Bruno Guimarães

[Joe1984]

19 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

Hmm sorry, not following. What does that mean?

 

 

 

It was before clubs started getting points deductions for FFP breaches.

 

[Beth]

He'll go to PSG. Played in France before, guaranteed to start every game and will get the best wage as well. At City he'd probably only start 60-70% of their games. 

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, Jonas said:

If there's one thing more deflating, demoralising and depressing than being a selling club its being a club that doesn't need to sell, doesn't want to sell and only has to because of arbitrary new rules specifically geared towards forcing you to do so.

I'd have felt better with McKeag and co squirriling away and or wasting the money from Beardsley/Waddle/Gascoigne than this rather than a direct competitor shafting you.

 

I don't think this really applies in Bruno's case, personally. If you can make an absolute killing on an asset then it's in your interests to explore that. Like I said in my last post, that isn't new in football I don't think. Coutinho to Barca is the example that always comes to mind. 

[Beth]

1 minute ago, nufcjb said:

Oooo..look at me..the matured one who can't take a tongue in cheek post.

Ah but was it though? Backtracking quicker than an Italian tank.

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, Jonas said:

If there's one thing more deflating, demoralising and depressing than being a selling club its being a club that doesn't need to sell, doesn't want to sell and only has to because of arbitrary new rules specifically geared towards forcing you to do so.

I'd have felt better with McKeag and co squirriling away and or wasting the money from Beardsley/Waddle/Gascoigne than a direct competitor shafting you.

 

 

 

The club would need to sell if another club meets the asking price and Bruno agrees to go

 

FFP regs didn’t force Bruno and his agent to insert that clause into his new deal …

[The College Dropout]

5 minutes ago, Teslact said:

Any chance the clause requires payment 100% upfront too? Would certainly rule most suitors out for PSR this season.

Paying upfront doesn't change anything from a PSR perspective.

 

20 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

Hmm sorry, not following. What does that mean?

 

 

 

Nevermind I misread what you wrote.

 

I *feel* like Liverpool were suggesting they could spend big to placate Klopp. And they lost out on wages anyway. The transfer story of the latest few years for them is being gazumped in the transfer market. And Klopp was never keen on the Edwards model either.

[jack j]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The club would need to sell if another club meets the asking price and Bruno agrees to go

 

FFP regs didn’t force Bruno and his agent to insert that clause into his new deal …

Aye but we'd more likely keep players like Bruno happy if the rules weren't put in to stop us signing more players of his calibre

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, jack j said:

Aye but we'd more likely keep players like Bruno happy if the rules weren't put in to stop us signing more players of his calibre

Yep, agreed - I’m definitely not an advocate for the current rules.  But this wouldn’t be someone being forced out of the club - they knew what they were doing having that clause inserted.  I also doubt that it was the club who made it public knowledge.  

[andyc35i]

8 minutes ago, Beth said:

He'll go to PSG. Played in France before, guaranteed to start every game and will get the best wage as well. At City he'd probably only start 60-70% of their games. 

Loves the city as well. My social media stalking has him always seemingly in Paris when he’s got time off 

[andyc35i]

Oh and he won’t go to Man Utd because they’re not an elite side. It’s a side step for his career right now and he deserves to play for a team that’s competing to win the big trophies 

[astraguy]

Dont see why any player now would really want to go to city with the 115 charges looming, Pep has one or two years max left IMO and I wouldn't be shocked if he fucked off at the end of the season before the court case tbh

[Erikse]

17 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Paying upfront doesn't change anything from a PSR perspective.

 

Nevermind I misread what you wrote.

 

I *feel* like Liverpool were suggesting they could spend big to placate Klopp. And they lost out on wages anyway. The transfer story of the latest few years for them is being gazumped in the transfer market. And Klopp was never keen on the Edwards model either.

 

I feel like Liverpool could still make a signing like that before june 30th if they really wanted to, and not break the rules? Not sure if they would spend this much on a midfielder this window, though, but they intended to do it last summer when Caicedo chose Chelsea.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2024 by Erikse

[Fezzle]

9 minutes ago, andyc35i said:

Oh and he won’t go to Man Utd because they’re not an elite side. It’s a side step for his career right now and he deserves to play for a team that’s competing to win the big trophies 

He won't go cos they struggled in the summer with spending, don't seem able to pay much for Ashford and not a chance in hell they can spend £100m before the end of this season when his release expires. Tgarve was just ignoring that minor detail 

[The Prophet]

Liverpool had to borrow cash to pay the Szoboszlai fee up front. Not that they couldn't do it again like.

