Who are the current active players worth £100m/116.99€m or more?

[criticalanalysis]

I’d snap someone’s hand off if they offered us 100 million for Rashford.

On paper it makes sense but I wouldn't.

I still have hope he can find his form again and even now he's still a very useful player to have. He's the only one with genuine pace and ability to beat players in a standing still position, break behind defensive lines and can regularly push us up the field 10-40 yards on just his own. He's had a terrible 12 months no doubt but still, local lad, british etc and his previous goals + assists contributions shouldn't be overlooked. He's 'worth' more than that to us.

Besides, there's no instant replacement without it being a project or us having the right structure atm to supplement this player. The latter is something Rashford would benefit from anyways. On top of that, I wouldn't trust the board to spend it wisely anyways. The only way I'd sell Rashford if is we were definitely getting a Frenkie De Jong or pre injury Sane type and even then, we don't 'need' the money; there's far more trimming to be done if we really needed the funds to get the FDJs etc.

 

[Stacks]

On paper it makes sense but I wouldn't.

I still have hope he can find his form again and even now he's still a very useful player to have. He's the only one with genuine pace and ability to beat players in a standing still position, break behind defensive lines and can regularly push us up the field 10-40 yards on just his own. He's had a terrible 12 months no doubt but still, local lad, british etc and his previous goals + assists contributions shouldn't be overlooked. He's 'worth' more than that to us.

Besides, there's no instant replacement without it being a project or us having the right structure atm to supplement this player. The latter is something Rashford would benefit from anyways. On top of that, I wouldn't trust the board to spend it wisely anyways. The only way I'd sell Rashford if is we were definitely getting a Frenkie De Jong or pre injury Sane type and even then, we don't 'need' the money; there's far more trimming to be done if we really needed the funds to get the FDJs etc.

He's not though. 100million talents are winning you major trophies or helping you challenge for them. During the Rashford era we have been "try to get top 4" or Europa league contender. Hes not even a sure thing for England. At his best he is Sterling level but possibly lower. remember Hazard went for 100million and even prime Hazard that would be steep and Rashford does not have Hazard impact.
I agree with not trusting the board to spend but we have just signed Sancho, we have Martial, Amad, Greenwood. We could easily get by.

 

[Berbaclass]

Not enough mentioning Bellingham IMO

Insane talent.

 

[Tom Cato]

£100m players are gamebreakers who are ready today.

Mohamed Salah stands out. Joshua Kimmich potentially.

Pedri, Greenwood, Bellingham have an argument in 1-2 years time.

Haaland and Mbappe arent worth mentioning, they both would command 200m+ in a free bid market

 

[One Night Only]

Not enough mentioning Bellingham IMO

Insane talent.

He's worth £100mill just for his comments about the ref

 

[Lee565]

Outside of the already mentioned - possibly Ruben Dias, fabinho, Joao felix, alphonso davies and lauturo martinez.

It's dependent on the who the buying club is especially with the likes of united and Barca who have massively over paid for players over the past 5-8 years

 

[Jibbs]

On paper it makes sense but I wouldn't.

I still have hope he can find his form again and even now he's still a very useful player to have. He's the only one with genuine pace and ability to beat players in a standing still position, break behind defensive lines and can regularly push us up the field 10-40 yards on just his own. He's had a terrible 12 months no doubt but still, local lad, british etc and his previous goals + assists contributions shouldn't be overlooked. He's 'worth' more than that to us.

Besides, there's no instant replacement without it being a project or us having the right structure atm to supplement this player. The latter is something Rashford would benefit from anyways. On top of that, I wouldn't trust the board to spend it wisely anyways. The only way I'd sell Rashford if is we were definitely getting a Frenkie De Jong or pre injury Sane type and even then, we don't 'need' the money; there's far more trimming to be done if we really needed the funds to get the FDJs etc.

Rashford, Martial and Pogba all have hit their peak. It will be all downward from here

 

[Toad]

Maguire

 

[bosnian_red]

I'll do 100m player that is actually worth the price, not those that would cost that much but would be dumb transfers (like Griezmann to Barca). Pretty much rule out anyone 28+.

1. Mbappe
2. Haaland
3. Kimmich
4. De Jong
5. Pedri
6. TAA
7. Sancho
8. Chiesa

These have all shown a pretty much world class level already in their career, are all extremely young so have a full contract length of world class performances where the value doesn't go down, and have the potential to grow more and become among the very best in their position if they aren't already.

