2025 Summer Transfer Rumors and Discussion Closed Window | Page 60 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

2025 Summer Transfer Rumors and Discussion Closed Window

He failed in the Premier League because he was on a Premier League team and was deemed not good enough to play in the Premier League. The actual counterargument is that he was a late bloomer and has developed a lot since he was at Brighton so his past failure is not necessarily indicative of his future performance. But being bought by a Premier League team and never reaching the field is very much failing in the Premier League.

He was a 19 year old who was signed from Sweden and moved straight to their U23 side. He clearly wasn’t deemed good enough to play in their first team. For context I’ll add that he was loaned out for about half of his time with the club. That however doesn’t make him a failure as he never got the chance. To actual have to have failed at something you’d actually have to have done it, and he never played in the Premiership therefore he never failed there. Now you could say he failed at Brighton, which I would say is somewhat harsh, but he didn’t fail in the Premier League.

As for counter argument, he’s a bit of late bloomer for sure, but he still lacked real chances. The other counters could be that Brighton poorly managed the player or didn’t see what they had. They gave him away to Coventry who made a killing on that just two years later and now he’d easily go for double that while the ask is four times that.
 
It is true he didn't play any EPL games because he was too young at the time and was loaned out to forty different locations, but he still got eight games British football and all of them were in Carbao Cup and FA Cup matches, so it's not a huge downgrade from an EPL game.

Nonetheless, my comment was due to a bit of ignorance on my part because David Ornstein made it sound like he came to the EPL and wasn't up to standard, so Brighton shipped him out. That could very much be the truth and he figured it out as a late bloomer. I am still a bit scared of him because unloading 70 to 80 million sterling pounds for a bloke whose best seasons are in the Portuguese league is not exactly an amazing resume.

The problem for Les_Habs is that Brighton is pretty damn solid at identifying talent. I suggest they would not have let him leave if they knew he was EPL quality. The other side to that is everyone makes mistakes and this could have been one for the Gulls.

He did get 8 matches of British football, but I certainly wouldn’t hold the Carabao Cup up to the Premiership. FA Cup is closer to be sure, but even then it’s not the same. Then you have to consider the fact that for at least part of that period he wasn’t in the first team and just thrown in for a handful of matches. Not sure what your expectation would be under those circumstances, but mine wouldn’t be that great.

I don’t think it’s fair to give Brighton somewhat of a pass on his sale to Coventry because he didn’t impress much on his loan spells either. That said, Coventry saw something and got a lot in return. He is a late bloomer to some degree, but others out there too. Look at Sorloth. And as I’ve noted, I agree on the fee and would also have some questions. Still, there’s a dearth of strikers out there and it’s not as Portugal is just some football backwater. Look at what Joao Neves is doing. Mateus Fernandes did well with Southampton all things considered.

Not a problem for me. Not everything Brighton touches turns to gold and even when a player does it doesn’t mean they were some unknown quantity. Look at their full list of transfers season after season and you’ll see a well run club, but not necessarily the Oakland A’s.
 
The worst spot? OK.

Fortunately for him that isn’t all he does, but seeing as how he does occupy half spaces it frees up the wide attacking players.
Worst spot of the teams he is linked with.

Honestly if I was Arsenal I’d probably use him on the left, but that’s just me
 
Is there an obvious centerback buy for Chelsea this summer? Needs to be a physically imposing presence like Rudiger, Konate to partner Colwill. Strong in 1 on 1s
The obvious CB for everyone was Huijsen. I don’t know who anyone’s backup plan is.
 
Worst spot of the teams he is linked with.

Honestly if I was Arsenal I’d probably use him on the left, but that’s just me

He’s not really linked with anybody else at the moment though, is he? I saw Chelsea, but I think they are practically locked in on the Ipswich kid.
 
He was a 19 year old who was signed from Sweden and moved straight to their U23 side. He clearly wasn’t deemed good enough to play in their first team. For context I’ll add that he was loaned out for about half of his time with the club. That however doesn’t make him a failure as he never got the chance. To actual have to have failed at something you’d actually have to have done it, and he never played in the Premiership therefore he never failed there. Now you could say he failed at Brighton, which I would say is somewhat harsh, but he didn’t fail in the Premier League.

