Mahrez to Man City shock

[FoxFossil]

City just putting Liverpool rumour out there to get Manc to cough up.

[STUHILL]

1 hour ago, FoxFossil said:

£65 m for Mahrez with £35 m for Drinkwater is good business. Just need to sell Slimani, Musa and a couple of others for similar big bucks and we can all retire to Spain.

It's not really though when you consider Coutinho went for £125million, with Mahrez having much better stats 

 

I think realistically, £75m plus Roberts (£15m) is fair. 

 

Watching Sterling last night, Man City really need to do this business too! 

[chapero82]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

It is actually very brave of you to share it here, and I appreciate it because it reminds me to think twice.

Thanks mate I appreciate your kind words ?

[ZeGuy]

6 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

It's not really though when you consider Coutinho went for £125million, with Mahrez having much better stats 

 

I think realistically, £75m plus Roberts (£15m) is fair. 

 

Watching Sterling last night, Man City really need to do this business too! 

It's highly unrealistic. They'll never pay 75M and give us a player on the top of that. No one will. 

 

Can see this deal falling through and us having a massive problem in the dressing room.

[STUHILL]

2 minutes ago, ZeGuy said:

It's highly unrealistic. They'll never pay 75M and give us a player on the top of that. No one will. 

 

Can see this deal falling through and us having a massive problem in the dressing room.

£70m then plus Roberts and a buy back fee?  Come on, work with me Zeguy! 

[4everfox]

Just now, ZeGuy said:

It's highly unrealistic. They'll never pay 75M and give us a player on the top of that. No one will. 

 

Can see this deal falling through and us having a massive problem in the dressing room.

Why would we have a massive dressing room problem? If he spits his dummy out again we should send him litter picking the training ground for the season. He'd soon start grovelling. 

Edited 19 June 2018 by 4everfox

[Gerard]

3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I often wonder if a fair bit of the information we read about deals is a week or two old......... sometimes more. Man City will pay the fee (total inc Roberts ) or we will soften our stance. They are banking on the latter but at some point someone has to blink. Shame that Riyad had to bring in an expensive agent last year which muddies the waters even more .......that was his call though. 

 

You would have to laugh if the deal never went through because the agent couldn't get an acceptable fee even though Mahrez, Leicester and Man City had come to an agreement. 

 

We're entitled to ask what we want though. The Man City bid is a hostile one and we'd probably turn down the bid we would accept tomorrow if Mahrez wasn't bothered in what shade of blue he would be playing in next season.

 

As with all things that are not for sale the buyers should respect the sellers price if they want to buy it. If someone unexpectedly knocked on your front door and tried to buy your house when it wasn't for sale you don't expect them to offer below market value and try and buy it for a cut price.

[ZeGuy]

19 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

£70m then plus Roberts and a buy back fee?  Come on, work with me Zeguy! 

He's that much worth for us and even more, without a doubt.

 

But let's face it, the situation won't be manageable if he's forced to stay. We saw how it looked like in january and you don't piss on 65M to send a player to the reserves.

 

I'd take £60M+add-ons+Roberts or 70-75M (edited) straight cash.

 

Either way he HAS to go.

Edited 19 June 2018 by ZeGuy

[ZeGuy]

4 minutes ago, 4everfox said:

Why would we have a massive dressing room problem? If he spits his dummy out again we should send him litter picking the training ground for the season. He'd soon start grovelling. 

 

Yeah, because it's how it works. Thank fck you don't manage a club.

[STUHILL]

2 minutes ago, ZeGuy said:

He's that much worth for us and even more, without a doubt.

 

But let's face it, the situation won't be manageable, if he's forced to stay. We saw how it look liked in january and you don't piss on 65M to send a player to the reserves.

 

I'd take £60M+add-ons+Roberts or 75M straight cash.

 

Either way he HAS to go.

I'll come back to you on that. We have other interested parties now 

[4everfox]

Just now, ZeGuy said:

Yeah, because it's how it works. Thank fck you don't manage a club.

