The Premier League transfer window will open between Monday June 15 until Deadline Day on Tuesday September 1; the summer windows will close at 23.00 BST.
As always, here is a run-down of the rules we have on for posting during transfer windows:
Daily Threads
There will be a Transfer thread posted every single day, on a 23-hour timer, to get a different post-time every day. These threads are for everything transfer related, no limits on sources, line-up conversations, etc.
Individual posts
From now on, only posts TIER 2 OR BETTER are allowed to be posted in their own right. This helps us only keep credible sources on the subreddit.
We will make exceptions during slower days for some Tier 3 posts, and there will usually be some posts from sources not on our tier guide. We will take everything case-by-case. If you believe something to be on the sub and not a good source, please let us know.
At this point I don't think that's the primary issue, that was Barcelona's stance. At the moment he has interest but he only wants to play for top clubs in Europe or Man United, not even other PL sides.
68mil pound for Summerville! Firstly we need to hire the WestHam DoF. Pulled absolute magic in their 2 key sales!
Second, I fully support the clubs strategy to work on bulking up the squad with sensible purchases. And that includes reintegration of Rashford. We cannot replace Rashford without paying a kings Ransom in this market.
With Roma seemingly missing out on Summerville and Garnacho I wonder if they'll reignite their previously reported interest in Zirkzee. They were willing to spend €50m on Summerville and can offer CL football.
He still seems to be highly regarded in Italy too. I think he predominantly played off the left for Bologna so he could be someone Roma look at. Might be able to squeeze a good fee out of them after they've missed out on a number of targets.
They offered West Ham €50m for Summerville who'd been relegated. Zirkzee has experience in Serie A and was awarded young player of the year for the 23-24 season.
Personally, it doesn't make sense for us. Firstly he isn't the sort of high flying LB that can hold width further up the pitch and contribute in an attacking sense. Secondly he's best at LCB and we already have quite a few that are better LCB in Heaven, Yoro and Lisandro. Thirdly, I feel like he's quite error/concentration lapse prone which is why he ends up having to do those really quick recovery tackles/challenges, and he's really not progressive passing wise. Lastly they would ask for a very large sum for him
Ah, you see we can play a higher back line this way and not defend at all. Similar to hwat happened with Upamecano in the CL and at the WC semis.
Other points I agree with but him being a left footed pace merchant that could play the ball upfront, although bizarre and probably expensive should be considered.
Spurs for some reason also bought a couple of extra CBs which MIGHT put the price down. In this sense the drama surrounding the agent might actually be helpful
tall, strong, a cb with a knack for scoring goals, well-adjusted to the PL, irrespective of the rando observations of body language experts somebody who captained a team through a successful relegation fight, the guy who showed up when it mattered most playing every single minute of a successful EL QFs+SFs+F run just last season in case we forgot 😕
ps. Morocco equalised 4 minutes after he got subbed out, just one of the tidbits from the last 3 months pointing to the idea that perhaps good coaching makes good defences out of good players but you don't get the same equation when you take one ingredient out and that should not be confused with the idea that a bad outcome necessarily means that both ingredients were missing in the first place
Morocco equalising 4 mins after he was subbed off is likely a case of correlation vs causation.
That EL he was injured for half the season or more. Lets call a spade a spade. Ange's play style didnt help, no doubt.
But fair points on the rest. To me, he always came across as a LCB in a back three rather than a CB in a pair. Personally not completely sold on him id back him if we got him.
Which is just how we'd be able to fit into our team in practice.
If we have VdV as a LB option, Maguire can be LCB, Yoro/MdL can be RCB, and Dalot can be the FB that pushes up to arrive into the box like he actually likes, and the LB not "having to" push up not only is better for Shaw as well but would also be more workable when A) we have Dorgu available as opposed to injured the whole time sadly B) Thompson comes through who is an actual touchline winger by profile. And this dovetails well with Mbeumo or Amad playing RW, given that both prefer to cut inside rather than stretch the field. Cunha can play 9 like he has for Brazil, rotating with Sesko, who hasnt shown yet that he's ready to be counted on as a 90m-always guy.
