Winter 2025 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc.

[Dave]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

[JJ-AV]

Would you not be tempted? If we got Grealish type money for him I would. It solves the PSR issues for the forseeable and he feels a bit like a bonus player this season anyway.

I think it's something we'd have to consider if it keeps the rest of the squad together and lets us invest.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Aston Villa are also looking at Juan Foyth & Andrei Rațiu.
@MatteMoretto

Had to look up both of them. Foyth has just come back from a year out over two separate injuries, so he would be a big risk. Ratiu seemed to take a year to settle at Rayo but seems to have settled now. Doesn't seem to be as attacking as Mingueza though, which might be a good or bad thing. Rayo and Celta play each other the weekend, so if we haven't signed one, we can see how they do in that match.

Andrei Ratiu reminds me of Kyle Walker with his speed and his defensive game is very strong. Pretty skillful too though he needs a bit of coaching on when to release the ball. Doesn't seem to cross the ball that often though if he did he'd probably be double the price. Effort wise the fans in Spain love him, a real 110%er. I've read he has a €25m release clause which explains why so many top clubs have shown an interest.

[cdbearsfan]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

Release clauses are still the exception in England. There's no reason to assume it would have been "insisted on" whatsoever. He might well have one, talking about it as definite just seems like pessimism for the sake of it.

[Demitri_C]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

Agree with this

Im sure both he and his agent would have insisted on it

[cdbearsfan]

Would you not be tempted?

Nope.

Leicester could probably have got loads of money for Vardy had they cashed in halfway through the 2015/16 season. They'd have been much richer, and almost certainly have still never have won anything other than the League Cup in their history.

We need to stop trying to sell players the second they start attracting attention if we are ever going to win things again.

[cdbearsfan]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

Agree with this

Im sure both he and his agent would have insisted on it

You're not "sure". You think it's the case.

[Beard82]

I don’t think anyone wants to sell him.  I don’t think anyone wanted to sale grealish.   

If he does end up leaving I am sure the club will make sure we get properly compensated.

I would hope it would be more than 70m - I would be disappointed if it was less than 100m.  And to be fair we’re no mugs when we sell players

[Dave]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

Release clauses are still the exception in England. There's no reason to assume it would have been "insisted on" whatsoever. He might well have one, talking about it as definite just seems like pessimism for the sake of it.

Optimism or pessimism doesn't come into it. I'm not assuming it would have been insisted on, I just can't think of any reason why they wouldn't have asked for it.

Contract negotiations either happen at a time when the club is in a more powerful position, or at a time when the player is in a more powerful position. Duran signed his contract at a time when (given his form at the time) his position was more powerful than than that of the club. So he was in a position to ask for more, like Grealish and Delph before him were.

There might be one. Or there might not. I'm not particularly concerned either way. But it's still fine to consider the dynamics involved, precedent and come down on a side that is more likely than the other. For example, I'm pretty certain that Rogers wouldn't have one.

[Beard82]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

Release clauses are still the exception in England. There's no reason to assume it would have been "insisted on" whatsoever. He might well have one, talking about it as definite just seems like pessimism for the sake of it.

Optimism or pessimism doesn't come into it. I'm not assuming it would have been insisted on, I just can't think of any reason why they wouldn't have asked for it.

Contract negotiations either happen at a time when the club is in a more powerful position, or at a time when the player is in a more powerful position. Duran signed his contract at a time when (given his form at the time) his position was more powerful than than that of the club. So he was in a position to ask for more, like Grealish and Delph before him were.

There might be one. Or there might not. I'm not particularly concerned either way. But it's still fine to consider the dynamics involved, precedent and come down on a side that is more likely than the other. For example, I'm pretty certain that Rogers wouldn't have one.

Whilst I wouldnt be surprised if he did have a release clause, I dont think that was neccessary the case that he was in a stronger position.   Whilst he was on form - he had time left on his contract, plus he nearly signed for West Ham and made a bit of a dick about himself.  I think some of it was of him commiting to the club and putting all that mess behind and buying into the role that the club had for him. 

