I doubt he’d go cheaply even if they are relegated. It wouldn’t make a significant difference if there’s big competition from premier league clubs. £40m seems fair value in this current market.
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
How often do you even hear of relegation clauses even being put into contracts? They are usually ones for wages if anything.
The idea that a club that had just qualified for the CL would put in a relegation clause for one of their players just doesn’t really have basis in reality.
How many clubs have started in the CL group stages and got relegated the same season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. If it does happen then it’s usually in the instance of a key player joining a smaller club who are realistically threatened with relegation - gives them an easy out. I believe that’s what happened with Jonny evans
Absolutely no way that’s happened with Tielemans and Monaco. Even if they do get relegated, his value wouldn’t change because he’s proven he can Moreno than cut it in the PL. The whole point of the loan really
Players usually ask for them when joining teams that have the fear of relegation before the season begins, but even then you don’t hear of them that often. That wouldn’t ever come into negotiations when signing for a CL club, the only similar clause you could think of would be a CL clause in the event of failing to make it - which you do hear of more often. Monaco have played a blinder really.
You have a point about a relegation clause. I still think Monaco will wait to see which league they’re in though; and that would affect Silva, which in turn would affect our budget.
He’s leaving regardless of what league they are in, so it doesn’t really matter.
I wouldn’t want the Tielemans deal if we weren’t able to offload Silva. That could be an expensive disaster.
Tielemans for £35m and Silva for £15m is fine by me though.
This doesn't look good but we'll need to wait and see.
If we get Tielemans then Rudkin and co will have played a blinder.
If we don't then they will have wasted (albeit entertainingly) the end of the season - and we will be mugs for giving Monaco a shop window to the detriment of our club. Unfortunately I don't see a happy medium in this instance.
I actually think £40m in today's market is worth it, especially now that we've seen he can handle the league.
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 9 hours, 4 minutes ago
He’s leaving regardless of what league they are in, so it doesn’t really matter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. Makes no difference - Monaco won’t care about Silva if they can get £40m from United. They will send him back and buy someone else
comment by Nuneaton_fox (U7936)
posted 2 hours, 15 minutes ago
This doesn't look good but we'll need to wait and see.
If we get Tielemans then Rudkin and co will have played a blinder.
If we don't then they will have wasted (albeit entertainingly) the end of the season - and we will be mugs for giving Monaco a shop window to the detriment of our club. Unfortunately I don't see a happy medium in this instance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You called this out from the very beginning in fairness. I think Monaco have played this extremely well. They had a player on their hands who had been awful for most of the season and a new manager who didn’t want him. Because he was still highly rated - they said to Leicester, buy him for £40m or have him on loan with no option to buy.
We did the latter, which I understand given the fact we have been stung so badly by our poor transfer dealings in the past (£25m for Iheanacho). However, now we have seen how exceptional he is, to not pay that fee now, irrespective of Silva, seems mad.
He’s absolutely vital for us pushing on to a top 7 place next season - if we don’t get him then it’s going to undo a lot of the progress we have made under Rodgers. Much of that progress has been down to the arrival of Tielemans who only played 3 games under Puel and was getting up to speed
I’m not saying Rodgers hasn’t improved things, he’s better than Puel no doubt, but to be fair to Puel, he never had a fully firing Tielemans at his disposal. Without Tielemans, would Rodgers have got the point that he has done since arriving? Absolutely no way
Nuneaton has been consistent on this and I'm sort of with him on it, but sort of not.
The positive is that Tielemans demonstrated quite unequivocally that we are desperately short of creativity in the midfield area and what can be achieved with the right recruitment. If minds weren't focused before then they certainly will be now. We will only achieve so much with a line of defensive midfielders who can't transition play through to attack.
The bit where I agree with our Warwickshire contributor is that you should never get too attached to loan players. You see this all over the place. Look how WBA became attached to Barnes. Loan signings are not a sustainable way to progress, but can be very effective in short term need - such as getting promoted from the Championship, But you should always be prepared that you may just have to move on.