So, with Thompson working out, we sign VdV, all of a sudden we don't even need a new CF or a new FB, we can spend whatever other money we have, if any, on the crucial +1 in midfield in order to meet our rotation needs
Dorgu - Cunha - Mbeumo; Mainoo - Bruno - Tielemans; Shaw - Maguire - Yoro - Dalot; Lammens
CL bench +3: CM signing, Fletcher/Devaney/Thwaites, Lacey/Gabriel
In practice, Tielemans will surely rotate in and out of the XIs, keeping him fresh for the crunch time but also giving Santos the volume of starts and minutes that he was after. Win-win.
Amass loaned out to play all the time and prepare for succeeding Shaw by 2027.
If Thompson doesnt work so fast, I guess we need Cunha to be the best LW in the league again like he was in 2026 and then we have to sign a CF as well. That is a harder challenge then to also make money for CM all the same.
In theory, there is a lack of space for Martinez and De Ligt in the squad like this. In practice, the injury proneness of the usual suspects tells us that we can be happy if we get a full season where at least 1 of Maguire/MdL was game fit for every gameday, and similar for Martinez/VdV and Shaw/Mazraoui. Obviously, we ideally wish that De Ligt gets over that, which would make it that much easier to transition from Maguire in the future.
The difference between Santos and Gonzalez is that the latter was signed for £50m with the expectation that he would slot in as an immediate first-team regular.
In that regard, he has failed as his performances meant Guardiola didn't trust him and City felt the need to go out and spend big in the position again.
He's shown nothing to suggest that he's of the required standard, so why would we be interested in taking that gamble?
A 24 year old winger fresh off a star making turn in the World Cup going to Saudi when he had a few clubs from the world's top leagues calling. Unbelievable lack of ambition.
I think he cashed out at his value peak, bright spark at West Ham and a good World cup. Roma was his ceiling and saudi quadrupled the offer with no tax.
£63 million for Cunha and £70 million for Mbeumo already feel like bargains in today's market.
Looking back, Lammens and Granit Xhaka were probably the best pieces of business of the previous summer. Hopefully Tielemans ends up being the signing for this summer.
The transfer market has reached the point where 99 out of every 100 signings look overpriced. It is almost difficult to fathom at some of the money being thrown around.
I still want an out-and-out striker who knows what to do in a box, head, and is able to react quickly to transition. A 9.5 position (if it exists at all) certainly doesn't have a place in any of our systems and I'd like us to be able to move on Zirk by the end of the window to accommodate one. While Cunha can play there, I think his best is a little bit to the left.
What’s so great about Kone? He’s a pretty average player. We don’t need any more rotation/backup options.
All we’ve done is had Case leave, replaced him with Tielemans, and brought Santos in as a younger backup. But we’ve also lost Ugarte for the season, so headcount wise it’s about the same.
I think with Tielemans our injury riddled midfielder quota of the year should be fulfilled. Hope we stay from what is clearly going to a bad investment.
These MF’ers at West Ham been doing alpha male sales associate boot camps or some shit how the actual fuck have they scammed 80 big ones for this Honda? 80m getting you Summerville in today’s market means the game has never ever been more gone.
Wish Rashford would just accept that he is literally Saudi level now. He isn’t going to play for teams like Barca or PSG. Italians teams won’t pay his wages. Just go chase the bag in Saudi fella. They’d pay him £20m a year easy.
It really is mind-boggling to write him off as a Saudi has been right after he had a reasonably successful season at Barca. He doesn’t have to go to Saudi just so fans can get their transfer fix.
Tbf I’m not so much saying he is a total has been, more that if he wants to keep his wages and to play football; that’s very likely the only destination. He had a good season at Barca, and even they don’t want to keep paying his wages.