Others like Greenwood/Saka might cost that much to buy and might be worth it eventually, but haven't shown that level yet. Others like Salah/De Bruyne/Van Dijk are probably the best in the world in their position, but it's a dumb decision to spend 100m on a ~30 year old and you get declining value right away. Others like Bruno are IMO at peak value already and a decent age but not quite 100m players IMO.

 

[Ajr]

Phil jones

 

[gibers]

No idea. You are only worth what someone pays for you. Grealish is the only 100 mill player this season

 

[Hansinity]

Mbappe, Haaland, Kimmich, Davies, Pedri

 

[peridigm]

Who, in the current market, would you say is worth that kind of fee?

Do we have more than 10 players in the world in this bracket anymore?

Let’s take the easiest and most obvious two off the table in Mbappé and Haaland; who then pads out a top 5, 10, or more, in your opinion?

With the ages of: Neymar, C.Ronaldo, Messi, Lewandowski, De Bruyne and L. Suarez the ‘auto-fill’ on this question is no longer valid; does Kane even hit 9-figures anymore for you, also?

No on Kane and Messi. If Mbappe was under contract for a couple more seasons he would be but he’s going to Madrid most likely, for FREE. Maybe PSG will throw €100m at Liverpool for Salah.

Haaland for sure.

 

[Righteous Steps]

What has Pedri shown to be worth 100m? He’s hardly a Bellingham who’s been contributing goals assists and dominating performances for the best part of two years, even then I struggle to think of a central midfielder actually being worth 100m.

I would say the only 100m player would be Haaland, maybe Mbappe.

 

[bosnian_red]

What has Pedri shown to be worth 100m? He’s hardly a Bellingham who’s been contributing goals assists and dominating performances for the best part of two years, even then I struggle to think of a central midfielder actually being worth 100m.

I would say the only 100m player would be Haaland, maybe Mbappe.

Dominated the euros? He's the best u20 player in world football. Stop letting goals and assists cloud your judgment for a midfielder.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Dominated the euros? He's the best u20 player in world football. Stop letting goals and assists cloud your judgment for a midfielder.

He did well in the euros yes but hasn’t had a consistent season like Bellingham has, that’s the thing because you say don’t let goals and assists clouds your judgement for a midfielder, but Jude is also a midfielder who defends, does most things a good midfielder should do plus gets goals and assists.

I rate Pedri highly but I don’t think he’s a 100m player.

 

[bosnian_red]

He did well in the euros yes but hasn’t had a consistent season like Bellingham has, that’s the thing because you say don’t let goals and assists clouds your judgement for a midfielder, but Jude is also a midfielder who defends, does most things a good midfielder should do plus gets goals and assists.

I rate Pedri highly but I don’t think he’s a 100m player.

Pedri's level he showed at Barcelona last year wad already brilliant and he dominated the euros. He showed he's basically the heir to Xavi at Barca, which is why he's going to be rated as the best young player. Your argument is similar to when brits would argue that Gerrard and Lampard were better than Pirlo/Xavi because they scored more goals. Bellingham is class, but Pedri showed a level of potential and technical perfection as a controlling midfielder at such a young age that is unmatched.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Pedri's level he showed at Barcelona last year wad already brilliant and he dominated the euros. He showed he's basically the heir to Xavi at Barca, which is why he's going to be rated as the best young player. Your argument is similar to when brits would argue that Gerrard and Lampard were better than Pirlo/Xavi because they scored more goals. Bellingham is class, but Pedri showed a level of potential and technical perfection as a controlling midfielder at such a young age that is unmatched.

Who argued that Gerrard and Lampard were better than Xavi and Pirlo? Certainly they were in certain years but not overall, also a controlling midfielder doesn’t make him better than a combative box to box one just because Xavi was the best midfielder of the last 20 years, they’re are other midfielders of a different ilk like Lothar Motthaus who aren’t any lesser of a player, it’s just different styles and all.

Bellingham has shown a even higher level just more consistently over the course of a season rather than a tournament of 8 games, Bellingham has shown qualities that are rare in a teen also, how many teenage midfielders are assisting and scoring at his rate? While also tackling passing and providing tireless work rate? In fact these qualities are even more rare in a young ish midfielder than the ones you mention with Pedri.

