Man City and the way they sell their young players

Maybe every club should decide to ignore the rules and do whatever they like? Their ‘football operation’ is very impressive obviously but you can’t discuss anything they do without factoring the cheating IMO.

And I’ve always felt there’s something ‘off’ about their transfer policy. The owners have bought clubs on every Continent and are constantly ferrying players from one club to another. Look at their list of transfers in and out over the past few years, across the club not just the seniors. It’s mental.

Southampton alone paid them almost £40m for four youth team players who’d played two cup matches for City between them. There are lots of transfers to other ‘City Football Group’ clubs that are undisclosed.

The world of football transfers is a very murky business.
 
This is the model we have been trying to make work. The problem is the quality of players in the academy.
The plan is for 1-2 academy players to graduate to the first team squad each year with those who don't make it getting sold off.
City are working with the cream of the cream so some of those who don't make it are still potentially good enough for a mid-table Premier league club which means that starting bid for a top City academy graduate is £12m. Some, like Rogers, filter down to a lower league and some just fade away.

For us, the academy graduates who aren't good enough for the 1st team squad have, virtually, no sellable value. League one and two teams aren't paying fees for academy players from us.

Until such time as get established in the Premier league, the only way we'll make money from academy sales is if they make it to the first team and get sold at that point.
 
Maybe every club should decide to ignore the rules and do whatever they like? Their ‘football operation’ is very impressive obviously but you can’t discuss anything they do without factoring the cheating IMO.

And I’ve always felt there’s something ‘off’ about their transfer policy. The owners have bought clubs on every Continent and are constantly ferrying players from one club to another. Look at their list of transfers in and out over the past few years, across the club not just the seniors. It’s mental.

Southampton alone paid them almost £40m for four youth team players who’d played two cup matches for City between them. There are lots of transfers to other ‘City Football Group’ clubs that are undisclosed.

The world of football transfers is a very murky business.
Agree transfers are a murky business, but they always have been, anything with such vast sums of money changing hands is open to abuse.

Citeh appear to have broken FFP rules, but imho they are only in place to keep the elite a closed shop, they'll probably get away with it on a technicality. I actually quite like the fact that they've been able to dislodge the clubs who dominated the EPL in it's early days.

Those clubs only also got there through dodgy practices in the past, I vaguely recall Man Utd being charged with illegal inducements to get young players to sign for them in the 70s. Loads of stories of clubs making illegal payments when the minimum wage existed.

We only had our halcyon period in the 90s because Gibson spent more than everyone else, didn't do anything against the rules, but you can imagine Man Utd etc weren't too chuffed at us paying £40k per week as the wage inflation they will have suffered probably spoilt things for the Edwards regime and others.

Football's always been a murky business
 
Yes look at Loftus-Cheek, Chalobah and the two we had on loan, Josh McEachran and Lewis Baker.
Don’t forget , we also had Lucas Nmecha , couldn’t get a tune out of him , he went back and was sold for £8m and is now worth much more .
 
The Chelsea approach has always been so strange to me. I don't know why they've made a thing of just hoarding all these players for the better part of a decade just to go out on loan after loan.

Baba Rahma has only just left them, there's your Lewis Baker's who played 2 games for them in the cup in 8 years, Marco Van Ginkel, Lucas Piazon, etc. Very strange.
 
The reason that City players sell for such high fees without ever playing for them is because to make it into the city academy a player has to be the best of the best of their age group. Going through that process is enough for other clubs to trust that city know what they are doing picking players and training them. If they've proven themselves out on loan then even better.
 
The market has changed. Chelsea made a lot of money from these loan fees plus the sales. Loan rules are being cracked down on in most leagues, so sales are becoming more preferable to the buying and selling clubs. The richest clubs always hoover up the best young talent, usually by breaking or bending the rules. Barcalona did it first and ended up with a great team , Chelsea did it and now City are doing it.
 
Speaking of City and youth products - does anyone have any ballparks on what we've paid for Rogers? Couldn't see anything beyond 'undisclosed' - I'd like to think it was £1-3m max potentially with plenty of add-ons, but they're clearly able to drive a hard bargain with their 'next level up' prospects
 
Speaking of City and youth products - does anyone have any ballparks on what we've paid for Rogers? Couldn't see anything beyond 'undisclosed' - I'd like to think it was £1-3m max potentially with plenty of add-ons, but they're clearly able to drive a hard bargain with their 'next level up' prospects
First time I've really thought about this but are we seeing more undisclosed fees and clubs being secretive about injuries due to the increased about of chit chat and tittle tattle on twitter?
 
There is really no commercial reason to disclose transfer fees unless it is a record fee and that is only for bragging rights. It all ends up in the accounts for people to see at some point anyway.
 
Speaking of City and youth products - does anyone have any ballparks on what we've paid for Rogers? Couldn't see anything beyond 'undisclosed' - I'd like to think it was £1-3m max potentially with plenty of add-ons, but they're clearly able to drive a hard bargain with their 'next level up' prospects

More than Flint, less than Fletcher
 
I wonder if they have a buy back clause for Morgan Rodgers or the other lad we got from them City (Agyemang)? Most likely a hefty sell on clause.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if they have a buy back clause for Morgan Rodgers or the other lad we got from them City (Agyemang)? Most likely a hefty sell on clause.

I think Rogers might but not Agyemang with him being a free transfer and I think out of contract.
 
Do our recruitment or coaching team have any Citeh connections? Can’t think of any off the top of my head, but Carrick might be on good terms with some from his Manchester days and standing in the game?
 
But nowadays there seems to be a stupidly high premium on 'potential'!
Yes, it’s insane. Seems to be the new fashion. Buying potential for £25m is good business because there’s room to improve. I do not understand clubs buying very unproven players for £70m - not many players improve their valuations from there, Haaland sold for less, Bellingham a bit more, and they’re two of the best in their positions in the world.

That Danish striker Hojlund that Man United are buying for £70m scored 9 goals last season. Nine!

I thought this when I saw some of the fees being mentioned for Southampton players. £40m minimum for Livramento, Lavia, Ward-Prowse (who’s older). If they’re that good I must have misremembered them getting relegated without a fight.
 
ManU seem to overpay on nearly every transfer they make (often by £10 or £20m). It’s crazy. Hojlund is another good example. Strum Graz paid £1.3m for him 18 months ago and Atalanta £10m a year ago. Add that to their long list - Macguire, Sancho, Van der Beek, Varane, Wan Bissaka, Martinez, Fred, Bailly, Mount, Anthony. The list is endless. Only Fernandes has proved an excellent signing.
 
Last edited:
ManU seem to overpay on nearly every transfer they make (often by £10 or £20m). It’s crazy. Hojlund is another good example. Strum Graz paid £1.3m for him 18 months ago and Atalanta £10m a year ago. Add that to their long list - Macguire, Sancho, Van der Beek, Varane, Wan Bissaka, Martinez, Fred, Bailly, Mount, Anthony. The list is endless. Only Fernandes has proved an excellent signing.
Pogba. Left United on a free to Juve, bought him back for £90m, left again on a free to Juve.

They are the absolute worst for buying scattered flavour of the month superstars for way over the odds. They’re like the anti-City, there’s no strategy or long term thinking whatsoever.

Oh yeah, can’t forget when they replaced Cristiano Ronaldo with Wout Weghorst.
 
Back
Top