HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Let’s hope so, didn’t Alex Ferguson say Boro were the toughest negotiators he came across? Gibson should take their eyes out.
Morgan Rogers fee
- Thread starter northernrower
- Start date
festa5
Well-known member
Good. So we should.
You want a promising first team player from a championship club, under a long contract, in January and the club doesn't want to sell, then that comes at a premium.
We don't want to sell anyway, so it's no loss to us if they don't cough up enough we can't turn down.
And as for "he wants to go". Well I'm sure he does. But that doesn't mean he's unhappy here or doesn't want to be here. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.
The fact he played yesterday suggests he's not kicking up a fuss and is being professional about it.
Of course it's a gamble.
Potential - having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
That potential might be realised. It might not.
We paid £8m for the potential that Ashley Fletcher showed. It wasn't realised... its not football manager. There's not a hidden stat that shows what a player will definitely achieve if they play matches. Rogers could break his leg next week and miss 9 months of football and would almost certainly never reach his maximum potential. He could have peaked now. We might be seeing the very best version of Morgan Rogers.
At this stage Morgan Rogers has the potential to be a really good player. Maybe Premier League? But yes, it's very much a gamble like with any young player.
And by the way. My valuation of £8-10m builds in my perceived potential for Morgan Rogers and the amount of risk. He's currently performing nowhere near a £8-10m player.
Jonathan
Well-known member
This overly cautious approach you seem to have factoring in things like "oh but what if he breaks his leg?!" type panic scenarios is slightly laughable to me, frankly. It's not something you should factor in to these decisions at all when considering a bid. Can happen to literally anyone. Are Darragh Lenihan and Tommy Smith failed gambles because they're out for the season?
Nobody would spend any length of time at any club with this kind of approach. Not every young player is going to be a roaring success, no, but you don't second guess your belief and faith that they will be that made you sign them in the first place at the first sign of interest because of some nonsensical "what if" in the back of your head.
Honest to god, it's like some fans have been indoctrinated and gaslit in to treating their clubs like businesses the way owners do. Utterly joyless.
Nobody would spend any length of time at any club with this kind of approach. Not every young player is going to be a roaring success, no, but you don't second guess your belief and faith that they will be that made you sign them in the first place at the first sign of interest because of some nonsensical "what if" in the back of your head.
Honest to god, it's like some fans have been indoctrinated and gaslit in to treating their clubs like businesses the way owners do. Utterly joyless.
Jedi boro
Well-known member
Good
changingman
Well-known member
But ultimately they are a business? And generally those that are best run as such are those that have success on the pitch.
You either have a massive injection of cash or run things properly. Decision making, commercial performance, recruitment etc. These may be slightly staid topics but they are absolutely crucial to the success of any club, ours included.
Or some of us are just a bit more realistic on our player's valuations. It'll all pan out over the next couple of days. I'll use @The Card Cheat 's phrase. Let's leave it to the experts.
We'll see where is valuation lies. I would think Villa are somewhere near their highest offer now though at £8mil of that's their third offer. Maybe we'll sell, maybe we won't. But I think that's a fair offer. Their first two were way under.
Calm your self down mate. It's not my money, it's not your money. It's just a debate on a player's value. I personally won't be massively upset if he moves on. He's done well the last couple of months but im hopeful Azaz can perform at the same level.
We'll see where is valuation lies. I would think Villa are somewhere near their highest offer now though at £8mil of that's their third offer. Maybe we'll sell, maybe we won't. But I think that's a fair offer. Their first two were way under.
Calm your self down mate. It's not my money, it's not your money. It's just a debate on a player's value. I personally won't be massively upset if he moves on. He's done well the last couple of months but im hopeful Azaz can perform at the same level.
Jonathan
Well-known member
I'm perfectly calm. I'm just bemused by this weird approach of being happy to accept relative peanuts mid-season from a club taking the p*ss with lowball offers, going on and on about "the model", and taking this panicky approach of thinking it's a gamble to not sell cause he might not reach his potential, or he might break his leg, whatever else. It's just weird. We're never going to get anywhere as a club if we're selling our highly rated young players after 6 months for a minimal return.
