2018/19 Yerry Mina

[MikeH72]

Yes but if he’s absolute garbage we are losing 30M, which we wouldn’t be losing on a loan.

As I say we have a fair chunk to lose and after inflation not a lot to gain.

I’m harping on now so I will leave it lads.

What if he’s not absolute garbage though, you know, the far more likely scenario?

 

[ProZ]

But that's the risk with any player ffs?

No because when you invest that kind of money in a player, you should be able to decide if you’d like to keep the player, or sell him on for a lot more than inflation.

In a world when Harry Maguire is not being sold for 75m, if Mina turns out to be good for us, he’s going to be worth a hell of a lot more than that.

 

[Bluerobins]

I think all need to worry less about the ins and outs of every transfer on here. After all, there isn’t a single one of us that understands the intricacies and has visualised any of the contracts that we are on about.

 

[Lanolin]

No because when you invest that kind of money in a player, you should be able to decide if you’d like to keep the player, or sell him on for a lot more than inflation.

In a world when Harry Maguire is not being sold for 75m, if Mina turns out to be good for us, he’s going to be worth a hell of a lot more than that.

I for one look forward to the day in 12 months time when we use your faultless metrics to sell Michael Keane for £45m.

 

[blulouie]

True but it all comes from the same source, the true cost of a transfers the fee and cost of a contract. Id say we make a profit of a 1-5 million if they exercised their option. Like i dont like the deal, but i like the player.

My name is not Neil by the way!

We would still have to pay a wage to any other centre back....or you could just say he is on Ashley Williams money.

The deal is what it is , if thats the way we have to do deals to get a better calibre of player, I'm more than happy with that.

 

[dholliday]

I'm not sure I can believe that when I see that Sandro scored 15 goals in there, and Stuani - who scored 7 goals in a Championship season for Middlesbrough - got 19 in La Liga last year.

that's a very unfair comparison when you consider they have barca and real the two best teams in the world

that league has about 4/5 teams in who stature wise are league 2 standards, spain has 3 world class teams ( Madrid teams and barca ) they have Valencia who are decent then 1 or 2 half decent teams then the rest are absolutely garbage

Oh yeah, the top teams are absolutely brilliant don't get me wrong. There's loads of dross though, more than here i'd say.

I didn't say they was league 2 standard I said the club stature is, ie stadium/fanbase size etc

Is this a troll? La Liga has much worse sides than the prem. In england we have just promoted sides spending a 100Mil ffs. La Liga has four good sides

hmmm, spending money doesn't make a good side. Spanish sides have constantly shown themselves to be stronger in Europe and they have far more than 4 good sides!

Which teams outside of there 4 top sides have done well in Europe?? Baring in mind they do treat Europe far more importantly than we do as well.

like Sevilla? that side who got to the CL QF last season beating United and who always go far in the EL. Or Celta Vigo who got to the EL semi final 3 years ago

Celta Vigo could have quite easily beaten United in the Europa League a couple years back and made the final. Athletic Bilbao played in a Europa League final. I'd say having Barca Atletico and Real Madrid all making the Champions League final is hugely impressive compared to anything England can offer. Then you have Sevilla, Athletic, Villarreal, Celta all with deep European runs in recent years.

Seville are one of there 4 successful clubs.



To use Celt a Vigo and Villarreal who both got beat by an English team sort of strengthens the point. Especially considering it’s in a competition English teams have no interest in.

We’ve had good runs in it also but so have other clubs but using the Europa league as a baromater of how strong La Liga is outside there 5 top clubs and then saying Celta, Villarreal and Athletic have had good runs just confirms it’s actually not that strong.

Liverpool, Arsenal, United, Leicester, Chelsea, City and Spurs have all had good runs in the Champions Lge. That’s 7 clubs reaching the latter stages of the big one in recent years despite the tougher domestic schedule.

I'm not really sure if there is any real way to change your mind given how selective your evidence is but you'll be hard pressed to find many people who will say the Premier League top to bottom is stronger than La Liga. More entertaining at times maybe but on quality for me it isn't close. Watching teams like Cardiff, Newcastle and Southampton all but confirms that.

One of the reasons that this myth of the Prem being harder developed is outside Ferguson no one was managed well enough to dominate. As good as he was he never really put up seasons in line with what Barca and Real have done. Granted he never had peak Messi and only had peak Ronaldo for two years but still. Pep is showing how it can be done in the Premier League too.

The technical quality in La Liga is miles better than the EPL

Look at Valencia..they finished fourth and I thought we outplayed them and looked much better on the ball (despite the loss). Massive reach to say more than two sides have proven stronger in Europe. A Chelsea side that was the weakest its been in years outplayed Atletico.

I think it’s just foreign football really. Stick most European leagues on and it looks more aesthetically pleasing than most teams in the PL. Most jarg teams in the EL will look nicer it’s just how their players are brought up really.

Less noticeable now with both the amount of foreigners in the PL and also the change in now academies teach the kids.

Barca and madrid, yes. We looked much better on the ball than fourth place finishers Valencia. Their only chances came on terrible individual errors. We picked apart their defense with smart passing and good skill. You are massively overrating their league. They looked a very average side.

If the technical quality in the Spanish league is so great, then how did Sandro ever get a game?

Sevilla won three Euro cups in a row, Real 3 CL, Athleti have won 3 EL since around 2009 Barca have won 3 in recent times. They have had a strangle hold on the competitions in recent times. You just have to look at Coaching license numbers per country Spain out numbers England 9-1 just on these figures alone. Coaching, youth development and technical ability is streets ahead in Spain it’s not even worth arguing.