 

[harms]

No argument: Mbappé, Haaland
Based on potential & ability probably already worth that much: Jude, Foden
Most likely: Neymar, Salah
There can be some argument: De Bruyne, Bruno
Unlikely candidates: Van Dijk, Frenkie, Kimmich, Kane, Grealish, Bernardo
Not yet but soon possibly will: Fati, Pedri, Greenwood, Vinicius, Sancho
Too old to be worth that:
Ronaldo, Messi, Suarez, Benzema… probably Lewandowski as well

Edit: Trent is a good shout but probably not yet. I’m contemplating including Davies as well.

 

[Champ]

I'm surprised to see Marquinhos mentionned here several times as he's one of the most underrated player in the world. Good job redcafers.



No way Gavi is worth £100m. It's debatable for Fati even if it could be possible but it would be ridiculous for Gavi. De Jong was 85M€ when Barcelona bought him and he was a FAR more accomplished player than the Barcelona youngsters, including Pedri (even if I think Pedri could be worth 80-100M€).

De jong cost 15€ less then a couple of stalwarts of European football??
How's he doing now by the way??!

 

[Champ]

No way Kante is worth that much

He has never been worth that much!!

 

[Oly Francis]

De jong cost 15€ less then a couple of stalwarts of European football??
How's he doing now by the way??!

De Jong has been good with Barcelona overall. Not helped by the coach or his teamates but he's definitely a player that most clubs in europe would need, including United or PSG. He seemed pretty deflated at the end of the Koeman era though.

 

[Lyricist]

Florian Wirtz might get there in a couple of years.
18 years of age, is already the focal point of most of the attacks of his team, has incredible playmaking ability and so far this season has 8 goals and 11 assists in 17 games in Bundesliga and Europa League...again, that as an 18 year old.

 

[Polar]

Fati
Haaland
Saleh
Kane
Mbappe
Neymar
(Foden)

 

[Focusmate]

Mbappe and Haaland are the 2 that jump out - But from a purely footballing view. Clubs are happy to spank the big bucks if the marketing is going to pay them back so older popular players go for more than their footballing worth
I personally dont think Kane is close to 100m at this stage turning 29 next year and showing signs of being on the downgrade. Spurs missed their chance to cash in

 

[Wolf1992]

Some not mentioned, but close

Kante
Marquinhos
Goretzka

Kante is a top player, but he is 30 now, and a defensive midfielder.
Defensive midfielders, as very important as they are, don't cost as much as strikers or attacking midfielders.

Plus i believe he is a late bloomer like Salah, so that might decrease his price a bit, which is why i think Salah(as inmense as he is) isn't worth 100 millions either, he is 30 too.

 

[Stacks]

I'll do 100m player that is actually worth the price, not those that would cost that much but would be dumb transfers (like Griezmann to Barca). Pretty much rule out anyone 28+.

1. Mbappe
2. Haaland
3. Kimmich
4. De Jong
5. Pedri
6. TAA
7. Sancho
8. Chiesa

These have all shown a pretty much world class level already in their career, are all extremely young so have a full contract length of world class performances where the value doesn't go down, and have the potential to grow more and become among the very best in their position if they aren't already.

Others like Greenwood/Saka might cost that much to buy and might be worth it eventually, but haven't shown that level yet. Others like Salah/De Bruyne/Van Dijk are probably the best in the world in their position, but it's a dumb decision to spend 100m on a ~30 year old and you get declining value right away. Others like Bruno are IMO at peak value already and a decent age but not quite 100m players IMO.

Many players on the list are not game breaking players and if you signed them you could just be like Barcelona. I have no idea how Sancho is on the list. So far the only player that has justified this kind of fee has been Cristiano (who was already a Balon D'or winner) and I dont see a Cristiano level talent on that list so this is fugazi

 

[criticalanalysis]

He's not though. 100million talents are winning you major trophies or helping you challenge for them. During the Rashford era we have been "try to get top 4" or Europa league contender. Hes not even a sure thing for England. At his best he is Sterling level but possibly lower. remember Hazard went for 100million and even prime Hazard that would be steep and Rashford does not have Hazard impact.
I agree with not trusting the board to spend but we have just signed Sancho, we have Martial, Amad, Greenwood. We could easily get by.

