Summer Transfer Window - 2016

jive

Jayop wrote: »

What an absolute load of nonsense tbf. We bought four players this summer and only two of them fall into the big name category. OK Mkhitaryan is technically a name with lots of letters in it but you know what I mean.

Instead of comparing the signing of Pogba who's already a global name so naturally going to be a big deal, with Stones, compare the signing of Eric Bailly to Stones who's clearly the most equatable signing we've made. Both were no nonsense transfers.


FFS, look at the song and dance City made when Pep signed with them. Noel Gallagher interviewing him ffs. The reason City haven't had a big reveal or marketing campaign this summer is because they've bought no-one who it would work with. The last time they had a big transfer coup they had Welcome to Manchester Posters up and ran the whole twitter crap.

We'll have to agree to disagree. You're last paragraph is nonsense though, they've bought some top young players (clearly with long-term footballing reasons in mind) just not POGBOOM POGBACK extraordinaire.

The Talking Bread

Jayop wrote: »

He's not going to a big club though, he's going to Everton. They only finished 4 places and 5 points above Palace last year.

Koeman is a shrewd manager and I think what he sees in Bolasie is someone who as the pace to break the line, get to the by-line and pull the ball back into the oncoming attack. Easy goals doing that, it won United most of our PL titles.

how many assists for "easy goals" did he get last season doing that? I like Bolaisie but based on last couple of seasons (which have arguably been his best) and even in this inflated transfer market, the price is about 10 million over what it should be and that is being marginally generous. That is an extra ten million to put towards another squad forward.

He will definitely provide an impact, will help Everton with their often stiff centre of the park issues, changing defence to attack and a run of confidence may allow him to have a big impact but this is all speculative and you have to take into account his past performance and £30 million (which tbh I am convinced may the wrong actual price and its actually 22 million or so) is not justified for him.

deaddonkey15

jive wrote: »

Haven't seen him linked with anyone but Mata is definitely a goner I am guessing. Be interesting to see where he goes if he stays in England. Hope he goes to Leicester or somewhere he'll be a top dog

I'd be disappointed if Mata goes, he's a very good player and good to pop up with a goal every now and then. Do we know if it was due to an injury that Mourinho brought him back off again on Sunday? It's not looking good for him if it wasn't.

Lucas Hood

I think Zaha is a better player than Bolasie.

Everton is way above his level imo.

Jayop

jive wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree. You're last paragraph is nonsense though, they've bought some top young players (clearly with long-term footballing reasons in mind) just not POGBOOM POGBACK extraordinaire.

It really isn't. We've already got a much younger squad than them are we're well set in that department, what we needed was quality and experience to replace what we've lost recently.

United Transfers that cost money
Pogba - 23
Bailly - 22
Mkhi - 27


So if you don't see the total of that as long term footballing reasons then you're blind or on the wum. Two 22 year olds and a 27 year old are the only players we paid anything for. Zlatan was on a free so his age is irrelevant.

City transfers that cost money

Stones - 22
Sane - 20
Jesus - 19
Gundongen 25
Nolito - 29

That's the 5 players City spent serious money on.

Please please explain to me how there's a huge difference in the two paths? How one club is buying young players with an eye for the future and the other are buying "POGBOOM" players.

Pure unadulterated drivel TBF.

United don't need to buy a load of kids because we've got a fantastic stable of young players already at the club. Martial, Rashford, Lingard, Shaw, Fosuh-Mensah, Borthwick-Jackson.


Why the feck would we go out spending 40 odd million each on young talents when what we already have ourselves is just as good.


And for the record, City have already spent 5 million euro more than United.

The Talking Bread wrote: »

how many assists for "easy goals" did he get last season doing that? I like Bolaisie but based on last couple of seasons (which have arguably been his best) and even in this inflated transfer market, the price is about 10 million over what it should be and that is being marginally generous. That is an extra ten million to put towards another squad forward.

He will definitely provide an impact, will help Everton with their often stiff centre of the park issues, changing defence to attack and a run of confidence may allow him to have a big impact but this is all speculative and you have to take into account his past performance and £30 million (which tbh I am convinced may the wrong actual price and its actually 22 million or so) is not justified for him.

