Transfer Tweets - 2020/21 | Check the OP for blacklisted sources before posting

Status
Not open for further replies.

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,831
Thing would adapt to it's over time.

In this example, with Ajax is guaranteed more money via regular CL football and more chance to stay longer in the competition! They're supposed to use that money to pay their players better.

Long contract has been waste of resource in current system where as some teams just hoarding incompatible talents because they have money and useless FFP can't do nothing about it. Some teams have been using their money not only to strengthen themselves but weakening their rivals, which is more damaging to the playing field than anything.

With this ban, everyone would have to think twice about committing to long contract for the sake of the club and the player. Clubs would lose money loaning their surplus, while talented players need to be smarter not to jump into talent grinding pit, just for quick bucks.
It won't. Apart from top 5 leagues, other leagues won't get much TV Money for their domestic leagues. For example, Barca and Juventus pair around 300-400k for De Jong and De ligt. They won't get anywhere near that Money in Dutch league.

Also it's a very poor rule, for example with this rule players like Ronaldo wouldn't have moved to ManUtd if clubs like Sporting made CL and also many of the clubs actually rely on transfer money. So running out contract is not the way to go for them. They put all the hard work and then let player leave for free, then big clubs with huge revenue will pick them for free. How will that help smaller clubs?
 

ReallyUSA

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2015
Messages
2,990
The idea that we can somehow get David a new home, and move Henderson on to a club is so out of the realm of possibility for the board, it's almost insulting by Sky to spread that around.
 

ti vu

Full Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
12,799
It won't. Apart from top 5 leagues, other leagues won't get much TV Money for their domestic leagues. For example, Barca and Juventus pair around 300-400k for De Jong and De ligt. They won't get anywhere near that Money in Dutch league.

Also it's a very poor rule, for example with this rule players like Ronaldo wouldn't have moved to ManUtd if clubs like Sporting made CL and also many of the clubs actually rely on transfer money. So running out contract is not the way to go for them. They put all the hard work and then let player leave for free, then big clubs with huge revenue will pick them for free. How will that help smaller clubs?
The player wage and value has become unsustainably inflated. For some player worth, it would be more expensive than some club takeover operation. This has part due to the money from states pouring into football. A normal football clubs would eventually reach it limit, leaving states backed plastic clubs to lead, and bankrupt everyone else.

What we're seeing is a reset, not a continuity of what had been. This would normalize the money in football.

The CL teams main income is from the CL football money which is plenty for smaller league. As we saw, even PL clubs would be tempted to tap into CL football money despite getting paid well for PL TV deal. Losing top 4 spot, and they are tempted to invest to get back in it.

Players sale is a bad business for football clubs. With the out of control inflation we have seen, a big profitable sale today may become nothing money few years down the roads for lower quality players. How about extracting more of the players at his current clubs while getting that guaranteed CL money for what his contract worth? A player leaving for free after he fulfills his contract at a CL club would create a much stable income. The club value appreciated overtime, and less affected undervalued sale, and inflated overpriced reinvestment!

And don't be mistaken that there is no way a CL clubs can't sell their players. Since CL clubs can't buy directly, it changes the market. Big clubs can't hoard players and run loan centers. They're forced into sell with buy back/sell on clause to a third party non CL clubs. They still get money from players sale, but this empowering small non CL clubs. Youngsters are getting more chance to experience real football than stuck in reserve football and corrupted loan systems. The parent clubs get protected from losing the treasure of players at their clubs.

Remember that even big clubs take in debt as part of operation to pay transfer and wage. It's all based on projection. They can do so due to the fact, they're more likely guaranteed CL football. Without that guarantee, the fallen of big clubs wouldn't be able to pay that much, let alone clubs from smaller leagues. The more guarantee they get, the more they would be ready to gamble and pay. It's common sense, even for big league and big clubs. So you need to look from perspective of when it gets applied, not on the inflated wage, and transfer fee of yesterday.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,831
The player wage and value has become unsustainably inflated. For some player worth, it would be more expensive than some club takeover operation. This has part due to the money from states pouring into football. A normal football clubs would eventually reach it limit, leaving states backed plastic clubs to lead, and bankrupt everyone else.

What we're seeing is a reset, not a continuity of what had been. This would normalize the money in football.

