Marc Cucurella

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kalimantan said:
Can't I just turn it round and ask what on earth would be the point of us selling Cucurella for £30m? That would be a 15m pound profit, all of it needed to be spent on a replacement as we don't have a back up there. What would be the point? We don't need the money and we'll be a better team with him in it.

The Foden comparison is simply that he is one of your best young players, equivalent to Cucu for us. What's he actually worth? 80m, maybe100? So by your logic you should be happy to accept that bid for him if it came in. But you wouldn't, you'd reject it out of hand. You want to keep him, unless the offer is too good to refuse. That's the logic of our valuation.
Click to expand...
OK, allow me to explain how this transfer thingy works. Rarely will a club make a blind bid for a player. The players representatives will have been sounded out before an approach is made, so if PSG came in for Foden & the player stayed schtum, it's reasonable to assume the players is:

A. Interested in a move

B. Is using the interested club to negotiate a better contract

Either way, it's a dangerous game to play with City who've always said we won't stand in the way of players wanting to leave or stand for any games as Yaya Touré found out to his cost. Luckily for us, most of our top performers are more than happy with their lot at our club.

This is also the difference with your Cucurella/Foden comparison. As it stands Cucurella wants to leave, whilst Foden is busy committing his longterm future to his boyhood club where he's been since the age of 8 so I fail to see where the comparisons lie. Also, Foden isn't our best player, he's just one of them.

So since the breakdown in negotiations with Brighton over Cucurella, City have been linked with two other left backs. One rumoured to be valued at £20m - £25m & the other at £25m - £30m. Neither have PL experience, but as many posters on these pages have stated, City could buy BOTH for less than the price of Cucurella. So if we can source these Cucurella alternatives at those prices, why can't Brighton? I mean it's only 12 months since you sourced Cucurella for £15m. )(

Yes you'll be a better team with Cucurella in it, but the player doesn't want you & wants to leave. What reasons do you have to put such a punitive price on the head of your current player of the season & for it to not have serious future ramifications for your club?
 
JewelZee said:
Exactly. And while Cucurella has shown to be dynamite up the left flank this idea that he's not going there to compete with Chillwell but to play LCB in a 3 back set makes it even stranger. Ake may not be the LB Cucurella is, but Cucurella is 1000% not the LCB Ake is either. If Chelsea are actually looking for a replacement for Rudiger Ake is by far the better option. So we're supposed to believe 50 mil for Ake was too much for Chelsea, but possibly up to 65 mil for Cucurella to play out of position is OK with Chelsea. And I know Cucurella has played some at LCB, but without his ability to get up the field, run the line, and whip in crosses his value becomes much diminished. He is far from special as an inside back and IMO not even worth City's opening 30 mil pound bid in that position.
Click to expand...
Maybe City had no choice knowing Laporte was going to have his operation
Early videos shows both Laporte & Dias in Spain at the time Haaland was having his 1st part of the medical

I guess after those reports City were left with no choice for Laporte & told Chelsea to fuck off?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.