He wasn;t doing that though last season. I'm saying I think that could be what Koeman sees in him.

Jayop

The average age of the players City spent money on was 23 and United's was 24.

City planning for the future unlike United.

jive

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Adidas and Chevrolet had most of it covered.

Yeah and it's just as well those companies have those magic money trees and don't rely on people buying their products.

I would imagine Stormzy probably would have paid United to be part of the announcement as opposed to the other way around. United don't need more exposure, certainly not through Stormzy. He would have gotten a lot more exposure for being part of the announcement. You don't know anymore than the rest of us what money Pogba may have been offered elsewhere. He spoke quite fondly of United even when he was still at Juventus.

Hahahhahaha. Yes I'm sure Stormzy paid United to be part of their marketing campaign. If someone offered more money, he'd have gone there. He's not gone there for the weather or the champions league football.

Who was branding Jose unsuitable for United? Plenty were saying he was perfect for United, many predicting him as a future United manager before Fergie left. You can try and accuse of United of chasing the big name manager all you want but it holds little water. No other club of United's stature would have appointed Moyes as manager, no other club would have kept van Gaal as long as United did. They got Mourinho because he's a proven winner. He delivers titles wherever he goes. To say that it doesn't matter if succeeds or fails is laughable. City, Chelsea and Bayern appointed big name managers too this summer.

Loads of people said he didn't suit United, that's why he didn't get the job initially. He wasn't classy enough as a human being to lead such a prestigious club and yet, here we are.

He delivers titles and then leaves the club in turmoil for a season. It doesn't matter if he succeeds or fails because it's all about money and headlines for United.

Ibrahimovich is a massive name, just as he was when Barca paid 30m plus Eto'o plus Hleb to sign him a few years ago. Bailly isn't a very big name though is he? Either is Lingard, Rashford, Blind, Valencia, Smalling, Herrera, Carrick - all first team players at United. Neymar wasn't exactly unheard of when he made his shady move to Barca, same with Suarez. City, PSG and Real Madrid aren't strangers to buying the big names either but don't let that stop you having a dig at United.

What have any of those players got to do with Uniteds transfer policy at the moment? Ibra was in his prime then so not sure why that's relevant, United have bought a guy nearing retirement because he's a big name. Suarez, Neymar etc. were all signed in their prime.

Were you saying this 7 years ago when Real Madrid broke their own world transfer record twice in the same summer to sign Kaka and Ronaldo? Or maybe in 2010 when they brought in Mourinho, presumably less to do with the fact that he had just delivered a treble at Inter and more to do with him being a big name? United operate no different to any other club, they've just gotten quite good at maximising their revenue and global exposure. Funny how when United were linked with and missing out on the likes of Neymar, Lucas Moura, Hazard and Bale it was a sign of their decline and their inability to match Europe's elite clubs. Now they sign Pogba for not much more than what Ronaldo, Bale, Neymar, Suarez, and Higuain were signed for and it's a sign of their decline as a football club into simply a commercial entity. It's a lose lose for United by ABU logic.

I wasn't saying it 7 years ago but I was saying it when Madrid sold Ozil. They also have a clear focus on marketing rather than footballing. They offloaded Di Maria when he was the probably the in form player in Europe for half a season.

United are a commercial entity don't know how people argue otherwise. It's nothing ABU and look at Madrid, ultimately it ends up working for you on the pitch too. I've nothing against United at all and I like Jose, he's just not someone you would employ if stability and football were of primary concern.

johnnyryan89

jive wrote: »

1)Compare the signing of Stones to Pogba. Pogba turns up with an entourage in his red Chevrolet, the deal is clearly done but is not announced until peak time in the US. Instead of posting a pic of the guy holding the jersey he is in a hollywoodesque music video with some UK rapper and has a body double. In contrast, Stones' transfer is leaked out due to their CL squad and he's shown in City gear the next day.

I know the fans don't care about the price that is being paid but at the end of the day the 2)fans pay for all this nonsense, whether it's purchasing the merchandise, expensive match tickets or just paying big money for subscriptions.