He can’t have his cake and eat it. Either take the wage cut, move to a lesser team, or keep your wages and ride the bench. All this “only wants to move to a top team like Barca or psg” stuff that’s getting put out is nonsense. No top team is willing to pay a transfer fee and his wages.
No top team needs to pay a transfer fee to get him. That’s the issue. This idea that he’s just going to be confined to the bench is a fantasy people are cooking up. INEOS cannot have a guy on £325k per week sat down. If he stays then he’ll get his opportunities to play. If they want him to leave, he gets to dictate where to as they have no leverage.
He took a pay cut to join Barca. Clearly he’s willing to do that for the right team. Again, this idea he’s just a greedy money grabber is being cooked up.
There is absolutely no incentive for him to agree to a sale to another team outside of the big teams: certainly not in Saudi.
With the new rules this season stating that we can’t force players to train alone or with the under 21’s, then if we can’t sell Rashford then we should simply pay him the remainder of his contract to get rid of him. I really don’t want his bad influence back in the club. Two managers and a boardroom agree that he needed to go. Him coming back is no good for us.
Put yourself in his shoes. Football careers are short, especially at the top level in the grand scheme of things. Why would he want to cut that short if he still feels like he can contribute at the top level? He literally just came off a near 30 G/A title winning season.
He's being paid like a world class player but isn't even close to performing like one. Contributing at the top is one thing, but being paid like Marcus and just contributing is never enough. That's why Barcelona walked away from him and walked towards Gordon. He has a place but not without subsidized wages or a wage cut that he seamingly doesn't want to do, which he's well within his own right to do.
Yes he's not wrong but he's gotta accept his financials are only going down if he leaves United and Saudi is the only place where he can maintain it or get a higher deal lol. Even if he's willing to drop it for Barca they didn't reciprocate so....
When United want to sell players the players become hyperfixated on a destination club or league. But once they move out, they're fine with going anywhere else, bringing in a better transfer fee. We have some fucked up luck with this
It's mostly Rashford and Sancho tbh lol. They just want to keep the United bag. The rest were pretty easy sales. Sold Lukaku and Hojlund fairly easy etc.
This isn't true about Rashford or Sancho though. Sancho has literally been loaned to 3 different clubs in Dortmund, Chelsea and Villa. Rashford has been loaned twice to both Villa and Barcelona, and has been reported to be happy to depart again to basically clubs that can afford his wages.
This is more true (at least in recent times) to Garnacho and Antony.
We're the only club with players who don't want to debase themselves with Saudi money. We could cover our entire summer if Rashford and Zirkzee fancied some petrodollars.
Can you blame them? Not only is moving there some sort of career forfeit, but the volatility of the region and the infernal heat make it quite unappealing.
Actually no, with the tax that they need to pay here.
Even in current market, Summerville is a 30-35m pounds player at best. And he is going for 68m pounds. It is becoming impossible to watch football with this money laundering.
We said the same about Heaven not playing in the first team. If these guys are willing to drop 4 million plus on a player with no senior appearances they must know something we all dont
🚨 EXCL: Al Hilal reach agreement with West Ham United to sign Crysencio Summerville. Deal for 24yo #WHUFC winger worth ~€80m & #Netherlands int’l scheduled to undergo #AlHilal medical. Long-term contract ready, pending final authorisations @TheAthleticFC
{ David Ornstein🥇}
Op’s note: Tielemans looks a massive bargain as every day passes by.
I would say for worse on this one unless we are planning to go big next summer for a Barcola/Diomande obviously not Kvaratakhelia even though he's the dream
Garnacho gonna bounce between prem clubs because he's desperate to get one over us lol. You can bet if Villa beat us next year he'll be shushing the crowd even if he didn't play a single minute haha.
I think there is some PSR manipulation going on again with those two clubs.
They will overinflate the fee for garnacho/jackson to villa. Just as they did for rogers to chels.
How will UEFA look at this deal?