The EPL has a high standard due to the influx of cash and foreigners and it’s a league focused more on athleticism.

La Liga is a far higher standard technically it’s not even up for debate there’s a reason why the best players in England ain’t English

It's really not, they just have lots of time on the ball. The premier league is much faster.

The list of Spanish players who were highly regarded who came over here and couldn't adapt is quite high.

Less time on the ball means more mistakes that’s true but there’s a reason why English sides get smacked in Europe running around like headless chooks doesn’t work that well against composed teams

You've just mentioned 4 of the best teams in Spain. Who are dominate in Europe but what about the rest of the leauge? There's about 6 teams that can hold their own the rest you can get a better game down the pits.

Also the top teams in Spain take all the money and can afford to buy the best players, one of them is rolled buy the monarchy ffs.

And on the point of foreigners last season:

Reals best three players were from Portugal, Croatia, Germany.

Barca's best three players were from Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil

Athleticos best three players were from France, Brazil and Uruguay

They have just as much foreigners at the teams that can afford them as the premier league.

It really isn't, outside of Sevilla, Barca, Real, Ateletico, and Valencia there isn't any real quality, and the top sides usually steamroll anyone outside of that group

Villarreal would have battered us last season. Betis are a good side. Bilbao underperformed last season.

Most of the top half are all very slick teams. Most of the bottom half - cloggers.

Do some of you realize that the prior two coaches were just really bad? When players have good track records elsewhere, they don’t magically become bad players.

And the Spanish league is not just more technical, it’s just a better quality league. Love the PL, thought. The time on the ball thing is silly. There’s a reason these team have more time on the ball. Press a technical team and see what happens.

None of that is in any way related to your point though. It doesn't matter whether the best players here are English or not, they're still here, and so they still count towards the technical quality of the league. You've also used the example of the same 4 teams that the poster you were replying to had said they were discounting as the point was about depth.

To me it depends what you class as technical quality. Is a defender who has a great touch and passing ability but can't head, tackle or intercept technically good or technically bad? Are we judging them on the technical skills most relevant to their role, or those most pleasing on the eye?

Anyway, looking forward to see Mina when he eventually manages to get himself on to the pitch.

I keep hearing this drivel about the Premier league being much faster.. I heard it when Pep dominated with Barca and I half believed it until i watched Bilbao completely over run Manchester United in the Europa League and made them look like yard dogs.

well it's very easy to look at one or two games in isolation and make a opinion (no matter how informed).

For starters the way a team players in a leauge is different to how they play in Europe. You have to play to win over two legs not 38 games. As well as that not being United's best year with them crashing out of the champions leauge in the group stages and de gea still being ropey.

If you actually watch the Spanish leauge and not base your opinion on a one off game from 6 years ago, you'll see just how slow it can be. I mean watch two of the teams outside of the top 6 play each other, it's like when the Simpsons got to watch the football.

lots of debate, so let's put it to a poll to get the definitive answer:

https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/la-liga-vs-prem.104833/

 

[Neiler]

On the fee, we make a £25m profit (give or take).

You don't really take wages into account when talking about profit on a fee...

We're not mate, you are, but im not.

 

[Neiler]

We would still have to pay a wage to any other centre back....or you could just say he is on Ashley Williams money.

The deal is what it is , if thats the way we have to do deals to get a better calibre of player, I'm more than happy with that.

Yes, but the reality is it is factored as an outgoing, ultimately the whole deal is probably cost neutral with he fee and wages we arent making 20 million n the deal, a small profit i expect. There isnt a massive pot for transfer fees and a different one for wages that doesnt come of the bottom line the same way.

We have Zouma for a year.

We have Yerry for two years.

The Yerry deal isnt the deal of the century, its a glorified cost neutral loan deal, all going well for the lad. If hes rubbish its irrelevant.

 

[Neiler]

Absolute wham central this thread, I cannot believe some people manage to function in the world.

Agreed.

 

[Neiler]

It doesn’t mate, it has literally nothing to do with the fee. If you think it does then we’ve made a profit on Davy Klaassen because we’ve saved on his £6m a year wages for the next 4 years.

Seriously do you believe this?

Of course it does.

I cant believe what you just wrote that about Klassen.

Wages and transfers fees arent mutually exclusive when working out the liability on signing a player.

Thats the most of the wall thing ive read on here in a long time.

 

[MikeH72]

Seriously do you believe this?

Of course it does.

I cant believe what you just wrote that about Klassen.

Wages and transfers fees arent mutually exclusive when working out the liability on signing a player.

Thats the most of the wall thing ive read on here in a long time.

Why can’t you believe it? You’ve just said we have to take into account player wages when talking about transfer fees and profit we make after we sell a player. What is it you’re not getting?

 

[Goat]

Why can’t you believe it? You’ve just said we have to take into account player wages when talking about transfer fees and profit we make after we sell a player. What is it you’re not getting?

Hes all over the place here sadly.

 

[toffeejack]

True but it all comes from the same source, the true cost of a transfers the fee and cost of a contract. Id say we make a profit of a 1-5 million if they exercised their option. Like i dont like the deal, but i like the player.

My name is not Neil by the way!

Wow, I'd never even read it as Neil. It's davek all over again where I never even contemplated he was called dsve

 

[Connor]

We have Yerry for two years.

.

We have him for five, no?

I seem to remember that this a full transfer. Not a loan deal.

 

[MikeH72]

Hes all over the place here sadly.

I’ve never heard that argument used ever. Is every player’s transfer fee a rolling thing depending on how long they stay and how much wages we’ve paid them overall? So so far we’ve paid £11m for Sandro but that could rise to £35m if he sees out his contract? Is that how we’re looking at transfers now?