Thank god you don't, you'd sell all of our assets for a packet of peanuts and a pair of socks. 

[ZeGuy]

Just now, STUHILL said:

I'll come back to you on that. We have other interested parties now 

Eh? Seriously?

[ZeGuy]

1 minute ago, 4everfox said:

Thank god you don't, you'd sell all of our assets for a packet of peanuts and a pair of socks. 

Lol. Whatever you say.

 

 

[Gerard]

21 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

It's not really though when you consider Coutinho went for £125million, with Mahrez having much better stats 

 

I think realistically, £75m plus Roberts (£15m) is fair. 

 

Watching Sterling last night, Man City really need to do this business too! 

 

Plenty of people including a few on here think he'd only be going to Man City as cover for Stirling and Sane. Unbelievable anyone could come to that conclusion.

 

We should let them have their price and put in an add on that if Mahrez ever features in the top ten Balon d'Or again in his career they have to stump up another £50m.

[STUHILL]

Just now, Gerard said:

 

Plenty of people including a few on here think he'd only be going to Man City as cover for Stirling and Sane. Unbelievable anyone could come to that conclusion.

 

We should let them have their price and put in an add on that if Mahrez ever features in the top ten Balon d'Or again in his career they have to stump up another £50m.

I think Sane will become an absolute World beater eventually, but I would put Mahrez ahead of Sterling right now! Mahrez offers so much more than him in that position. 

They are being stubborn and Mahrez certainly hasn't helped our negotiating situation.

 

I imagine it will come down to an upfront fee of around the £60m, to save Man City's "pride", but with some almost nailed on add-ons of £15m or so. Hopefully a player too. 

 

We are in a strong position, but certainly would help if some other clubs came sniffing to help push it through! I would be leaking some "interest" from some other big clubs - PSG, LIverpool etc

[Gerard]

9 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

I think Sane will become an absolute World beater eventually, but I would put Mahrez ahead of Sterling right now! Mahrez offers so much more than him in that position. 

They are being stubborn and Mahrez certainly hasn't helped our negotiating situation.

 

I imagine it will come down to an upfront fee of around the £60m, to save Man City's "pride", but with some almost nailed on add-ons of £15m or so. Hopefully a player too. 

 

We are in a strong position, but certainly would help if some other clubs came sniffing to help push it through! I would be leaking some "interest" from some other big clubs - PSG, LIverpool etc

 

I think leaking false information is only for us mugs, Mahrez and his agent knows exactly who is interested as the clubs sound them out first.

 

It would be great to get a Chelsea or Liverpool type club interested and stump up the asking price. We could then accept their offer and reject Man City's putting Mahrez and Man City in an awkward position. However I don't think it works like that and the likes of a Chelsea or Liverpool don't want to be used and snubbed to get Leicester a better price.

 

I do think we have the whip hand here. Someone will buy Mahrez this summer as it's not often players of his quality come on the market and someone will have him near the end of the window when their transfer business hasn't gone as planned. If Man City really want him they'll cough up eventually for the sake of a few million quid. 

[MCFC]

Manchester City are really pushing this big new policy of not paying over what we think a player is worth. Unfortunately when the Sheikh took over we developed a bit of a reputation for being a soft touch in the transfer market- we would pay whatever it took to get players to come to us, both in transfer fee and wages, because we weren't as appealing as United, Barcelona or any of the other clubs we're trying to compete with. Nowadays, if I may say so, we're a bit more attractive for players who want to win trophies and work alongside some of the best in the game and we're trying to fix that reputation. We walked away from the Sanchez deal in August, and again in January, because we wanted to show that we don't pay over the odds anymore. I suspect we're being a pain in the arse RE Mahrez for the same reason. The only problem with this is that in January we paid £57m for Laporte because that was his release clause, when in reality he was probably a £35m player. Not exactly sending out a strong message, is it?

Now, who am I to say what price should be high enough for Leicester to sell? To me I'd say Mahrez is probably worth about £70m but if, bearing in mind the current market, Leicester want more then that's fair enough. I think he'll move during this window but if MCFC walk away in order to reinforce their tough-negotiator image then I won't be at all surprised. 

