Kyle Walker

[Dax777]

And if Gundogan is injured and we have sold Fernandinho. We're left with Yaya as our only option for sitting midfielder. I think the reason we gave Yaya one more year was insurance just in case Gundogan has any recovery / injury problems.

We'd have Delph :)

 

[Dax777]

Anyway I'm ruining this thread. So I'll stop now. :)

 

[SPIDERBOY]

That's possible. And we'll pay the fee. But I wouldn't go so far as calling it a good deal. An overpriced necessity, maybe.

The club will pay what the boys in charge deem worthy,not what you,me or anyone else deem worthy.
Not a dig at you personally,just getting on my tits now how some ramble about fees......it won't have no impact on our lives....let them do what they have to.

 

[blueparrot]

How are we short when we sell either Kolarov or Dihno?

We had two players missing most of last season Gundogan and Kompany Ive explained how Fernadinho could leave us short. Injury to Kompany and no Kolarov we have Stones and Otamendi thats it . We all hope Gundogan and Kompany stay fit but we wont be putting all our eggs in that basket, when we can avoid that risk by simply buying a homegrown Walker the best right back in the league instead if selling a player we might need just so we can shop abroad for a right back. It makes no sense which is why the club arent doing it.

 

[Cityfan]

Three reasons I can't agree with that.

1 - if we want to buy the best you have to pay the inflated prices. John stones is a young, highly promising English player and he was highly in demand when we bought him. It doesn't matter that Everton had a replacement, we were in competition with united and chelsea for him. we were never going to get him much cheaper than we did.

2 - you can look at almost any team in the top flight and you will be able to find a handful of players that look like they may have been overpriced when bought. It's just the way these things go. For every mangala is a Gabi Jesus.

We can either spend a lot less in future or we can buy the best, we can't do both, it's not realistic

3 - if we sold stones today we may not make back what we paid but in 2-3 years time he could be worth much more. This is the very nature of speculative investment.

An interesting post and one that If ind myself nodding in agreement with a lot of what you say. However on your last point, City's business is not speculative investment. Silva, Toure, Aguero, De Bruyne and others are not players we want to sell on at a profit. They are players we want to keep and build a team from, our profits come from team success not selling on players. Where selling players has importance is in players that we don't want that we recoup adequate money so thay we can continue to build the team with the money that we have. Stones will be a success not on whether we could or couldn't sell him for more money but whether or not he contributes to the success of the team. The same is true for Walker, whereas financial prudence dictates that we don't massively overpay his apparent market value. A moderate payment over apparent market value could easily be recompensed if it brings increased success on the pitch.

 

[CityFan94]

Walker will be amazing in our team, it'll suit him perfectly.

Walker and Rose have easily been the best full backs in the country for the last 18 months.

 

[AshLunn92]

An interesting post and one that If ind myself nodding in agreement with a lot of what you say. However on your last point, City's business is not speculative investment. Silva, Toure, Aguero, De Bruyne and others are not players we want to sell on at a profit. They are players we want to keep and build a team from, our profits come from team success not selling on players. Where selling players has importance is in players that we don't want that we recoup adequate money so thay we can continue to build the team with the money that we have. Stones will be a success not on whether we could or couldn't sell him for more money but whether or not he contributes to the success of the team. The same is true for Walker, whereas financial prudence dictates that we don't massively overpay his apparent market value. A moderate payment over apparent market value could easily be recompensed if it brings increased success on the pitch.

Yeh totally agree. In football there are two different forms of return on investment, sell on value and sporting contribution. City are not interested in sell on values since we never sell our best players (in fact we dont even sell the bad ones but that's another story altogether)

 

[MaccBlueSS115]

Walker is worth more than 25m I am not sure why you think he's not. Are you telling me Stones should be worth that when he hits his peak in 3 years too?

Stones isn't worth 50 million either, but like a say we're going to get more years out of him then Walker, coupled with stones' nationality, his unique style of play for his position, the fact he's future captain material and you can understand the inflated fee being that high, plus in my opinion Centre-backs are worth more as its such as crucial position on the pitch. Walker's got 3 years at his best, we only want him for his pace and nationality, he's a full back, he doesn't have any decent experience in cup finals or the final stages of European competition either.

45 million should get you more than just pace and English nationality.

 

[Crouchinho]

45 million should get you more than just pace and English nationality.

Unfortunately that's the way it is. Decent/above average English players have had fees over 20m. Milner, Lescott, Shaw, Lallana, Carroll, Stones, Sterling, Jones, Henderson etc. Considering we are moving a few years on it's about the right price.

You can't blame Levy in the slightest, he would do the same to United, that's why Ferguson hated him too

I think City want Walker more than Spurs want to sell right now, but as I said we have decent back up (not as good as Walker obviously) if we did sell.

I'm going to have a wild guess and say he'll go for 37.5m and with a load of Levy addons

 

[mosssideblue]

Why agree with a lie? The solution is right there in his claim. Find a worth it foreign fullback and move Kolarov and Dihno. The very 2 names he mentioned.

And I'm.not even a front office guy. But I can see the possibilities.

Kolarov, Bravo, Dihno, and Ota. Are four foreign players who are unlikely to be starters. You can move any of them.


Lets go outside the box here

Henrichs in
Dihno out
Delph stays.

Henrichs a 14 million pound up and coming RB, with the best tackle/Interception combo of all fullbacks in the top 5 leagues. Comes in to learn from Alves and team up with him to dominate the RB position. He is bigger than Walker, just as rapid, a better crosser, uses both feet well. Way younger too. So more moldable. Boom! Full back problem solved.

Move Dihno on. Yes, its painful, great player, good lad, but closing in on 32 and showed a bit of decline last season. Unlikely to start at any position and mostly will probably be a deep backup next year. Sell for 8 million. Total Net spend on Right back? 6 million! Now that's putting together a good deal.



Keep Delph as the 6th CM instead. Sure he'll be injured a lot, but lets be real, the other 5 will play 95% of the games even if he or Digno were healthy for every game.

So issue solved. And we still have 3 wildcards we can move if the Mbappe thing shakes :)

I agreed with an opinion, you know, something that people have