Summer transfer thread 17/18 season (NEYMAR TALK IN OTHER THREAD)

Skylinehead

super_furry wrote: »

I think Lukaku is a more Mourinho type of player though. He'll be going direct with quick, early long balls and using his physicality and presence to bully teams. He'll try to use him like Chelsea did Drogba.

Wait, this is the Mourinho that loaned him out, didn't play him, and sold him yeah? Mourinho type of player...

Lucas Hood

Skylinehead wrote: »

Wait, this is the Mourinho that loaned him out, didn't play him, and sold him yeah? Mourinho type of player...

Lukakus choice to leave.

Skylinehead

Lucas Hood wrote: »

Lukakus choice to leave.

I would too after not playing :P

Potential Underachiever

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Again this is a myth, pull up the stats (SSN had them yesterday and are still decent)


Simply put with a much better team in Utd he will flourish

It is a simplistic approach to think that alright doesn't mean it will work out like that, it could do but Benteke is a prime example, he bangs them in for lower teams but did not exactly flourish at Liverpool.

irishman86

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

It is a simplistic approach to think that alright doesn't mean it will work out like that, it could do but Benteke is a prime example, he bangs them in for lower teams but did not exactly flourish at Liverpool.

He moved to a style of play that didnt suit him. Lukaku will suit Joses style of hit and run

Lucas Hood

Lucas Hood wrote: »

Lukakus choice to leave.

It's called "easing out"

the whole year inn

irishman86 wrote: »

He moved to a style of play that didnt suit him. Lukaku will suit Joses style of hit and run

He should do, but there's a chance he may not either and for a few reasons, but I'm expecting him to be a 20-25 goals in the next Pl season.

dr.kenneth noisewater

If Higuain was worth £75 million last year with his best years gone then Lukaku is definitely worth the same

Lukker-

Laois_Man wrote: »

Bit of a cod really calling it a £100 Million transfer.I doubt the full £15 Million worth of add ons will ever be paid and Rooney was never moving for a transfer fee

How do you know? Most deals with add ons are linked to appearances

rwbug

The Guardian describes the add-ons as -

"The deal will be worth an initial £75m plus a further £15m of easily attainable add-ons linked to achievements and appearances."

Hierro_4

mightyreds wrote: »

Wait... you finished 1 place above them in the league last year

Leicester finished what, 10 places ahead of Chelsea in 15/16?

Chelsea still had much better players and United have much better players than Everton now.

LiamoSail

Hierro_4 wrote: »

Leicester finished what, 10 places ahead of Chelsea in 15/16?

Chelsea still had much better players and United have much better players than Everton now.

It's a team sport. Leicester were a far better team than Chelsea in 15/16

Skylinehead

dr.kenneth noisewater wrote: »

If Higuain was worth £75 million last year with his best years gone then Lukaku is definitely worth the same

Best years gone? You do realise that Higuain was sold on the back of a Serie A record season?

CSF

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

I don't think a Lukaku, Mkhitaryan, Rashford/Martial combo of 3 is gonna score the goals required to win the league. I think the addition of Lukaku alone should mean that United shouldn't have to worry about finishing top 4, but it's another thing again to be top of the pops. You need that attacking quality in your team.

As things stand lukaku is just replacing what Ibra offered them last season.

I think due to age, Lukaku will be an improvement for United. But I don't think he will solve United's goalscoring problems alone. The issue was never the lack of a potent goalscorer. Badly in need of a foil for their striker who is almost as dangerous. A Sanchez/Hazard/Mané type who isn't a striker but completely changes the way teams have to defend against your team.

Trigger

Was wondering why Alves hasn't been announced yet.. everyone seems to be at it these days

https://twitter.com/City_Watch/status/883754968087396356

irishman86

CSF wrote: »

I think due to age, Lukaku will be an improvement for United. But I don't think he will solve United's goalscoring problems alone. The issue was never the lack of a potent goalscorer. Badly in need of a foil for their striker who is almost as dangerous. A Sanchez/Hazard/Mane type who isn't a striker but completely changes the way teams have to defend against your team.

I like Mane but you shouldnt use him in the same sentence as the other two.

Harry Palmr

Two stories in the Greek press linking Liverpool with the Roma CB Kostas Manolas, one of the articles reckons it's unlikely while the other seems to think it's a go and will happen early next week. Monchi came out earlier today to say the time for selling was over and he was now buying.

