Transfers

Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.

This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.

comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Shugs (U14253)
posted 2 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 12 hours, 13 minutes ago
comment by JonVeron (U6514)
posted 3 minutes ago
According to Sky sources, Atletico Madrid paid Chelsea €65m (£58.3m) for the permanent signing of Alvaro Morata.

————————

If this is true... How the heck do Chelsea get such good prices when they sell??!! I’d be surprised if we sold Pogba for much more than that knowing our negotiating, assuming he does leave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For a highly marketable player with a better than one-in-two record in Spain and Italy, yet to enter his prime, with three years left on his contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The only time moratas been 1 in 2 or better was in Reals youth team

He's not as bad a player as people make out tbf, but 60 million or thereabouts is over priced

Not as overpriced as when Chelsea bought him tho obv
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope; for Real’s seniors, his record was actually better than a goal every 90 minutes.

For Juve, he hit better than a goal every 180 minutes and got close to a goal or assist a game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Make up your mind on what stat you're using... Goals per game or per minute played

At juve his goal per game was less than 1 in 3... Which is about his average overall i think

Goals per minutes.... Different stats... If he was really all that then the question is why didn't he play more minutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hold on, hold on.

You cannot judge him on total appearances at Real, in particular, when the majority of his games there were off the bench with ten minutes here and there

It was the same at Juve, wasn’t it? More appearances off the bench than starts, or close to that anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Its 2 seasons at real coming on as a late sub that distort his goals per minutes played stats

Do we discount the goals given some games were likely dead and buried

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 7 minutes ago
Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.

This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Same twisting of stats to suit his argument too

Shugs

I hade this same argument with the know it alls on here about Pedro. His stats were distorted by the goals he got as a sub for Barca when games were dead and buried.

Needless to say he has been very average for Chelsea.

I swear some of our fans just read stats instead of watching the game.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 hours, 10 minutes ago
Shugs

I hade this same argument with the know it alls on here about Pedro. His stats were distorted by the goals he got as a sub for Barca when games were dead and buried.

Needless to say he has been very average for Chelsea.

I swear some of our fans just read stats instead of watching the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of it is that. But you get the same with strikers at all the top clubs, and with Morata not as much as you might think. He hit an awful lot of opening goals, equalizers and winners in the 2016/7 season with Real, for example.

He’s tried and tested in Spain. Real fans didn’t want him to leave and Atleti fans are delighted he’s signed.

I think he’ll clean up the next few seasons in that side.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 hours, 38 minutes ago
Rosso

Would you be happy if Ed spunked 58 million on Morata?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d be happy with a straight swap for Lukaku, for sure

If Lukaku is going to Inter you should be asking for Icardi in return as he has no future at Inter

comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 hours, 38 minutes ago
Rosso

Would you be happy if Ed spunked 58 million on Morata?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d be happy with a straight swap for Lukaku, for sure
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I wouldn't. And I don't rate Lukaku either.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 4 hours, 26 minutes ago
Also, what is 'highly marketable' about Morata.

This is the kind of utter $hit that Nobb comes out with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You might not enjoy (or even be remotely interested in) that side of the game, but certain players bring clubs a lot of money in through use of their name, image, signature, endorsements, voice, etc.

And those assets are considered by buying and selling clubs and factor into transfer fees.

comment by rosso is facking happy (U17054)
posted 5 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 2 hours, 42 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 1 hour, 52 minutes ago
comment by rosso is facking happy(U17054)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
I do feel the same frustrations as with the OP in regards to the duration process of transfers (speculations?)

But you also have to factor in several big factors.

- The bidding club - in this case cash cow United.
Who has had a recent history of blowing ridiculous money on worthless transfers. Which has created a trend of 'get as much out of United as we can, because they are in a mess' problem.

- The 'stubbornness' of selling clubs.

- The money flowing into the game.

- Other better attractive clubs.

- Players' greed.

- Ed Woodward's lack of direction/expertise outside of his expertise.

- The instability of United.

Other wealthy/stabilised clubs such as City and Madrid during this window can get their deals done more smoothly because they have better enabled people to take care of this than we do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not defending Woodward - I hate the cant more than most, I promise you - but none of City, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, PSG, Bayern and more have signed more players than we have so far.

Few of them have managed to shift players on anything other than a free transfer either.

I say it again:

EVERY FAN BELIEVES - AND SAYS EVERY TRANSFER WINDOW - THAT THEIR CLUB IS SLUGGISH IN TRANSFER DEALINGS.

Have a look around the other boards and listen to other fans. People are impatient, and they have absolutely no idea what an elite player transfer involves.

We are talking about satisfying multiple parties (usually minimum four separate entities) with conflicting and different interests in a multi-million pound business service deal comprising multiple separate yet interdependent legal contracts.

It’s massively, massively, massively complicated business.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that it is a massively complicated business proceedings. But we can't help but feel that when it is concerning United, that some of these hurdles are magnified tenfold.

And while I do realise that City haven't bought that many players during this window thus far. I was referring more to their efficiency in doing transfers. They have a proper structure in place and it works more smoothly than ours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well it all aligns in with the manager that they targeted for a while before they got him in. Now he’s in place and set a foundation. They also have a specific technical director in who’s worked closely and effectively alongside Guardiola back at Barcelona. They have have a blueprint of player criterias that they try to adhere to.

Over here at United, the transfer policies has been fluctuating from bizarre to okay to desperation. Not all of our buys have been a disaster, but many of them just haven’t worked out for multiple reasons. And bad planning has been one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I know and agree with all that.

I don’t see how any of it helps them get individual transfers done more efficiently and smoothly though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently as a whole they have everything in place better than we do. Yes, we can compete with them financially, but when you factor in what lays ahead for them in the near future and what’s in store for us. It looks like they are presently more stable than us.

For some players, a better guarantee of high level competitiveness alongside a handsome wage can be the differences in which each club gets in players.

Other players are still attracted to the status and eliteness of a traditional club like ours.

However, the blame can still be placed largely on the board for not addressing the issues any sooner.

I’m saying that, it looks like this new season we seem to be trying to create another new identity.

Apologies for my very late replies. I don’t always get time to respond often.