1) One was for a world record transfer fee and the other wasn't. So I doubt United or even more so their sponsors who are Chevrolet( the crowd who probably organised for him to being seen in their flashy car) and Adidas(who shot that hollywoodesque music video to big up their brand like a lot of brands do with footballers whether it be Adidas, Nike, Pepsi, Turkish Airlines etc) are gonna keep it all hush. United haven't been the first club to make a big fuss about a big named player with a high transfer fee and they wont be the last either.

2) Then don't buy all the overpriced merchandise or expensive match tickets and the sky sports package. At the end of the day a game of ball is a game of ball and it cost you nothing to watch the local u16's team down at the park kicking around the same ball you'll see United and City play with this season.

jive

Jayop wrote: »

The average age of the players City spent money on was 23 and United's was 24.

City planning for the future unlike United.

Yeh let's leave ibra out of this because he's only on £250k plus and probably only got a few million for signing on. He would skew your average age stat so it is best to leave him out.

Jayop

jive wrote: »

Yeh let's leave ibra out of this because he's only on £250k plus and probably only got a few million for signing on. He would skew your average age stat so it is best to leave him out.

Look at the post above where I laid it out in detail. You're talking rubbish.

jive

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

1) One was for a world record transfer fee and the other wasn't. So I doubt United or even more so their sponsors who are Chevrolet( the crowd who probably organised for him to being seen in their flashy car) and Adidas(who shot that hollywoodesque music video to big up their brand like a lot of brands do with footballers whether it be Adidas, Nike, Pepsi, Turkish Airlines etc) are gonna keep it all hush. United haven't been the first club to make a big fuss about a big named player with a high transfer fee and they wont be the last either.

2) Then don't buy all the overpriced merchandise or expensive match tickets and the sky sports package. At the end of the day a game of ball is a game of ball and it cost you nothing to watch the local u16's team down at the park kicking around the same ball you'll see United and City play with this season.

1) yeah, Madrid go heavy on it as well. I never said United were the only club?

2) I don't buy any of that, just saying fans are delusional if they think that it ain't their money. I'm not a fan, I go to GAA games and have been to 3 LoI games.

jive

Jayop wrote: »

Look at the post above where I laid it out in detail. You're talking rubbish.

Avg age of United signings =26.5, you're talking rubbish. You're leaving out the oldest player because it suits your stat hahaha

Ibra has a kind heart working for United for free and signing on for no fee. Manchester man at heart.

The Talking Bread

Jayop wrote: »

He wasn;t doing that though last season. I'm saying I think that could be what Koeman sees in him.

So Koeman's reasoning, you are thinking, is that we will spend £30 million on a player because I think he might suddenly start increasing his productivity this season, even though he is 27 now and his assist and goal stats are very average, for a player at this level. There is potential to improve, but not drastically at his age. £30 million with a very small sell on value is very overpriced. Even taking into account (the most used saying this Summer )"today's inflated market prices"

As I said, he will add value to Everton, but Crystal Palace, if they use the money wisely are on the end of a fantastic deal!

Jayop

The Talking Bread wrote: »

So Koeman's reasoning, you are thinking, is that we will spend £30 million on a player because I think he might suddenly start increasing his productivity this season, even though he is 27 now and his assist and goal stats are very average, for a player at this level. There is potential to improve, but not drastically at his age. £30 million with a very small sell on value is very overpriced. Even taking into account (the most used saying this Summer )"today's inflated market prices"

As I said, he will add value to Everton, but Crystal Palace, if they use the money wisely are on the end of a fantastic deal!

He's hardly going to buy him if he doesn't think that.

Jayop

jive wrote: »

Avg age of United signings =26.5, you're talking rubbish. You're leaving out the oldest player because it suits your stat hahaha

Ibra has a kind heart working for United for free and signing on for no fee. Manchester man at heart.

Ah man give up if that's the best reply to have. United have already got a much young starting team than city and we added two more very young players and a 27 year old to that. Anyone saying United aren't building for the future purely because of Zlatan is daft. A player like him will improve our kids dramatically.

deaddonkey15

jive wrote: »

Yeah and it's just as well those companies have those magic money trees and don't rely on people buying their products.

