Mahrez to Man City shock

[4everfox]

42 minutes ago, Gerard said:

 

Mahrez needs to go, he's been a great servant to the club and has generated this club over £100m. The offer isn't a pisstake, it will make Mahrez the oldest player in history to be transferred for such an amount apart from Higuain going to Juventus from Napoli.

 

If Mahrez was early 20's I'd agree with you but he'll be 28 in February. Man City are buying a player at his peak value who they will have no chance of getting their money back on or making a profit on him. In 2.5 years he'll be 30 and his decline won't be long away.

 

We're in a great position to let him go as we're not threatening winning trophies or Champions League places and we should be far too good to get relegated. He's done all he can here and he is a depreciating asset with two years on his contract left. By all means we should do what's necessary to get as much money as we can but it will be bad news for everyone if he's still here after deadline day. We'll never see that Mahrez play for us again as he'll go through the motions and won't bust a gut for a club that has betrayed his loyalty. His time here is done and he should be allowed to go and win things, our club hasn't kept up with his ambitions since we won the title.

 

65 million for a PFA Player of the Year in his absolute prime is an insult in todays market no matter which way you look at it. 

[Gerard]

2 minutes ago, 4everfox said:

65 million for a PFA Player of the Year in his absolute prime is an insult in todays market no matter which way you look at it. 

 

Not when he's 28 this coming February and has two years left on his contract.. The whole world and his dog knows that Mahrez wants a move and no one has rivalled Man City for his signature.

 

If he stays here we won't be getting a £65m player back, we'll be getting someone who is disillusioned with the club and the game going through the motions. I think the deal will get done in the next two weeks and all three parties may not be 100% happy with the deal as they've had to give up more ground than they would like but it's in nobody's interest for the status quo to remain and especially not for the sake of £10m or so.

[Buce]

1 hour ago, Gerard said:

 

Mahrez needs to go, he's been a great servant to the club and has generated this club over £100m. The offer isn't a pisstake, it will make Mahrez the oldest player in history to be transferred for such an amount apart from Higuain going to Juventus from Napoli.

 

If Mahrez was early 20's I'd agree with you but he'll be 28 in February. Man City are buying a player at his peak value who they will have no chance of getting their money back on or making a profit on him. In 2.5 years he'll be 30 and his decline won't be long away.

 

We're in a great position to let him go as we're not threatening winning trophies or Champions League places and we should be far too good to get relegated. He's done all he can here and he is a depreciating asset with two years on his contract left. By all means we should do what's necessary to get as much money as we can but it will be bad news for everyone if he's still here after deadline day. We'll never see that Mahrez play for us again as he'll go through the motions and won't bust a gut for a club that has betrayed his loyalty. His time here is done and he should be allowed to go and win things, our club hasn't kept up with his ambitions since we won the title.

 

3

 

The club has not betrayed his 'loyalty' - he hasn't shown any for one thing, and we just want what he's worth, for another.

Edited 23 June 2018 by Buce

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

The club has not betrayed his 'loyalty' - he hasn't shown any for one thing, and we just want what he's worth, for another.

 

Bollux 

 

he stayed 

 

ngolo left

 

 

[Buce]

Just now, st albans fox said:

Bollux 

 

he stayed 

 

ngolo left

 

 

 

For a year with a massive increase in wages.

 

He then threw a monumental strop because we didn't let him leave for a cut-price fee right at the end of the January window. He banged in a transfer request, which he cynically withdrew to get a 'loyalty bonus'. Not my idea of loyalty.

[RODNEY FERNIO]

Well we must have spent close on £50 million already … if we keep Mahrez

as well it would be a serious statement.

[Gerard]

Just now, Buce said:

 

The club has not betrayed his 'loyalty' - he hasn't shown any for one thing, and we just want what he's worth, for another.

 

 

Mahrez has arguably given more to this club than any other player in our history.

 

Loyalty is a two way street, if Mahrez had performed like a Conference level player when he arrived the club would soon bin him off and then where is your loyalty? Loyalty only seems to matter to football clubs to their better players. Every season scores of players at all levels are released by Leicester City.

 

Even not considering his performances for our club Mahrez signed a four year deal with us at his peak when he'd just won the PL, PFA POTY and 7th placed Balon d'Or. Kante had already jumped ship and if Mahrez went Vardy probably would have gone to Arsenal. Mahrez staying stabilised the club.

 

We've now run our race. We never kicked on after winning the title and the last two years we've finished mid table. Any player who has given us so much deserves to be treated with respect and allowed to progress the three/four years he has at the top of the game to go to one of the most desirable clubs in the world and win plenty of silverware. If Man City were making Roma type bids then the club has every right to turn down such paltry sums but I think this is a ballpark fair offer considering his contract and age.