On Youri himself I still believe that #40m would be money well spent. This is on the caveat that Silva is then sold for at least #15m. I think our summer recruitment might be too constrained if we paid the money for YT and had nothing coming in the other way.
We'll have to wait and see, but at least it's clear now what we need. I hope we get him, but we have to be pragmatic about there being a very good chance we won't.
The question Joby is - if we don’t get him, who do we go for? It’s highly unlikely we will get someone of his quality for less than £40m. Any new player (not already in the PL) has to get up to speed in this division and carries the Adrien Silva risk of not being up to it
The fact is we have wasted millions on bad transfers since 2016. I’m not saying it’s all down to losing Steve Walsh but the trend since his departure has been notable. While Walsh wasn’t towards the end personally scouting every player - he was the one who gave the final nod and it seems that since his departure, we have made some very costly and poor mistakes
Tielemans interestingly enough was a player on Puels radar, without Puel I’m not convinced we would have gone for him.
The question Joby is - if we don’t get him, who do we go for?
____________________________________________
Danny Drinkwater??
comment by For Fox Sake (U4263)
posted 12 minutes ago
The question Joby is - if we don’t get him, who do we go for?
____________________________________________
Danny Drinkwater??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s a possibility. He isn’t a patch on Tielemans though - but you could do a lot worse
Maybe BRodgers will be able to get the best out of Andy King
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 53 minutes ago
Maybe BRodgers will be able to get the best out of Andy King
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d rather that than Joe Allan
I know I’ll get shot down for saying this but Silva has been doing well for Monaco. His biggest issue in the time he was with us was ball retention but the role Tielemans has been playing requires this less.
Could Silva be the man to replace Tielemans if we don’t get him?
I don’t agree with Nuneaton. I think getting Silva off the books and a player in who added value and vision to our squad, manager and season has been worth it even if we don’t get him.
As Joby points out, it’s at least focussed our recruitment on what we need!!
Sorry guys but on what planet didn't you know at Christmas that we needed somebody in midfield who could pass a ball forward? We didn't need the potential waste of time that is Tielemans to clarify that.
Adrien Silva just doesn’t have it in his locker. He’s been doing well at Monaco playing a completely different role to Tielemans. He’s the opposite player really, a more disciplined deeper midfielder who keeps things ticking over by knocking the ball sideways.
There’s no way he can step up to provide the creativity that’s been desperately missing since Mahrez left. Looks like our previous shambolic recruitment (money wasted on huge flops) has caught up with us and could now stop us spending the money on the one quality player we have identified
At least we signed Rachid Ghezzal before anyone else got him........
I guess my argument for the loan is that Tielemans was looking more Iheanacho than Aguero at Monaco. If we’d spent the cash then on an underperforming player and he didn’t settle that would have been a stupid decision.
More stupid than a loan in my view.
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
I guess my argument for the loan is that Tielemans was looking more Iheanacho than Aguero at Monaco. If we’d spent the cash then on an underperforming player and he didn’t settle that would have been a stupid decision.
More stupid than a loan in my view.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I totally agree. We couldn’t have spent £40m on a player who despite his potential was struggling badly at Monaco. The loan was the only realistic option at the time
Not arguing about the loan, it's not having a buy option that was crass.
Not suggesting we should keep Silva either.
Monaco wouldn’t agree to an option to buy.
comment by The Artist formerly known as Black Starr (U12353)
posted 1 hour, 57 minutes ago
Monaco wouldn’t agree to an option to buy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If they were wanting 40 mil for him at the time, why not put that in a buy clause? They would of got what they initially wanted and we would of had a certain amount of control. Now we may just turn out to be a shop window at Top Shop!
Sign in if you want to comment
Leicester cool interest in Tielemans
Page 2 of 3
posted on 16/5/19
I doubt he’d go cheaply even if they are relegated. It wouldn’t make a significant difference if there’s big competition from premier league clubs. £40m seems fair value in this current market.
posted on 16/5/19
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 3 minutes ago
How often do you even hear of relegation clauses even being put into contracts? They are usually ones for wages if anything.