 

Also, for what it's worth, I think we should pay your club to take Roberts off our hands. An inconsistent player with a poor attitude. I wouldn't touch him if I were Puel. 

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, MCFC said:

Manchester City are really pushing this big new policy of not paying over what we think a player is worth. Unfortunately when the Sheikh took over we developed a bit of a reputation for being a soft touch in the transfer market- we would pay whatever it took to get players to come to us, both in transfer fee and wages, because we weren't as appealing as United, Barcelona or any of the other clubs we're trying to compete with. Nowadays, if I may say so, we're a bit more attractive for players who want to win trophies and work alongside some of the best in the game and we're trying to fix that reputation. We walked away from the Sanchez deal in August, and again in January, because we wanted to show that we don't pay over the odds anymore. I suspect we're being a pain in the arse RE Mahrez for the same reason. The only problem with this is that in January we paid £57m for Laporte because that was his release clause, when in reality he was probably a £35m player. Not exactly sending out a strong message, is it?

Now, who am I to say what price should be high enough for Leicester to sell? To me I'd say Mahrez is probably worth about £70m but if, bearing in mind the current market, Leicester want more then that's fair enough. I think he'll move during this window but if MCFC walk away in order to reinforce their tough-negotiator image then I won't be at all surprised. 

 

Also, for what it's worth, I think we should pay your club to take Roberts off our hands. An inconsistent player with a poor attitude. I wouldn't touch him if I were Puel. 

It's not just your club though, there seems to be a general dismissiveness of Mahrez and Leicester in his price. The fact is if the player and clubs name were kept anonymous and a valuation was done on an ex PL winner, PFA POTY, Ballon D'Or nominee, top of the scoring and assists combined in the last 3 seasons, peak age then in this current market it would be £70m minimum. I accept there's potentially question marks over his temperament but he's so calm and composed that it's one of the main reasons he's magic. If he was at any fashionable club and done what he's done here in his time he'd have a queue of top clubs offering mad money, for this reason alone I hope we tell clubs to pay up or fcuk off.

[Gerard]

5 minutes ago, MCFC said:

Manchester City are really pushing this big new policy of not paying over what we think a player is worth. Unfortunately when the Sheikh took over we developed a bit of a reputation for being a soft touch in the transfer market- we would pay whatever it took to get players to come to us, both in transfer fee and wages, because we weren't as appealing as United, Barcelona or any of the other clubs we're trying to compete with. Nowadays, if I may say so, we're a bit more attractive for players who want to win trophies and work alongside some of the best in the game and we're trying to fix that reputation. We walked away from the Sanchez deal in August, and again in January, because we wanted to show that we don't pay over the odds anymore. I suspect we're being a pain in the arse RE Mahrez for the same reason. The only problem with this is that in January we paid £57m for Laporte because that was his release clause, when in reality he was probably a £35m player. Not exactly sending out a strong message, is it?

Now, who am I to say what price should be high enough for Leicester to sell? To me I'd say Mahrez is probably worth about £70m but if, bearing in mind the current market, Leicester want more then that's fair enough. I think he'll move during this window but if MCFC walk away in order to reinforce their tough-negotiator image then I won't be at all surprised. 

 

Also, for what it's worth, I think we should pay your club to take Roberts off our hands. An inconsistent player with a poor attitude. I wouldn't touch him if I were Puel. 

 

It's a bit of a contradiction justifying paying £57m for Laporte because that was his release clause, you can still choose to offer less and walk away. 

 

This is a hostile bid by Man City. If Mahrez offered to sign a five year deal at Leicester tomorrow we might not even sell him at £100m. The only reason we're selling Mahrez is because his head has been turned and there is a lot of bad feeling I suspect between the two clubs when you've unsettled our player and are now trying to get him on the cheap, it's business but it's not very ethical or classy.

