Maguire

[ARM1968]

9 minutes ago, brucey said:

Why do we even need to set a benchmark? No buyout clause at all (ie £ infinity) is far more protective of our assets than any stated amount like £ 100m. We choose what we want to sell for, and when.

Like we did with Mahrez?

[Buce]

16 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Well better that than £60 million as some have suggested. Seems to work for continental teams. Just think we should be more proactive in protecting our assets. Sets a benchmark but can be dangerous if too low, as in the Kante case - but who could have known?

 

Generally speaking, I think a buy out clause favours the player, not the club.

[ARM1968]

6 minutes ago, ROB-THE-BLUE said:

I don't think any recent sales have been due to financial requirements at all. Mahrez and Drinkwater had opportunities to go to big clubs and forced their way out. We got a good price for Drinky too, it wasn't because we needed the money. 

Mate, seriously, who said ‘needs’?  Someone offers £100 million for Harry we will sell in a heartbeat. It’s business. 

[ARM1968]

Just now, Buce said:

 

Generally speaking, I think a buy out clause favours the player, not the club.

Depends where it’s set I guess - but possibly so. 

[volpeazzurro]

51 minutes ago, funkyrobot said:

There aren’t many Man Utd players that you could say are thriving under Mourinho at the moment so I’m not sure how fantastic a move it would be in reality. 

You're dead right and a few players who have allegedly not come whilst he's there, wasn't Griezman one of those (not sure). There may also be a few wanting out also. If you were an exuberant attack minded player, why would you go to united? As a centre back who likes to play out from the back I don't think United at this point in time would be good ... Liverpool however ... ? I think he'd be best served at this moment in time with a good payrise and the Captaincy. He's not done bad here thus far has he!

[Buce]

4 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Like we did with Mahrez?

 

If Mahrez had a buy out clause, it would have been set when he last signed a contract and that was before(?) Neymar/ Van Dilk et al set a silly benchmark, so it would have probably been something like the £60 m that he went for, possibly even less.

Edited 22 July 2018 by Buce

[ARM1968]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

If Mahrez had a buy out clause, it would have been set when he last signed a contract and that was before(?) Neymar/ Van Dilk et al set a silly benchmark, so it would have probably been something like the £60 m that he went for, possibly even less.

 

Speculative there but possibly accurate. Like I say a lot of foreign teams use them and with a degree of success. I just think we should use everything at our disposal to protect our assets. 

[brucey]

21 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Like we did with Mahrez?

We were asking for around Sterling's price (£49m) at the time he signed his new contract. So he would likely have gone for less that we got, and had him for less time than we eventually did.

 

If he had a £60m buyout, he would have gone in Jan, disrupting our season on deadline day with no contingency plan in place. I know he caused disruption with his strike anyway, but he did still score for us a few times after that.

 

If he had a £100m buyout, Man City wouldn't have paid that. They'd still have offered £60m in Jan, he'd still have gone on strike, and we'd still have sold him this summer for £60m.

 

The only exception is if he had a £65m clause where Man City might have been willing to pay a little extra for less hassle. But then we wouldn't have had the hindsight to go for that specific number 2 years ago, and the disruption to our forward planning would not really have been worth the extra 5m imo.

 

Also, unless I'm mistaken, a buyout clause means the player is sold for a fixed price and essentially excludes the addition of any potential add-ons that could net us another £10-15m.

Edited 22 July 2018 by brucey

[ROB-THE-BLUE]

20 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Mate, seriously, who said ‘needs’?  Someone offers £100 million for Harry we will sell in a heartbeat. It’s business. 

Fair enough mate , I misinterpreted your original post. I'm still not convinced we'd sell Maguire for that price unless he specifically said he wanted to go though. 

[ARM1968]

7 minutes ago, ROB-THE-BLUE said:

Fair enough mate , I misinterpreted your original post. I'm still not convinced we'd sell Maguire for that price unless he specifically said he wanted to go though. 

You’re probably quite right. Funny old world. Let’s win the league again and worry about it next season. 

[HybridFox]

Dunno why I just have a feeling he loves us and won't go. Maybe I'm biased but it just feels different to Riyad or Kante who actively gave the impression they wanted to move on

[dylanlegend]

Anything over 70mill and we'd be silly not to sell. He's a good player but not sure his stock will ever be as high as it is now. Prone to a few mistakes and can leave us exposed, would rather keep him but think he's replaceable. 

 

Lewis Dunk or Micheal Keane 25mill

[mozartfox]

11 hours ago, dylanlegend said:

Anything over 70mill and we'd be silly not to sell. He's a good player but not sure his stock will ever be as high as it is now. Prone to a few mistakes and can leave us exposed, would rather keep him but think he's replaceable. 

 

Lewis Dunk or Micheal Keane 25mill

Forget Dunk or Micheal Keane we've got Wes.  

[Realist Guy In The Room]

11 hours ago, dylanlegend said:

Anything over 70mill and we'd be silly not to sell. He's a good player but not sure his stock will ever be as high as it is now. Prone to a few mistakes and can leave us exposed, would rather keep him but think he's replaceable. 

 

Lewis Dunk or Micheal Keane 25mill

Or both.  Dunk and Keane coming in with Maguire going out.  I wouldn’t be hugely unhappy at that.

