The European Club Soccer Off-Season Thread

[cam_wmh]

I don't have alot of faith in Woodward.. leaving it this late, even if it were on the Basque club, still could have been avoided with a prudent amount of time allowed for the transfer.

And paying more than the buy-out for Fellaini? That should be his termination right there.
I'm sure he's paid around a few million quid a season, and he just squandered his yearly salary with that screw up.

[Locke]

Crap. Arsenal grabbing Ozil might be the signing of the season. What the hell were Madrid thinking letting him go?

I would say that he was RM's second best play-making midfielder after Xabi Alonso. Isco is good, but hes no Ozil.

Modric must be stoked, he might actually get his ass off the bench one of these days.

[Barnet Flame]

The signing of Ozil is not nearly enough on its own. Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased with the signing, but this needs to be built upon during the next couple of windows. If not, it is a complete waste of time and a waste of his talent.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

The signing of Ozil is not nearly enough on its own. Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased with the signing, but this needs to be built upon during the next couple of windows. If not, it is a complete waste of time and a waste of his talent.

I agree, but the guy is in his prime, I know hes making truckloads of cash, I read somewhere that RM had to offload him because he was making £200k/wk, but hes a brilliant attacking midfielder.

I agree that some of his potential will be wasted by inconsistent finishing, but hes going to make that midfield better instantly.

As soon as I heard that Arsenal bought him I was wondering why Liverpool didnt look at him, but hes really not a Rodgers style of player, he passes the ball forward far too much for BR's liking. It would be the Nuri Sahin thing all over again, just far more expensive.

[SuperMatt18]

Other issue with the Ozil signing was it didn't fill an area of weakness. It brings a star to an already deep position, and it is a great move because that star is only 24 and will be the focal point of the team now, but wasn't their need.

Defense and Striker were bigger needs and they didn't get filled.

[Addick]

I think it was a very tidy piece of business. Although it does not address Arsenal's most pressing needs, it does address one of our needs (i.e. more creativity).

Originally Posted by Addick

Needs
Additional Striking Options - We only have one recognized striker and while he did have a relatively successful first season in England, he isn't proving himself to be clinical.
Creativity in the Midfield - When Cazorla is in the middle of the park, we miss the creativity that Nasri provided on the flanks. When Cazorla is move to the wing, we miss the creativity that Fabregas provided in the centre of the park. We either need a creative winger or a creative midfielder.
A Tackling/Grittier Holding Midfielder - It might not be as dire of a need as many think, but it definitely would not hurt to have a box-to-box midfielder that didn't mind getting stuck in.
A Mobile but Stay-At-Home Defender - Although the BFG does get caught for pace at times, his positioning is often excellent and the coverage he provides an attack-minded CB partner essential. Why not find someone who does the latter but isn't hindered by the former?

In hindsight, I probably should have added a veteran keeper to this list. Going forward as if I did, I think Wenger may well have scored 3 out of 5.

Additional Striking Options - Not Addressed.
Creativity in the Midfield - With Özil, Fabregas has finally been replaced and Cazorla can provide a creative option on the wing.
A Tackling/Grittier Holding Midfielder - While Flamini may not have the passing abilities a team like Arsenal would want from their ideal DM, he's a solid addition. He'll provide the required defensive cover and allow Arsenal time to look for the ideal solution. A sufficient solution for now.
A Mobile but Stay-At-Home Defender - Not Addressed.
A Mentor & Competition For Szczęsny - Viviano isn't ideal either but could work out; possibly a sufficient solution.

[Locke]

Another question, who is Iago Aspas and why did we buy him? It looked like 12 against 10 for Man U on the weekend with Aspas out there.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by carom

Isn't this United's fault for leaving this so late?

of course it is. Signing a player from Bilbao is very complex, as we saw with Martinez and Llorente last year. If United genuinely wanted the player, why wait until 3 days before the deadline? This should have started weeks ago.

Originally Posted by carom

Isn't it United's fault for getting Herrera's expectations up without having their homework done?

well to be fair, if a team agrees to pay a buyout clause AND the player wants the move, it normally gets done, right? It's just that Bilbao is a very stubborn club when it comes to that. United (and probably Herrera too) underestimated that, I think. But yeah, I feel they should have known.

Originally Posted by valo403

Doesn't that sort of make the buyout clause moot? Seems like an odd result.

IIRC, in Spain and Portugal every single player MUST have a buyout clause, that's why even Messi, Ronaldo and all the other superstars have one (although extremely high though, I think Ronaldos is a billion €). I don't know if I understand the system correctly, but obviously there are options for a club that doesn't want to sell at all. Bilbao always seems to be willing to go the extra mile to keep their players against their will ... happened with Martinez (who at one stage was "kidnapped" by Bayern and flown to Munich for the medical in the middle of the night) and Llorente (who was forced to sit out the final year of his contract without playing much), so it's not really a surprise they pulled that stunt with Herrera too. Again: based on that, I feel that United should have known that 3 days wasn't nearly enough to make it happen.

[cam_wmh]

#DavidGillIn

[The Big Chill]

Originally Posted by Locke

Another question, who is Iago Aspas and why did we buy him? It looked like 12 against 10 for Man U on the weekend with Aspas out there.

