Jump to content

Bruno Guimarães


wykikitoon
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think £100m is fair tbh - I also don't see anyone paying that right now so unless he returns to form we should be pretty safe. It'll likely be down to our wage structure more than anything, that we had to put it in. i.e. he's accepted a lower amount than he may have wanted and so has this as a back door.

 

We might just need to get used to this sort of thing.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the flip side, it would seem that selling a player for 100m would open up a lot of funds to buy players with the way fees are amortised over the terms of the contract for incoming and instant for outgoings.

 

I'd expect we'll see a young 6 in the coming summer window to bolster the position in case Bruno comes to be viewed as more of a saleable asset. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, toonotl said:

I'd also hope that the release clause is for non-PL clubs. If we sell him to Bayern or Madrid for 100m then it's happy days.

I’d imagine he has eyes on Madrid but they are stocked well for CMs. I suspect liverpool will be making a bid for him in January considering they were allegedly knocked back with a £100m offer in the summer.

 

So £100m sounds good on paper but that will just strengthen them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

If someone wants to buy him for £100mil then crack on. We can use the cash to buy a proper CDM and we already have his replacement in Tonali 


there is no guarantee Tonali will cut the cheese. We are just guessing at this stage and my guess will be that he’ll be back on loan to Italian team within 3 seasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Holden McGroin said:

I suspect liverpool will be making a bid for him in January considering they were allegedly knocked back with a £100m offer in the summer.

 

So £100m sounds good on paper but that will just strengthen them.

 

That's why I said, "I hope the release clause is for non-PL clubs" so that PL clubs couldn't trigger it. Only the likes of Bayern or Madrid since nobody else has the money on the continent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, toonotl said:

 

That's why I said, "I hope the release clause is for non-PL clubs" so that PL clubs couldn't trigger it. Only the likes of Bayern or Madrid since nobody else has the money on the continent.


it it’s £100m to Man City or a foreign club then that’s more palatable.  Anyone else is not. 

Edited by Holden McGroin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy with this, that release clause is very high tbf there’s only been a very small handful of teams ever to have paid it and it’ll have to be £100m cash upfront which I would guess basically none of the £100m deals were. 
 

It’s a Real Madrid clause iyam, I doubt he’d go to Chelsea or Man U. Also, if someone did give us £100m we’d have insane FFP spending power. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree it would seem to be a "Madrid" clause. It also protects the club from Real's typical attempt to turn the player's head in an effort to force their club to do business more on their terms taking advantage of a disgruntled player agitating for a move.

 

Instead, with such a clause in place, if business should happen between the clubs, it would appear that it'll take place on our terms because the terms are set at the outset. The player and the club have agreed upon the price. It's up to Real to meet it. For me, it simplifies the situation and protects us from Real bullshit.

 

(This is all hypothetical, of course, because Real don't necessarily appear to be in the market for a 6 and Bruno hasn't been performing at the level and consistency that drew the reports of RM interest.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

If someone wants to buy him for £100mil then crack on. We can use the cash to buy a proper CDM and we already have his replacement in Tonali 


Didn’t Liverpool allegedly offer that for him in the summer? Were that to happen again we’d have no choice but to sell him. Imagine if Chelsea come in for him on deadline day, we’d be fucked. 
 

Great that we’ve secured our best player on a new deal but I’d rather any release clause was a more defensive, astronomical figure. I think this paves the way for his departure if we don’t qualify for the champions league this summer, sadly.
 

However, the Tonali purchase makes more sense now if he’s come in as Bruno’s replacement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:


Didn’t Liverpool allegedly offer that for him in the summer? Were that to happen again we’d have no choice but to sell him. Imagine if Chelsea come in for him on deadline day, we’d be fucked. 
 

Great that we’ve secured our best player on a new deal but I’d rather any release clause was a more defensive, astronomical figure. I think this paves the way for his departure if we don’t qualify for the champions league this summer, sadly.
 

However, the Tonali purchase makes more sense now if he’s come in as Bruno’s replacement. 

They’d need to offer £100m cash upfront though and there’s no way Liverpools offer was that (if it actually happened), it would have been over years of payment. 
 