Yes, not everyone that buys their products will be a United fan though or even a football fan. Pogba's transfer was funded by some random Chevy driving American tennis fan with some Adidas tennis gear back at his house as much as it was by an average United fan like myself, in fact probably more so. There are Real Madrid fanatics buying Ronaldo jerseys all over the world that contributed more to the Pogba transfer than a lot of United fans did. So trying to paint it as if United fans are the ones paying for the big Pogba announcement doesn't really work.

jive wrote: »

Hahahhahaha. Yes I'm sure Stormzy paid United to be part of their marketing campaign. If someone offered more money, he'd have gone there. He's not gone there for the weather or the champions league football.

Well I don't think United had much to gain by Stormy's involvement in this transfer announcement. He might have gone elsewhere if he was offered more money yeah, the same as practically every other professional footballer and practically every other professional in anything. It doesn't mean he doesn't care about the club. Messi wouldn't be long leaving Barcelona if they decided to slash his wages.

jive wrote: »

Loads of people said he didn't suit United, that's why he didn't get the job initially. He wasn't classy enough as a human being to lead such a prestigious club and yet, here we are.

He delivers titles and then leaves the club in turmoil for a season. It doesn't matter if he succeeds or fails because it's all about money and headlines for United.

And what inside information do you have exactly to state so surely why Mourinho didn't get the job initially? The fact is you don't know, so don't pretend that you do. Loads may have been saying he didn't suit United, equally loads were saying that he did. Time will tell I suppose.

He left Madrid in 2013 and they've won the Champions League twice since. Turmoil indeed. There's no denying that Mourinho is prone to falling out with people, but so was Ferguson. Plus, some of the clubs he left, Chelsea and Real Madrid, are well renowned for showing little patience with their managers and for having a number of big ego's in the dressing room. It's no secret that the likes of Terry and Abramovich have a big influence at Chelsea and that Casillas and Ramos and Perez have a big influence at Madrid. Ancelotti has spoken about Perez's influence since he left Madrid. Blame it all on Mourinho though. It's all about success for United, that's why they generate the big money to bring the big players to help deliver success. Like any football club.

jive wrote: »

What have any of those players got to do with Uniteds transfer policy at the moment? Ibra was in his prime then so not sure why that's relevant, United have bought a guy nearing retirement because he's a big name. Suarez, Neymar etc. were all signed in their prime.

Neymar was not in his prime and was younger than Pogba when he moved to Barcelona.If rumours are to be believed, his transfer fee wasn't much less than Pogba's either. Those other players are relevant because they are examples of big clubs spending big money on big players to help win football matches, exactly the same as what United are doing but for some reason it's to be criticised when they do it. Juve signed Pirlo on a free transfer at 32, was he just a commercially fueled big name signing too? Ibrahimovich has already scored a bicycle on his debut and a match winner at Wembley, looks a free transfer well spent so far. You're suggestion that United are only chasing big names is odd considering they've dropped Schweinsteiger to the reserves and in the last year brought in household superstars like Bailly, Schneiderlin, Mkhitaryan, Martial, Darmian and Depay. Massive names.

jive wrote: »

I wasn't saying it 7 years ago but I was saying it when Madrid sold Ozil. They also have a clear focus on marketing rather than footballing. They offloaded Di Maria when he was the probably the in form player in Europe for half a season.

United are a commercial entity don't know how people argue otherwise. It's nothing ABU and look at Madrid, ultimately it ends up working for you on the pitch too. I've nothing against United at all and I like Jose, he's just not someone you would employ if stability and football were of primary concern.

So United signing one of the best midfielders in the world and Madrid selling the most in form player in Europe are both examples of the club's focus being on commercial interests? Bit of contradiction there. Buy a big name, and you care less about football than you do about marketing. Sell a big name and you also care less about football than you do about marketing. All those Champions League wins for Barcelona and Madrid are just collateral damage from aggressive marketing campaigns? United are no more a commercial entity than any other major club and despite your hipster style arguments, the reason marketing is taken so seriously by clubs like United and Madrid and Barca is so they can ultimate invest in putting together a good football team as football was, is and always will be the primary focus.

deaddonkey15

jive wrote: »

1) yeah, Madrid go heavy on it as well. I never said United were the only club?

2) I don't buy any of that, just saying fans are delusional if they think that it ain't their money. I'm not a fan, I go to GAA games and have been to 3 LoI games.

