Jump to content

Jype

Member
  • Posts

    5,884
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15
  • Country

    Finland

Everything posted by Jype

  1. Yep, he comes across really well. Says he felt he needed a change of scenery to get out of his comfort zone to really challenge himself at a new club, and that he wants to show people that the Saul of +2 years ago is still there just waiting to be unleashed again. That's pretty much word for word what I said last week when it first came out the club had made an offer to sign him. Saul also said Chelsea have promised him he'll be training and playing in his preferred midfield position, and not bounced around all over the pitch like Simeone did in the last couple years. Playing just one position will surely help him rediscovering his best form, and in a way his versatility ended up being one of the main reasons for his downfall at Atletico because Simeone knew he could trust Saul to do a job in pretty much any position, which might have benefited the team but not so much Saul himself. Really excited to see him play for us. He could be in line to make his full debut in the UCL home game against Zenit if Jorginho-Kante are being kept fresh for the Spurs league match that weekend. Then there's also the League Cup game against Villa after Spurs, so I would guess we'll be seeing him start at least two games in September already. In October (after Man City game) the league schedule becomes a bit easier too so should be plenty of opportunities to integrate Saul in the squad.
  2. The option to buy will be either €25M or €30M. Even better than the €35M some reported before.
  3. Saul on loan for €5M with a €35M buy option is a hell of a deal, hats off to Marina. This again shows it's only a good thing for the club that she doesn't budge in transfer negotiations. Sure we didn't get Kounde in the end but if she caved on that one she would have had to cave with Saul too and got a much worse deal on that one.
  4. His current contract was signed in June 2020, so more than a year ago. I don't think a loan with a £17M buy option + buy-back clause is a bad deal. In any case he needs a loan deal to get more consistent playing time, and I don't mind the buy option included in the deal because it's all about playing the odds. Chances are he'll never make it to be Chelsea starting player level so if he can potentially be sold for £17M after the loan it'd be a great deal. If he then defies the odds and becomes a star player in the next few years he could easily be bought back for a net loss of just £17M, which is not too bad. I like the fact that the club are including these buy-back clauses into more and more deals for young players. It keeps the club invested in their development and even if they're not bought back the buy-back clause can bring extra money later on (ie. with Jeremie Boga).
  5. I don't think it's a matter of getting a replacement. They already signed Rodrigo de Paul for midfield earlier. It's probably more to do with the clubs not agreeing a deal. Atletico want a permanent transfer or loan with obligation to buy, whereas we only want a loan with a buy option. Now let's see if Atletico are just bluffing and agree to a loan with a buy option if at the end of the day it's still the only offer on the table and the clock is ticking down.
  6. I fully understand Sevilla's stance here, they don't have an obligation to help bigger clubs just because we want them to. We wouldn't want to lose our best players on deadline day either, just two years ago the club set a time frame for the Hazard deal to be completed and Real Madrid respected that. If the club really want Kounde that badly, I can only question why it was left so late in the first place. It's been more than a month since the clubs started negotiating and we agreed personal terms with the player so Sevilla have every right not to want to lose their star man this late.
  7. Zero impact at Palace is simply not true. He was good enough that season to be called up to the England team for the 2018 World Cup and impressed enough for Sarri to keep him around even though Palace wanted him back. Hodgson said: “It was no secret we wanted him back, because he’d done so well and we didn’t want to lose any of that team which had done so well. Ruben made an enormous impression, played extremely well, and was a decisive figure towards the end of the season when we started to really climb up the league from around March onwards." People forget how good he was in 2018/19 for us once he really got a chance to play consistently. He ended the season with 10 goals and 5 assists despite only starting 17 games across all competitions. The achilles injury wrecked him badly but to say he was not good enough in 2017-2019 is just revisionism at its best. After his injury he's not been good enough but I don't think it's a total disaster if he gets a chance as the 4th choice midfielder. Gilmour and Gallagher both wanted to go on loan for consistent playing time and Tuchel confirmed that during a press conference in pre-season. Especially for Gilmour it's vital for his development that he's at a club where he can play every game and he won't improve by playing a cup game here and there. If RLC doesn't perform, the window opens again in only four months and in the meanwhile Kante, Jorginho and Kovacic will play 90% of games anyway. I definitely wanted Saul to come in because he's got enough quality to even challenge Kovacic for the 3rd midfielder spot and become a regular starter but for the next 3-4 months it's not a disaster if he doesn't sign and we can get back to it in the January window if needed.
  8. He literally says "CHO situation could change if they get a replacement in" before mentioning Saul, which would suggest he is linking the two together.
  9. It's not just 'waiting for Rice' but also the difficulty of getting a player of real quality in with three top central midfielders already in the team, two of whom are tipped to be within top 5 of the Ballon d'Or this year. Convincing a top prospect like Tchouameni, Camavinga or an already established player like Saul to come in and play 4th choice in midfield surely can't be easy when they can just wait till next year and sign for some other top team who will immediately make them starters (at least the first two names). Any of those three could usurp Kovacic for the 3rd midfielder and end up getting decent minutes, but I don't see a case for any of them to get past Jorginho or Kante. If one of those three can't be signed, there's very little point in signing anyone because that's how the club ended up with players like Drinkwater and Barkley in the first place.