The idea that a club that had just qualified for the CL would put in a relegation clause for one of their players just doesn’t really have basis in reality.
How many clubs have started in the CL group stages and got relegated the same season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. If it does happen then it’s usually in the instance of a key player joining a smaller club who are realistically threatened with relegation - gives them an easy out. I believe that’s what happened with Jonny evans
Absolutely no way that’s happened with Tielemans and Monaco. Even if they do get relegated, his value wouldn’t change because he’s proven he can Moreno than cut it in the PL. The whole point of the loan really
posted on 16/5/19
Players usually ask for them when joining teams that have the fear of relegation before the season begins, but even then you don’t hear of them that often. That wouldn’t ever come into negotiations when signing for a CL club, the only similar clause you could think of would be a CL clause in the event of failing to make it - which you do hear of more often. Monaco have played a blinder really.
posted on 16/5/19
You have a point about a relegation clause. I still think Monaco will wait to see which league they’re in though; and that would affect Silva, which in turn would affect our budget.
posted on 17/5/19
He’s leaving regardless of what league they are in, so it doesn’t really matter.
posted on 17/5/19
I wouldn’t want the Tielemans deal if we weren’t able to offload Silva. That could be an expensive disaster.
Tielemans for £35m and Silva for £15m is fine by me though.
posted on 17/5/19
This doesn't look good but we'll need to wait and see.
If we get Tielemans then Rudkin and co will have played a blinder.
If we don't then they will have wasted (albeit entertainingly) the end of the season - and we will be mugs for giving Monaco a shop window to the detriment of our club. Unfortunately I don't see a happy medium in this instance.
posted on 17/5/19
I actually think £40m in today's market is worth it, especially now that we've seen he can handle the league.
posted on 17/5/19
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 9 hours, 4 minutes ago
He’s leaving regardless of what league they are in, so it doesn’t really matter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This. Makes no difference - Monaco won’t care about Silva if they can get £40m from United. They will send him back and buy someone else
posted on 17/5/19
comment by Nuneaton_fox (U7936)
posted 2 hours, 15 minutes ago
This doesn't look good but we'll need to wait and see.
If we get Tielemans then Rudkin and co will have played a blinder.
If we don't then they will have wasted (albeit entertainingly) the end of the season - and we will be mugs for giving Monaco a shop window to the detriment of our club. Unfortunately I don't see a happy medium in this instance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You called this out from the very beginning in fairness. I think Monaco have played this extremely well. They had a player on their hands who had been awful for most of the season and a new manager who didn’t want him. Because he was still highly rated - they said to Leicester, buy him for £40m or have him on loan with no option to buy.
We did the latter, which I understand given the fact we have been stung so badly by our poor transfer dealings in the past (£25m for Iheanacho). However, now we have seen how exceptional he is, to not pay that fee now, irrespective of Silva, seems mad.
He’s absolutely vital for us pushing on to a top 7 place next season - if we don’t get him then it’s going to undo a lot of the progress we have made under Rodgers. Much of that progress has been down to the arrival of Tielemans who only played 3 games under Puel and was getting up to speed
posted on 17/5/19
I’m not saying Rodgers hasn’t improved things, he’s better than Puel no doubt, but to be fair to Puel, he never had a fully firing Tielemans at his disposal. Without Tielemans, would Rodgers have got the point that he has done since arriving? Absolutely no way
posted on 17/5/19
Nuneaton has been consistent on this and I'm sort of with him on it, but sort of not.
The positive is that Tielemans demonstrated quite unequivocally that we are desperately short of creativity in the midfield area and what can be achieved with the right recruitment. If minds weren't focused before then they certainly will be now. We will only achieve so much with a line of defensive midfielders who can't transition play through to attack.
The bit where I agree with our Warwickshire contributor is that you should never get too attached to loan players. You see this all over the place. Look how WBA became attached to Barnes. Loan signings are not a sustainable way to progress, but can be very effective in short term need - such as getting promoted from the Championship, But you should always be prepared that you may just have to move on.