Rashford, Martial and Pogba all have hit their peak. It will be all downward from here

Based on what we've witnessed in these past 2-3 years I can't really disagree with your opinions but let's judge until the end of this season under Ralf.

Not as bothered about Martial/Pogba as they may have run their courses. Whilst I would love those two to suceed, I have a bit more faith in Rashford in returning to his form pre-shoulder injury.

 

[bosnian_red]

Many players on the list are not game breaking players and if you signed them you could just be like Barcelona. I have no idea how Sancho is on the list. So far the only player that has justified this kind of fee has been Cristiano (who was already a Balon D'or winner) and I dont see a Cristiano level talent on that list so this is fugazi

Taking account the current market. The only players where it makes sense to spend 100m is where you can get a full 5 year contract out of them, and then still resell them for pretty much the same value. They have to have shown basically a top class current level despite a young age, with elite potential to be game changers. All those players have shown that. You have no idea how Sancho is on the list? Mbappe is the only player who scored and assisted more goals in a big league than he has before his 20th birthday (and just 1 more, when Sancho's chance to pass that got cut short). Regularly over the past 3 years being up there with Messi in terms of chance creation. He's one of the biggest talents in world football, has been for years, and has played at basically a world class level for Dortmund for 3 years already.

I'm not sure what you're considering a 100m player. Does it have to be a Ballon d'or player and nothing else? Greatest of all time level? A 100m player, these days, is a player who is pretty much a world class player or has shown a top level with the clear potential to be a world class player - and someone who can sustain that level over a 5 year span and who you can project won't lose value in that time. That's who is worth 100m. Not a player who is 100m now but in 5 years is worth 50 or 0. Those are the elite u26 players in world football. You could probably put Foden in there as well, but I don't think he's there yet and hasn't shown as much as those on that list. Chiesa for me is probably the most arguable one, but he's in due to his great Euro's basically. I think the top 5 there isn't a single doubt that they are or should be the most valuable footballers in the world right now, because of a mixture of age and current level.

Also Barcelona issue is spending insane sums on players whose values plummeted and didn't give enough on the pitch. Griezmann an obvious bad signing due to his decline before joining and age making it obvious they could never recoup that value.

 

[Bepi]

Front value football, immediate return on investment, it is only Salah imho: fully in his prime, with two or three years more at the very top of his game.

 

[Red00012]

From our own side I’d say Bruno and Rashford would fetch north of £100m personally. Rashford is in poor form but his age and the quality he’s shown in the past would command it imo.

Greenwood not there yet but won’t be long.

From the England team I’d agree with Foden and also would expect Mount to be up there as well as Grealish (still). Trent is £100m player too imo.

Rashford £100 million

 

[Jam]

Its interesting because I said in the Rice thread that these 80+ 100+ £million players never justify or live up to their fee. I would argue only Ronaldo has justified it in recent years. The others either flopped or made no real meaningful improvement to their sides so with this in mind I would say no one. certainly not the ones mentioned in these lists. They would most likely be decided as flopped or "not justified" when purchased.

£80m for 450 goals and four Champion’s Leagues, he has absolutely been the best value “mega transfer” ever.

 

[M Bison]

Rashford £100 million

Personally i would value him at that for us, yes. I wouldn't sell him for any less, he's playing poorly at the moment I agree, but that hasnt always been the case and i'm confident he'll rediscover that form.

 

[paraguayo]

What has Fati done to be mentioned much more than Vinicius?

 

[Stacks]

Taking account the current market. The only players where it makes sense to spend 100m is where you can get a full 5 year contract out of them, and then still resell them for pretty much the same value. They have to have shown basically a top class current level despite a young age, with elite potential to be game changers. All those players have shown that. You have no idea how Sancho is on the list? Mbappe is the only player who scored and assisted more goals in a big league than he has before his 20th birthday (and just 1 more, when Sancho's chance to pass that got cut short). Regularly over the past 3 years being up there with Messi in terms of chance creation. He's one of the biggest talents in world football, has been for years, and has played at basically a world class level for Dortmund for 3 years already.