Aspas scored 12 goals and had 7 assists in La Liga last season while playing for a bad team. He also had a great preseason this year. I think it's fair to give him a chance to prove himself. It's also likely that he will be used as a sub once Suarez is back anyway.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by The Big Chill

Aspas scored 12 goals and had 7 assists in La Liga last season while playing for a bad team. He also had a great preseason this year. I think it's fair to give him a chance to prove himself. It's also likely that he will be used as a sub once Suarez is back anyway.

Obviously I'll give him time, that was the first time I watched him play, but he was brutal. Useless first touch, always looking to the ref and talked himself into a yellow card.

You could tell he was always going to be the first player subbed off.

[Bagor]

So, apparently United paid 23.5 for Fellaini

With Everton demanding £27.5 million and Moyes unprepared to offer beyond the £23.5 million escape clause in Fellaini’s contract, which expired on July 31 but was due to be reactivated on Jan 1, the 25-year-old broke the deadlock by waiving £4 million in loyalty bonuses to get the deal done in the final hours of the transfer window.

By submitting a transfer request shortly before 8pm, Fellaini ensured Everton would not be forced to pay the player £4 million in loyalty bonuses, enabling the two clubs to agree a deal worth £27.5 million to the selling club.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...-collapse.html

United insist they have paid Everton no more than the £23.5m release clause that was in Fellaini’s contract – a clause that expired at the end of July – but Everton say the deal is worth £27.5m to them. The difference is understood to be Fellaini’s own cash sacrifice.By submitting a written transfer request on deadline day Fellaini, left, has forfeited about £4m in loyalty bonuses that would have been due on the two years remaining on his Everton contract . That has allowed Everton to declare the deal as being worth £27.5m to them.
Fellaini will make up for his lost bonuses over the course of the four-year contract he has signed at United, which has seen his wages jump by £50,000-a-week to £125,000-a-week

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/footb...chester-United

He'll recoup the 4M in wage increases in the first year.

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by Bagor

So, apparently United paid 23.5 for Fellaini

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...-collapse.html

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/footb...chester-United

He'll recoup the 4M in wage increases in the first year.

Everton director of communications Alan Myers seems to be saying that that is not the case, and that the buying club is paying £27.5m. Just public relations damage control at Old Trafford to try and save face after a nightmare of a transfer window.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Nuje

Everton director of communications Alan Myers seems to be saying that that is not the case, and that the buying club is paying £27.5m. Just public relations damage control at Goodison Park to try and save face after losing another star to United.

FYP

See how that goes both ways? I don't know which is true, and while both are plausible the version United has put out there makes the most sense.

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by valo403

FYP

See how that goes both ways? I don't know which is true, and while both are plausible the version United has put out there makes the most sense.

Why would they bother if they're getting the money either way?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Nuje

Why would they bother if they're getting the money either way?

Because they aren't getting the money either way?

The story as told by United has Everton receiving 23.5mil and saving 4mil. The story as told by Everton has them receiving 27.5mil, with no mention of savings. One results in an influx of 27.5mil, the other in an influx of 23.5mil. The net may be the same, but the optics of receiving 27.5mil, especially when leaving the potential savings out of the story to allow speculation, is a heck of a lot better for Everton.

It also let's their fans say 'You took another one of our stars, but we got one over on you', when that might not be the case at all.

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by valo403

Because they aren't getting the money either way?

The story as told by United has Everton receiving 23.5mil and saving 4mil. The story as told by Everton has them receiving 27.5mil, with no mention of savings. One results in an influx of 27.5mil, the other in an influx of 23.5mil. The net may be the same, but the optics of receiving 27.5mil, especially when leaving the potential savings out of the story to allow speculation, is a heck of a lot better for Everton.

It also let's their fans say 'You took another one of our stars, but we got one over on you', when that might not be the case at all.

One could say that, yes. But Everton did a great job in general with bringing in Barry, McCarthy and Lukaku. Between the two squads, Everton aren't the ones who need to save face this transfer window.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Nuje

One could say that, yes. But Everton did a great job in general with bringing in Barry, McCarthy and Lukaku. Between the two squads, Everton aren't the ones who need to save face this transfer window.

I disagree, United may not have had a great transfer window but in regards to their history with United Everton have every reason to try to save face. Their only recent superstar? Left for United. Their long term manager? Left for United. Their most recent elite talent? Left for United.

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by valo403

I disagree, United may not have had a great transfer window but in regards to their history with United Everton have every reason to try to save face. Their only recent superstar? Left for United. Their long term manager? Left for United. Their most recent elite talent? Left for United.

Did the story of the £4 mil. come out of Old Trafford even? Sounded like just papers reporting. I'll take the word of someone who actually works for a club involved.

[d_phaneuf]

ok so you have a club in Everton who everyone says had a great window, improved the squad etc.

saying they received 27.5m

you have a club in United, who have been roundly criticized for their transfer window, and who do things like this

http://www.theguardian.com/football/...chester-united

It is understood the lawyers had been instructed by United to attempt to find a resolution to the transfer and, according to sources at the Spanish league, did so with the formal authorisation from Manchester United....

Faced with the uncertainty and potentially extra costs involved in tax, United decided not to proceed, thereby forcing Herrera to stay in Spain, the sources state. United had told the midfielder to be prepared in the event of a deal going through. Once the deal collapsed, United claimed that the three men had nothing to do with them.

so ya...