So I dont think he had us over a barrel in the way Grealish and Delph did.  So if there is a release clause I would expect it to be one the club would be happy with.  i see it more similar to Rogers as rewarding a player and showing they are valued and appericated her and considered "key"

[cdbearsfan]

He had ages left on his contract, he has probably at least doubled his salary. They may have asked for a release clause. We may have accepted. We may have said no and they'd have signed it anyway, having got loads more money, a large signing on fee and the assurances about first team football he was after.

An agent asking for something does not guarantee it was agreed. I'd imagine most agents go into negotiations hoping to get some of what they ask for, not all. We aren't 1998 Leeds.

[Dave]

We don't, but it seems sensible to contemplate a world where there might be one.

I don't see any reason why his agent wouldn't have insisted on it, and any reason why we would have said no.

Release clauses are still the exception in England. There's no reason to assume it would have been "insisted on" whatsoever. He might well have one, talking about it as definite just seems like pessimism for the sake of it.

Optimism or pessimism doesn't come into it. I'm not assuming it would have been insisted on, I just can't think of any reason why they wouldn't have asked for it.

Contract negotiations either happen at a time when the club is in a more powerful position, or at a time when the player is in a more powerful position. Duran signed his contract at a time when (given his form at the time) his position was more powerful than than that of the club. So he was in a position to ask for more, like Grealish and Delph before him were.

There might be one. Or there might not. I'm not particularly concerned either way. But it's still fine to consider the dynamics involved, precedent and come down on a side that is more likely than the other. For example, I'm pretty certain that Rogers wouldn't have one.

Whilst I wouldnt be surprised if he did have a release clause, I dont think that was neccessary the case that he was in a stronger position.   Whilst he was on form - he had time left on his contract, plus he nearly signed for West Ham and made a bit of a dick about himself.  I think some of it was of him commiting to the club and putting all that mess behind and buying into the role that the club had for him. 

So I dont think he had us over a barrel in the way Grealish and Delph did.  So if there is a release clause I would expect it to be one the club would be happy with.  i see it more similar to Rogers as rewarding a player and showing they are valued and appericated her and considered "key"

Yup, don't really disagree with any of that - but I'd also argue that the Grealish release clause was also one that the club was happy with. If they're not happy with it, they're not going to agree to it. Even Delph to a certain extent. £8m was better than £0m.

But I think this is the most obvious recent example of the club doing whatever they needed to do to quickly secure the future value of an asset - the only other comparable one recently would be Martinez, and he's the only other player in the squad that I think (on balance of probability) might have one.

[AV82EC]

Ultimately, as I’ve said ad nauseum on several threads player trading will be part of the “dash for turnover” growth we’re witnessing. If Duran forms part of that discussion then so be it, just like any of our players. There will be a value at which we’re willing to sell and if someone meets it and it feeds into the squad composition and then financials we’d be mad not to consider it at this stage in our journey.

[john2710]

The idea, from the club's of view of agreeing to a release clause, is that it sets the price at a deliberately restricted value. Because you protect the club against future development. If Duran turns into Messi you'd want to protect against that.

Duran was already on a long contract & being offered a big increase in salary. They were in no position to insist on a release clause. If there is one, & I doubt there is, it would be closer to £100m.

But if we got £100m I'd take it

[Dave]

The idea, from the club's of view of agreeing to a release clause, is that it sets the price at a deliberately restricted value. Because you protect the club against future development. If Duran turns into Messi you'd want to protect against that.

But from the player's point of view, if you've just had a frustrating summer of clubs making a series of bids (which you were clearly keen for your current club to accept) only to see them refused, when contract negotiation time comes around one of the first things you're going to put on the table is "I want it to be clear, in writing, what value you put on me so we don't end up here again".

And I agree, if it's there then I'd imagine it would something high enough to protect our investment, in line with his form at the time and his (presumably) massive new salary. Somewhere between £80-100m would be my guess.