[The College Dropout]

4 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

I feel like Liverpool could still make a signing like that before june 30th if they really wanted to, and not break the rules? Not sure if they would spend this much on a midfielder this window, though, but they intended to do it last summer when Caicedo chose Chelsea.

 

 

 

I don’t think they will spend crazily. 

[Tsunami]

It all hinges on FFP and where we finish in the league. We have transfer targets and ball park figures for what we’ll need.

 

Getting into European competition may mean we don’t need to sell, I believe Bruno is very happy here. 
 

It’s in our own hands.

[TBG]

The absolute heartbreak when he pings in the winner in the FA Cup final for City against us and cups his ears towards our fans after we've treat him like subhuman scum aka Ayoze Perez all game.

[STM]

One of my biggest annoyances around this is the "you won't be able to replace him for 100m". 

 

Which is often said by people who, let's be honest, had probably never heard of Bruno in the first case, who we signed for 40m. It's not easy, by any means but that's why you make sure your scouting team is on the ball. 

 

It's also not 100m, it's a complete reshaping of our financial situation. It doesn't wipe the slate clean but it would be very much "we go again" in terms of a big push forward.

 

Its not my preference. I hope he stays but that's football:

 

Coutinho, Sterling, Ronaldo, Bale, Kane, Van Persie.

 

Sometimes it happens. 100m is not to be sniffed at.

[Elliottman]

1 minute ago, STM said:

One of my biggest annoyances around this is the "you won't be able to replace him for 100m". 

 

Which is often said by people who, let's be honest, had probably never heard of Bruno in the first case, who we signed for 40m. It's not easy, by any means but that's why you make sure your scouting team is on the ball. 

 

It's also not 100m, it's a complete reshaping of our financial situation. It doesn't wipe the slate clean but it would be very much "we go again" in terms of a big push forward.

 

Its not my preference. I hope he stays but that's football:

 

Coutinho, Sterling, Ronaldo, Bale, Kane, Van Persie.

 

Sometimes it happens. 100m is not to be sniffed at.

Yep, you move on and evolve. It selling Bruno takes us to the next level then unfortunately it’s something we’d have to accept. 

[The Prophet]

Completely agree it's all on Bruno. 

 

I don't think we want to sell and I think he'd only consider a club who will be competing for silverware.

 

Given the finances involved, City are probably the one to watch, if anyone. Seems Paqueta is high up on their agenda too.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2024 by The Prophet

[PauloGeordio]

11 minutes ago, STM said:

One of my biggest annoyances around this is the "you won't be able to replace him for 100m". 

 

Which is often said by people who, let's be honest, had probably never heard of Bruno in the first case, who we signed for 40m. It's not easy, by any means but that's why you make sure your scouting team is on the ball. 

 

It's also not 100m, it's a complete reshaping of our financial situation. It doesn't wipe the slate clean but it would be very much "we go again" in terms of a big push forward.

 

Its not my preference. I hope he stays but that's football:

 

Coutinho, Sterling, Ronaldo, Bale, Kane, Van Persie.

 

Sometimes it happens. 100m is not to be sniffed at.

Grealish, and look at Villa now! I don’t want Bruno gone but if he goes it’s with my blessing and he’s stolen a place in our hearts forever ??

[STM]

The answer will always lie with what we do with the money.

 

West Ham sold Rice and with that money signed Kudus, among others, who will probably fetch them similar money as to what they got for Rice.

 

Mind, you don't want to keep doing it, at some point you want to turn it into silverware but if you are smart, it can work in your favour.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2024 by STM

[SUPERTOON]

Hope we can stretch the money as much as Liverpool claim to have stretched the Coutinho money. They are still spending it now.

[Geordie_once_removed]

1 hour ago, Beth said:

Ah but was it though? Backtracking quicker than an Italian tank.

If you're going to try to take the moral high ground and call someone immature you probably shouldn't chuck in some light xenophobia.

[PauloGeordio]

 

NUFC loungewear!  He loves us ??