Oh, you're one of those people. Probably not worth interacting with you so.

johnnyryan89

Jayop wrote: »

Ah man give up if that's the best reply to have. United have already got a much young starting team than city and we added two more very young players and a 27 year old to that. Anyone saying United aren't building for the future purely because of Zlatan is daft. A player like him will improve our kids dramatically.

Exactly, Zlatan is a stop gap measure on a 12 month contract to strengthen a slim squad left behind by Van Gaal who only had four out and out strikers in Rooney, Rashford, Keane and Wilson. Rooney has been out of form for quite awhile, Keane and Wilson aren't good enough at the moment to be leading the line for United and Rashford is only 18 so it makes sense to bring in someone like Zlatan whose been there and done it to help plug a hole for 12months and maybe teach the young kids like Rashford, Wilson and even Martial and Memphis a thing or two.

The Talking Bread

Jayop wrote: »

He's hardly going to buy him if he doesn't think that.

That's not my point at all!!

£30 million is a hell of a price to pay for a 27 year old player you think may reach a standard even though he has failed to live up to the standard for 10 years as a pro footballer!

It is, in essence, the epitome of wishful thinking if that is what he is relying on to justify this cost!

I am not saying he won't do so but on the balance of probabilities he won't justify the price. The higher the price, the lower the justification. With his career stats, taking into account his age, Bolaise is well overpriced, probably by as much as 33% at £30 million.

And considering Everton are a relatively frugal team (Lukaku and Fellaini being their record transfers) that don't break the bank often, paying £30 million for Bolaisie is a very strange gamble.

But, yeah, the market is what it is and Everton after all their frugality over the years must have a warchest so they can afford to take the odd gamble.

RobertKK

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/aug/09/manchester-united-paul-pogba-real-madrid-world-record

Pogba had the choice of Real Madrid or United, according to the Guardian.
United have been doing good against Real Madrid in the transfer market since that infamous fax machine incident.

Unearthly

Jayop wrote: »

30m is what 10m was 3 years ago. That's the reality now.

It shows how big the fee was for Ronaldo in 2009 that it's only been beaten twice. United could have bought Sneijder Eto'o Robben and Benzema (transfer fee wise) with the Ronaldo money back then.

Juve realistically could only afford getting one top class player with the Pogba money

gosplan

RobertKK wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/aug/09/manchester-united-paul-pogba-real-madrid-world-record

Pogba had the choice of Real Madrid or United, according to the Guardian.
United have been doing good against Real Madrid in the transfer market since that infamous fax machine incident.

Well 'an offer' from Madrid.

AdamD

Jayop wrote: »

It really isn't. We've already got a much younger squad than them are we're well set in that department, what we needed was quality and experience to replace what we've lost recently.

United Transfers that cost money
Pogba - 23
Bailly - 22
Mkhi - 27


So if you don't see the total of that as long term footballing reasons then you're blind or on the wum. Two 22 year olds and a 27 year old are the only players we paid anything for. Zlatan was on a free so his age is irrelevant.

.

Insinuating Zlatan didn't cost money is so hilariously disingenuous. What was it, a rumoured 10m signing on fee and 300k per week? That would mean hes costing United 20m per year for 2 years.

Not that I care in this silly argument but lets at least keep it accurate.

deaddonkey15

AdamD wrote: »

Insinuating Zlatan didn't cost money is so hilariously disingenuous. What was it, a rumoured 10m signing on fee and 300k per week? That would mean hes costing United 20m per year for 2 years.

Not that I care in this silly argument but lets at least keep it accurate.

Any sources for this rumoured signing on fee? Any sources for the wages figure?

Giggsy11

Every player gets signing on fee and wages, funny how for everyone those are not counted when it comes to transfer fee but it is for ManUtd players.

jive

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Oh, you're one of those people. Probably not worth interacting with you so.

Cringe, what is 'one of those people? I'm not a fan of any PL club, I enjoy the sport and watch it regularly; I spend my finite resources attending GAA fixtures over soccer fixtures and that makes me a type of person???