[martyn]

3 hours ago, KFS said:

Your mate needs a melanoma check up

Never thought I'd see someone who looks like a cross between Zach Galifinakis and Mark Chapman

[Grebfromgrebland]

It would be great if we could keep a happy mahrez! 

[SouthStandUpperTier]

3 minutes ago, RODNEY FERNIO said:

Well we must have spent close on £50 million already … if we keep Mahrez

as well it would be a serious statement.

Still think he's going. With only 2 years left on his contract his value goes down significantly with each passing transfer window. The owners might be stubborn, but they're not stupid either. We're just making Mahrez, his agent and Man City sweat a bit first before agreeing on a compromise fee.

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

For a year with a massive increase in wages.

 

He then threw a monumental strop because we didn't let him leave for a cut-price fee right at the end of the January window. He banged in a transfer request, which he cynically withdrew to get a 'loyalty bonus'. Not my idea of loyalty.

Riyad gets loads of stick for being disloyal compared to NG. my point is that he could have left when NG did.  it wasn’t his fault that the market changed dramatically as the new tv deal came in. no way did we think he was a 50/60m player when he signed his new deal. His agent is a knob for not asking for a ‘ridiculous’ release clause around 60m after year 2 to be insterted. I imagine we would have agreed that, even though we had decided that no more clauses would be allowed after the Kante debacle. 

 

he made a mistake in signing signing his new deal. He would have been far better off financially to have left that summer. We are fortunate that we got to see more of him in blue for two seasons. 

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, 4everfox said:

65 million for a PFA Player of the Year in his absolute prime is an insult in todays market no matter which way you look at it. 

He isn't in his prime, he's passed that. 

Transfer offers are calculated talking into account sell on value for the buying club. This is reduced because of his age. In a season and a half he hits 30. 

£65m is fair. 

[SouthStandUpperTier]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

Riyad gets loads of stick for being disloyal compared to NG. my point is that he could have left when NG did.  it wasn’t his fault that the market changed dramatically as the new tv deal came in. no way did we think he was a 50/60m player when he signed his new deal. His agent is a knob for not asking for a ‘ridiculous’ release clause around 60m after year 2 to be insterted. I imagine we would have agreed that, even though we had decided that no more clauses would be allowed after the Kante debacle. 

 

he made a mistake in signing signing his new deal. He would have been far better off financially to have left that summer. We are fortunate that we got to see more of him in blue for two seasons. 

He couldn't though, because back then he didn't employ an agent smart enough to negotiate a release clause.

[RODNEY FERNIO]

2 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Still think he's going. With only 2 years left on his contract his value goes down significantly with each passing transfer window. The owners might be stubborn, but they're not stupid either. We're just making Mahrez, his agent and Man City sweat a bit first before agreeing on a compromise fee.

My statement was a bit tongue in cheek .. as I don't think they are spending the money

they are at present and keeping Mahrez . Think a deal has been done and they are effectively spending

the Mahrez money in advance of actually receiving the funds from Manchester City.

[FoxinNotts]

He’ll never play for us again. 

[Ian Nacho]

Thought something had happened with it being hot...

[Wymsey]

13 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

It would be great if we could keep a happy mahrez! 

He seemed happy towards the end of last season.

Not sure if that's because he feels settled at a club for a good amount of years or just happy that his performances haven't let him down.

[Gerard]

9 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

He couldn't though, because back then he didn't employ an agent smart enough to negotiate a release clause.

 

To be fair to Mahrez and his agent and extremely luckily for us and if IIRC Mahrez signed a four year deal for £40k a few weeks before the title winning season started.

 

So after we won the title he still has three years left on his current contract at £40k a week.

 

Signing a new £100k a week contract with another year added doesn't seem like the worst decision when in theory if he had done nothing he could still be here on £40k a week with still a year left on his contract.

 

The club would have had the whip hand in negotiations if we were adamant no more release clauses.

Edited 23 June 2018 by Gerard

[Wymsey]

25 minutes ago, RODNEY FERNIO said:

Well we must have spent close on £50 million already … if we keep Mahrez

as well it would be a serious statement.

If this becomes true, next season would surely be one of the best opportunities to do excellently in the league again and win one of the cup competition trophies.

 

Just concerned that Mahrez is in two minds about leaving and, despite the time he's had to decide what he really wants to do next, is wasting both his and other people's time still weighing up things.

[1972 Fox]

On 22/06/2018 at 11:33, 4everfox said:

Stop negotiating. The price is the price. Wouldn't sell for a penny less than 100 million, if they aren't willing to pay what we want than we should pull out and refuse to do business with them. Might be the wake up call they need to stump up the price we want. Like a previous poster said, if Mahrez was an Arsenal player the number would be well over 100 million. Its time for the disrespect to end. 

