Marc Cucurella

  • Thread starter Thread starter ElleBla
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cobwebcat said:
Not much left to say about this transfer anymore. Can we officially call it a “saga” yet?

It looks very much like a situation where, in the past, we have walked away.

Brighton making noises that their business model is to let players go at a certain price made me think it was just a matter of time but I’m not as confident now.

I feel sorry for Cucu but I wouldn’t be surprised if a name we hadn’t even been linked with before suddenly signed for us instead. Cucu is for sale no doubt but not at a price we seem willing to pay.

Look at the prices we signed our last 4 players really good deals and others wondering how City did it. This is our model now.

It‘s a big thing to City to be seen to be getting value for money and to take advantage of the fact that virtually every player wants to come here. It’s probably something we, as fans, underestimate.
Click to expand...
By all accounts we've made one bid which was knocked back and have since submitted a second. I think the Viking Sagas can rest easy on their laurels.
 
Bluewars said:
This is definitely a transfer 'Saga' now and expect a sad ending.

City want to be seen as 'getting value for money' but last summer they paid a £100 Million release clause for Grealish. A player with only two years of premier league experience at the time. It's understandable some fans are confused by our approach to this transfer.

If Pep has identified Cucurella as his 1st choice LB the directors should stop bluffing and pay the fee, five seasons without a natural LB is incompetent enough.

Pep has done a great job coaching Delph, Zinchenko and Cancelo, they're all midfielders! Zinchenko will be exposed as a LB at Arsenal.

The team is incomplete without a natural Left back, why haggle over £10 Million for PR purposes.
Click to expand...

I really don’t think our directors can be accused of this. How many businesses or football clubs have you been a director of?

Let them get on with the job. If they don’t sign him they will have very good reasons. Don’t think they’ve done too badly so far
 
Centurions said:
Unless you think we paid more than the release clause then we didn't "overpay" for Grealish. We were obviously convinced he was worth it, I suspect he'll prove his worth this coming season for anyone unsure on him BTW.
Click to expand...
As others have mentioned, it's not a question of did we overpay?
Was, or is Grealish worth £100 Million? Quite evidently he is not, which begs the question why are City not applying the same logic to the Cucurella deal.
 
The slaughtered lamb said:
I think I said at the time, in today’s market and with his contract situation I could understand paying up to £80m for Grealish.

So 12 months later, here we are doing the dance around the price. We’re testing their resolve but it’s a bit pointless due to us a) our previous, and us obviously wanting him, and b) his contract situation. He’s money in the bank for them for the next 2 years; if we don’t pay £50m, someone will next season or the season after and until then they still have the player. They won’t budge.
Click to expand...
I think the release clause is interesting to think about for Cucurella. If Brighton had written one in for him last season how much would it have been? £30m? £35m? Villa set theirs because they were savvy and knew how important Grealish was for them.
 
Centurions said:
By all accounts we've made one bid which was knocked back and have since submitted a second. I think the Viking Sagas can rest easy on their laurels.
Click to expand...

Is there any reputable source confirming the 2nd bid (outside the forum, that is). Wouldn't say 'by all accounts', but might be wrong and the confirmation is arriving as I'm typing :)
 
Nicholas van Whatsisface said:
I guess this is the biggest story of his professional career - it’s probably expecting too much for him to toe the line and not turn this whole thing into some childish, binary, absurdist melodrama.

This is his one chance to get an invite from the WhatsApp group. He needs that golden ticket!!
Click to expand...

Can't be bothered to listen to him, guess he's repeating his opinions and doesn't add something new.
 
CC1 said:
I really don’t think our directors can be accused of this. How many businesses or football clubs have you been a director of?

Let them get on with the job. If they don’t sign him they will have very good reasons. Don’t think they’ve done too badly so far
Click to expand...
I back City to win the League and a domestic cup with Cancelo and JWE as Lbs, that's down to Peps brilliance. If they don't sign Cucurella I'm more than content. But no natural lb at the club for five seasons is not great from our directors.
 