If anything it's not worth discussing with a United fan, many of whom seem to have lost all sense of financial reality. Zlatan, ignoring a signing on fee (to put it in perspective Andre Ayew over 5 mil for signing for Swansea, the fees are considerable), is earning a quarter of a million per week; whether it's good value for money or not I don't know, it probably is in the current market and the lack of strikers available, but it sure as shít ain't free.

jive

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Every player gets signing on fee and wages, funny how for everyone those are not counted when it comes to transfer fee but it is for ManUtd players.

Out of contract = free agent = massive signing on fee. The signing on bonuses are comparatively minuscule when a transfer fee has to go to a parent club.

09_09_09

I will roll the dice again.

Swansea City's £17m offer for Algerian striker Islam Slimani is rejected by Sporting Lisbon

jive

09_09_09 wrote: »

I will roll the dice again.

Swansea City's £17m offer for Algerian striker Islam Slimani is rejected by Sporting Lisbon

Swansea are in trouble if they don't make some smart signings. I've never heard of or seen that guy play but their business this summer has baffled me. Offloading their 2 best players and signing Llorente...

Flint Fredstone

First time I've heard of a 10m signing on fee for Zlatan.

rob316

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Any sources for this rumoured signing on fee? Any sources for the wages figure?

All free agents get signing on fees, a few million is the minimum at a big club, I could well believe Zlatan got £10m and he isn't dropping his wage demands for anyone.

BullBlackNova

09_09_09 wrote: »

I will roll the dice again.

Swansea City's £17m offer for Algerian striker Islam Slimani is rejected by Sporting Lisbon

jive wrote: »

Swansea are in trouble if they don't make some smart signings. I've never heard of or seen that guy play but their business this summer has baffled me. Offloading their 2 best players and signing Llorente...

Yep - Swansea are going down this season IMO.
Getting Sigurdsson to sign a new deal just before selling Ayew and Williams is about all they can hang their survival hopes on.
Slimani is a quality player, though. If they get him, I'll be happy to reconsider my stance! But, I reckon he could do a job for much better sides than Swansea who may move if he does become available.

inforfun

jive wrote: »

Out of contract = free agent +Mino Raiola = massive signing on fee. The signing on bonuses are comparatively minuscule when a transfer fee has to go to a parent club.

FYP.

jive

inforfun wrote: »

FYP.

Didn't realise he was Zlatan's agent as well. I'd say he has made a mint this summer, jaysus

Flint Fredstone

rob316 wrote: »

All free agents get signing on fees, a few million is the minimum at a big club, I could well believe Zlatan got £10m and he isn't dropping his wage demands for anyone.

You being able to believe it doesn't prove anything though. Has anybody any source for this 10m?

BullBlackNova

Sunderland make moves for Paddy McNair and Donald Love for combined £8 million.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/manchester-united/manchester-uniteds-paddy-mcnair-set-for-sunderland-as-moyes-makes-8m-move-34954331.html

Also says that WBA won't sell Jonny Evans to Arsenal for less than £15m.

ASOT

jive wrote: »

Swansea are in trouble if they don't make some smart signings. I've never heard of or seen that guy play but their business this summer has baffled me. Offloading their 2 best players and signing Llorente...

Silimani is class, would improve there chances of staying up tenfold aslong as he adapted to the PL well. Fairly sure he was the top scorer last year got 30 goals or so.

Nerdlingr

jive wrote: »

Swansea are in trouble if they don't make some smart signings. I've never heard of or seen that guy play but their business this summer has baffled me. Offloading their 2 best players and signing Llorente...

Slimani would be a great signing for swansea (or any other team in the team!)

Johner

Slimani would be a brilliant acquisition for Swansea, in today's market £17million was never going to be enough to get him though. I think he's the type of striker that would do really well in the Premier League.

inforfun

jive wrote: »

Didn't realise he was Zlatan's agent as well. I'd say he has made a mint this summer, jaysus

Pogba, Zlatan, Mkhitaryan.
All 3 Mino Raiola.

Here he is picking up his new car from the commission

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjNQnrRv2Jw

Jayop

Anyone complaining that I didn't mention Zlatan in that post should look past the distance their Abu eyes allow them. I left out the players city signed on free transfers too but I don't see you complaining about those.

Maybe because you never heard of those players, I dunno?

Blatter

jive wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree. You're last paragraph is nonsense though, they've bought some top young players (clearly with long-term footballing reasons in mind) just not POGBOOM POGBACK extraordinaire.

