Under 70m isn’t really an excellent fee though, especially before we see who and what price we have to spend on a replacement.
1 Like
I don’t think getting Isak is dependent on Diaz being sold. They’re not connected at all.
Our move for Rodrygo (or another) on the other hand…
The mentioned €100m wasn’t realistic anyway, never believed that.
It was always the case of a club going a bit higher and us lowering the ceiling a bit.
It’s a bit lower than what I expected, but not much lower.
Gakpo needs to continue on this trajectory and also look to improve even more and we’ve added or about to add more players who should take the mantle of being key players.
And I don’t expect us to go for Rodrygo after Ekitike, Isak and a CB.
Exactly. Before this summer I didn’t expect us to be able to repeat last season with the same players. If this summer means ‘too many changes’ so we don’t start with a league winning points difference after 13 games, then I think that was highly unlikely anyway.
1 Like
I think you have to conclude we’re fine moving in this direction from a sporting perspective. I’m kind of surprised by it because he did seem to value Diaz, but maybe as he brings in the attackers and creative players who are more aligned with what he wants the value of Diaz to him is lessened
1 Like
Perhaps. I think it’s also a case of being pragmatic that holding out for an extra 10m at the expense of reshaping the team isn’t helpful right now. It all depends on who/how we are looking to utilise the fee.
1 Like
a sell on clause in addition to the 70m will work fine. Diaz will continue to push for the Barca move.
3 Likes
Oh sure, but that’s kind of what I mean. Even at 10m more, it isn’t enough to back us into a corner to accept money for a player we wanted to keep.
1 Like
He’s 28. If Bayern find themselves selling him before the contract is done it will be at a loss.
2 Likes
It’s not going to fund transfers alone but it will help fund the overall outlay and that is where we are at, we still have 3-4 players we can sell on the fringe
Even if they sell him for 40m , A 20% sell on clause is a sizable amount.
1 Like
But what’s the point, just ask for another £5m now and guarantee it.
Most sell on clauses are for younger players. The selling club accepts maybe slightly less than they’d like with a view to getting an additional chunk in the future taking it over their initial valuation should the players career sky rocket.
For older players you typically pay for getting a known quantity with some add ons to reflect how successful he helps makes the team.
3 Likes
Zero. It makes no sense at all. The clauses arent all based on a % of the profit, but even when they are based on the overall fee they are done with an expectation of the buying club making a profit when they subsequently sell. Without an expectation of profit the clause makes no sense.
2 Likes
Was just listening to the Anfield Wrap and they made a good point on this. You can have Chiesa if he’s your sixth of six options. What you don’t want is him to be your fifth option of five, especially in an AFCON season where Mo could miss 10 games.
And yes, we can look at Wirtz, Dom and Frimpong as options but we’ve got to be careful double counting people. If Frimpong is your Salah AFCON plan then are we looking at Bradley playing RB for 90 minutes for all the games Mo is away? If Wirtz is playing LW and Dom AM then who are your midfield bench options if Elliott is sold as we expect.
I think you could go into the season with five forwards providing Chiesa isn’t one of them which means Isak shouldn’t be our last attacking addition.
2 Likes
Yeah that sums up Chiesa well. Unless the club are internally expecting him to get picked a lot more then last season but I don’t think there is much evidence of that considering how little he played even after we had wrapped up the league.
You can even extend that to Gomez at RB…he is a more than acceptable back up for the back up, but not if he’s our only CB on the bench, or even worse isnt available himself.
2 Likes
Joyce says we did try for a new contract, just not on the terms he wanted.
Changes the info from Diaz’s side that we’d promised him a contract and offered nothing. Still, if he values himself as worth more than we were offering can’t really blame him for wanting to go somewhere he could get his last big contract
4 Likes
I’m sad to see him go, as he was brilliant for us last season but if there was that big a gap between what he wanted or thought he could get elsewhere and what we were willing to offer, then fair enough. I understand his desire to move.
1 Like
£66m in the isak kitty
2 Likes