As for counter argument, he’s a bit of late bloomer for sure, but he still lacked real chances. The other counters could be that Brighton poorly managed the player or didn’t see what they had. They gave him away to Coventry who made a killing on that just two years later and now he’d easily go for double that while the ask is four times that.
Being loaned out doesn't help your argument either; if he had been good enough to help the first team, he wouldn't have been loaned out. The bolded is nonsensical. Not only would he have gotten the chance had he been good enough, it's illogical. That's like saying I haven't failed to become a professional footballer because I was never given the chance. The underlined is where you give away the fact that you're just making semantic arguments rather than anything substantive. You're arguing you can say that he failed with a Premier League team but not with the Premier League. That's so goofy. And it's not even true! He was on the bench for Premier League matches but was deemed to be not good enough to be subbed on. In all three cases, by the way, a sub for the striker was made, and in each case he was behind Glenn Murray and Florin Andone in the pecking order.

The counterargument is also silly. First of all, it's incumbent upon a player to earn chances and not the team to just give chances, especially a team like Brighton who finished two points clear of relegation that season. Further, by your own admittance, he was loaned out plenty, which gave him chances on lower tier sides. And it wasn't like he set the work on fire on those loans. His first loan was to St. Pauli, in the 2. Bundesliga, where he was outscored by Dimitrios Diamantakos and Hank Veerman. He was then loaned to Swansea, where he didn't score a league goal in the Championship across 11 matches before going to Coventry, where even during his loan spell there, he scored all of three goals across 19 matches. In other words, he had 3 in 30 in the Championship. Of course he didn't get more of a chance at Brighton - he wasn't scoring in droves in second tier leagues, so why would they be handing him spots in the Premier League? But even still, they gave him chances in the Cups, where, across 8 matches, he scored one goal, against League One side Portsmouth. A striker who isn't able to score except against third tier competition just isn't going to get chances in the Premier League.

All of that said, full credit to Gyokeres for figuring it out and to Coventry for unlocking that talent. It's not like it was a sure thing; he was riding the bench at times during his loan spell there. And clearly he's continued to be prolific at Sporting, although it is probably worth noting that a third of his goals are penalties and he scored two goals across six games against the other top 4 teams in Portugal, one of which was a penalty and the other was a set piece. To be sure, he did score six goals in the Champions League, including 3(!!) against Man City, but again, it should probably be noted that two of the goals against City were penalties and Man City was starting a 19 year old making his first ever senior start at CB. The other goals, by the way, were against Sturm Graz, Lille, and RB Leipzig, with neither of the latter two teams playing in CL next season.

Once again, to ensure that you don't misunderstand me, I am not saying that Gyokeres is a bad player, nor am I trying to take anything away from the hard work he must have put in in order to develop into such a prolific scorer. All I am saying is that it is reasonable to (1) say he failed in the Premier League the first time around because he was on the roster of a Premier League side and his performances did not warrant even a substitute appearance in the Premier League; and (2) have doubts about his ability to translate his scoring numbers to a high level Premier League (or other similar level of league) team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: S E P H
He’s not really linked with anybody else at the moment though, is he? I saw Chelsea, but I think they are practically locked in on the Ipswich kid.
I don’t think Delap would prevent Chelsea signing Gyokeres. Never stopped them before. Gyokeres kind of seems like he is everyone’s Plan B and no one’s Plan A. Could go down to musical chairs
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brookbank
Dudes on 375k a week. He wasn't much better at Villa than he was at United. I don't see why anyone would pay anything of value for him.
He got injured and it kinda f'd his momentum at Villa. Originally they didn't say they didn't want him. They just couldn't afford him.

I wonder if it is feasible for him to play for Amorim again
 
I will say that since Amorim joined, United was on a 38 point pace, which still wouldn't see them relegated, but would have seen them in 17th. On the other hand, in that same period, all of the relegated teams plus Tottenham were still worse
Yea 27 in 27.

They were 11 in 9 under ETH (46 point pace, good for 14th).

They were 4 in 2 under Ruud so basically Ruud was a second place in the PL manager.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Abusement Park
He got injured and it kinda f'd his momentum at Villa. Originally they didn't say they didn't want him. They just couldn't afford him.

I wonder if it is feasible for him to play for Amorim again
Unless he changes everything about everything off field about himself I don’t imagine he plays again under Amorim.

Idk I’m just kind of done with the whole Rashford era at United. Dude is decently talented and been essentially the face of United the last 6-7 years. But he’s also been the face of some awful teams and a core member of a locker room that’s been a disaster at best.