We also don’t know the terms, it could be non English sides only, or only active if we aren’t in Europe for a season or two etc. 

 

I agree with Toonotl in that it protects us from any Real Madrid style tactics since we’ve now got an agreed upon fee of £100m up front. As sad as I’d be to see him go a £70m or so profit for FFP would allow us to spend a fucking fortune. If it was as you say for if we miss CL this year that would more than overcome missing out for a season. 

Edited by Howay
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Howay said:

They’d need to offer £100m cash upfront though and there’s no way Liverpools offer was that (if it actually happened), it would have been over years of payment. 
 

We also don’t know the terms, it could be non English sides only, or only active if we aren’t in Europe for a season or two etc. 

 

I agree with Toonotl in that it protects us from any Real Madrid style tactics since we’ve now got an agreed upon fee of £100m up front. As sad as I’d be to see him go a £70m or so profit for FFP would allow us to spend a fucking fortune. If it was as you say for if we miss CL this year that would more than overcome missing out for a season. 


Is that how it works, is it? You can’t structure a deal if it’s a release clause? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:


Is that how it works, is it? You can’t structure a deal if it’s a release clause? 

Yeah, at least typically release clauses are 100% cash up front. It’s why Enzo Fernandez cost Chelsea more than his release clause as they didn’t want to pay 100% up front so they had to actually negotiate a price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think the clause would give Bruno a feeling of control, having the owners we have I imagine as a player you’d feel lacking control due to the fact they could turn down basically any amount offered without blinking. Even with a clause as high as £100m upfront it gives him knowledge that if a team met that he could discuss. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Howay said:

Yeah, at least typically release clauses are 100% cash up front. It’s why Enzo Fernandez cost Chelsea more than his release clause as they didn’t want to pay 100% up front so they had to actually negotiate a price. 


I mean, if Chelsea want to break his release clause but give us £150m for him so they can pay in instalments I’d say crack on.

 

I do think he’s committed to us. And if we qualify for the champions league again I think he’ll be happy to stay on but he’s keeping his options open in case we drop away this season. Perfectly understandable from his point of view. It’s a short career and he’s about to hit peak age.  
 

£100m up front would give us plenty of FFP headroom. It would be the first time we’d have sold one of our best players since the takeover though. He looks an absolute steal at £35m, or whatever it was we payed for him, in today’s market. I think handing control over to the player and the buying club is the thing which bothers me most. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Howay said:

I also think the clause would give Bruno a feeling of control, having the owners we have I imagine as a player you’d feel lacking control due to the fact they could turn down basically any amount offered without blinking. Even with a clause as high as £100m upfront it gives him knowledge that if a team met that he could discuss. 


We must have hit send more or less the same time there as I just mentioned control in my last post. 
 

If Real came in with £100m he’d go with our blessing but if Man City or Liverpool decided to spunk that wedge in him on the last day of the transfer window, leaving us no time to source a replacement, I’d be livid.  Probably won’t happen but if it did we’d be powerless to stop it. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

If Real came in with £100m he’d go with our blessing but if Man City or Liverpool decided to spunk that wedge in him on the last day of the transfer window, leaving us no time to source a replacement, I’d be livid.  Probably won’t happen but if it did we’d be powerless to stop it. 


Hold up, Bruno would still have to agree and want to go. Real, yeah we know that’s a definite, Citeh would be a maybe, he’d not be the main man like here & Pool I reckon he wouldn’t want to go too. Bruno’s a smart lad, he can see who is on the decline and who is on the up.

Edited by sammynb
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:


We must have hit send more or less the same time there as I just mentioned control in my last post. 
 

If Real came in with £100m he’d go with our blessing but if Man City or Liverpool decided to spunk that wedge in him on the last day of the transfer window, leaving us no time to source a replacement, I’d be livid.  Probably won’t happen but if it did we’d be powerless to stop it. 


The clause will come with stipulations such as the money up front but but it’s also likely to only be valid for a certain part of the window. It’s like when Moyes bought Fellaini for Man U he had a release clause but it was only valid until a certain date which was missed and they ended up paying more a few weeks later.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.