On Youri himself I still believe that #40m would be money well spent. This is on the caveat that Silva is then sold for at least #15m. I think our summer recruitment might be too constrained if we paid the money for YT and had nothing coming in the other way.
We'll have to wait and see, but at least it's clear now what we need. I hope we get him, but we have to be pragmatic about there being a very good chance we won't.
posted on 17/5/19
The question Joby is - if we don’t get him, who do we go for? It’s highly unlikely we will get someone of his quality for less than £40m. Any new player (not already in the PL) has to get up to speed in this division and carries the Adrien Silva risk of not being up to it
The fact is we have wasted millions on bad transfers since 2016. I’m not saying it’s all down to losing Steve Walsh but the trend since his departure has been notable. While Walsh wasn’t towards the end personally scouting every player - he was the one who gave the final nod and it seems that since his departure, we have made some very costly and poor mistakes
Tielemans interestingly enough was a player on Puels radar, without Puel I’m not convinced we would have gone for him.
posted on 17/5/19
The question Joby is - if we don’t get him, who do we go for?
____________________________________________
Danny Drinkwater??
posted on 17/5/19
comment by For Fox Sake (U4263)
posted 12 minutes ago
The question Joby is - if we don’t get him, who do we go for?
____________________________________________
Danny Drinkwater??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s a possibility. He isn’t a patch on Tielemans though - but you could do a lot worse
posted on 17/5/19
Maybe BRodgers will be able to get the best out of Andy King
posted on 17/5/19
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 53 minutes ago
Maybe BRodgers will be able to get the best out of Andy King
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d rather that than Joe Allan
posted on 17/5/19
I know I’ll get shot down for saying this but Silva has been doing well for Monaco. His biggest issue in the time he was with us was ball retention but the role Tielemans has been playing requires this less.
Could Silva be the man to replace Tielemans if we don’t get him?
I don’t agree with Nuneaton. I think getting Silva off the books and a player in who added value and vision to our squad, manager and season has been worth it even if we don’t get him.
As Joby points out, it’s at least focussed our recruitment on what we need!!
posted on 17/5/19
Sorry guys but on what planet didn't you know at Christmas that we needed somebody in midfield who could pass a ball forward? We didn't need the potential waste of time that is Tielemans to clarify that.
posted on 17/5/19
Adrien Silva just doesn’t have it in his locker. He’s been doing well at Monaco playing a completely different role to Tielemans. He’s the opposite player really, a more disciplined deeper midfielder who keeps things ticking over by knocking the ball sideways.
There’s no way he can step up to provide the creativity that’s been desperately missing since Mahrez left. Looks like our previous shambolic recruitment (money wasted on huge flops) has caught up with us and could now stop us spending the money on the one quality player we have identified
At least we signed Rachid Ghezzal before anyone else got him........
posted on 18/5/19
I guess my argument for the loan is that Tielemans was looking more Iheanacho than Aguero at Monaco. If we’d spent the cash then on an underperforming player and he didn’t settle that would have been a stupid decision.
More stupid than a loan in my view.
posted on 18/5/19
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
I guess my argument for the loan is that Tielemans was looking more Iheanacho than Aguero at Monaco. If we’d spent the cash then on an underperforming player and he didn’t settle that would have been a stupid decision.
More stupid than a loan in my view.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I totally agree. We couldn’t have spent £40m on a player who despite his potential was struggling badly at Monaco. The loan was the only realistic option at the time
posted on 19/5/19
Not arguing about the loan, it's not having a buy option that was crass.
Not suggesting we should keep Silva either.
posted on 19/5/19
Monaco wouldn’t agree to an option to buy.
posted on 19/5/19
comment by The Artist formerly known as Black Starr (U12353)
posted 1 hour, 57 minutes ago
Monaco wouldn’t agree to an option to buy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If they were wanting 40 mil for him at the time, why not put that in a buy clause? They would of got what they initially wanted and we would of had a certain amount of control. Now we may just turn out to be a shop window at Top Shop!
Page 2 of 3