You disagree with the assertion that Mkhitaryan and Bailly were signed for football reasons rather than 'commercial' ones? Strange.

Btw, it was reliably reported that Pogba was a target for Mourinho last Summer at Chelsea and he has a history of buying experienced players that used to play for him (Eto'o, Drogba, Ricardo Carvalho etc. and now Ibra)

It is quite believable that United's four signings this Summer were all Mourinho's targets and were primarily signed for footballing reasons. Of course the club will be happy with the commercial boost from the Pogba and Ibra deals but to say that was the primary reason behind the signings is a nice fanciful theory but doesn't stand up to the facts.

Skylinehead

Jayop wrote: »

Anyone complaining that I didn't mention Zlatan in that post should look past the distance their Abu eyes allow them. I left out the players city signed on free transfers too but I don't see you complaining about those.

Maybe because you never heard of those players, I dunno?

Scarleh for yeh. Pathetic term

HalloweenJack

Borja Baston could prove to be a good signing for Swansea.

I've kept an eye on him in the last few years and his goalscoring record is impressive. I didn't see him play for Eibar but did see him at Zaragoza and was impressed, though at a lower level. He was able to make the step up to La Liga this year, probably playing in a similar situation to what'll be expected of him at Swansea, i.e. leading the line in a lower-end side.

I was hoping to see him get a chance at Atleti but keeping Torres and getting Gameiro put a stop to that for now. Hopefully there's a buy-back clause.

Mr.Nice Guy

The Guardian are reporting Leicester have bid £23.2m for Gabigol (Gabriel Barbosa) of Santos. Like Gabriel Jesus he's been touted as the 'new Neymar' in the past. Him, Jesus and the actual Neymar are in action at the Olympics currently (Brazil are playing at 2 am tonight I think) and while Brazil aren't exactly doing fantastic right now, I do reckon he's a good signing for that price if they can get him.

Jayop

Skylinehead wrote: »

Scarleh for yeh. Pathetic term

Ah sure I was scarleh typing it but sometimes a man has to do wha a man has to do

Jayop

Blatter wrote: »

You disagree with the assertion that Mkhitaryan and Bailly were signed for football reasons rather than 'commercial' ones? Strange.

Btw, it was reliably reported that Pogba was a target for Mourinho last Summer at Chelsea and he has a history of buying experienced players that used to play for him (Eto'o, Drogba, Ricardo Carvalho etc. and now Ibra)

It is quite believable that United's four signings this Summer were all Mourinho's targets and were primarily signed for footballing reasons. Of course the club will be happy with the commercial boost from the Pogba and Ibra deals but to say that was the primary reason behind the signings is a nice fanciful theory but doesn't stand up to the facts.

They were all signed for football reasons primarily. Bailly, Mkhi and Ibra there can be no doubt. Pogba was signed for football reasons but the only reason we were prepared to go so far with the fee was because we could recoup it with the commercial side.

We'll be fine.

inforfun

Van der Vaart signed 2 year contract with Midtjylland.

Not as surprising as you would think (that he ends up in Denmark, not that someone still offers him a contract) as his girlfriend plays professional handball for a Danish club.

StringerBell

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

The Guardian are reporting Leicester have bid £23.2m for Gabigol (Gabriel Barbosa) of Santos. Like Gabriel Jesus he's been touted as the 'new Neymar' in the past. Him, Jesus and the actual Neymar are in action at the Olympics currently (Brazil are playing at 2 am tonight I think) and while Brazil aren't exactly doing fantastic right now, I do reckon he's a good signing for that price if they can get him.

He was great in one of the FM games anyway (once you built your team around him)

Oat23

inforfun wrote: »

Van der Vaart signed 2 year contract with Midtjylland.

Not as surprising as you would think (that he ends up in Denmark, not that someone still offers him a contract) as his girlfriend plays professional handball for a Danish club.

Betis are paying a % of his salary to get him off the books and the rest of his salary is being paid for by the club's sponsors apparently.

It's not a bad deal for Midtjylland. Although I'm not convinced he has enough left even for Danish football to be honest. The only way I can see it going bad is if their coach doesn't have the balls to drop him if he is not playing well.