big club" means nothing. All these hypothetical arguments are BS.
The fact is, Bayern Munich won the treble with loan players like Peresic and Coutinho.
We need immediate results and reguilon could provide that.
Hasn’t this been the case since the start of the window?
We're not close enough to challenging for the title to do that. We're not in a Juventus or Bayern situation. They win their leagues every season. It's easy to just slot in a loan player or a player with a buy-back clause.
Exactly. But apparently Romano and the other journalists are frauds.
He literally broke Smalling to Roma. And other stories also. As have other journalists like Ornstein did with Reguillon to Spurs. Reliable transfer journalists don't always have exclusives. You just know with people like Romano, Ornstein, Boufhasi, Falk, etc. that they're actually getting info from sources and they're not Miguel Delaney/indykalia or that Sirachia(I don't remember his name).
Why is this thread still open?
Waiting on the signature I presume, hearing that's its all done and they are doing the photos and tour etc.
No. Completely wrong. 100% the right stance to take.
Your argument would be perfectly valid if we bought a young fullback instead with the intent of building for the future. Your argument would also be perfectly valid if we already had a team to safely finish within the top-four, or better still, compete for the title. Unfortunately, none of that seems to be happening at the moment.
A buy-back clause is bad but it is no guarantee that the player will definitely go back. A long-term injury to the injury-prone Shaw could see our PL campaign go for a toss. Not just Shaw, there are so many other players we cannot afford to lose through injuries - the squad is so thin. While I agree with the sentiment of not buying a player to later hand over to Madrid, we are also desperate for short-term fixes, as it is pretty clear that we aren't spending on world-class talents anytime soon.
I don't see an issue of buy back clause or developing player for other club. If the player can help you this season and u can afford the salary then do it. Arsenal has been loaning cellabos for 2 season paying loan fee and wages and I am fine with it. Achraf couldn't go back, neither will cellabos or Reguilon as long as Zidane is the manager. I wonder how many minutes Odegaard will play this season.
You answer yourself, Perisic and Coutinho were good deals because they were loans, you use them for the season you need them, and they're gone, doesn't matter if they're great or awful.
Getting a player for his full market value with a buyback it's the opposite. You spend 30M on a player for his performances and the chance to choose keeping him or milking a lot of money from him, a buyback clause basically means that if the player is a bust you have to keep him, and if he's good you're going to lose him.
Imagine Bayern paying 120M for Coutinho and Barcelona having a 140M buyback in the next two years? It's a terrible deal because they wouldn't end up being winners on either escenario.
Agreed. Plus lots of players move with "buy back" clauses. But they don't go if the selling club don't want to sell! You could say almost any player joining any club might leave at some time in the future.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
2 years. #AdiosReguilon.
Close thread
Close thread
Need some vinegar?
Because you signed Reguilon? This is a transfer thread. He's joined Spurs. This thread closes, that how it works.
You made a quip abiout the buy back clause, if he is bought back it means hes been a success.
Well yeah, so? I'd hate to sign a player who had a buy back clause. Be constantly waiting for Real to activate the buy back, and if they don't it's because he isn't good enough for a top team. Which, in itself, would be annoying as a Spurs fan.
Fantastic business for a smaller scale club like Spurs.
Very excited about this kid
Why isn't this thread closed already?
Official announcement already made.
Official announcement already made.
The same reason I wasn’t keen on the Haaland deal (release clause) or this deal (buy back) is because if they are as fantastic as we would want them to be other clubs (Haaland) or the selling club (Reguillon) can have a free run at your players and as a club you can’t do anything about it.
Guess this season I'll support Tottenham on the Premier League. 
This @Damien
- Status