Brightwell Bros. said:
I think the release clause is interesting to think about for Cucurella. If Brighton had written one in for him last season how much would it have been? £30m? £35m? Villa set theirs at because they were savvy and knew how important Grealish was for them.
Click to expand...
The Villa boys got that clause bang on. They either got to keep the player (which they probably wanted) or the buying club had to ‘overpay’. Probably right for Cucurella’s clause, maybe £40m tops.
 
Kamaro011 said:
Then why we didn't go for cheaper alternative striker last season?

I mean it's the same situation isn't?, more likely all of those alternative is smoke screen. The real and only transfer target will always be Cucurella, if we don't get our target then we wait a season until next opportunity arises.

Fans will not like it but there precedent case of why there's more likely we will not look for alternatives if Cucurella transfer failed.
Click to expand...

If you can't see the difference between the two, don't bother posting. And clearly, you can't, so I won't bother to beging pointing it out to you.
 
Pollocksheader said:
Nothing he said is wrong, why we so sensitive?
Click to expand...
The only ones getting sensitive over this are twitter brighton fans. Not sure whats to be gained by keeping him but most seem to think the club wants city to back away so they can keep him.

Flipping a player after 1 year for £30m profit, near 3 times what they paid is exactly what brighton’s model should be. Bank the profit and go buy 2 more for £10m each and go again.

His value will never be higher (though it may remain high). Cash in. I see no world where the owner actually wants to keep him over getting a high price
 
Rammy Blue said:
As people have rightly said though, we overpaid for Jack only 12 months ago so you can fully understand Brighton thinking we will do same for Cucurella.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we've potentially made a rod for our own back by paying 100m for Grealish.

It's why Leeds knew they could hold out for an extra 10-15m for Phillips and why Brighton are doing the same.
 
DorisBlue said:
The only ones getting sensitive over this are twitter brighton fans. Not sure whats to be gained by keeping him but most seem to think the club wants city to back away so they can keep him.

Flipping a player after 1 year for £30m profit, near 3 times what they paid is exactly what brighton’s model should be. Bank the profit and go buy 2 more for £10m each and go again.

His value will never be higher (though it may remain high). Cash in. I see no world where the owner actually wants to keep him over getting a high price
Click to expand...
It is the model (some of our lot still don't understand that hence the wailing on Twitter), but here it's simply the number that's the issue - your valuation doesn't meet ours. What we gain is keeping our clear (players and fans) POTS (probably for one more season max), in a position where we haven't had anything this good and where we won't get an equivalent replacement, and certainly not for £10m - if we're to progress, the numbers in our 'model' will continue increase and we're starting to see this now. Think the club see it as much more sensible, I suspect, to flip him for the same or more profit after two seasons rather than one.
 
Gully said:
It is the model (some of our lot still don't understand that hence the wailing on Twitter), but here it's simply the number that's the issue - your valuation doesn't meet ours. What we gain is keeping our clear (players and fans) POTS (probably for one more season max), in a position where we haven't had anything this good and where we won't get an equivalent replacement, and certainly not for £10m - if we're to progress, the numbers in our 'model' will continue increase and we're starting to see this now. Think the club see it as much more sensible, I suspect, to flip him for the same or more profit after two seasons rather than one.
Click to expand...
That's OK as long as his form holds.
 
Centurions said:
Unless you think we paid more than the release clause then we didn't "overpay" for Grealish. We were obviously convinced he was worth it, I suspect he'll prove his worth this coming season for anyone unsure on him BTW.
Click to expand...
Semantics. You know exactly what I mean. I like and really rate Jack so don’t get me wrong, he was just never worth £100mil, he was a £75/80mil player at max.
 
Centurions said:
Unless you think we paid more than the release clause then we didn't "overpay" for Grealish. We were obviously convinced he was worth it, I suspect he'll prove his worth this coming season for anyone unsure on him BTW.
Click to expand...

Yerry Mina had a release clause of €100m with Barca, but they ended up selling him for 30.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top