I think the excuses just run thin for me at this point. And there’s a good chance he leaves and looks good elsewhere but I’m just ready to move on at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jussi
Being loaned out doesn't help your argument either; if he had been good enough to help the first team, he wouldn't have been loaned out. The bolded is nonsensical. Not only would he have gotten the chance had he been good enough, it's illogical. That's like saying I haven't failed to become a professional footballer because I was never given the chance. The underlined is where you give away the fact that you're just making semantic arguments rather than anything substantive. You're arguing you can say that he failed with a Premier League team but not with the Premier League. That's so goofy. And it's not even true! He was on the bench for Premier League matches but was deemed to be not good enough to be subbed on. In all three cases, by the way, a sub for the striker was made, and in each case he was behind Glenn Murray and Florin Andone in the pecking order.

The counterargument is also silly. First of all, it's incumbent upon a player to earn chances and not the team to just give chances, especially a team like Brighton who finished two points clear of relegation that season. Further, by your own admittance, he was loaned out plenty, which gave him chances on lower tier sides. And it wasn't like he set the work on fire on those loans. His first loan was to St. Pauli, in the 2. Bundesliga, where he was outscored by Dimitrios Diamantakos and Hank Veerman. He was then loaned to Swansea, where he didn't score a league goal in the Championship across 11 matches before going to Coventry, where even during his loan spell there, he scored all of three goals across 19 matches. In other words, he had 3 in 30 in the Championship. Of course he didn't get more of a chance at Brighton - he wasn't scoring in droves in second tier leagues, so why would they be handing him spots in the Premier League? But even still, they gave him chances in the Cups, where, across 8 matches, he scored one goal, against League One side Portsmouth. A striker who isn't able to score except against third tier competition just isn't going to get chances in the Premier League.

All of that said, full credit to Gyokeres for figuring it out and to Coventry for unlocking that talent. It's not like it was a sure thing; he was riding the bench at times during his loan spell there. And clearly he's continued to be prolific at Sporting, although it is probably worth noting that a third of his goals are penalties and he scored two goals across six games against the other top 4 teams in Portugal, one of which was a penalty and the other was a set piece. To be sure, he did score six goals in the Champions League, including 3(!!) against Man City, but again, it should probably be noted that two of the goals against City were penalties and Man City was starting a 19 year old making his first ever senior start at CB. The other goals, by the way, were against Sturm Graz, Lille, and RB Leipzig, with neither of the latter two teams playing in CL next season.

Once again, to ensure that you don't misunderstand me, I am not saying that Gyokeres is a bad player, nor am I trying to take anything away from the hard work he must have put in in order to develop into such a prolific scorer. All I am saying is that it is reasonable to (1) say he failed in the Premier League the first time around because he was on the roster of a Premier League side and his performances did not warrant even a substitute appearance in the Premier League; and (2) have doubts about his ability to translate his scoring numbers to a high level Premier League (or other similar level of league) team.

Loaning him out doesn’t help my “argument”? My argument was that he never played in the Premiership, and he literally did not. That was my argument as I’ve already pointed out. Then you came along, tried to turn it into something else. And no, he did not fail in the Premiership because he literally did not play in the league. Also, yes, you too haven’t failed in the Premiership because you haven’t played there. Arguing that someone wasn’t deemed good enough is fair context, but it doesn’t change the fact that one didn’t fail.

What Premier League matches was he on the bench for? Go ahead and post them all with dates. Of course they’re irrelevant as he didn’t play, but go ahead and post them. As for his time when he was actually at Brighton, he played at U23 level a good amount of matches.

As for the counter, yes, he was loaned out to lower tier sides and didn’t set the world on fire. Hence my reply to SEPH, before this post I’m now quoting, stating as much. However, 8 cup matches spread out over 2 seasons aren’t what I would call “real chances”. I also noted that one might argue they poorly managed the player. I don’t see all those loans and playing for four different teams (five actually) over the course of two and a half seasons great player management. Of course I wouldn’t put that all on Brighton as often times the player and/or their representatives can get involved, but still the kid (and he was a kid) was being bounced around all over the place. I also noted that Brighton didn’t see what they had. I can’t qualify that apart from his record with the U23s or his record before joining Brighton including being joint top scorer at the 2017 European U19 Championship, but if you ask Brighton I’m guessing they’ll tell you he’s now better than they thought he’d be. In fact, I’m sure they’d had told you the same two years ago.

Yeah, and without adding context, that’s already been discussed and has nothing to do with this.

1. He didn’t fail in the Premiership as he didn’t play. Even if one wanted to say he did fail, then you can add young De Bruyne and young Salah to that list. As for 2, again, not relevant as no one has said that and it’s not part of this discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Live in the Now
Unless he changes everything about everything off field about himself I don’t imagine he plays again under Amorim.

Idk I’m just kind of done with the whole Rashford era at United. Dude is decently talented and been essentially the face of United the last 6-7 years. But he’s also been the face of some awful teams and a core member of a locker room that’s been a disaster at best.