It's not low ball in opinion. That's my point. I'm not saying panic and sell. But if an offer comes in above what the club value him at then they will rightfully listen.
Since when was £10million be peanuts to Boro. It would be in our top 5 sales of all time wouldn't it?
He's not playing anywhere near the level of Gyrokes was 6 months ago. Is he showing the potential that he could be better tha5 Gyrokes? I'd say it's more likely that he never reaches that level than reaches it.
Why would you think we would get same ball park as him?
Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret
Well-known member
10-12 million plus add ons
Jonathan
Well-known member
I literally haven't mentioned Gyokeres, huh?
And we demonstrably have been lowballed in the clubs view because the reports were they the club just immediately dismissed and rejected their first two offers.
Put it this way, there are basically two possible reasons Aston Villa want to sign him.
A) To play this season.
B) To farm out on loan, and turn a profit on him themselves.
In both scenarios I fail to see how £8m is even remotely good enough.
No I'm mentioning it as a bit of perspective of the market.
Colgates_shaving_foam
Well-known member
I can't understand how you think selling him for 10 mill is a good deal?
At least 2 mill goes to city we paid about 2 mill for him which leaves 6 mill profit with which we need to replace him with, with hardly any time to do it and clubs will charge us a premium as they know we will be desperate.
We are In the strong position here, if villa are desperate then they have to pay for it. 15 mill plus the rumoured 20% sell on we would owe city so 18 mill would be the absolute minimum it would be worth selling Rogers for this window.
Of course he isn't an 18 mill player but that isn't how transfers work. The selling club need to be compensated for their inconvenience and the cost of any replacement.
I think it's a good deal because we are getting a good chunk more money for a player than he's worth. The 20% to City is part of the deal we made. No doubt we will put a similar clause in if Villa sign him. And if he goes onto become the £15-20m that everyone is so confident he will become then we will get another 3 or 4 mil down the line to make it up to £13-14 mil. A healthy £12mil profit on a player we held for 6 months.
If he doesn't go on to be that player, which is entirely possible, then we will have had Villa's eyes out and made £5-6mil profit on a player in 6 months. Either way, I think we'll.have done alright there.
That will buy us another 3 or 4 Rogers/Azaz type players. Hence the famous model. If we going to float ridiculous figures around for players then "the model" won't work.
The same will happen with Hackney by the way. He's worth £15-20m and that's what we'll get in the summer in my opinion. And there'll be people bleating on on here saying we should be getting £30-40m which no one is going to pay. We could just hold them this window. Then hold them again next window and before you know it you have a player who doesn't want to be here entering the last 2 years of their contract and we won't be able to demand their full value any more.
Paintolerance
Well-known member
Do they? It sounds like they went in low. But they'll only pay what they perceive he's worth. I'd be stunned if it's North of £12m. I think £10m would be top end. £8mil would be fair.
From reports.. Villa seem same ball park.
Jonathan
Well-known member
What's "fair" and what's right for the club are two different things. We shouldn't give a toss about what's "fair". No other club does unless they actively want to sell. If he's a player to go straight in to the first team to play for a team in the top four of the Premier League then £8m is demonstrably not "fair" nor what he's "worth", clearly. If he's not, and a means for them to turn a profit on him in a years time, then we should be making it even more difficult for them. What he's worth is entirely what we decide he's worth.
Redwurzel
Well-known member
3 bids in 3 days suggest Villa are very keen on him - certainly keener than £8m. Remember George Saville we paid £7m to £8m and the £6.5m/7m for Ashley Fletcher we were very keen. Rogers is also better than them. No way I would sell for £8m at present - his value is only going to rise as he looks like he is developing well, only 21 and getting more experience all the time with Boro.
If I was running the Boro I would also have to consider what I have to pay for a decent Championship forward.
If I was running the Boro I would also have to consider what I have to pay for a decent Championship forward.