The CL teams main income is from the CL football money which is plenty for smaller league. As we saw, even PL clubs would be tempted to tap into CL football money despite getting paid well for PL TV deal. Losing top 4 spot, and they are tempted to invest to get back in it.

Players sale is a bad business for football clubs. With the out of control inflation we have seen, a big profitable sale today may become nothing money few years down the roads for lower quality players. How about extracting more of the players at his current clubs while getting that guaranteed CL money for what his contract worth? A player leaving for free after he fulfills his contract at a CL club would create a much stable income. The club value appreciated overtime, and less affected undervalued sale, and inflated overpriced reinvestment!

And don't be mistaken that there is no way a CL clubs can't sell their players. Since CL clubs can't buy directly, it changes the market. Big clubs can't hoard players and run loan centers. They're forced into sell with buy back/sell on clause to a third party non CL clubs. They still get money from players sale, but this empowering small non CL clubs. Youngsters are getting more chance to experience real football than stuck in reserve football and corrupted loan systems. The parent clubs get protected from losing the treasure of players at their clubs.

Remember that even big clubs take in debt as part of operation to pay transfer and wage. It's all based on projection. They can do so due to the fact, they're more likely guaranteed CL football. Without that guarantee, the fallen of big clubs wouldn't be able to pay that much, let alone clubs from smaller leagues. The more guarantee they get, the more they would be ready to gamble and pay. It's common sense, even for big league and big clubs. So you need to look from perspective of when it gets applied, not on the inflated wage, and transfer fee of yesterday.
Players are the key component in the football club, so yes they should get as much as they are getting and yes that's why they are worth so much too.

CL football money is not enough to pay good wages, that's why players move to clubs where they are paid good enough for their talent, performance levels. Now with this rule, you are either restricting what players can earn because of club's financial issues, or you are making club to take a financial risk stretching wages way beyond their level or lose player for nothing after putting all the hard work.

Non CL clubs won't pay good money to sign players. CL clubs doesn't means just 4-5 clubs which signs many players. So if Ajax can't retain De Jong and De Ligt as they are too good for their league, instead of getting 70 million for them, they will get nothing as they have to run down their contract or have to sell them to non CL clubs who don't pay much and then players of that level will be playing in Non CL clubs. That's awful from players point of view.

If CL money alone is enough then Ajax wouldn't have problem paying all the mega wages for their talented players, same with Benfica, Porto for their players. Benfica and Porto are CL regulars for a decade, how much stable they are without selling players? Only PL clubs have it all good because of insane TV deals and then it's good with Bundeslgia and La Liga. Rest all leagues don't get much money except the top clubs in their league.

Then the sponsorship money, how much commercial income will these clubs get? It's not enough to pay insane wages.

Relegated teams in PL earn more from TV deal in than these CL regular teams (or nearly as much).

This rule is just awful for players, UEFA have made so many awful decisions and this will top them all. No player should be restricted to earn only so much because of some dumb rule. Maybe this will have larger impact on this selling CL clubs as players don't want to move to these clubs as it will block their path to biggest clubs.
 
Last edited:

ti vu

Full Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
12,799
Players are the key component in the football club, so yes they should get as much as they are getting and yes that's why they are worth so much too.

CL football money is not enough to pay good wages, that's why players move to clubs where they are paid good enough for their talent, performance levels. Now with this rule, you are either restricting what players can earn because of club's financial issues, or you are making club to take a financial risk stretching wages way beyond their level or lose player for nothing after putting all the hard work.

Non CL clubs won't pay good money to sign players. CL clubs doesn't means just 4-5 clubs which signs many players. So if Ajax can't retain De Jong and De Ligt as they are too good for their league, instead of getting 70 million for them, they will get nothing as they have to run down their contract or have to sell them to non CL clubs who don't pay much and then players of that level will be playing in Non CL clubs. That's awful from players point of view.

If CL money alone is enough then Ajax wouldn't have problem paying all the mega wages for their talented players, same with Benfica, Porto for their players.

