Jeremy Monga

[davieG]

https://psgtalk.com/2025/01/man-city-psg-jeremy-monga/

 

Paris Saint-Germain have never been afraid to sign promising young teenage talent, Xavi Simons and Cher Ndour come to mind. As a result, the capital club appear ready to head to that well again, but face competition.

Under sporting advisor Luis Campos, the Parisians are targeting young talent and, if it’s possible, French. The Ligue 1 side are steering clear of big-name stars as they look to build a team with manager Luis Enrique instead of relying on individual skills.

A new report reveals that the capital club could be looking to add an English player to their youth system and be a gem in their academy.

Could PSG lure an English player to the French capital?
Jeremy Monga
Paolo Bruno/Getty Images
Fichajes reported on Sunday that Manchester City and PSG have set their sights on 15-year-old winger Jeremy Monga, who plays for Leicester City’s Under-18 team. Nonetheless, the report claims that the Foxes are unwilling to let their promising player go so soon.

The young winger has impressed with his dribbling, explosive speed, and knack for assisting and scoring goals. Despite his age, his maturity and technical ability on the pitch have made him a standout player in Leicester’s youth ranks, catching the eye of several top-tier clubs.

[AKCJ]

Why is it that we can't get him signed up and these clubs are free to pinch him for nothing? How is that fair?

[Grebfromgrebland]

I guess we're seeing the truth about the academy which is that it can be great to nurture talent but if you're a Leicester it goes before they can get a game.

 

 

[Finnegan]

9 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Why is it that we can't get him signed up and these clubs are free to pinch him for nothing? How is that fair?

 

Technically it isn't nothing, they'll have to pay compensation but the compensation will be nominal.

 

That's being pedantic, though, you are still right, it is ludicrous.

 

By all accounts, we did the same ourselves in acquiring Monga in the first place, mind, so it's probably karma in this instance.

 

[James_lcfc]

Sounds like agent talk to be honest, but as he's under 16 it can't be can it? 

 

Having watched him a few times it's not a surprise he has the whole of the football world watching him.

 

Never going to play in our first team is he...

[st albans fox]

The rules probably need changing 

perhaps clubs who have nurtured an academy player for more than six years should be allocated 5 % of every fee the player drives through their career ??. (If they leave before age 18) 

[coolhandfox]

46 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Why is it that we can't get him signed up and these clubs are free to pinch him for nothing? How is that fair?

We do it to others!

[AKCJ]

36 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

We do it to others!

So how is that fair?

[RoboFox]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

Why is it that we can't get him signed up and these clubs are free to pinch him for nothing? How is that fair?

I might be wrong, but I think they'd have to pay a compensation / solidarity fee to release him. 

 

Not that it would be that much considering how much he could be worth.

[glenny_fox]

I've always wanted them to introduce a % on sales for any academy prospects taken by bigger clubs (us included). should be a 50% sell on fee for anybody 'poached' under the age of 18. would massively help out the smaller clubs in lower leagues.

[Chrysalis]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

The rules probably need changing 

perhaps clubs who have nurtured an academy player for more than six years should be allocated 5 % of every fee the player drives through their career ??. (If they leave before age 18) 

Thats just financial compensation though, I think they need changing to that if the club that owns the academy offers a contract the player either has to sign it or is not allowed to sign any contract for another club at all until they are 25.  In other words club has the right to first dibs, and the player cannot refuse 5 years or less, so as to avoid silly 1 year contracts.

Edited 13 January by Chrysalis

[jayfox26]

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

Technically it isn't nothing, they'll have to pay compensation but the compensation will be nominal.

 

That's being pedantic, though, you are still right, it is ludicrous.

 

By all accounts, we did the same ourselves in acquiring Monga in the first place, mind, so it's probably karma in this instance.

 

Not saying we didn't do the same and we certainly did some dodgy stuff with Hirst, but we didn't get Monga from another pro club though did we? There's been a few things said on here about us being dodgy when we signed him but nobody has actually said what happened, although anyone that knows might not be allowed to say.