 

Mahrez is a former PFA POTY and a 7th placed Balon d'Or player and over the last three seasons there is not a player in the Premier League who has got more goals and assists than him all whilst playing RM in a 4-4-2 with defensive responsibilities in a low possession side. We're a bit pissed off that you value him in the same ballpark as a 24 year old uncapped centre half who you stumped up the cash to Athletic Bilbao no questions asked.

 

We've seen Mahrez be a statistically better player than both Coutinho and Hazard and they are valued at twice what Mahrez is despite Mahrez being statically better and both those players given more attacking freedom for their teams. 

 

I agree about Roberts, I don't want him here personally, I'd much rather have Grealish. Two seasons at Celtic seems to me he doesn't have the fire in his belly to keep challenging himself and took the easy option.

[STUHILL]

17 minutes ago, MCFC said:

Manchester City are really pushing this big new policy of not paying over what we think a player is worth. Unfortunately when the Sheikh took over we developed a bit of a reputation for being a soft touch in the transfer market- we would pay whatever it took to get players to come to us, both in transfer fee and wages, because we weren't as appealing as United, Barcelona or any of the other clubs we're trying to compete with. Nowadays, if I may say so, we're a bit more attractive for players who want to win trophies and work alongside some of the best in the game and we're trying to fix that reputation. We walked away from the Sanchez deal in August, and again in January, because we wanted to show that we don't pay over the odds anymore. I suspect we're being a pain in the arse RE Mahrez for the same reason. The only problem with this is that in January we paid £57m for Laporte because that was his release clause, when in reality he was probably a £35m player. Not exactly sending out a strong message, is it?

Now, who am I to say what price should be high enough for Leicester to sell? To me I'd say Mahrez is probably worth about £70m but if, bearing in mind the current market, Leicester want more then that's fair enough. I think he'll move during this window but if MCFC walk away in order to reinforce their tough-negotiator image then I won't be at all surprised. 

 

Also, for what it's worth, I think we should pay your club to take Roberts off our hands. An inconsistent player with a poor attitude. I wouldn't touch him if I were Puel. 

That's interesting! I heard some Man CIty fans calling him a mini Messi, but think that was couple of seasons ago to be fair.

 

I don't think he would be coming to start here, far from it. More a case of having another young, exciting prospect on the books. Puel likes young boys... 

 

As for Mahrez, I think Leicester value him at around £90million with Man City valuation being closer to £60m. Be interesting to see who blinks first! 

[Dan LCFC]

45 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

It's not just your club though, there seems to be a general dismissiveness of Mahrez and Leicester in his price. The fact is if the player and clubs name were kept anonymous and a valuation was done on an ex PL winner, PFA POTY, Ballon D'Or nominee, top of the scoring and assists combined in the last 3 seasons, peak age then in this current market it would be £70m minimum. I accept there's potentially question marks over his temperament but he's so calm and composed that it's one of the main reasons he's magic. If he was at any fashionable club and done what he's done here in his time he'd have a queue of top clubs offering mad money, for this reason alone I hope we tell clubs to pay up or fcuk off.

Couldn't agree more with this. I've said this a long time but look at the stats he posts in Leicester's side despite the fact it's for us rather than because of it. The simple fact is we haven't got a side littered with quality like others have got and this is going to be a hindrance to his numbers. It's snobbery. Nothing more.

[bpfox]

u know what every time they say no to 75 million wack another 2 million on, that will f*** them.

[FoxFossil]

Managing the dressing room is key I think to next season. Mardy Mahrez and Sulky Slimani need to be sold asap so new players aren't infected. £65m for RM enables us to rebuild. This is business, not about nob size.

[Ian Nacho]

The saga begins again. 

[Buce]

3 hours ago, ZeGuy said:

He's that much worth for us and even more, without a doubt.

 

But let's face it, the situation won't be manageable if he's forced to stay. We saw how it looked like in january and you don't piss on 65M to send a player to the reserves.

 

I'd take £60M+add-ons+Roberts or 70-75M (edited) straight cash.

 

Either way he HAS to go.

 

 

He's not being forced to stay.

 

When someone meets his valuation, he can leave.