This rule is just awful for players, UEFA have made so many awful decisions and this will top them all.
Under healthy normal circumstances, what pays player wage is the potential income and the source is consumers. The boasted revenue often going straight into fee and wage payment. That's why we have been seeing best earning clubs, making very little profit, even going under. Some clubs take less risk in wage and fee game but more often than not end in up with lowering ambition. What became broken is the money for state pumped into the football, which is outside a normal system. You're mistaken if you think this is UEFA original idea. It has Super League/ the clubs bosses fingerprint all over it. Yes, we had already arrived where the inflation is out of control in football. Every big clubs have freaked out, hence they're siding to push for this reform. UEFA couldn't care less in this current broken system. What they feared is exodus of big clubs who already foresee their bleak future.

Once you fix the system via these reform, thing would normalize. The worth of player would normalize over time in this reformed CL. The consumers interest in teams and players increase with the guaranteed for historic high performers, more big match match up that wouldn't result early elimination; the CL clubs in question increase their potential income, lowering the risk of going under thus allowing them to pay more in wage.

A non CL club doesn't need to pay much up front really to start when they're acting as hub for transfer/ developing ground for CL clubs. CL clubs can sell their raw talents, for reasonable, even peanuts with big sell on clause for when the players move to another clubs. There is only few months between summer to winter window. If they're want to deal, they can always do it using a trustworthy middle man club.

What is unfair is players can't go a long way with their boyhood clubs, or their dream clubs go down under and their only choice left is joining plastic club for high wage. As thing happening, with the Ac Milan, Barcelona of this world struggling financially now, next could very be Real Madrid Juventus, Liverpool... and us.

Many young players not exactly outgrow the league or the team they're in. They're sold because there are clubs driven by the unhealthy competition, just throw money at the parent club. The parent club lack the platform to grow, so they don't have ambition to keep the players. Players maybe immature for their new clubs, and stunt their development. A great prospect may end up with bad career. In the long run, they're not making as much money as player who enjoy a good career, despite a more humble pay.

A league profile would improve as their teams doing well in Europe, especially CL. You're still basing your view on the future system on yesteryear facts. If the league grow to become a big league, then how can a player outgrow it? For example, Just like how Serie A used to be the pinnacle of football while English football was nothing in comparison. We have top players in England want to come to Italy, while English clubs most of the time only attract out of favor, difficult players from Italy. When English football grow to become a top league, you don't see that trend any more. Serie A despite the drop of quality, their native players most of the time opt to stay in his countries as it's still a bigger league. Spreading the ambition, let other league grow, it it takes care of the problem itself.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,831
Under healthy normal circumstances, what pays player wage is the potential income and the source is consumers. The boasted revenue often going straight into fee and wage payment. That's why we have been seeing best earning clubs, making very little profit, even going under. Some clubs take less risk in wage and fee game but more often than not end in up with lowering ambition. What became broken is the money for state pumped into the football, which is outside a normal system. You're mistaken if you think this is UEFA original idea. It has Super League/ the clubs bosses fingerprint all over it. Yes, we had already arrived where the inflation is out of control in football. Every big clubs have freaked out, hence they're siding to push for this reform. UEFA couldn't care less in this current broken system. What they feared is exodus of big clubs who already foresee their bleak future.

Once you fix the system via these reform, thing would normalize. The worth of player would normalize over time in this reformed CL. The consumers interest in teams and players increase with the guaranteed for historic high performers, more big match match up that wouldn't result early elimination; the CL clubs in question increase their potential income, lowering the risk of going under thus allowing them to pay more in wage.

A non CL club doesn't need to pay much up front really to start when they're acting as hub for transfer/ developing ground for CL clubs. CL clubs can sell their raw talents, for reasonable, even peanuts with big sell on clause for when the players move to another clubs. There is only few months between summer to winter window. If they're want to deal, they can always do it using a trustworthy middle man club.

What is unfair is players can't go a long way with their boyhood clubs, or their dream clubs go down under and their only choice left is joining plastic club for high wage. As thing happening, with the Ac Milan, Barcelona of this world struggling financially now, next could very be Real Madrid Juventus, Liverpool... and us.

Many young players not exactly outgrow the league or the team they're in. They're sold because there are clubs driven by the unhealthy competition, just throw money at the parent club. The parent club lack the platform to grow, so they don't have ambition to keep the players. Players maybe immature for their new clubs, and stunt their development. A great prospect may end up with bad career. In the long run, they're not making as much money as player who enjoy a good career, despite a more humble pay.