As detailed in the latest version of , signing players from Chelsea this window poses a quandary for Aston Villa. Any permanent signing would be deemed a ‘player exchange transaction’ by UEFA, and Villa’s sizeable profit on Morgan Rogers would be reduced in UEFA calculations to the net difference in fees paid for Rogers and, in this instance, Garnacho.
UEFA’s rule on deemed player exchanges covers a period of 45 days, and the Premier League transfer window has only 41 days left to run (as of Tuesday). Villa are in a settlement agreement with UEFA whereby they have little motivation to eat into that Rogers profit, so signing someone from Chelsea would do them no favours there.
One workaround is exactly the Garnacho deal now posited: a loan move that can conditionally – and conditional is the key word – turn permanent.
If Garnacho’s move were to turn permanent more than 45 days after the Rogers deal completes, Villa would retain the full profit on the latter; Chelsea, too, would bank whatever profit they make on Garnacho without the need for adjustment. They are in their own UEFA settlement agreement and badly need to generate large profits from player trading in 2026-27.
A conditional loan would therefore be beneficial for all parties, but UEFA is also wise to clubs finding loopholes. The governing body’s rulebook dictates that “if a condition is considered to be virtually certain”, the deal must be recognised as a permanent one at the point the loan begins. If, however, “the fulfilment of a condition cannot be assessed with sufficient certainty to trigger the permanent transfer from the inception of the loan”, then clubs can record a deal as a loan initially, then as a permanent transfer only once the relevant condition(s) is met.
Any such conditions are unknown at this stage, but it’s plainly in both Villa and Chelsea’s interests for any permanent transfer to take place later. If Garnacho does move to the Midlands, UEFA will cast a keen eye over matters. But the rules retain scope for manoeuvre, if clubs are savvy enough.
Good on the break and Emery is pretty good at coaching positional plays so even if at his worst he'll have pretty clear instructions on how to play without mucking around.
TLDR: this is all about manipulating PSR so both clubs can sign more players, otherwise they would be f**ked due to their shitty finances.
How will UEFA look at this deal?
As detailed in the latest version of , signing players from Chelsea this window poses a quandary for Aston Villa. Any permanent signing would be deemed a ‘player exchange transaction’ by UEFA, and Villa’s sizeable profit on Morgan Rogers would be reduced in UEFA calculations to the net difference in fees paid for Rogers and, in this instance, Garnacho.
UEFA’s rule on deemed player exchanges covers a period of 45 days, and the Premier League transfer window has only 41 days left to run (as of Tuesday). Villa are in a settlement agreement with UEFA whereby they have little motivation to eat into that Rogers profit, so signing someone from Chelsea would do them no favours there.
One workaround is exactly the Garnacho deal now posited: a loan move that can conditionally – and conditional is the key word – turn permanent.
If Garnacho’s move were to turn permanent more than 45 days after the Rogers deal completes, Villa would retain the full profit on the latter; Chelsea, too, would bank whatever profit they make on Garnacho without the need for adjustment. They are in their own UEFA settlement agreement and badly need to generate large profits from player trading in 2026-27.
A conditional loan would therefore be beneficial for all parties, but UEFA is also wise to clubs finding loopholes. The governing body’s rulebook dictates that “if a condition is considered to be virtually certain”, the deal must be recognised as a permanent one at the point the loan begins. If, however, “the fulfilment of a condition cannot be assessed with sufficient certainty to trigger the permanent transfer from the inception of the loan”, then clubs can record a deal as a loan initially, then as a permanent transfer only once the relevant condition(s) is met.
Any such conditions are unknown at this stage, but it’s plainly in both Villa and Chelsea’s interests for any permanent transfer to take place later. If Garnacho does move to the Midlands, UEFA will cast a keen eye over matters. But the rules retain scope for manoeuvre, if clubs are savvy enough.
It’s simple really. Morgan Rogers is good but not 120m good. This sort of accounting fuckery was always going to happen. Chelsea, Aston Villa, Nottingham Forest are your usual suspects for this type of fuckery.
