To be fair, it was always fairly established that Ederson would require a world record for GKs fee and the issue of the third party part-owners isn't new.
Ederson is unquestionably better than Pickford and obviously the form Bravo has been in since his arrival, so it surprises me that they wouldn't pay the price for the lad, especially if the rags will instead. It's interesting to me that the rags are seemingly open to meeting every single one of Mourinho's transfer expectations, regardless of cost, yet City seem to want to take the cheaper options.
Then MEN linking to Butland. Thoughts on that Ahsan? And heard anything else?
You are spot on. But after the take over those kind of mediocre players have been scott sinclair, navas now nolito etc. I am not saying we shoild not try that but if we have brava as a no 1 and caballero who is may be even better than bravo as a deputy. Why not give caballero a new contract. He deserve that as well, and why waste money especially when we have to address other positions and even go for a world record fee for mbappe.We aren't in for Butland. No idea where the MEN have plucked that nugget out from. No doubt someone somewhere knows Butland's agent and after his injury ravaged season he fancies a new contract.
I had a conversation with a sporting director at a club recently about valuations and what kinds of conversations are had between scouts, managers, and sporting directors. He said something which I guess is common sense but was also interesting in a way. He basically said that everyone overpays from time to time but it's all about what the net gains are in a sporting sense. The example he used was Pogba. He said that the data that was available to all the scouts suggested that there were at least a dozen players valued between 20-50 million who had either similar or stronger skill set than Pogba's either technically, or physically, or both. The valuation was skewed by the selling club's stature and the agent's confidence in finding someone to pay the world record fee.
So lets use Pickford vs Ederson as a hypothetical example. The scouts are saying that Ederson is unquestionably stronger in every single department to Pickford. But. That Pickford's skill set means he's a top drawer goal keeper who's likely to gain you as many points over a season with his shot stopping as Ederson because the physical number of shots they'll face is limited and the likelhood is that of those shots the number which would be above Pickford's ability will be incredibly limited. As a club you then choose. You can pay the excessive valuation due to where you're buying from and the agents/3rd parties involved, and get a player who is better but not necessarily better in a way that will directly translate into a markedly different points haul, or you can go for the player who's valued substantially lower but who's skill set isn't substantially lower.
It's funny because actually this is exactly the kind of contradiction which exists on Bluemoon. We batter the club for not being better and smarter in the transfer market, but when they do attempt to do it we inevitably flap because there's some headline grabbing transfer in the same position happening elsewhere. We applaud the club when they splash the cash but then hammer them if that player doesn't turn out to meet the expectations of the transfer fee (Mangala/Otamendi being prime examples).
We aren't in for Butland. No idea where the MEN have plucked that nugget out from. No doubt someone somewhere knows Butland's agent and after his injury ravaged season he fancies a new contract.
I had a conversation with a sporting director at a club recently about valuations and what kinds of conversations are had between scouts, managers, and sporting directors. He said something which I guess is common sense but was also interesting in a way. He basically said that everyone overpays from time to time but it's all about what the net gains are in a sporting sense. The example he used was Pogba. He said that the data that was available to all the scouts suggested that there were at least a dozen players valued between 20-50 million who had either similar or stronger skill set than Pogba's either technically, or physically, or both. The valuation was skewed by the selling club's stature and the agent's confidence in finding someone to pay the world record fee.
So lets use Pickford vs Ederson as a hypothetical example. The scouts are saying that Ederson is unquestionably stronger in every single department to Pickford. But. That Pickford's skill set means he's a top drawer goal keeper who's likely to gain you as many points over a season with his shot stopping as Ederson because the physical number of shots they'll face is limited and the likelhood is that of those shots the number which would be above Pickford's ability will be incredibly limited. As a club you then choose. You can pay the excessive valuation due to where you're buying from and the agents/3rd parties involved, and get a player who is better but not necessarily better in a way that will directly translate into a markedly different points haul, or you can go for the player who's valued substantially lower but who's skill set isn't substantially lower.
It's funny because actually this is exactly the kind of contradiction which exists on Bluemoon. We batter the club for not being better and smarter in the transfer market, but when they do attempt to do it we inevitably flap because there's some headline grabbing transfer in the same position happening elsewhere. We applaud the club when they splash the cash but then hammer them if that player doesn't turn out to meet the expectations of the transfer fee (Mangala/Otamendi being prime examples).
Great post, this.
One point I would throw out there is that perceptions do matter, to an extent. Impact signings are a thing, but even beyond that.
As far as we know, a few marquee signings were missed last summer, notably Bonucci and Sandro. I guess my point is that Mourinho identified the players he wanted and the rags blew their load on them, that seems like it will happen again too. How serious are City about getting the players Pep has said he wants for his squad?
Thanks, I appreciate that.
Pep's the one saying "don't pay that price" as far as I'm aware (certainly with Pogba he was). We didn't miss out on Bonucci because we weren't prepared to pay the dough, we missed out because he didn't want to move.
I totally agree about impact signings being a thing, but honestly that's not always about money either. Look at Jesus. Enormous signing impact wise, going to be a world star. Was he a 'marquee' player at 30 million pounds or whatever he cost? Not really.
If it's Pep being frugal, then that's a different issue. I would hope that it would be tempered with the understanding of how much work really needs to be done to get our squad back to the top again.
It's a different way of thinking for City though, coming from the 'you signed Phil Jones we signed Kun Aguero' style, post-takeover.
The rags are continuously linked to Griezmann, Mbappe, fucking Neymar and now Ederson/Donarumma, despite the possibility of another year without CL football and a manager who is already throwing his players under the bus he parked. City, if the rumours are correct, are eschewing that in favour of more solid yet unspectacular (Sanchez excluded of course) talent. Perhaps with the expectation Pep can make then take the next step?
We aren't in for Butland. No idea where the MEN have plucked that nugget out from. No doubt someone somewhere knows Butland's agent and after his injury ravaged season he fancies a new contract.
I had a conversation with a sporting director at a club recently about valuations and what kinds of conversations are had between scouts, managers, and sporting directors. He said something which I guess is common sense but was also interesting in a way. He basically said that everyone overpays from time to time but it's all about what the net gains are in a sporting sense. The example he used was Pogba. He said that the data that was available to all the scouts suggested that there were at least a dozen players valued between 20-50 million who had either similar or stronger skill set than Pogba's either technically, or physically, or both. The valuation was skewed by the selling club's stature and the agent's confidence in finding someone to pay the world record fee.
So lets use Pickford vs Ederson as a hypothetical example. The scouts are saying that Ederson is unquestionably stronger in every single department to Pickford. But. That Pickford's skill set means he's a top drawer goal keeper who's likely to gain you as many points over a season with his shot stopping as Ederson because the physical number of shots they'll face is limited and the likelhood is that of those shots the number which would be above Pickford's ability will be incredibly limited. As a club you then choose. You can pay the excessive valuation due to where you're buying from and the agents/3rd parties involved, and get a player who is better but not necessarily better in a way that will directly translate into a markedly different points haul, or you can go for the player who's valued substantially lower but who's skill set isn't substantially lower.
It's funny because actually this is exactly the kind of contradiction which exists on Bluemoon. We batter the club for not being better and smarter in the transfer market, but when they do attempt to do it we inevitably flap because there's some headline grabbing transfer in the same position happening elsewhere. We applaud the club when they splash the cash but then hammer them if that player doesn't turn out to meet the expectations of the transfer fee (Mangala/Otamendi being prime examples).