Summer transfer thread 17/18 season (NEYMAR TALK IN OTHER THREAD)

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

They could sort out their defence and midfield with this money.

It's a great deal for Barca, the don't need Neymar most of the time anyway, his presence for Barca means that instead of them winning 2-0 they win 3-0.

Suarez and Messi are both 30, Neymar is only 25. Nothing is coming through the academy, I'd argue they need him now more than ever and even more in future years. Huge loss to Barcelona, ego will be badly dented too PSG just snatching their player.

Lukker- wrote: »

Suarez signed a new contract without a release clause, and was still sold the following summer. Players will sign anything if they can get more dough.

Nope he pushed for the Arsenal move, had a sulk, told he wasn't been sold. Signed a new big money contract which had a £75m release clause that could be triggered by Barca or Madrid.

marklazarcovic wrote: »

If it's true and the Arabs are paying Neymar 300 million to be ambassador,and he buys out his contract with Barca... technically he is a free agent yes,and could sign for anyone ..

Be beyond hilarious if Madrid we're behind this

FFP would account buyout money to PSG, regardless of whether they technically paid it themselves. There are clauses to cover just such things so it can't be so easily got around.

GavRedKing wrote: »

I cant wait for PSG to announce a new Qatar based sponsor, I'd hazard a guess it will be to the tune of abot 300m.

FFP can also decide that sponshorship deals are unrealistic and 'faked' for such things, and take them out of FFP equations.

Whether Uefa have the balls to push such a line is another matter. If they did (and they could) you can be certain PSG (and others) would take them to court over it.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

FFP can also decide that sponshorship deals are unrealistic and 'faked' for such things, and take them out of FFP equations.

Whether Uefa have the balls to push such a line is another matter. If they did (and they could) you can be certain PSG (and others) would take them to court over it.

PSG have already fallen foul of FFP.

FWIW, I think FFP is a load of bo**ocks anyway, its good in theory but with the money around sponsorships and TV deals, its not really the great equaliser UEFA assumed it would be.

You only hear of smaller clubs coming undone over FFP the last few years.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

In reality, I can't really come up with a good reason why a club owner can't put whatever money he wants into a club, as long as it doesn't burden the club with debt.

If PSG or City owners want to gift their club 5billion quid, so they can buy every player in football, who are we (or Uefa) to say they can't? I think clubs should be stopped from putting themselves in massive debt that threatens their existence (Glazers putting United 800million in debt should not have been allowed) but that isn't what is happening at City or PSG.

yet this transfer has everything to do with why the Champions league has become a billionaire circus and holds little appeal to me today - no player should be worth 100 million, never mind 200 million, never mind Neymar - was at Bohs v Rovers last friday and on our doorstep we have what football is all about not a billionaire Harlem globetrotters circus that the CL has become. The game of the people.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

In reality, I can't really come up with a good reason why a club owner can't put whatever money he wants into a club, as long as it doesn't burden the club with debt.

If PSG or City owners want to gift their club 5billion quid, so they can buy every player in football, who are we (or Uefa) to say they can't? I think clubs should be stopped from putting themselves in massive debt that threatens their existence (Glazers putting United 800million in debt should not have been allowed) but that isn't what is happening at City or PSG.

I agree with ya, UEFA in setting up FFP have somewhat closed the door on "new money" coming into clubs and trying to turn around their fortunes.

Again though, I think its an exercise in futility and clubs should spend what they want, as you said, City and PSG have in effect, bottomless pits of money from the Arabs, if they want to invest it however they see fit, they should be allowed too, FFP is probably anti-competitive in its nature and I'm not sure how the EU would treat it if it went to court.

SlickRic wrote: »

I'm not sure what Neymar has done here to be hated by anyone.

He went to Barca for further fame and fortune.
He's gone to PSG for fortune beyond what even Barca could offer him. Plus, more chance of winning the Ballon D'Or now that he'll be out of Messi's shadow.

Fair play to the lad.

It must suck for Barca fans to have this done to them for a change.

Exactly. He didn't utter a word in public, didn't make a "Slave" comments, didn't go on striker or anything. It was dealt very professionally, just that cry babies just can't handle losing one of their best player. Like you said, for a change they are at receiving end.

Barca officially announced that Neymar asked to leave and buying club should pay release clause.

AdamD wrote: »

It all seems a bit nonsensical, if he wins the CL with Barca - Messi rightfully gets Balon Dor as hes the better player.

If he wins CL with PSG - Neymar gets Balon Dor even though Messi is still a better player..

Even if he won the CL, Messi would have to have an off season as well.

Since he came to Barca he's finished an average of about 20 goals a season behind Messi. That's ignoring how memorable goals were in that time, how many assists he was behind him, how important the goals were, etc.

He's not getting the Ballon D'Or unless he achieves something approaching parity to Messi's performance, or maybe for the 18/19 season if he has a strong world cup as well.

He'll probably get one eventually, but that would've happened at Barca as Messi starts to wane in the next 2 or 3 years.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

In reality, I can't really come up with a good reason why a club owner can't put whatever money he wants into a club, as long as it doesn't burden the club with debt.

If PSG or City owners want to gift their club 5billion quid, so they can buy every player in football, who are we (or Uefa) to say they can't? I think clubs should be stopped from putting themselves in massive debt that threatens their existence (Glazers putting United 800million in debt should not have been allowed) but that isn't what is happening at City or PSG.

There's no particular reason why they should care about clubs putting themelves into massive debt either.

In either case, it's an arbitrary decision made for practical, economic reasons rather than any particular ideal they're trying to adhere to.

If wealth reaches such a concentration that the sport loses too much competetiveness and that reduces interest, then that is very much UEFA's business.