The Fans Football Blog3

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is impressive how Madrid manage to get money for their players they dont want. It was impossible for us to get any offers for Saviola and he went on a free, while he has barely played in Madrid and they still manage to get money for him.

26 June 2009 at 12:28  

fcbee said...

He didn't want to leave because we paid him too much. I'm pretty sure madrid will pay part of his salary so he keeps earning the same as he did with them for not playing. Nothing impressive there.

26 June 2009 at 12:34  

James said...

He was also upset at us for his treatment. Which is stupid on his part because he clearly needed a step down in competition to resurrect his career. He couldn't accept that fact, so he stayed and then signed for Real to spite us (and for money). The Real Madrid stay proved that we were right in the first place, he should have just left earlier and been more willing to be loaned out or taken a wage reduction. He completely ruined his career.

26 June 2009 at 13:33  

Don Luis said...

Uhh sucks for Saviola. He was promising player. He was named in the Fifa top 100 by Pele.

I hope Saviola gets his RIver Plate form back and be the player we all wanted to see.

Best of luck Javier!!!

26 June 2009 at 14:11  

Anonymous said...

fcbee, there is nothing which suggests that Madrid will pay part of his salary in Benfica, that is something you simply made up.

Considering he barely played as well, I think it says something about our transfer policy compared to Madrid. Same with 23 year old Spain international Albiol for 15m. I think it is impressive compared to what we do, after all, we are also in the lookout for a central defender.

26 June 2009 at 14:24  

fcbee said...

Knowing Saviola, it's probably be that way. He also didn't want to leave us because he couldn't get the same fee elsewhere. Looking at the wages Madrid and Benfica pay, you simply cannot believe he would cut his wage in three or something just for fun.

We had Pique for 5. What do you prefer: Pique for 5 or Albiol for 15?

26 June 2009 at 14:29  

Anonymous said...

fcbee, remember Pique left for free from us, so I don't think it is comparable. Let us see what we do now with the central defender we are looking at. If we buy 28 year old Bruno Alves for 22m-25m while Madrid manages much younger and more la liga experienced Albiol for 15m, I will scream.

Regarding Saviola, if what you claim is true, then it would have been reported in the news.

26 June 2009 at 14:51  

blaugrana_uk said...

fcbee i agree yes pique for 5 an albiol for 15 but why pay 16.5 for caceres who has been mediocre or a reported 18 for chygrynskiy who isnt proven in spain albiol is on the face of it a good signing for the dark side but on the flip side of things he is very injury prone!!! i trust laporta i trust txiki but most of all i trust pep whom i believe knows what he wants!!

26 June 2009 at 14:51  

fcbee said...

Yeah, they would sure say that openly... That's not how Florentino works.

That he left for free (not exactly true cause we got a fee in return) has nothing to do with it. He came for 5 and that was a great buy. If we stick to the central defenders: how much did Madrid pay for Cannavaro and Woodgate and how much did they get for them? Why always look at the negative side of things?

26 June 2009 at 14:56  

Anonymous said...

I also think alot of people here has said that Madrid only were going to buy offensive players and don't care about defence. It seems they were wrong.

26 June 2009 at 14:56  

Don Luis said...

Wel Florentino did buy Sergio Ramos, whom i wanted at Barca cpl years ago.

Ramos was Perez best signing next to Zizou. Ramos is the 2nd best RB in the world behind Alves. Ramos is 23. He can go down as one of the greatest RB of all time for spain or possibly all of football. Mark my words.

That Albiol signing was really good, he is promising and very experienced. Plus they get Garay back....

26 June 2009 at 15:51  

Anonymous said...

I think the fact that he left for free has alot to do with it. He is a product of La Masia and he had one year left on his contract with Man U and probably would have come to us for free the next year as he is a cule in his heart. So it was a special case and can not be compared.

Madrid got most of the money back when they sold Woodgate, the same with that other English player Owen, I think they got twice as much money for Owen when they sold him as when they bought him.

I don't always look at the negative sides, but I think Madrid are much better at getting good money for their players than us.

26 June 2009 at 16:42  

fcbee said...

With the salary they paid Saviola (and will keep on paying him) plus the money they paid him and his agent to sign, they lose money from this.

And when you get a player for free, you'll always get "good money" from that. We also did it with Van Bommel.

26 June 2009 at 23:49  

Xaviniesta said...

@anonymous i'm just curious since you seem to know a lot of things about madrid..would you know how much madrid got for the likes of eto'o, mata, diego lopez, granero, arbeloa, moreno, jurado and the others? it would be interesting to know since as you say their policy kind of works better than barca.. thanks.

27 June 2009 at 02:22  

SJP said...

@anon about albiol, 15mil may have been quite a good price, but what about his wages? it wouldn't surprise me if he is better paid than 90% of the barca squad, thats not what we do. real buy so many players that they are bound to get money back for some of them. what about ronaldo? cant see them making anywhere near the same money from him, wages and bonuses inc.

everyone seems to want to criticize our board when they have delivered a team that is the best in spanish football history nd twice in the last four years the best in europe, what more can they do?

27 June 2009 at 02:25  

Post a Comment