Maguire to Man Utd / Man City

[Buce]

1 hour ago, kingcarr21 said:

Do you really think he is our best defender? Evans for me was by far the better defender.

 

Maguire is our biggest asset, if we keep him then its all good but from what I have heard about Benkovic (Many Celtic fans say he is better than Vin Dijk when he was at Celtic) then I think we could seriously benefit from cashing in on Maguire, bringing Benkovic straight into the team and allowing Brendan to bring in players to improve our forward options.

 

Its one of those situations that I think either way it goes we cant really lose. We keep Maguire then that's fine, his stock can rise further and potentially become even more valuable but if he was to go then I honestly don't think it will hinder us at all.

 

His stock may be higher but United and City will have filled their vacancy by then and who else is there with that kind of money to splash on a defender?

 

Of all the players linked with other clubs, he would be easiest to replace - indeed, we may already have his replacement in Benkovic; I would sell him like a shot if we are offered £90m.

Edited 11 June 2019 by Buce

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, FoxyPalace.com said:

AKE very good in IMO

Agree but Ake wouldn’t come here unless we pay him 100k+/ week

 

bournemouth will demand 50m+ for him 

 

not sure there is a lot of saving 

 

id like to see if benkovic can get through a season without big injury issues and of Calgar can develop 

 

keep harry for for next season and loan benko to another PL club - one which is happy to play out from the back 

 

next summer you know where you stand and Harry will still attract 70/75m cos yanited won’t have solved all their defensive woes 

 

 

 

 

[urban.spaceman]

Man City fans don’t want him:

 

 

I don’t think any of them realise they’re using the Botswana flag in their usernames 

[turtmcfly]

36 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

I don't get it. If we become scared of spending money because we might not sign well then what's the point? The money is therefore useless.

 

Best example I can use here is Coutinho. Liverpool sold him for astronomical money, well over what he's truly worth, which allowed them to improve their defence significantly despite the hit in midfield - something they would later improve by signing Keita.

  

Coutinho effectively paid for van Dijk (the best defender in the world) and Keita. No doubt it was right to sell.

Why not use an example closer to home?

 

For the money we got for Mahrez we bought Maddison, Ricardo and Evans, gave 12 million to charity and still had a chunk left over

 

 

[Dan LCFC]

2 minutes ago, turtmcfly said:

Why not use an example closer to home?

 

For the money we got for Mahrez we bought Maddison, Ricardo and Evans, gave 12 million to charity and still had a chunk left over

There are countless but the main reason I used that one is I think Coutinho went for well over his true worth (Brazilian tax is another I'm convinced) and Maguire would be too. Mahrez I don't think did. Same kind of principle though. Selling for over the odds isn't unambitious - it can be a way to progress.

 

Mahrez was worth more to us than Maguire IMO.

Edited 11 June 2019 by Dan LCFC

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, turtmcfly said:

Why not use an example closer to home?

 

For the money we got for Mahrez we bought Maddison, Ricardo and Evans, gave 12 million to charity and still had a chunk left over

 

 

And ghezzal .... what we didn’t do is replace the hole left by riyad’s departure ....... perhaps we can cope without maguire and play out from the back as Brendan wants us to ..... I’m pretty sure I know how Brendan is looking at it .....

Edited 11 June 2019 by st albans fox

[turtmcfly]

2 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

There are countless but the main reason I used that one is I think Coutinho went for well over his true worth (Brazilian tax is another I'm convinced) and Maguire would be too. Mahrez I don't think did. Same kind of principle though. Selling for over the odds isn't unambitious - it can be a way to progress.

 

Mahrez was worth more to us than Maguire IMO.

 

Sure, but my example was just a more relevant counter to the 'what if don't buy well' argument against selling Maguire.

 

[turtmcfly]

3 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

And ghezzal .... what we didn’t do is replace the hole left by riyad’s departure ....... perhaps we can cope without maguire and play out from the back as Brendan wants us to ..... I’m pretty sure I know how Brendan is looking at it .....

 

I covered that with my lame '12 million to charity' ...

 

To be honest I still hold out a little bit of hope that the little Sid-the-sloth-faced bugger amounts to something.

[fuchsntf]

1 hour ago, turtmcfly said:

Why not use an example closer to home?

 

For the money we got for Mahrez we bought Maddison, Ricardo and Evans, gave 12 million to charity and still had a chunk left over

 

 

Yeh...but giving money to charity,ruined it for me..

[Liamlcfc1]

?????

[1972 Fox]

9 hours ago, kingcarr21 said:

Do you really think he is our best defender? Evans for me was by far the better defender.

 

Maguire is our biggest asset, if we keep him then its all good but from what I have heard about Benkovic (Many Celtic fans say he is better than Vin Dijk when he was at Celtic) then I think we could seriously benefit from cashing in on Maguire, bringing Benkovic straight into the team and allowing Brendan to bring in players to improve our forward options.

 

Its one of those situations that I think either way it goes we cant really lose. We keep Maguire then that's fine, his stock can rise further and potentially become even more valuable but if he was to go then I honestly don't think it will hinder us at all.

Yes I do, that's why I wrote it. We won't realise what we're missing until he's gone.

 

I'm not in the camp that wants us to sell our best players, I want to keep them all and also add quality to the squad. That is the way I want to see us progressing into the top 6 then 4 and with the backing of our board I think we can do it.