[Ric Flair]

I love Maguire and think he's one of the most unusual footballers in the world but I'd take £75m for him without batting an eyelid if we had more time. It's what he does with the ball that is more important than his defending and for a team like us I think we'd not be any worse off if we replaced him with a competent defender. We would however dearly miss him bringing the ball out and it would be crucial for us to sort out central midfield which we may not have enough time to do.

 

 

[Babylon]

10 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I love Maguire and think he's one of the most unusual footballers in the world but I'd take £75m for him without batting an eyelid if we had more time. It's what he does with the ball that is more important than his defending and for a team like us I think we'd not be any worse off if we replaced him with a competent defender. We would however dearly miss him bringing the ball out and it would be crucial for us to sort out central midfield which we may not have enough time to do.

 

 

£65m is fair let alone £75m IMO. But it would only be a sale on condition of getting in someone of high enough quality.

[Fox1norfolk]

12 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I love Maguire and think he's one of the most unusual footballers in the world but I'd take £75m for him without batting an eyelid if we had more time. It's what he does with the ball that is more important than his defending and for a team like us I think we'd not be any worse off if we replaced him with a competent defender. We would however dearly miss him bringing the ball out and it would be crucial for us to sort out central midfield which we may not have enough time to do.

 

 

The problem is that we are now perceived as a 'selling' club. After Kante, Drinkwater, Marez and nearly Vardy, possibly Maguire the big boys know they can cherry pick our best talent. We however, would never consider approaching one of the big six clubs for one of their stars even if we could afford it. What it clearly demonstrates we are OK as we are ticking over mid-table making a profit, but with no real ambition to go for the title. 

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Fox1norfolk said:

The problem is that we are now perceived as a 'selling' club. After Kante, Drinkwater, Marez and nearly Vardy, possibly Maguire the big boys know they can cherry pick our best talent. We however, would never consider approaching one of the big six clubs for one of their stars even if we could afford it. What it clearly demonstrates we are OK as we are ticking over mid-table making a profit, but with no real ambition to go for the title. 

That's a joke right?

[Guest Cujek]

16 hours ago, Buce said:

 

Generally speaking, I think a buy out clause favours the player, not the club.

They are also a legal requirement in Europe, so they have no choice.

[Fox1norfolk]

No, the reality of the commercial football world

[Ric Flair]

16 minutes ago, Babylon said:

£65m is fair let alone £75m IMO. But it would only be a sale on condition of getting in someone of high enough quality.

It's the worry of Vardy wanting out if we get tempted to take the cash that bothers me.

[FrankieADZ]

wouldnt want HM to go tbh

 

though if i was him, i wouldnt go to Man Utd with Jose in charge, most England players in his charge tend to go too sh*t and become players they once were

 

all in all though we should keep him unless they bid something stupidly high

[ian_marshall]

I do like Maguire, his composure on the ball and under pressure is probably up there with the very best defenders in the game currently. However, as a defender I'm not overly convinced that he's as good as all of the hype suggests. For me his positional awareness and concentration levels aren't that great. He reminds me a lot of when Michael Keane was on loan to us, he looks the business but the stats don't backup the illusion that the defence has actually improved.

 

Call me old fashioned but I like defenders to defend first and foremost. I am an advocate of having player's at the back who are comfortable on the ball and don't panic under pressure, hence why I'd rather not see Wes in the first team, but conversely in my eyes they also don't have to be Franz Beckenbauer so long as they are capable of offloading a simple 5 yard ball into the midfield. 

 

If we get a decent offer for Maguire and it works for all parties I wouldn't be too concerned if he chose to leave so long as it allows us to find a replacement and maybe strengthen elsewhere. For me there are plenty of realistic alternatives that we could look to acquire so I don't think it would be the end of the world. Player's like Tarkowski, possibly Keane, Mawson, and Gibson to name just a few would all fill the gap left behind by Maguire should he go. 

[hackneyfox]

44 minutes ago, Fox1norfolk said:

The problem is that we are now perceived as a 'selling' club. After Kante, Drinkwater, Marez and nearly Vardy, possibly Maguire the big boys know they can cherry pick our best talent. We however, would never consider approaching one of the big six clubs for one of their stars even if we could afford it. What it clearly demonstrates we are OK as we are ticking over mid-table making a profit, but with no real ambition to go for the title. 

I don't believe we are, had no choice about Kante or Mahrez, Vardy didn't go  and we'd have been mugs not to have let Drinkwater go for that amount.

39 minutes ago, Cujek said:

They are also a legal requirement in Europe, so they have no choice.

Are they really?

We're still in the EU.

As a club aren't we under the auspices of UEFA?

[davieG]

From the Merc 

Harry Maguire is setting his sights high but insists he’s really happy at Leicester City.

The centre-back is attracting interest from Manchester United after his confident World Cup displays and he readily admits his desire is to play at the highest level.

However, he is just one season into a five-year deal at Leicester , with talks over an improved contract still to come this summer, and says the club have been “unbelievable” in their support.

“Every player wants to play at the highest level,” Maguire told the Sun .

“I’ve just come back from playing at a World Cup, where I really enjoyed the high pressure of the games. It was something that I really thrived off.

“Leicester have been unbelievable to me and I’m really happy there but I’m also an ambitious player and everyone wants to play at the top.”

Following England’s run to the World Cup semi-finals, Maguire has been granted an extended holiday and will return to City after next week’s trip to Austria.