Trigger

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Two stories in the Greek press linking Liverpool with the Roma CB Kostas Manolas, one of the articles reckons it's unlikely while the other seems to think it's a go and will happen early next week. Monchi came out earlier today to say the time for selling was over and he was now buying.

wasn't he not supposed to be going to Zenit.. either way he is way too good for Zenit, cracking player and a very decent alternative to VVD

Lukker-

i'd be surprised if Roma sold Rudiger and Manolas tbh. He'd be a good fit for Liverpool, super quick, good at pressing. He's a dodgy passer though, and useless with the ball at his feet.

Lukker-

irishman86 wrote: »

I like Mane but you shouldnt use him in the same sentence as the other two.

What Mane lacks in technical ability he makes up for in athleticism imo.

Rooney having his medical..

Laois_Man

Hierro_4 wrote: »

Leicester finished what, 10 places ahead of Chelsea in 15/16?

Chelsea still had much better players and United have much better players than Everton now.

2015/16 was an outlier in terms of where both Leicester and Chelsea finished

Man Utd last season finished in pretty much their average finishing position over the last 4 years

Thats the difference

CSF

irishman86 wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

I think due to age, Lukaku will be an improvement for United. But I don't think he will solve United's goalscoring problems alone. The issue was never the lack of a potent goalscorer. Badly in need of a foil for their striker who is almost as dangerous. A Sanchez/Hazard/Mane type who isn't a striker but completely changes the way teams have to defend against your team.

I like Mane but you shouldnt use him in the same sentence as the other two.

He isn't as good as the other 2 but would still be a great addition, offers that threat that creates space for other players.

irishman86

Lukker- wrote: »

What Mane lacks in technical ability he makes up for in athleticism imo.

I dont argue that Id have him more than a step below the other two though, Id rank him slightly below Mahrez if Im being honest but it would be closer than Hazard/Sanchez.

irishman86

CSF wrote: »

He isn't as good as the other 2 but would still be a great addition, offers that threat that creates space for other players.

I dont think hed be a great addition to one of the bigger teams outside of perhaps Arsenal
My point was if your going to use two superstars (accurately by the way) why add a decent premier league player which kinda negates the point when they arent even similar players to him

Utopia Parkway

Lukker- wrote: »

What Mane lacks in technical ability he makes up for in athleticism imo.

Never felt Mane is lacking in technique to be honest. He's quick but he can play.

His stats would have been even better last season only for the fact he missed a month for AFCON and then missed the last 6 weeks or so of the season.

Giggsy11

Lukker- wrote: »

How do you know? Most deals with add ons are linked to appearances

How do you know most addons are linked to appearances? Apparently Martial's had a clause for Balon D'or, RVN had for winning La Liga with Madrid, RVP's had winning PL with ManUtd.

No one has a clue about what the add ons are. They might be appearances or personal performances or team performances.

Not that it matters as I always want the addons to be paid, which means player is doing well.

Giggsy11

Skylinehead wrote: »

Wait, this is the Mourinho that loaned him out, didn't play him, and sold him yeah? Mourinho type of player...

That was when Lukaku was still a youngster and Lukaku wanted to leave as he wanted to be first choice player. Considering Chelsea had Costa who won them league it wasn't possible for Lukaku to be first choice.

He had 3 years of first team games and scored plenty of goals. Now Jose feels he is ready to lead the line which isn't surprising.

Giggsy11

Harry Palmr wrote: »

No more fishy than Lukaku ending up at Utd rather than Chelsea - it's all about the agent.

Eh? Lukaku is not a kid, he is the employer not agent. Some of you need to take head out of the sand, agent does as the player says, not the other way.

Poor chelsea and Lukaku, mugged by evil agent.

https://twitter.com/AdamJosephSport/status/883679893489307651

ThunbergsAreGo

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Eh? Lukaku is not a kid, he is the employer not agent. Some of you need to take head out of the sand, agent does as the player says, not the other way.

Poor chelsea and Lukaku, mugged by evil agent.

https://twitter.com/AdamJosephSport/status/883679893489307651

Didn't Riaola get forty something for Pogba alone?

Liam McPoyle

naughtb4 wrote: »

Didn't Riaola get forty something for Pogba alone?

The agent fees for the Pogba deal were paid by Juve so wouldn't figure in United's numbers.

Giggsy11

naughtb4 wrote: »

Didn't Riaola get forty something for Pogba alone?

That's not agent fee, that's more like third party fee. Raiola owned 25% of Pogba's rights. It was paid by Juventus.

mightyreds

Rod Munch wrote: »

The agent fees for the Pogba deal were paid by Juve so wouldn't figure in United's numbers.

Not according to Fifa when they went to investigate it!

Liam McPoyle

mightyreds wrote: »

Not according to Fifa when they went to investigate it!

They investigated it.

And United were cleared of any shenanigans.

Do try and keep up.

mightyreds

Rod Munch wrote: »

They investigated it.

