Which club is their transfer model not based mostly on agreeing terms with the player first and hoping they don’t listen to other clubs before negotiating with the club?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Josko Gvardiol
- Thread starter Lkzerinho
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
B
B
BrazilianGus
Guest
I didn’t want Cucurella, made it clear on this very board. I don’t think we can judge him based on one season at the worst and messiest Chelsea has looked in ages — it certainly wasn’t his fault, he was caught up in it. But Pep and the club wanted him. It’s funny, you back the club’s choices but they wanted a dogshit player? I don’t judge players retrospectively based on how they performed in clubs they eventually joined. I believe the majority of them would have actually excelled with usYeah but Cucurella is dogshit, we dodged a bullet with him. Let's see if Rice can cut it at a bigger club and front and centre. We pulled out signing Van Dijk and that didn't bother us too much. We missed out going higher for kane, we win the league.
I back txiki and the board in buying players and not buying players, they got a better idea than us. They've never let us down before imo, let's see if they surprise a few in these next 6 weeks.
I'm sure Txiki and the board would say that, on the whole, it's a strategy that's worked and they'd be sat in front of a LOT of trophies :)
You can't win them all and I'm sure if we'd have paid £150m for Kane, £90m on Koulibaly, £150m on Haaland then they'd be asking £200m for Gvardiol!
Or when City’s CEO Soriano announces to the world City’s revenues will be £700mill, and City will be No1 in the world. Selling clubs remember those kind of boast.
It’s the same with Rice. West Ham had been saying £120M for a long while. Arsenal offer £100M and we pull our claiming the moral high ground? Lol give me a break. Cucurella was another. We actually believed Brighton would just cave in. He probably listened to Chelsea after seeing we weren’t being serious, and I can’t blame him and his agent for it
Not about caving in it’s about what city value is! If we don’t think £86m is our value we will walk
B
B
BrazilianGus
Guest
Does it work? Usually we struggle trying to sign players without a release clause or players that clubs actually want to get rid of or planned on sellingIt works though, so thats all that matters.
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 29,477
Who gives a fuck. Last 11 years we‘ve won a load of trophies, broken numerous records, not made losses. Whatever we do it works better than anyone else. Nothing else matters.I didn’t want Cucurella, made it clear on this very board. I don’t think we can judge him based on one season at the worst and messiest Chelsea has looked in ages — it certainly wasn’t his fault, he was caught up in it. But Pep and the club wanted him. It’s funny, you back the club’s choices but they wanted a dogshit player? I don’t judge players retrospectively based on how they performed in clubs they eventually joined. I believe the majority of them would have actually excelled with us
TFC
Well-Known Member
The amount of absolute solid gems brought in, and bullets dodged in recent times, I think our club does a pretty fucking exceptional job when it comes to transfers. I’m pretty sure they’ll take care of business here.
But we wouldn’t have gotten near 120M even if he had picked up the phone
Correct rumour was 75m up front and addons of 25m we emailed them we got no response..
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 29,477
Treble.Does it work? Usually we struggle trying to sign players without a release clause or players that clubs actually want to get rid of or planned on selling
Publicly City still haven’t walked. So we’re still in for him?Not about caving in it’s about what city value is! If we don’t think £86m is our value we will walk
- Status
- Not open for further replies.