Summer Transfer Window 2017/18 - Rumours & Signings

There's talk Fabinho wants to play RB anyway, though Valencia has been good.
i said that initially when i first posted in this thread. personally i think hes a far better player at RB than D/CMF. one of those players that offers a great deal more going forward at RB. unless ofc man utd have a potential world class RB in the team already:p
 
You really can't change peoples opinion of Mourinho. Its embarrassing to watch people claim that buying a 22-23 year old isn't thinking of the future simply because they are going straight into the first team. What team buys players for any real money that are not supposed to be challenging for first team places. You buy a 28 year old and you are being short termist (even though 28 isn't that old for players who are not 90% reliant on their pace) and you are being short-termist. You buy them young and thats ignored because you are overpaying for unproven talent or some other BS reason.

How many youngsters have Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and City brought through recently.

Who gave the most minutes to teenagers last season?

Conte – 0
Wenger – 1
Pochettino – 19
Guardiola – 415
Mourinho – 1,443

Average age of teams in last years PL.

City - 28yrs 303 days
Chelsea 27yrs 235 days
Arsenal 27yrs 99 days
Man Utd 27yrs 87 days
Liverpool - Not sure because they are apparently second in the list yet it says 28yrs 14 days which doesn't make sense.
Spurs 25 yrs 266 days

Thats with Carrick and Zlatan in the team who are 35 and 34. We are a reasonably young team and Mourinho is buying players that will generally be at the club for at least 5-6 years at the very least.

Its ok though because Mourinho hates youth and only ever buys players to win the title in the coming season and then leaves clubs in a mess.
 
Duncan Castles nonsense.
It's not about youth or age of the player. Mourinho's only concern is today. The point regarding the 23 year old's Mourinho has signed was simply that he doesn't care whether they're 23 or 33 as long as they can play today. Mourinho does not care about tomorrow, never has and never will. How many players has he let go over the years that have gone on to be superstars simply because they were no use to him there and then? How many players has Mourinho ever brought through from youth team into the first team? And by first team I don't mean making a few sub appearances when it doesn't matter and they never feature again. Again, contrast that by the number of ageing players he's signed (often at the expense of giving a young player a chance) to come in and do a job for 12 months?

And as has been pointed out before, the teenage minutes stats is somewhat misleading seeing as Rashford was already in the first team prior to Mourinho arriving and for the most part Mourinho played him out of position for his defensive work in that role.
 
£40m for a player about to turn 29. Yes that sounds a superb deal, nothing wrong here.

He was one of the worst players in Chelsea's bad season and that was under Mourinho. He was frequently poor last year as well, though had very good games. Yeah Kante isn't going to leave and there is no chance Utd could buy him, but there is a reason Chelsea would be fine seeing Matic go rather than offering him a massive new deal, he's not that good and isn't worth a huge wage or a huge transfer fee.
 
You really can't change peoples opinion of Mourinho. Its embarrassing to watch people claim that buying a 22-23 year old isn't thinking of the future simply because they are going straight into the first team. What team buys players for any real money that are not supposed to be challenging for first team places. You buy a 28 year old and you are being short termist (even though 28 isn't that old for players who are not 90% reliant on their pace) and you are being short-termist. You buy them young and thats ignored because you are overpaying for unproven talent or some other BS reason.

How many youngsters have Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and City brought through recently.

Who gave the most minutes to teenagers last season?

Conte – 0
Wenger – 1
Pochettino – 19
Guardiola – 415
Mourinho – 1,443

Average age of teams in last years PL.

City - 28yrs 303 days
Chelsea 27yrs 235 days
Arsenal 27yrs 99 days
Man Utd 27yrs 87 days
Liverpool - Not sure because they are apparently second in the list yet it says 28yrs 14 days which doesn't make sense.
Spurs 25 yrs 266 days

Thats with Carrick and Zlatan in the team who are 35 and 34. We are a reasonably young team and Mourinho is buying players that will generally be at the club for at least 5-6 years at the very least.

Its ok though because Mourinho hates youth and only ever buys players to win the title in the coming season and then leaves clubs in a mess.

This is a classic case of reshaping what people are saying then arguing against the new thing you basically made up.

No one accuses Mourinho of hating kids or never playing teenagers, so trying to concoct proof against that claim is meaningless. It's like trying to prove Ozil isn't lazy because he runs about in games, the media reframed the criticism that he was lazy and then when on and on to 'prove' that false. The problem was the complaints were he was a giant girl and didn't show up in the big games, not that he didn't run around a lot over a whole season.