  10. He's played wing-back for Atletico before but as far as I know it's always been on the left. He's a left-footed player so playing RWB could be problematic. Not totally impossible but not definitely not ideal.
  11. 'All eyes on Saul now' How on earth does Saul affect CHO in any way? They don't even play in any of the same positions. In the attacking places there's already Lukaku, Havertz, Werner, Mount, Ziyech and Pulisic so six players for three positions, which is already ideal for rotation and CHO leaving wouldn't change that. Callum going on loan would only really affect RWB because we'd have less cover in there. Even that wouldn't be a problem if Kounde were to be signed because James/Azpi could easily handle the RWB spot together but without Kounde the team is lacking one player in CB/RWB.
  12. True, James can cover in the back-3 as well but I counted only five for the CBs because unless CHO (or someone else) starts playing regularly at wing-back then one of James/Azpi has to play RWB always so it basically becomes six players for four positions (three CB and RWB). Not an ideal amount of depth for a long season and one more would be preferable, whether it's additional wing-back cover or another CB. Looking at the Wolves game last night I really wouldn't mind having Adama Traore as RWB. Shit end product but his pace and dribbling ability is insane, I could see him flourishing as RWB in Tuchel's system.
  13. Trevoh Chalobah looks set to stay so we have already replaced Zouma. Having five CBs for three places in the team wasn't a problem last season so I don't see it becoming a big issue now either if Kounde can't be signed. I'd happily take Kounde if a deal can be done with reasonable prices because it's always good to prepare for the future as well, but I don't think it's a must-have signing. Maybe not getting Kounde now when he's available will come back to bite us later if he goes to another club (ie. Real Madrid) next year and becomes one of the best in the world for the next decade but for the current season I don't see much of a difference whether he's signed or not.
  14. Easiest group: Sevilla, Salzburg, Sheriff Hardest group: PSG, Ajax, Milan I kinda want to draw Barca from pot 2 though.
  15. I'm late but like others said before, a buy option in a loan is a contractual thing. The fixed price becomes essentially a release clause for the player so the selling club can't decline the offer if the clause is activated, but it can only be activated by the loan club for the said price. Of course like with release clauses, the player himself would still be free to decline the permanent move next year, but I don't think that happens very often because for the club to even want to trigger the buy option in the first place the loan would likely have been a very successful one and there'd be little reason for the player to turn down the move. I see very little risk in a loan for Saul. Obviously there would still be a reasonably big loan fee involved (5-10m€) and we'd have to take on his wages but the upside is huge. If he can get back to his previous level (2015-2019) it'd basically mean having the option of buying a world class player for peanuts and at worst he'd still be a good (although expensive) squad filler for the season and no doubt better than the likes of RLC, Ampadu would be if they stayed. And like you said, if he proves not good enough the club can just send him packing next year and go after another target.
  16. If it's true that Zouma can be sold for €30M to West Ham and then Kounde bought in for €50M I think that's a really good deal.
  17. It only says Atletico would want an obligation to buy, not that they would actually get it. If there are no takers for a straight transfer or as a loan with buy obligation, they might well be persuaded into accepting a loan with a buy option as long as the loan club pays a good enough loan fee and full wages. We've seen the same many times when dealing with other clubs for players we want to move on, and if no club is willing to agree to the terms Marina wants the terms will be renegotiated. I don't think it would be a disaster for Atletico to allow for a loan without an obligation. Saul has five years left on his contract so unless he has the worst season of his career he'd still retain his value for a potential sale later on to another club, and with the 'sizeable loan fee' they'd already have got some chunk of profit for him. That said, if they are holding really firm with the buy obligation I would pass as well. I'm intrigued with the idea of trying Saul in the team to see if he can get back to his best in a new team, but also recognize the risks involved so a loan with an option would be ideal. The worst I would go for is a loan with a conditional obligation to buy if certain performance clauses are triggered (ie. the team winning title/UCL this season or Saul starting a set amount of league games) because if that happens he'd have likely been a success and would probably be bought anyway.
  18. They probably can't but I don't think Saul has done anything like that in a while either. The clip is from 2016. 😆 Either way, he's better going forward than any of Jorginho/Kante/Kovacic. Could be a great option to have for games against the lower sides because I recall plenty of times we've all been screaming for a more attacking minded option in the midfield two. Playing the likes of Havertz or Mount there isn't really an option because it sacrifices too much in the defensive side of things, but Saul is more than adequate and he has plenty of experience in shutting down opposition having played years in a Simeone team. I'm all for the signing if it happens. Worst case scenario we lose the loan fee (surely less than 10M) and pay star player wages for the season for someone who only ends up filling the numbers as a squad player, but best case scenario we strike a bargain and get a 26-27yo world class player for a cheap price. The very definition of a low risk -high reward in my books.
  19. One thing to remember with Saul is that he offers something no current midfielder in the team (or any other player for that matter) does, which is a threat from long range shots. Kante, Jorginho and Kovacic can't shoot dangerous shots from outside the box if their lives depended on it but Saul has a more than decent scoring record, or at least he did before the 2020/21 season.
