It's Quiet 17 - Glory Thread

Tugay One Cup said:
I don't get why people say this stuff with any conviction.

The only reason I can think of is that you've spent too long ingesting the shite all over social media from people who also know fuck all.
Click to expand...
Because the top one is obviously a dipper or rag. Don't bother with them. Sad little, obsessed, mentally disturbed keyboard warriors :)))
 
domalino said:
In a post-covid world, can anyone even afford to pay €200,000,000 / £170,000,000 for a player?

Bearing in mind it's a release clause, so 100% is due up front.

PSG are the only club in the world who can pay that IMO. Barcelona and Bayern Munich certainly can't.

Real Madrid are the obvious "threat" but the last time Perez spent €150m on someone it was Hazard and he's been a complete failure.
Click to expand...
Hazard cost £89 million.

What has already been sent me is that complete fiction that Real Madrid sent wild offers to PSG for Mbappe last summer entering his final year. What a surprise: they let that rumor go without comment exactly because it made them look financially much stronger than they actually are… (and PSG also much welcomed the headlines of them rejecting such amount)
 
BrazilianBlue (Gus) said:
Hazard cost £89 million.

What has already been sent me is that complete fiction that Real Madrid sent wild offers to PSG for Mbappe last summer entering his final year. What a surprise: they let that rumor go without comment exactly because it made them look financially much stronger than they actually are… (and PSG also much welcomed the headlines of them rejecting such amount)
Click to expand...

No, That was the initial fee. The total was €150m (I believe that was £141 at the time) and Chelsea had earned £20m from the addons in just his first season because they were so easy to get.
 
Coatigan said:
Why would they contemplate one at all? Our policy couldnt be clearer, players can leave when they wish to leave, release clause or not. If they can find a buying club with the right offer for us.

I don't believe for one second there is a release clause. Not because of what Gus, Tolmie or anyone else says, not because of what I think of Bild, but because purely based everything that I know to have happened to date, at least as publicly available.
Click to expand...

I think there is a release clause personally. Not sure why I do, though.

However, us having history of letting players leave if they want to is all well and good but the mentality of ‘that’s ok then, I won’t give myself that security’ isn’t going to be the same for all players.

You only have to look at Kane and his ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ to see that players will probably want some form of safety net.
 
Yusufmes123 said:
Lol the guy is max doing 3 years and leaving
Click to expand...
And if so we have seen one of the best striker in this generation in a Man City shirt and it is 3 years of silverware. He does have a choice to stay and many players have stayed throughout their career at city, the fans will absolutely love him and cheer his name every game he plays and he can have a affection towards the fans and that makes his mind up to stay
 
At the end of the day if the clause did exist, he'd have to be phenomenal for us for someone to come in and pay €200m. Apparently De Ligt (another Raiola client) has one for €120m kicking in this summer but nobody is talking about that because he hasn't been good enough for someone to pay it.

If someone is coming in a few years down the road and paying €200m for him then he's probably won the Balon D'or with us.
 
JustAnotherCityFan said:
At the end of the day if the clause did exist, he'd have to be phenomenal for us for someone to come in and pay €200m. Apparently De Ligt (another Raiola client) has one for €120m kicking in this summer but nobody is talking about that because he hasn't been good enough for someone to pay it.

If someone is coming in a few years down the road and paying €200m for him then he's probably won the Balon D'or with us.
Click to expand...
No matter how good De Ligt had been, no one would pay that, period, and it’s the same here. The clause would only help in negotiating wages. But Raiola is gone. For all we know, we could negotiate a new contract next year with an extension and without a clause IF there is one at all.
 
BrazilianBlue (Gus) said:
Ibra moved around because he’s so insufferable he made the environment around him at every club so toxic he had no choice but to go after a few years
Click to expand...
Blasphemy! :-)

He left..
Malmö to play internationaly
Ajax for a better/bigger league
Juventus because he didn't want to play in Serie B ("calciopoli" )
Inter to have a chance to win the CL (ironically)
Barcelona because he, just like Icaros, flew to close to the sun <-- I'll give you this one, Gus
Milan, together with Tiago Silva, because the club needed the money
PSG wanted to rejuvenate
United since his body couldn't cope with the highest level anymore, at least that's what he thought
LA to get back

Great player. A proven (league) winner, but never a player to rely on in knock-out stages. Sure, at times his ego got to him, but don't rewrite history.
 
The only real issue is if he wants to leave at some point. And if he does then I don't think it'd have mattered too much if there's a release clause.

And if he doesn't want to go he just signs an extension
 


If City are comfortable with it, it’s fine with me. It sounds like it’s an amount that would be substantial if Erling does want to leave via the clause. Inserting the release probably helped us keep his wages within our wage structure and the agent fees reasonable. It’s good for both parties, imo. With that said, he technically isn’t a City player yet, we shouldn’t be thinking about him leaving when he hasn’t even worn the shirt yet. Lets live in the moment. Happy 93:20 Day!!!
 
domalino said:
In a post-covid world, can anyone even afford to pay €200,000,000 / £170,000,000 for a player?

Bearing in mind it's a release clause, so 100% is due up front.

PSG are the only club in the world who can pay that IMO. Barcelona and Bayern Munich certainly can't.

Real Madrid are the obvious "threat" but the last time Perez spent €150m on someone it was Hazard and he's been a complete failure.
Click to expand...
Not really, the club can take payment how they like
 
SterlingSilvas said:
Not really, the club can take payment how they like
Click to expand...

A release clause has to be paid in full unless the selling club decides to do the buyer a favour, and I don't see why we would.

The more you think about the economics of buying 24 year old Haaland for €200m the more you realise it's very unlikely to happen.

€200m fee, probably another €50m agents fees and signing bonuses, then a contract of €50m/year minimum.

That's on top of the €50m/year Mbappe will be getting, and whatever Vinicius is asking for if he keeps playing as well as he has this season.

Real's wage bill in 2021 was €370m. Even for them, adding €100m a year to that by 2024 is bad management.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top