And United were cleared of any shenanigans.

Do try and keep up.

I didn't say anything about wrong doing, your talking about Juve paying the fees and I replied to that, united paid about 40% of the fees , do try and keep up

Giggsy11

mightyreds wrote: »

I didn't say anything about wrong doing, your talking about Juve paying the fees and I replied to that, united paid about 40% of the fees , do try and keep up

No they didn't. ManUtd paud 89 million pounds to Juventus, they paid the money to the agent as Raiola had 25% of Pogba rights.

duffman13

mightyreds wrote: »

I didn't say anything about wrong doing, your talking about Juve paying the fees and I replied to that, united paid about 40% of the fees , do try and keep up

United paid Juventus £89 million, Juve are being investigated for potential 3rd party ownership issues which has nothing to do with United.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2716792-manchester-united-cleared-in-paul-pogba-transfer-fifa-to-investigate-juventus

mightyreds

Giggsy11 wrote: »

No they didn't. ManUtd paud 89 million pounds to Juventus, they paid the money to the agent as Raiola had 25% of Pogba rights.

Yeah sure I don't pay any tax on my goods cause it all went to Tesco and I didn't give it directly to the revenue

United paid Juventus £89 million, Juve are being investigated for potential 3rd party ownership issues which has nothing to do with United.

And to mention again I wasn't talking about any wrong doings I was mentioning fees paid in the FIFA investigation which said United paid some allocation to the agent

Giggsy11

mightyreds wrote: »

Yeah sure I don't pay any tax on my goods cause it all went to Tesco and I didn't give it directly to the revenue



And to mention again I wasn't talking about any wrong doings I was mentioning fees paid in the FIFA investigation which said United paid some allocation to the agent

Not sure you are on about. Raiola's agreement was with Juventus, how Juventus and agent divided the money is not ManUtd's concern. They named the price and we paid the money.

Juventus even released official documents confirming the same.

rwbug

We have been through this before. The figures for the Pogba transfer were made public by footyleaks.

Man United payed Juventus £89.5 million +£5 million if he signs a new contract or is sold for more than £50 million. Of this fee Juventus gave Raiola £23 million for his share of the ownership.

In addition to this United paid agent fees to Raiola of £16.4 million. Pogba paid agent fees to Raiola of £2.2 million.

The investigation was to do with Raiola being employed by Juve to sell at the highest price and by United to try to buy at the cheapest price. There was no wrong doing by United.

KERSPLAT!

Holy **** that is serious money.

Benzino

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Holy **** that is serious money.

It's a good few Andy Carroll's alright!

yabadabado

mightyreds wrote: »

Yeah sure I don't pay any tax on my goods cause it all went to Tesco and I didn't give it directly to the revenue



And to mention again I wasn't talking about any wrong doings I was mentioning fees paid in the FIFA investigation which said United paid some allocation to the agent

Stop talking bollix.Tesco jaysus

pjohnson

From United FB:



#FarewellToALegend

Wayne Rooney is leaving Manchester United to return to Everton: http://manutd.co/vU

Thank you, Wayne, from all of us.

bucketybuck

mightyreds wrote: »

Yeah sure I don't pay any tax on my goods cause it all went to Tesco and I didn't give it directly to the revenue

Thats a ridiculous analogy.

Its really a very simple concept, United paid Juventus a sum of money, what Juventus did with that money afterwards was completely out of Uniteds control and as such absolutely nothing to do with United.

LiamoSail

What are Everton doing bringing Rooney back?

mightyreds

yabadabado wrote: »

Stop talking bollix.Tesco jaysus

Great way to add to the debate, foundation of intelligence you are too

And to add here is a link of fees paid as reported by many media outlets

http://www.rte.ie/amp/884328/

So back to the original argument that United paid nothing before the bandwagon jumped in to derail it

Giggsy11

mightyreds wrote: »

Great way to add to the debate, foundation of intelligence you are too

And to add here is a link of fees paid as reported by many media outlets

http://www.rte.ie/amp/884328/

So back to the original argument that United paid nothing before the bandwagon jumped in to derail it

Did you even read what it said? Out of 40 Million 27 Million was paid by Juventus, which is exactly what everyone is saying but for some reason it's too hard for you to understand.

mightyreds

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Did you even read what it said? Out of 40 Million 27 Million was paid by Juventus, which is exactly what everyone is saying but for some reason it's too hard for you to understand.

So who paid the other 13 million? Originally I just corrected the person saying United paid nothing Juve had paid it all, then yous jumped in to defend the teams honour of any wrong doing which wasn't mentioned.

pjohnson

Was Pogba's transfer not last summer? Why is it being debated here this summer AGAIN?