  20. Gary Neville also predicted Lukaku to be the PL top scorer this season so I don't think he was being dismissive at all. He just sees Lukaku as a better tactical fit for our game system as those other teams. For example, Liverpool under Klopp play with a false-9 setup so they'd have to tweak their game system a lot to fit someone like Lukaku in, and with the amount of goals they've been scoring in the last few years with Mane-Firmino-Salah up front I don't see any reason for Klopp to change that much. Lukaku is for sure a better striker than Firmino who will barely reach 10 goals a season but in their setup it's Salah who's the main man in attack so replacing Firmino with Lukaku probably wouldn't do them much good, because Salah would need to start playing much less selfishly and start providing more chances for the striker which could be detrimental for their overall play. Last season we didn't have a goal threat anywhere near as good as Salah so it makes more sense for us to get one in Lukaku and build the team around providing him with enough chances to score a lot of goals. As for United they already tried with Lukaku and he wasn't a good fit for them (whether it was for tactical reasons or Lukaku just not settling in at their club) so even if he has improved a lot under Conte I don't see why they'd have wanted to have another go with him, especially for the price needed to get him. With City I have no idea. They have enough quality in their team to provide the necessary chances for a top striker to score plenty but Guardiola has usually preferred other types of strikers in his teams. To put it into perspective, he couldn't even make it work with a 28yo prime Zlatan Ibrahimovic at Barca so it's not really about the quality of the player but more the player type. Guardiola has called Lukaku a world class player before so he obviously rates him, but much like Klopp I don't really see him wanting to build his attack around a single main striker either.
  21. Could be many things. Maybe he means the likes of RLC and Ampadu, who have had a full pre-season and are hoping to nail a spot in the squad as the fourth midfielder only to be told in the last week of the transfer window that they're being offloaded so the club can get another new high-profile player instead? But I don't think the club should worry too much about the kind of message a new signing sends to players who've already been deemed not good enough. Or he could mean disrupting the flow of the current midfielders from last season? Don't think Jorginho and Kante would have anything to fear, but if Saul comes in and starts performing well it could mean bad things for Kovacic and him potentially being reduced to a bit-part role after good performances under Tuchel would be kind of harsh. Either way, I think having four quality midfielders competing for two places in the starting XI can only be a good thing for the team's success. There are plenty of games to be played this season and if someone ends up playing less it's because the others are simply performing much better and that's what the team needs to compete for the league title and/or retaining the CL. In the current midfield situation I wouldn't necessarily want a huge money signing like Rice to come in (although I rate him really highly and still have hope for him to join later) but a loan signing with an option to buy would make a lot of sense.
  22. Basically saying the same as Matt Law yesterday. RLC and Ampadu needs to be moved on before the club consider making a loan offer for Saul. Any loan deal would include a 'sizeable loan fee' and an option to buy at around £35-40M.
  23. I think with Saul it's way more likely the club are simply reluctant to pay +40M and hand a 5 year contract with wages of more than 200K/wk to a player who has not been at his best level lately so a loan with an option to buy makes a lot more sense. If he can get back to his best in a new environment then activating the buy option next year is a no-brainer but if he's not a huge success he can just be shipped back to Atletico next year. Even with a loan I'd think it's going to be an expensive deal, would assume roughly a £10M loan fee and paying his full wages so around £20M for the season. But the potential upside is huge if we get the prime-Saul so I'd definitely be willing to try.
  24. Saul Niguez, yes or no? Been some reports that the club are looking into his situation at Atletico. Haven't seen much of Atletico in the last 1-2 years but a few years ago I'd have taken him in a heart beat and rated him really highly. Heard he's not been as good recently as before, but still only 26yo and hasn't suffered any major injuries so maybe he just stagnated a bit and needs a fresh challenge to get back to his best? Either that, or playing in Simeone's high intensity team has ran him into the ground at a very early age. Some reports are saying he's even available on loan so could be a low-ish risk gamble to see if he can reinvent himself in a new team? On a permanent transfer I'd probably pass but a loan deal with an option to buy could be an intriguing opportunity. As a player type I could see him fitting well in Tuchel's midfield.
  25. I think most people rate Kounde higher than Konate at least. Konate started only 14 league games in the last two seasons for RB Leipzig (playing less then 1300 minutes out of 6120 possible) because he's been injured so much. Of course if he can get over his injury problems and re-start his development he can prove to be better value for money in the end, but at the moment I'd say it's not even close as to which of the two is the higher rated player. I don't think Upamecano was an option in the first place, he wanted to go to Bayern and they confirmed the deal already in February. At that time we were something like 7th in the league and Tuchel had just come in so he obviously wasn't going to snub Bayern to sign with a team that still had a lot of question marks over them. If he'd have waited till the summer before confirming his next move he could've been persuaded into joining but he got the move he always wanted so he wasn't willing to wait. Btw neither Konate or Upamecano got called up by France for the Euros but Kounde did. Kounde didn't play much either but at least he made the squad so for what it's worth I can only assume he ranks higher in Deschamps' opinion than the other two.
×
×
  • Create New...