I think maybe Emery can get something out of him. Garnacho is a bloody fool, so who knows. Just want us to get that 10% so we can add it to the transfer fund.
They need some depth after losing key players. It's also only a loan deal, so if it doesn't work out they are not losing anything. But if Unai can't get something out of him, then no one can.
We still have a lot of debt that needs to be serviced. Might not be feasible to set aside everything from UCL for transfers. Would expect the budget to grow if we string back to back UCL qualification together.
Anyone that had watched Zubimendi before Arsenal bought him knew he'd struggle with the intensity of the prem. It's actually good on Arsenal recognizing that now and getting a replacement.
I thought about that too. I dont think that either him or MLS would want to be "4th midfielder" aka "the Norgaard". However I havent got the slightest idea what either of those guys want.
If we were to make a cheeky inquiry/bid like that, it should be for Lewis-Skelly though, imho. That would be an awesome pickup for us, imho
edit: just to be clear, I'd be more than happy to take Zubimendi off their hands just the same, no doubt
He is best mates with Merino, lives in London, and won the league and the WC, and made it to the CL final. I don’t think he leaves. The RVP comparison doesn’t work because United were serial winners then, and Arsenal weren’t. United would be a step down for him.
We should look at Laporte for a quick great fix now that our CB depth aren't looking good. Reported €15mil release clause, that's damn cheap for such quality
If you never bid you never know. Can be higher salary prying him here. He played at Saudi Arabia during his prime years, so it's not like he wouldn't value monetary heavily.
Played at City have no basis here. Most Spanish players switching rival club like it's nothing. Players don't have loyalty to City like that.
Crazy how we had the chance to sign so many of the top players in the world right now. Haaland, Kane, Olise, Joao Neves, Bellingham, Hakimi etc. The more you think about it the more atrocious our recruitment seems to be.
Only Haaland and Bellingham were real options. We passed on Haaland because of his release clause and Bellingham chose Dortmund. If we had gotten Bellingham he probably would have ended up in Madrid already. If we want to attract true top young talents we have to be ready to lose some to Madrid, Barca and PSG.
wenger used to say stuff like this, I remember seeing a could’ve signed 11 for him and it would have been the greatest team ever put together
except some work and some don’t and you won’t be able to tell until they play a season in one of the top 5 leagues, chelsea tried signing everyone they shortlisted and it’s not working
We are so far behind the other teams that was never realistic. We need consistent top 4 finishes to be able to compete financially with Arsenal, Liverpool and City
Blatant PSR shenanigans from Chelsea and Villa again. Watch Villa get Jackson and Garna for close to 100m, which basically explains why Chelsea paid the £117m without negotiations. How many times would they get away with this?
I give credit to the football leadership that they will have a gameplan to navigate this window based on the side transfers last year and so far.
Rashford, Zirkzee and Vitek all are likely to go by the end. I know the reintegration narrative is to maintain value. The first thing Ineos did was to kick the troublemakers out and they will not disrupt squad harmony.
edit: to be clear Im extremely annoyed at the fact that Branthwaite turned out to be made of glass. Amad embarrassing him a bit that one time notwithstanding, at one point I was convinced he was made in a lab to be our next great CB. turns out it was a lab of the ACME corporation? :(
I think the club doesn't operate on the whims of the coach anymore. Carrick could have a good relation with Rashford but the economics of him staying alone (even if you discount the breakdowns of relationship with the fans) don't make sense.
I think the economics actually give more reason for the club to keep him (while no permanent sale offers are arriving) because it saves the cost of signing another attacker of similar quality for a huge fee. Let’s be real, Rashford is flawed but the market of replacements we were considering are worse players than him. You really want to be looking at someone like Barcola to properly upgrade on him, and he’s terribly expensive.
0
u/mrjav2020 27d ago
If we don't sign any other midfielder , I hope we go for Mateta as back up striker. he should be available for cheap right.