I'm not sure what you're considering a 100m player. Does it have to be a Ballon d'or player and nothing else? Greatest of all time level? A 100m player, these days, is a player who is pretty much a world class player or has shown a top level with the clear potential to be a world class player - and someone who can sustain that level over a 5 year span and who you can project won't lose value in that time. That's who is worth 100m. Not a player who is 100m now but in 5 years is worth 50 or 0. Those are the elite u26 players in world football. You could probably put Foden in there as well, but I don't think he's there yet and hasn't shown as much as those on that list. Chiesa for me is probably the most arguable one, but he's in due to his great Euro's basically. I think the top 5 there isn't a single doubt that they are or should be the most valuable footballers in the world right now, because of a mixture of age and current level.

Also Barcelona issue is spending insane sums on players whose values plummeted and didn't give enough on the pitch. Griezmann an obvious bad signing due to his decline before joining and age making it obvious they could never recoup that value.

That doesn't justify 100million. Dembele cost 100m as did Joao Felix and I don't feel it is being justified. For me they already have to be the best in the world and currently world class ala Cristiano when he signed. They have to be a guarantee and also the players who WIN you matches i.e. attacking players. Don't think any midfielder is worth 100m in todays market or a FB. Gotta be strikers, wide forwards. As I said, only Cristiano has justified an 80 million fee so far so use that as a benchmark. The rest have disappointed.

we just bought Sancho for 74mill so no idea why he is suddenly now worth over 100m when he has barely done anything

 

[AjaxCunian]

What has Fati done to be mentioned much more than Vinicius?

Think until recently scoring at a much higher rate, at a younger age, in a worser team.

His mins per goal/assist is very good for such a young player.

Vinicius is finally showing his greatness.

 

[Fortitude]

That doesn't justify 100million. Dembele cost 100m as did Joao Felix and I don't feel it is being justified. For me they already have to be the best in the world and currently world class ala Cristiano when he signed. They have to be a guarantee and also the players who WIN you matches i.e. attacking players. Don't think any midfielder is worth 100m in todays market or a FB. Gotta be strikers, wide forwards. As I said, only Cristiano has justified an 80 million fee so far so use that as a benchmark. The rest have disappointed.

we just bought Sancho for 74mill so no idea why he is suddenly now worth over 100m when he has barely done anything

But isn't that more down to the quality of them than the position on the pitch? Prime Xavi, Keane, Zidane, Robson, Vieira etc. are all going for over £100m in this market, don't you think? Same goes for a Cafu, Roberto Carlos, Maldini, Dani Alves and so on.

With assurances of peak productivity over a prolonged period of time, I don't think any position on the pitch, even keeper, is worth less than £100m - prime Buffon, Kahn, Neuer, Schmeichel etc. are all going to break that barrier, even if some of them aren't great with their feet.

 

[AjaxCunian]

That doesn't justify 100million. Dembele cost 100m as did Joao Felix and I don't feel it is being justified. For me they already have to be the best in the world and currently world class ala Cristiano when he signed. They have to be a guarantee and also the players who WIN you matches i.e. attacking players. Don't think any midfielder is worth 100m in todays market or a FB. Gotta be strikers, wide forwards. As I said, only Cristiano has justified an 80 million fee so far so use that as a benchmark. The rest have disappointed.

we just bought Sancho for 74mill so no idea why he is suddenly now worth over 100m when he has barely done anything

I think contract length and personal relationship take much in these situations. Dortmund had to really sell after asking a high fee for Sancho and being difficult for years.

That 74 million felt like a great deal this summer especially when considering what other players of his class went for.

 

[do.ob]

That doesn't justify 100million. Dembele cost 100m as did Joao Felix and I don't feel it is being justified. For me they already have to be the best in the world and currently world class ala Cristiano when he signed. They have to be a guarantee and also the players who WIN you matches i.e. attacking players. Don't think any midfielder is worth 100m in todays market or a FB. Gotta be strikers, wide forwards. As I said, only Cristiano has justified an 80 million fee so far so use that as a benchmark. The rest have disappointed.

we just bought Sancho for 74mill so no idea why he is suddenly now worth over 100m when he has barely done anything

And how often are those players on the market for a remotely affordable fee? When you answer that question you also know, why clubs spend triple figures for the most promising talents.

 

[harms]

What has Fati done to be mentioned much more than Vinicius?

Vinicius showed less promise prior to this season, the answer is simple. He had finally stepped up now though & Fati is having issues with his post-injury form so the tables might have been turned on this one.