Mourinho doesn't like to give young players who are unproven a chance, this is fact and it's seeable at every club he's been at. It was a monumental mistake to push KDB out and favour the likes of Oscar, but Oscar was known and proven in terms of he knew what the player could do and was happy with that, KDB needed games to get form and confidence and Mourinho had no idea how he'd play after 5 games so never risked it. This is what he's accused of.

Playing Rashford who was an established member of the team isn't the same as playing Rashford having not played much if at all for Utd. Likewise playing a kid because everyone else is injured is NOT the same as trusting and bringing through that player normally. Likewise playing kids because you've quite publicly given up on the league to focus on the Europa cup and don't want to risk players is again not the same as intentionally choosing to bring a young player through and actively wanting to give them a chance to prove themselves.

Average age of the squad means nothing, because he didn't put the squad together, minutes played by teenagers is irrelevant for the same above reasons, he gave up on the league, he wasn't giving those guys a run of 5 games midseason, but at the end when he literally abandoned the league and was saving his squad. No one I've ever seen has said he won't buy younger players either if a 20year old looks fantastic already there would be no reason to not buy him. But Mourinho absolutely has a habit of buying experienced players who are at the level required and not wanting to buy guys who look like they need building up into the quality of player they look like they can be, more so than the majority of other managers. He builds for instant impact and at multiple clubs this has had an effect on longevity of his squads competitiveness.
 
This is a classic case of reshaping what people are saying then arguing against the new thing you basically made up.

No one accuses Mourinho of hating kids or never playing teenagers, so trying to concoct proof against that claim is meaningless. It's like trying to prove Ozil isn't lazy because he runs about in games, the media reframed the criticism that he was lazy and then when on and on to 'prove' that false. The problem was the complaints were he was a giant girl and didn't show up in the big games, not that he didn't run around a lot over a whole season.


Mourinho doesn't like to give young players who are unproven a chance, this is fact and it's seeable at every club he's been at. It was a monumental mistake to push KDB out and favour the likes of Oscar, but Oscar was known and proven in terms of he knew what the player could do and was happy with that, KDB needed games to get form and confidence and Mourinho had no idea how he'd play after 5 games so never risked it. This is what he's accused of.

Playing Rashford who was an established member of the team isn't the same as playing Rashford having not played much if at all for Utd. Likewise playing a kid because everyone else is injured is NOT the same as trusting and bringing through that player normally. Likewise playing kids because you've quite publicly given up on the league to focus on the Europa cup and don't want to risk players is again not the same as intentionally choosing to bring a young player through and actively wanting to give them a chance to prove themselves.

Average age of the squad means nothing, because he didn't put the squad together, minutes played by teenagers is irrelevant for the same above reasons, he gave up on the league, he wasn't giving those guys a run of 5 games midseason, but at the end when he literally abandoned the league and was saving his squad. No one I've ever seen has said he won't buy younger players either if a 20year old looks fantastic already there would be no reason to not buy him. But Mourinho absolutely has a habit of buying experienced players who are at the level required and not wanting to buy guys who look like they need building up into the quality of player they look like they can be, more so than the majority of other managers. He builds for instant impact and at multiple clubs this has had an effect on longevity of his squads competitiveness.

Mourinho has managed Chelsea (twice), Inter, Real Madrid and a post Fergie Man Utd - that is some of the most volatile situations to be managing in. There is no way you are being given time to develop young players in any of these scenarios. Roman will sack managers at the drop of a hat, Inter are hardly a bastion of stability and Real are nuts at the best of times, we also have Man Utd trying to get silverware back in the cabinet and get established back in the CL. If you don't hit the ground running at these clubs you are out of a job, that alone dictates that you have to live for today. I find it staggering that anyone is surprised by this approach or use it as a stick to beat him with. It will be of little consolation if he had brought through a couple of young players at Chelsea if you can be out on your arse a few short months after delivering the title. Football has changed "developing youngsters" now means loaning them out in the hope they do well and then selling them anyway.
 
All a little slow on the transfer front at the moment. My two cents on the Matic thing is not the most exciting signing (if it comes off) and it's not a long-term signing (not short term either) But the way I am looking at it is that clearly, Carrick does not have the legs anymore to play a full 90 mins twice a week. Is Fabhinio the answer? If its the player that United wanted then I am sure we would have made a bid

Now onto the enigma that is Paul Pogba. You could see that Pogba's best games for United last season were when he was playing more as an attacking midfielder than being constrained with defensive duties. Same with France, ran the show against England with a decent midfield around him. So not totally against a player who can hit the ground running from day one, knows the manager, knows the Premier League, disciplined and will know the system the boss wants to play. He ticks a lot more boxes than some fans and pundits are giving him credit for. Let's not get drawn into this Chelsea cast off nonsense, they have been trying to tie him down to a new deal for the last 18 months, so clearly he is wanted at the club.