I think the excuses just run thin for me at this point. And there’s a good chance he leaves and looks good elsewhere but I’m just ready to move on at this point.
The only other option is to let him go for whatever someone is willing to pay. Getting 15-20 million for him wouldn't feel very good
 
Loaning him out doesn’t help my “argument”? My argument was that he never played in the Premiership, and he literally did not. That was my argument as I’ve already pointed out. Then you came along, tried to turn it into something else. And no, he did not fail in the Premiership because he literally did not play in the league. Also, yes, you too haven’t failed in the Premiership because you haven’t played there. Arguing that someone wasn’t deemed good enough is fair context, but it doesn’t change the fact that one didn’t fail.

What Premier League matches was he on the bench for? Go ahead and post them all with dates. Of course they’re irrelevant as he didn’t play, but go ahead and post them. As for his time when he was actually at Brighton, he played at U23 level a good amount of matches.

As for the counter, yes, he was loaned out to lower tier sides and didn’t set the world on fire. Hence my reply to SEPH, before this post I’m now quoting, stating as much. However, 8 cup matches spread out over 2 seasons aren’t what I would call “real chances”. I also noted that one might argue they poorly managed the player. I don’t see all those loans and playing for four different teams (five actually) over the course of two and a half seasons great player management. Of course I wouldn’t put that all on Brighton as often times the player and/or their representatives can get involved, but still the kid (and he was a kid) was being bounced around all over the place. I also noted that Brighton didn’t see what they had. I can’t qualify that apart from his record with the U23s or his record before joining Brighton including being joint top scorer at the 2017 European U19 Championship, but if you ask Brighton I’m guessing they’ll tell you he’s now better than they thought he’d be. In fact, I’m sure they’d had told you the same two years ago.

Yeah, and without adding context, that’s already been discussed and has nothing to do with this.

1. He didn’t fail in the Premiership as he didn’t play. Even if one wanted to say he did fail, then you can add young De Bruyne and young Salah to that list. As for 2, again, not relevant as no one has said that and it’s not part of this discussion.
Your argument was very specifically that he did not fail in the Premier League (also, if you're going to be so pedantic, at least get the name right; it hasn't been the Premiership since 2007). I posit if you are on the roster of a Premier League team and you fail to earn a league appearance, you have failed in the Premier League. To argue otherwise is just silly! Put it in other contexts. Imagine Team A signs a player for 100M and that player never plays for Team A because he wasn't good enough. By your logic, you cannot say that 100M player failed at Team A. That's nonsense.

I'm not sure why you're incapable of googling this information yourself, but he was on the bench for Brighton's 2-1 defeat away at Cardiff on Nov. 10, 2018, Brighton's 1-0 victory at home against Everton on Dec. 29, 2018, and Brighton's 2-1 loss away to Man United on Jan. 19, 2019. As mentioned previously, in each case, both Florin Andone and Glenn Murray either started or were subbed in over Gyokeres.

8 cup matches over two seasons is a lot for a team like Brighton and it was also over a season and a half. In fact, Brighton only played 10 cup matches during that time, so it's not like they had an opportunity to play him in more cup matches during that time. As for the loans, I'm not really sure how you found 5 teams, unless you're counting Brighton's senior team as different than its U23 team. Brighton bought him in Jan 2018. He stayed at Brighton for the remainder of that season and all of 2018-19, where he got into 5 (of 7) cup matches and sat on the bench for three PL matches. They then loaned him to St. Pauli for 2019-20, where he had regular playtime. After that, at the start of 2020-21, he started in all of their cup matches but could not earn PL playing time, so they loaned him out to Swansea. At Swansea, he performed so poorly that he was stapled to the bench, so they recalled him and instead loaned him out to Coventry, where he scored three goals in 19 matches. Four teams: Brighton, St. Pauli, Swansea, Coventry. I refuse to believe you actually think its bad player management to recall a player who has earned a full time bench role at his loaned team in order for him to get minutes at a different team that's a couple hours drive away.

1. Sure, you could say Salah and De Bruyne failed in the PL when they were young! To play semantics like you, though, I'm not sure how they're relevant because they both played in the PL, so surely, using your logic, you would agree they failed as well. That said, as you mention in 2, the conversation about whether Gyokeres will be successful is irrelevant, so I don't know what you were trying to solve by referencing Salah or KdB.

