• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Totally Unofficial Soccer Transfer Thread (NWT)

ipitytheblue said:
Sounds like Pool dropped interest in Fulham's Ryan Sessegnon, leaving the door open for Spurs. Based on what I've heard, hope we sign him.
Click to expand...
You mean Sessegnon dropped interest in Liverpool.

Sounds like he wants to stay in London, and Pochettino is the fullback whisperer.
 
The Atletico transfer ban is upheld which reopens Everton's chances with Sandro
 
I feel Griezemann falls through I'm pretty sure United are interested in Lukaku
 
timdunkandthefunk said:
Doesn't change the fact he has a buyout clause.
Click to expand...

No, but

"Much to the club's dismay, the Court of Arbitration for Sport has upheld the transfer ban handed down to Atlético Madrid by FIFA. The Rojiblancos will be prohibited from registering new players until January 2018.

This is obviously bad news for the club, but also for Manchester United and Antoine Griezmann. The Atléti forward was expected to make a move to Old Trafford this summer, but United reportedly ended their interest in signing him.

These two events are probably linked. While Atléti might have let Griezmann go without a fight -- and for less than his release clause fee -- before the ban, they're now unlikely to let anyone leave. United might have liked the idea of signing Griezmann for £60 million or so, but they're probably less thrilled with the prospect of investing £86 million in a transfer fee for him.

United has the money to pay the fee for any player, but financial fair play limits their spending somewhat, so there's opportunity cost to factor into any big purchase. United wants to have the flexibility to move quickly to sign a superstar like Gareth Bale or Neymar if they become available.

There are also a lot of potential variables when it comes to signing those two players, or anyone else of their caliber. If United fails in their pursuit of bigger stars, Griezmann will still be at Atléti with the same release clause in two months. If it turns out their best option is to just pay whatever it takes to get Griezmann, they can do that later.
 
siff said:
No, but

"Much to the club's dismay, the Court of Arbitration for Sport has upheld the transfer ban handed down to Atlético Madrid by FIFA. The Rojiblancos will be prohibited from registering new players until January 2018.

This is obviously bad news for the club, but also for Manchester United and Antoine Griezmann. The Atléti forward was expected to make a move to Old Trafford this summer, but United reportedly ended their interest in signing him.

These two events are probably linked. While Atléti might have let Griezmann go without a fight -- and for less than his release clause fee -- before the ban, they're now unlikely to let anyone leave. United might have liked the idea of signing Griezmann for £60 million or so, but they're probably less thrilled with the prospect of investing £86 million in a transfer fee for him.

United has the money to pay the fee for any player, but financial fair play limits their spending somewhat, so there's opportunity cost to factor into any big purchase. United wants to have the flexibility to move quickly to sign a superstar like Gareth Bale or Neymar if they become available.

There are also a lot of potential variables when it comes to signing those two players, or anyone else of their caliber. If United fails in their pursuit of bigger stars, Griezmann will still be at Atléti with the same release clause in two months. If it turns out their best option is to just pay whatever it takes to get Griezmann, they can do that later.
Click to expand...

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

No.
 
Sead Kolasinac to Arsenal on a free. Long term contract. Gibbs likely to leave.
 
What the fuck? Consensus on RAWK is that Liverpool actually did illegally tap him up and was told to either apologize or face consequences. Someone should get fired over this.

"Club announcement

Liverpool Football Club would like to put on record our regret over recent media speculation regarding Southampton Football Club and player transfers between the two clubs.

We apologise to the owner, board of directors and fans of Southampton for any misunderstanding regarding Virgil van Dijk.

We respect Southampton's position and can confirm we have ended any interest in the player.

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/announcements/265720-liverpool-fc-statement"
 
Echo saying that Klopp meeting him in Blackpool is the cause. Him not signing is whatever but if the club throws Klopp under the bus and this ends with him resigning then holy shit.
 
timdunkandthefunk said:
What the fuck? Consensus on RAWK is that Liverpool actually did illegally tap him up and was told to either apologize or face consequences. Someone should get fired over this.

"Club announcement

Liverpool Football Club would like to put on record our regret over recent media speculation regarding Southampton Football Club and player transfers between the two clubs.

We apologise to the owner, board of directors and fans of Southampton for any misunderstanding regarding Virgil van Dijk.

We respect Southampton's position and can confirm we have ended any interest in the player.

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/announcements/265720-liverpool-fc-statement"
Click to expand...
Nah. It's never LFCs fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top