As with all great sides Liverpool 70's & 80's, United 90s and 2000's the strong consistent teams are more than the sum of their individual parts.
 
You really can't change peoples opinion of Mourinho. Its embarrassing to watch people claim that buying a 22-23 year old isn't thinking of the future simply because they are going straight into the first team. What team buys players for any real money that are not supposed to be challenging for first team places. You buy a 28 year old and you are being short termist (even though 28 isn't that old for players who are not 90% reliant on their pace) and you are being short-termist. You buy them young and thats ignored because you are overpaying for unproven talent or some other BS reason.

How many youngsters have Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and City brought through recently.

Who gave the most minutes to teenagers last season?

Conte – 0
Wenger – 1
Pochettino – 19
Guardiola – 415
Mourinho – 1,443

Average age of teams in last years PL.

City - 28yrs 303 days
Chelsea 27yrs 235 days
Arsenal 27yrs 99 days
Man Utd 27yrs 87 days
Liverpool - Not sure because they are apparently second in the list yet it says 28yrs 14 days which doesn't make sense.
Spurs 25 yrs 266 days

Thats with Carrick and Zlatan in the team who are 35 and 34. We are a reasonably young team and Mourinho is buying players that will generally be at the club for at least 5-6 years at the very least.

Its ok though because Mourinho hates youth and only ever buys players to win the title in the coming season and then leaves clubs in a mess.

Isn't that essentially what he has done in the past though?
 
It's not about youth or age of the player. Mourinho's only concern is today. The point regarding the 23 year old's Mourinho has signed was simply that he doesn't care whether they're 23 or 33 as long as they can play today. Mourinho does not care about tomorrow, never has and never will. How many players has he let go over the years that have gone on to be superstars simply because they were no use to him there and then?

Not that many. How many teams hold onto super promising players for years without them getting really regular first team football. If you are are top young player you won't be happy playing bit parts in a handful of games in a season. Teams like Bayern and Barca can play their youngsters a bit more because half the games in a season are completely pointless and they could probably win them with their reserves. The PL is another matter. Stick a team of reserves out against any team in the PL and they will probably get beaten. The top teams have a first XI full of star players so you are either playing because you are good enough already, the game is already won or someone is injured.

My main issue with people giving Mourinho stick is that apparently he is the only one who does any of these things. All the stats point to the fact that Mourinho isn't as bad as pretty much any of the other top managers with regards to these issues and yet he is the one who is always pinned up as the example.
 
You really can't change peoples opinion of Mourinho.

This is the long and short of it.

No top club manager is going to have a squad of under 25's and win the league and CL. No matter what Mourinho does, people will change their argument to suit. His record speaks for itself, the Chelsea team that just won the title is one he largely assembled, even if they fell out with him. While our season wasn't a resounding success, it was our best season for a long time, he gambled on the Europa League and it paid off.

At the absolute biggest clubs your only priority can be the current season, you can win the title and be sacked a few months later.

I'm really not sure what people expect.

-

Back to transfers, it seems the Matic deal may not yet be a formality, the press may have jumped the gun slightly.
 
The Matic links were all tier 3 links (going by the red devil reddit tier ranking) none of the higher tiers were talking about it.

Yep, I'd say the best journalists for Man Utd in terms of reliability are Simon Stone and James Ducker. Mark Ogden isn't as connected as he was and has now moved to ESPN, and Jamie Jackson at the Guardian is weird. :p

Duncan Castles, shockingly, is best connected to Mourinho/Mendes, so it's possible he will hear things before the rest.

All in all, transfer journalism is a shambles, the vast majority of transfer news is things being reported globally, so people don't know what's part of a gossip column, or something more reliable.
 
All in all, transfer journalism is a shambles, the vast majority of transfer news is things being reported globally, so people don't know what's part of a gossip column, or something more reliable.

Its not really surprising. By the very nature of it you can never be sure how a deal will progress or complete. There have been a number of articles that have come out over the past few years about how team x nearly signed player y only for it to fall apart or someone else to swoop in at the last second. These are confirmed by the manger or someone actually involved in the transfer so its not just speculation.

Then there is the fact that you can literally make up whatever **** you want because who knows whats happening and lets be honest, very few teams care enough to actually refute the claims of some c-list journo.
 
I bet it's great fun, just randomly generating names and teams to link them to :p

Oh for sure :)

"Shall we link Mbappe to Arsenal? Their fans will think its nuts but deep down they will really hope its true and that Wenger is finally splashing the cash. Trolloolol"
 
Back
Top Bottom