A league profile would improve as their teams doing well in Europe, especially CL. You're still basing your view on the future system on yesteryear facts. If the league grow to become a big league, then how can a player outgrow it? For example, Just like how Serie A used to be the pinnacle of football while English football was nothing in comparison. We have top players in England want to come to Italy, while English clubs most of the time only attract out of favor, difficult players from Italy. When English football grow to become a top league, you don't see that trend any more. Serie A despite the drop of quality, their native players most of the time opt to stay in his countries as it's still a bigger league. Spreading the ambition, let other league grow, it it takes care of the problem itself.
You are basing your views on fantasy land where every league will grow and clubs will make more money to pay good wages. There are regular CL clubs who still can't pay good wages and there is no way they will pay wages to rival the biggest clubs.

Anyways I made my points. Neither of us are going to agree with each other on this topic. We have 2 completely different views on this rule change. IMO it's a dumb idea.
 

gajender

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2016
Messages
3,976
You are basing your views on fantasy land where every league will grow and clubs will make more money to pay good wages. There are regular CL clubs who still can't pay good wages and there is no way they will pay wages to rival the biggest clubs.
As the saying goes road to hell is paved with good intentions , here even the intention seem to be dubious at best.
 

roonster09

Hercule Poirot of the scouting world
Scout
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
36,831
As the saying goes road to hell is paved with good intentions , here even the intention seem to be dubious at best.
Exactly. What is the fecking point of transfer window if there is a restriction on from which club you can buy and to which club you can sell. It's like some Suits wants to control the whole transfers.

Imagine 2 players (for example player 1 playing for Porto and player 2 playing for Braga) both wants to leave as they are good enough to play for top teams. Porto can sell to clubs at lower end of the food chain who aren't loaded with money which means they will end up with less money, whereas Braga can sell the player to anyone with clubs paying big money.

In this case, only mistake Porto did was to do well in previous season to qualify for CL.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
120,561
Location
Dublin, Ireland
It’s the dumbest proposal in years

imagine this scenario

CL club X have a top player who has fallen out with the club and isn’t playing. Player wants out. Doesn’t want to go to NonCL club.

Madrid want him. Player wants to go. They can’t sign him because of the rule. He’s got 4 years left on his contract so he can’t wait it out and join them soon. Player calls it “slavery” just like FIFA president Sepp Blatter did with Ronaldo.

unless there is a way around this scenario it’s not happening, it would be open to legal challenges
 

Wednesday at Stoke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
21,765
Location
Copenhagen
Supports
Time Travel
Imagine Sancho, Bellingham and Halland having to spend the rest of their careers with Dortmund. Their entire business model would fail if players realize they cannot use them as a stepping stone.
 

Steve Bruce

Full Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
1,376
It’s the dumbest proposal in years

imagine this scenario

CL club X have a top player who has fallen out with the club and isn’t playing. Player wants out. Doesn’t want to go to NonCL club.

Madrid want him. Player wants to go. They can’t sign him because of the rule. He’s got 4 years left on his contract so he can’t wait it out and join them soon. Player calls it “slavery” just like FIFA president Sepp Blatter did with Ronaldo.

unless there is a way around this scenario it’s not happening, it would be open to legal challenges
The way round it would be go to a non CL team in August then sign for the CL team in January.

Big clubs will buy small feeder clubs to play out this scenario
 

Wednesday at Stoke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
21,765
Location
Copenhagen
Supports
Time Travel
The way round it would be go to a non CL team in August then sign for the CL team in January.

Big clubs will buy small feeder clubs to play out this scenario
I don't think they even have to wait until January, if I remember correctly, the FIFA restriction is that a player cannot play for more than 3 clubs in a year. So technically a player can go from Juventus -> Salford -> Manchester United in a minute.
 

Rozay

Master of Hindsight
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
27,309
Location
...
Again, seems that the ‘above 100m’ part of the proposal is being wilfully ignored. I’m seeing mentions of De Ligt and De Jong and other players who went for less than 100m as examples as to why this proposal will not work.

I had a skim through the proposals and ‘no triple-figure transfers’ was mentioned. Tbh, I don’t agree with that anyway, but only 6 players have gone for more than 100m anyway.
 