 

I still think it's wrong though however that clubs spend money on their academy's and then don't actually reap the benefits as the big clubs just hoover up all the talent as a way of balancing psr in the long run. 

[Foxin_Mad]

If they are going to insist on bullshit like PSR, they absolutely need to ensure clubs get a fair value for their academy products else the red cartel/greedy six can just cherry pick and squad load all the best players from a young age. 

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

So how is that fair?

Why is it unfair? 

 

We are allowed to do what they are doing. 

 

Clubs get compensated.  

Edited 13 January by coolhandfox

[AKCJ]

1 minute ago, coolhandfox said:

Why is it unfair? 

 

We are allowed to do what they are doing. 

Because someone somewhere is missing out. Always the smallest one too.

[coolhandfox]

1 minute ago, AKCJ said:

Because someone somewhere is missing out. Always the smallest one too.

Whether it is right is different to fair. 

[Claridge]

34 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

Thats just financial compensation though, I think they need changing to that if the club that owns the academy offers a contract the player either has to sign it or is not allowed to sign any contract for another club at all until they are 25.  In other words club has the right to first dibs, and the player cannot refuse 5 years or less, so as to avoid silly 1 year contracts.

Yet we are allowed to stiff hundreds of kids who don't make it? Every professional footballer has seen loads of their mates got rid of by the clubs, why should they not get the best deal for their careers.

[davieG]

If the PL14 don’t like the rules why don’t they vote to change them because some like LCFC have delusions of being in the top 6

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Chrysalis said:

Thats just financial compensation though, I think they need changing to that if the club that owns the academy offers a contract the player either has to sign it or is not allowed to sign any contract for another club at all until they are 25.  In other words club has the right to first dibs, and the player cannot refuse 5 years or less, so as to avoid silly 1 year contracts.

That’s too restrictive 

courts would never allow that once challenged under employment law 

 

you might get away with two years which takes the player to 18 and therefore you get the chance to play them and build a value in the event they leave at 18. 

 

[LCFCJohn]

It’s a load of crap and I agree with the suggestions above about financial recompense etc.

 

In this case, why wouldn’t he go though. Man City, Liverpool, PSG whoever. Any of those he is more likely to be given a shot at senior level quicker than he would with us. 
 

The rules might mean we lose some of these youngsters. The fact we are a shambles will cause us to lose them more regularly.

[Ted Maul]

[AjcW]

I'm not sure if it's a FIFA ruling or what, but if you sign someone under 18 from South America, they stay at their club until they're 18.

The PL/FA could implement something similar, fair enough if you want to pre contract someone when they're an adult, but they stay put until they're 18 and the club who has agreed the transfer fund their costs.

 

You could even extend it to say the selling club gets first refusal on a development loan too. 

This would really help football league sides who would likely field these players in the first team from age 17 anyway. It would also increase the bond that player has to their development club, increasing the likelihood of a future return if their dream transfer doesn't work out. 

[Foxin_Mad]

4 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Why is it unfair? 

 

We are allowed to do what they are doing. 

 

Clubs get compensated.  

Is the compensation enough though given the values of money in the game now? Stuff like FFP, home grown talents etc

 

Also there should be limits on the players big clubs can 'hoover' up. Its seems they take anyone one with any ounce of talent. 

 

Why should clubs invest millions in facilities and development only for the big boys to come along and nick them. 

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, Foxin_Mad said:

Is the compensation enough though given the values of money in the game now? Stuff like FFP, home grown talents etc

 

Also there should be limits on the players big clubs can 'hoover' up. Its seems they take anyone one with any ounce of talent. 

 

Why should clubs invest millions in facilities and development only for the big boys to come along and nick them. 

We do it to other clubs smaller than us.

 

Is not right, but its not unfair.

[FosseSpark]

Stick him in the first team like Nwaneri was at Arsenal. If hes that good get him on instead of the shitdonkeys clogging up the bench...