We spent £45m on a backup defensive mid a few weeks ago. If you think that's good value for money, I have no idea how you can have a problem with the idea of paying £5m more for a starter left back.
As much as I do get the club wanting to draw a line under the precedent we've already set for ourselves, I don't get why this particular move is the one where we decide to be frugal. Especially when you consider the fact that we've just sold our only left sided full back.
Just a bit weird.
Not an outstanding performance to be honestHow that play out for TAA in the CL final? Just asking.
Fair enough well reasonedAs a Brighton fan it's fascinating reading this thread and getting the other side's perspective. Having seen a lot of Cucurella live, I think he's an excellent player - and essential to the way we played for much of last season. We may be "small" in Premier League terms, and obviously we're still newbies when it comes to the big time - but the club IS ambitious, and Tony Bloom has shown many times that he will not sell unless he gets the right money (even if the player gets upset and puts in a transfer request). It's part of the club's strategy to be a long-term player in the EPL. We don't have the resources of City, and never will have. But we ARE good at unearthing young talent and fostering it. Not unlike City, but on a very small sale (eg: the relationship with Royal Union St Gilloise in Belgium, and the number of young players we currently have out on loan). We definitely do NOT take young players from bigger clubs on loan - so the prospect of fostering a relationship with City and getting some of your brightest U23s is a non-starter. And setting a perceived high price has nothing to do with BHA wanting to "get one over" City. We're not in that game! We're too small for anyone to worry about us!!
At the end of the day we MAY sell Cucurella to City, but it will take a lot more than has been offered. Cucurella is, after all, a significant upgrade on Ake. But if City don't meet the valuation, then that's fine...we keep an excellent player who has 4 years left on his contract. Cucurella may be disappointed if that's the way it pans out, but he seems a great guy, and he's hardly likely to goon strike for 4 years!
Walker was a full international at the time, and signed from a direct rival (and was £45m +5 add ons).Walker was £52m I think and Chilwell was £50m as was Wan-Bissaka. BHA will probably point to Ben White being sold for £50m and us paying £41m for Ake as they probably rate Cucurella more highly.
Josh Wilson Esbrand and James McAtee can play there.
This! Spot onThere's really nothing to debate. This is the Prem. Going into the season with FIVE healthy backs is ridiculous. Not 9/1, fucking 8/7. Are people being serious now? Optimism is one thing, track record of success as well, but being downright delusional is another. Going thru what we went thru last May isn't some kind of plan. We were a whisker away from going trophy-less which with a roster like ours and a manager like ours would have been criminal.
The first 3 or 4 league games don't matter? What the fuck are people drinking. Everyone else has 8 or 9 backs. If Laporte was healthy and Zinchenko was still here we'd still be short. That's why we were pursuing Cucurella for so long, to replace Mendy. Someone like Mbete or JWE are good for the 9th spot at this time. I cannot believe people are actually insisting we're good to go as of right now. And those of us who are concerned are being called entitled and spoiled. Actually those of you who are disrespecting our opponents by thinking we can proceed with your Aunt Betty and your fucking German Sheppard as cover and still be OK as long as the club says so are the entitled ones.
Completely agree. This is one instance where we need to cop it on the chin and pay the difference. At the moment we have two senior fullbacks for the season staring next weekend, after just selling our third fullback.We spent £45m on a backup defensive mid a few weeks ago. If you think that's good value for money, I have no idea how you can have a problem with the idea of paying £5m more for a starter left back.
As much as I do get the club wanting to draw a line under the precedent we've already set for ourselves, I don't get why this particular move is the one where we decide to be frugal. Especially when you consider the fact that we've just sold our only left sided full back.
Just a bit weird.
Why go to £45m though? They initially hinted at £35m and city bid that, the goalposts were moved to £50m take it or leave it, now they are briefing their media outlets that an offer well in excess of £50m would be needed to tempt them to sell… See the issue here? Everyone saying “pay the extra £10m” are missing the fact they want more than £50m to even discuss it. They are taking the piss for a player nobody knew about 12 months ago and are using the fact he won player of the year at Brighton as justification!Thought for sure we’d at least go to 45mil.
Sticking at near 35mil though, ballsy from txiki! Don’t think it’ll work though
He isn’t worth £30m + a player so it won’t get done. City didn’t want to sell Zinchenko, he wanted to go so we facilitated that. He was worth £32M to Arsenal. He is an established international and has captained his country. He is a better player that Cucurella. He wasn’t let go so we could buy Cucurella, it was his time to go. His value has no bearing on a replacement LB. To suggest so is infantile.Ignore him. He’s known for chatting absolute bollocks.