Actually that's not true - I know exactly what your point is, whether you'll say it or not. The underlying current of this conversation is trying to answer the unwritten question of if Gyokeres will be successful at a top side. Hence, you brought up Salah and KdB as examples of players who were later successful in the PL after not achieving success at Chelsea when they were younger. Of course, there are I'm sure hundreds of examples of players who were unsuccessful at a young age on a Premier League team and didn't turn out to be Salah or KdB. However, even accepting the comparison, I think it's relevant to note that both were at a Chelsea team contending for titles rather than a lower-in-the-table Brighton side, so presumably it would have been harder for either to establish himself as a first-team mainstay and both, when loaned and ultimately sold, were sold to teams in a different top 5 league. Other than his 8 cup matches you scoff at, Gyokeres hasn't played a game for a team in a top 5 league.

Anyway, this is all a lot more words than I intended to type about Gyokeres, so I'll let you have the last word I know you desperately crave. Take it away - let's see which hair you'll split this time to weasel out of the meaning of your words.
 
I don’t think Delap would prevent Chelsea signing Gyokeres. Never stopped them before. Gyokeres kind of seems like he is everyone’s Plan B and no one’s Plan A. Could go down to musical chairs

I agree to a pretty good extent about him being a Plan B. However, I’d add that there are questions about pretty much all the available strikers out there. Osimhen is probably your best bet and yet that could be an expensive operation.

I also agree on the musical chairs. Dearth of strikers out there which I would imagine would necessitate some of the clubs moving even on these less than sure bets, though I wouldn’t want my club to spend 80 million on Gyokeres either.
 
Is the United discussion crap that has derailed this a debate on how shit United was?

Because they were pretty shit. Manager likely not good enough too. Bruno might have been good but when you’re the best player on an awful team it doesn’t mean a ton. Someone has to take some of the chances I guess. I don’t know how he would fit on a side that wins stuff as they’re crap, been crap, and not sure he’s a winning player at this stage. Either way I’m not sure what it matters if they were relegation level or just barely above. The idea that’s even a discussion point that a United supporter is having shows you just how wretched they are and how far they’ve fallen.

As for Bruno, I wouldn’t want him, but the issue at hand is more if he goes, they might as well blow it up. Which probably wastes 150 million and gets the manager sacked. Sounds great to me
 
I agree. I do not understand the Diaz hate from anybody. He is very similar to a right footed Raphinha which is very good for Barca.
Yeah it’s no hate on my end. It’s just the perfect time to sell him. Two years left on his contract, he surely won’t sign another one, and he’s still top quality so he’ll cost a ton of money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gary69
Yeah it’s no hate on my end. It’s just the perfect time to sell him. Two years left on his contract, he surely won’t sign another one, and he’s still top quality so he’ll cost a ton of money.
Yeah I like the guy. But he runs himself into the ground. I don’t know that I like that player at 31-32. They’ve had some contract talk but it’s hard. It’s likely his last big payday and he’s not being paid very well from some accounts compared to players of his rate (and who 85 million is being tossed around) so whether Liverpool want to pay him like a top 3-4 guy on the roster is a debate. I would guess not if Saudi came with a hefty bid.

I think Diaz would sign a new deal, but if Barca came strong he would want to go. They’re not going to be in a situation to do that anytime soon I would expect. So I’d guess he goes to Saudi if money is good, stays a season or two and comes back to Spain on the cheap.

It would make sense for FSG. They probably already know at least one if not 2-3 of their top earners are moving to Saudi. They would not be spending without in my mind. The budget is too tight unless there’s a big injection of cash.
 
The only other option is to let him go for whatever someone is willing to pay. Getting 15-20 million for him wouldn't feel very good
I mean there’s gonna be a lot of doesn’t feel very good in the short term here. Rashfords value isn’t good. High wages, average performances and (at least when he was at United) pretty questionable professionalism.
 
Yeah I like the guy. But he runs himself into the ground. I don’t know that I like that player at 31-32. They’ve had some contract talk but it’s hard. It’s likely his last big payday and he’s not being paid very well from some accounts compared to players of his rate (and who 85 million is being tossed around) so whether Liverpool want to pay him like a top 3-4 guy on the roster is a debate. I would guess not if Saudi came with a hefty bid.

I think Diaz would sign a new deal, but if Barca came strong he would want to go. They’re not going to be in a situation to do that anytime soon I would expect. So I’d guess he goes to Saudi if money is good, stays a season or two and comes back to Spain on the cheap.

It would make sense for FSG. They probably already know at least one if not 2-3 of their top earners are moving to Saudi. They would not be spending without in my mind. The budget is too tight unless there’s a big injection of cash.
Diaz played 90 minutes back to back once this season. Doesn't seem like he's getting run that hard
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Ad

Ad