RUCK4444

New Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,553
Location
$¥$¥$¥$¥$
Again, seems that the ‘above 100m’ part of the proposal is being wilfully ignored. I’m seeing mentions of De Ligt and De Jong and other players who went for less than 100m as examples as to why this proposal will not work.

I had a skim through the proposals and ‘no triple-figure transfers’ was mentioned. Tbh, I don’t agree with that anyway, but only 6 players have gone for more than 100m anyway.
Yeah that puts a total different spin on it. Especially considering the lasting financial effects of Covid.
 

Robertd0803

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
6,648
That’s how the media works. People need to stop being so invested and desperate to uncover liars and charlatans. He reports on football, this is a football story and he’s reported it.
He was already uncovered last summer by many others before me.
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada

Also, the players who are currently loaned into West Brom will return to their parent clubs. They are:
  • Conor Gallagher (Chelsea)
  • Ainsley Maitland-Niles (Arsenal)
  • Okay Yokuslu (Celta Vigo)
  • Mbaye Diagne (Galatasaray)
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Time for more rehashed stories and BS courtesy of SportBILD:

This is why you look for stories attributed to journalists.
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Kylian Mbappé's future is up in the air according to Cadena SER:

Originating Tweet:

Basically, PSG handed Mbappé three different contract offers, and Mbappé's rejected all of them.
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
They're begging for our money now, see it you love to.
As much as Dortmund are willing to sell him, that particular story suggests that United would be interested in spending 120 million Euros to get him. For whatever reason, they decided to bring that number back despite Watzke stating that they didn't necessarily hold on for that amount.
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
More on de Bruyne's contract situation:

Source: Het Belang van Limburg

De Bruyne is using his father and their lawyers to help him out in the negotiations.
 
Last edited:

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Ole confirms that United have yet to meet up with Cavani for talks.

This also suggests that Cavani's family may be acting in their own interests.
 

AgentSmith

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2019
Messages
1,557
Ole confirms that United have yet to meet up with Cavani for talks.

This also suggests that Cavani's family may be acting in their own interests.
That’s pretty funny from Ole.

You’re doing a tremendous job @mazhar13, this thread used to be one of the biggest cat fishes going in terms of notifications but basically everything in here is either relevant or interesting and definitely well-researched either way.

Props to you!
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Liverpool signing Mbappe :lol: it was fairytale stuff when they were good.
Honestly, those are just suggestions from journalists. There's nothing in the Liverpool links at all. The only thing that's a concern is Mbappé having yet to renew his contract and also not being keen on a new deal at this moment. This becomes even more apparent when Pochettino talks about him. He overtly praises Mbappé and always talks about "hoping" for Mbappé to remain in Paris.
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
You’re doing a tremendous job @mazhar13, this thread used to be one of the biggest cat fishes going in terms of notifications but basically everything in here is either relevant or interesting and definitely well-researched either way.

Props to you!
Thanks! I'm glad that this thread is serving as a hub for many people to keep themselves up to date. Just wait until the summer, though...That's when things get real fun, especially with the notifications.
 

SAFMUTD

New Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
11,787

Also, the players who are currently loaned into West Brom will return to their parent clubs. They are:
  • Conor Gallagher (Chelsea)
  • Ainsley Maitland-Niles (Arsenal)
  • Okay Yokuslu (Celta Vigo)
  • Mbaye Diagne (Galatasaray)
Can't think of a single players that I would take from West Brom, they've been so awful that I don't think many players from their squad will find PL teams interested in them.
 

mazhar13

Kermit Inc. 2022
Scout
Joined
Sep 10, 2013
Messages
37,090
Location
Toronto, ON, Canada
Can't think of a single players that I would take from West Brom, they've been so awful that I don't think many players from their squad will find PL teams interested in them.
When I took a look at the players who'll become free agents, not a single player looked like they'd get an offer from a Premier League club. At best, they'll probably get an offer from a newly-promoted club, but if they scout well enough, they can get better-quality players than most of the players in the list.
 

SAFMUTD

New Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
11,787
When I took a look at the players who'll become free agents, not a single player looked like they'd get an offer from a Premier League club. At best, they'll probably get an offer from a newly-promoted club, but if they scout well enough, they can get better-quality players than most of the players in the list.
It seems that way, usually relegation teams, even when awful, have one or two stand out players. That doesnt seem to be the case with Westbrom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.