This ^ and this.....

 

7 hours ago, Albert said:

Spot on & this is the attitude the owners have had ever since he requested to leave. Agents, clubs and the outside World see us as still being a one hit wonder small club but have overlooked the fact we are owned by very wealthy & ruthless businessmen who can’t be bullied & will only do deals on there terms.

 

Chelsea learnt that when they were told the price for Drinkwater & no matter how much haggling/negotiations they tried over a number of weeks they ended up paying the asking price at the final hour.

 

The owners have looked at the current market & set their price so unless that price is met they won’t budge. Its as simple as that. I was reliably told that in the January window that unless there was a bid of at least £90m the owners wouldn’t even entertain a phone call.

 

I’m pretty sure that although the deal is currently being delayed by agent antics etc it will eventually happen & being honest I hope it does for Mahrez’s sake. After everything he’s done for us It’s the right time. We’ll get a huge fee that will help us in our squad overhaul & I don’t begrudge him such a dream move as he more than deserves the chance to play under Pep at the elite level.

 

 

 

Daniel Levy at Spurs is very often lauded for being a tough negotiator when doing transfer business at Spurs (e.g. the likes of Alli or Eriksen would not be allowed to leave unless the buying club agreed to pay Tottenham's valuation) so why should we be any different?

 

And likewise, Man City wouldn't be letting Sterling or Sane leave for less than £100m.

 

Little old Leicester, eh! Time for Man City to put up or shut up.

[SouthStandUpperTier]

Just now, Gerard said:

 

To be fair to Mahrez and his agent and extremely luckily for us and if IIRC Mahrez signed a four year deal for £40k a week before the title winning season.

 

So after we won the title he still has three years left on his current contract at £40k a week.

 

Signing a new £100k a week contract with another year added doesn't seem like the worst decision when in theory if he had done nothing he could still be here on £40k a week with still a year left on his contract.

 

The club would have had the whip hand in negotiations if we were adamant no more release clauses.

The club have always had the whip hand. I could be wrong, but I don't think Mahrez and his former agent ever even thought about negotiating a release clause. The club must have been sniggering into their sleeves during those 2 contract negotiations.

[SuperMike]

11 minutes ago, FoxinNotts said:

He’ll never play for us again. 

Dead right.

Hope there is a sell-on clause cos he won't suit City, wont like sitting on the bench and will be moving on within 12 months. What's 30% of £55,000,000?

[Gerard]

Just now, SouthStandUpperTier said:

The club have always had the whip hand. I could be wrong, but I don't think Mahrez and his former agent ever even thought about negotiating a release clause. The club must have been sniggering into their sleeves during those 2 contract negotiations.

 

After Kante left because of  what became a ridiculously low release clause and Vardy had the option to leave for £20m we'd had our fingers burnt and said release clauses wouldn't be entertained. 

 

With Mahrez on £40k a week for three years he wasn't in a great position to demand one. 

[4everfox]

Just now, Blue Fox 72 said:

This ^ and this.....

 

 

Daniel Levy at Spurs is very often lauded for being a tough negotiator when doing transfer business at Spurs (e.g. the likes of Alli or Eriksen would not be allowed to leave unless the buying club agreed to pay Tottenham's valuation) so why should we be any different?

 

And likewise, Man City wouldn't be letting Sterling or Sane leave for less than £100m.

 

Little old Leicester, eh! Time for Man City to put up or shut up.

The thing is, the owners represent the portion of fans like us who think we should play hardball to get the fee we want. So all of these fans who are suffering from inferiority complex are literally debating against the reality of the situation, it won't change the fact that for 65 million, Mahrez is going nowhere. I'm glad we've got ruthless owners that would rather not sell as a principle then to sell on the cheap. Long may it continue. 

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

This ^ and this.....

 

 

Daniel Levy at Spurs is very often lauded for being a tough negotiator when doing transfer business at Spurs (e.g. the likes of Alli or Eriksen would not be allowed to leave unless the buying club agreed to pay Tottenham's valuation) so why should we be any different?

 

And likewise, Man City wouldn't be letting Sterling or Sane leave for less than £100m.

 

Little old Leicester, eh! Time for Man City to put up or shut up.

Spurs are pretty well a regular CL club. 

 

If we were then Riyad might be happy to stay. We have designs on being a consistent top four/six club but until we ‘talk the talk we can’t walk the walk’. 

 

How long left on sterling and sane’s contracts ? what is their weekly wage? How old are they? Sterling is English.  All these are relevant to valuation. 

 

As nigel would say...... too many ostriches here! 

 

im not asking to give him away - and I want us to have a settled and focussed squad for next season. If he is still here come late July then that’s not going to happen. 

 

65m please. Reasonable player related add ons to take it to 75/80. Done.