[splinterdream]

22 hours ago, foxfanazer said:

Would losing Harry and making £75m plus hinder that? 

I think it would yes

[HighPeakFox]

11 hours ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

I'm not in the camp that wants us to sell our best players.

There is no such camp.

[Col city fan]

6 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

There is no such camp.

Yes there is. There are quite a few who would be happy to sell Maguire as they don’t particularly rate him.

Of them all (eg. Maddison, Chilwell, Maguire) I wouldn’t be too concerned about selling Harry for good money. I definitely do not want to see Maddison or Chilwell leave the club though. They are the future and I wouldn’t want them sold for whatever price at present.

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Yes there is. There are quite a few who would be happy to sell Maguire as they don’t particularly rate him.

Of them all (eg. Maddison, Chilwell, Maguire) I wouldn’t be too concerned about selling Harry for good money. I definitely do not want to see Maddison or Chilwell leave the club though. They are the future and I wouldn’t want them sold for whatever price at present.

Not so much a camp, more like one bloke.  Most say we sell if it’s our only way of strengthening the more pressing areas. If we can do that without selling then don’t sell. 

[Tielemans63]

Whatever happens, Sky shouldn't be putting shit like this on their site. 

 

It's massively disrespectful to our club, particularly as we've been English champions more recently than United.

 

Also, I'm convinced that neither side are super keen on him but Sky Sports seem desperate to try and spark something as there's no interesting transfers on the horizon. 

 

Edited 12 June 2019 by Paddy.

[Dahnsouff]

The media love stuff like this, its far easier for them to have to focus on a smaller set of set of clubs, say like 6, than have to spread their resources/focus across 8-10 clubs.

Notice that the perceived love in for Wolves has soon dried up. All about the £££s across the globe.

[HighPeakFox]

33 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Yes there is. There are quite a few who would be happy to sell Maguire as they don’t particularly rate him.

Of them all (eg. Maddison, Chilwell, Maguire) I wouldn’t be too concerned about selling Harry for good money. I definitely do not want to see Maddison or Chilwell leave the club though. They are the future and I wouldn’t want them sold for whatever price at present.

Given you've decided to defend a phantom argument, allow me to re-quote the position I was challenging. 

 

19 hours ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

I'm not in the camp that wants us to sell our best players. 

Players, that's a plural. I suspect that anyone that wants to sell Maguire, does so conditionally, either on Tielemans being bought, or on being offered silly money. I highly doubt anyone wants rid in isolation.

 

Now, who else do people wish to flog, or were you just being contrary? 

Edited 12 June 2019 by HighPeakFox
Comma

[Countryfox]

15 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Given you've decided to defend a phantom argument, allow me to re-quote the position I was challenging. 

 

Players, that's a plural. I suspect that anyone that wants to sell Maguire, does so conditionally, either on Tielemans being bought, or on being offered silly money. I highly doubt anyone wants rid in isolation.

 

Now, who else do people wish to flog, or were you just being contrary? 

 

You missed a comma Peaky ???  !!!!! .......  never !!  ...     

[Col city fan]

I must be losing my marlies cos I’m genuinely sure there’s been plenty of posters who have said I’d sell (enter name here) if we got silly money for them, Maguire included?

Which is why I’ve said I’d sell Maguire for silly money but would be really disappointed to see the same done with Chillers and Maddison.

 

[HighPeakFox]

31 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I must be losing my marlies cos I’m genuinely sure there’s been plenty of posters who have said I’d sell (enter name here) if we got silly money for them, Maguire included?

Exactly. That's conditional Col, just as I said. I don't think anyone wants to sell him in isolation. 

[ARM1968]

28 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Exactly. That's conditional Col, just as I said. I don't think anyone wants to sell him in isolation. 

I want us to sell him in isolation. Don’t want any of our other talent being sold. 

 

Obviously I don’t count Slimani as talent. 

[HighPeakFox]

15 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

I want us to sell him in isolation. Don’t want any of our other talent being sold. 

 

Obviously I don’t count Slimani as talent. 

Fair enough - I have no issue with that, but am interested in why  

[Col city fan]

15 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Fair enough - I have no issue with that, but am interested in why  

That’s an easy answer HPF. I just don’t think Maguire is irreplaceable. He’s a good player, but slow. And it’s showed this season.

I believe Maddison and Chilwell can become exceptional players AND are younger. I literally wouldn’t replace Chilwell with any other any left back in the Prem at this present time. 

And Maddison will only get better.

Other than your David Silva’s and Bernardo Silvas their are very few players like Maddison around.

Edited 12 June 2019 by Col city fan

[HighPeakFox]

1 minute ago, Col city fan said:

That’s an easy answer HPF. I just don’t think Maguire is irreplaceable. He’s a good player, but slow. And it’s showed this season.

I believe Maddison and Chilwell can become exceptional players AND are younger. I literally wouldn’t replace Chilwell with any other any left back in the Prem at this present time. 

And Maddison will only get better.

Do you always answer questions directed elsewhere?  

 

I agree, for what it's worth. My point is, I don't think anyone wants to sell Maguire without there being an obvious benefit, be it other signings or an outrageous fee. And as you don't want to sell anyone else, we are simply discussing the possible sale of one player, rather than all our talent.