Vinicius Souza

Aggressive, tough tackling but also has great vision and skills too.

Pls Celtic, he’s exactly what we’re missing.

 

Yeah but what I mean is, when the club knows that he's not really going to play but they know they can make an extra few bob on him.

Like Morata. Madrid really had no intention of playing him. They had Ronaldo, Benzema etc, he was never going to play. They knew they could get a lot more for him and they were happy to keep him as part of the squad until the big offer came in, like it did from Chelsea a year later.

 

Looks very strong too!

 

Where’s this £15m buy back option coming from?

If we had to buy him for £7m with a £15m buy back clause inserted then I’d be fine with it anyway tbh.

2 years minimum of the guy and then making £8m profit would still be a good bit of business.

 

Where you heard that mate?

 

People in here posting about buy back clauses on the last page mate.

If there’s truth in it then I’d be fine with it.

 

Not good business if he carves up the champions league and is worth £40m.

 

That’s why I said I’d rather we didn’t have one and if we do, it needs to be high to discourage that behavior. If he’s worth £40m and we have £30m buyback, at least it’s a club record sale. If it’s £15m and they sell for £40m, we’ve developed him and been ripped off.

 

Ah OK mate.

 

We need to think about what’s best for the club on the pitch rather than off it.

We get a player that we maybe couldn’t get without the City link and make £8m profit after a couple of years good service.

Sounds a good deal to me.

 

We need to do both.

 

Stating the obvious.

But for this one player that could be a game changer for us, if we have to sacrifice some future profit for a big gain in performance on the pitch then it’s an absolute no brainer.

People too worried about sell on clauses and future transfers rather than enjoying the moment.

 

The buy back option came from McGrory. The £15m fee was just me plucking a figure out of thin air to make a point. The point being that any buy back clause would have to be significantly higher than any fee we buy him for, which looks like £7m at the moment. Now, it usually is but I was just making the comparison that City could buy him back on the cheap and sell him for far higher than that amount without any intention of playing him themselves, like many other clubs have done in the past.

So a club like Villa could be in touch to say, we like Souza, we know you have a buy back option. Celtic want £35m for him, buy him back for £15m and we will give you an additional £10m on top of that. That's pure profit for city that helps in their mad * spin of FFP.

 

The £15m was just being used as an example in here, it wasn't meant to be an indication of what an actual buy back figure might be.

 

You wouldn’t let the deal be scuppered by it, but you would look to protect the club. It may cost us more for a higher buyback, if you believe in the player you are buying and Ange, then you got to protect it.

Look at Ajax, they go for a run in the champions league and their players are priced appropriately. We as a club can’t afford to be leaving £15m on the table when the squad gets raided, that’s disrespecting ourselves.

 

It may be beyond stupid to you but it has been done at other top clubs in the past. It keeps both keepers at equal readiness and gives them a sense of equal respect. It also is a bonding experience that provides mutual support. It does not apply in all circumstances but I see both Hart and Siegrist as very similar in ability.

Its ultimately Ange's call. He is putting a squad together this season that can probably field two teams of 11 players plus reserves. That gives him the option of playing all his players on a regular basis both home and away if he chooses in a very congested set of fixtures this coming season.

As to being stupid, choose your words wisely or you look foolish if you can not listen to someone's opinion.

I would not call Don Revie stupid at Leeds Utd, when he had both his goalkeepers regularly playing, David Harvey and Gary Sprake, both excellent keepers.

I would not call Ferenc Puskas stupid at Panathinaikos, when he had both his goalkeepers regularly playing, Ikonomopoulos and Constantinou, both excellent keepers.

 

It would be a one-off and if it’s the only way to make this deal happen then so be it.

I think every Celtic fan would rather have him in the squad and double our outlay a couple of years down the line than not have him at all.

Could be the difference between us gaining extra income through points on the board in the CL groups and even though I think we’d win the league without him he could be a big difference maker in the derby games.

I’m sure we’ll find a fair middle ground with City either way though so no real need to waste our time on a hypothetical scenario.

 

I can understand the logic behind what you're saying, but have to disagree. The key is consistency. Not just for the keepers, but for the team in front of them. We simply cannot change keepers each game. We have a no. 1 which is Hart, with Siegrist as his back up and who will cover some cup games I would imagine.

Also, the 2 examples you've given were mid 70s I think, so not really a good arguement by giving almost 50 year old examples of it having been used!

 

Siegrist is a decent shot stopper.. but I don't see him as much more than that.

Hart is leagues above when it comes to organizing the defence.. distribution.. etc..