Summer Transfer Window (2024/25)

[Mic09]

2 minutes ago, Zatman said:

One of reasons am not happy with rumblings. Unai is a genius but a mini rebuild in a tournament summer is mad

Could take months to gel and next season we could be chasing early on

Sure, unless just like with Moreno the new players would fit in well with the new system. In which case we are cooking. 

[DaoDeMings]

3 minutes ago, Zatman said:

One of reasons am not happy with rumblings. Unai is a genius but a mini rebuild in a tournament summer is mad

Could take months to gel and next season we could be chasing early on

To be fair, the signings we’re making won’t be too disruptive to the first team. They’re mostly for depth which we badly need. I imagine the XI will mostly be the same, with maybe one or two changes (Maatsen, new midfielder?)

[RichW]

12 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

The midfield plan is still a little unclear to me.

I guess we have Rogers and Ramsey competing for the spot on the left,  McGinn and Tielemans for the more advanced role (perhaps with Buendia, although I see him being used more as an alternative to Bailey/Diaby), then Kamara holding when he's fit, with Barrenechea maybe backing him up, then Barkley at the moment in the deeper playmaking role replacing Doug (with McGinn and Tielemans to cover in an emergency). 

I'm not quite sure that's the finished article - I think there's still a proper replacement for Doug required - I guess that could be Gallagher, but that one has gone a bit quiet.

I didn't really buy into the Gallagher speculation in the sense that Villa would actually sign him. Evident Villa want him but with us signing Maatsen I don't see that deal happening now. Don't think Gallagher wants to leave Chelsea and will probably just run his contract down and pick where goes next summer. Chelsea just can't force him out and with there not being a Euros/World Cup next summer it's not like his going to miss out on an England squad if they don't play him. 

[AshVilla]

11 minutes ago, Zatman said:

One of reasons am not happy with rumblings. Unai is a genius but a mini rebuild in a tournament summer is mad

Could take months to gel and next season we could be chasing early on

I think we will struggle to finish top 8.

Will be a transition season and not convinced we will sign enough quality to replace what has been lost.

Hope i'm wrong but Unai has a big mountain to climb.

[villa89]

20 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I must admit, I didn't have "complete squad rebuild" down on my list of things that would be happening this summer when last season ended.

We're a lot busier than I thought we'd be.

Really? I fully expected a lot of transfers. We badly need it if we are to compete in the CL and PL. Look at what happened Newcastle last season. We have a mountain to climb if we are to finish 4th again.

[bobzy]

21 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I must admit, I didn't have "complete squad rebuild" down on my list of things that would be happening this summer when last season ended.

We're a lot busier than I thought we'd be.

I had it on firm authority from some posters on here - probably not yet a week ago - that it was a disastrous window...!

[allani]

8 hours ago, Dillon66 said:

Read some recent articles about Unai's pal Monchi........not sure how accurate they are but seriously hoping he's improved from his Roma stint. Unfortunately, given his pursuit of the clogger that is Weston  McKennie I fear not.

There was an awful lot of stuff going on at Roma at the time Monchi was there - interferring owners / president ( who gave specific instructions on players to sell and buy), a significant tactical change in terms of the way that Di Francesco wanted to play compared to the way that Spalletti did before and the teams that Monchi had previously been involved with, etc.  Probably the biggest issue though was that Roma were trying the Director of Football approach and by most accounts the type of players Monchi was asked to buy did not fit into the style of play that Di Francesco wanted to play. 

Many of those issues didn't apply at other clubs that he has been at and certainly don't apply here.  Our owners don't tend to get too involved in the small things - trusting their senior appointments to do their jobs.  Monchi and Emery seem to be very united in terms of their vision for the team, the style of football they want to play, the players that will fit that system and appear to spend a lot of time discussing those players.  Indeed it seems that Emery determines the type of player he wants, Emery and Monchi discuss players that appear to meet his requirements and then Monchi is responsible for actually doing the deal. 

A good parallel for assessing Monchi's time at Roma would be to compare the form of players here under the reign of Gerrard and their performances with Smith and Emery.  Players who were **** with Gerrard weren't necessarily bad players they were (mainly) good players under terrible leadership.

Monchi was also (in my opinion) unfairly blamed for a lot of the issues that Roma were having (by the owners who were actually the main problem!) and was fired before some of his signings had a chance to settle - in hindsight many of his signings were actually pretty good.  Certainly his hit rate was pretty much in line with what you'd usually expect given that a lot of them were gambles on youth prospects.

Karsdorp - has been a pretty solid performer for Roma since he arrived.  Not my favourite player but you'd definitely put him down as a hit.

Under - a terrific young talent who caused quite a stir when he first joined.  Unfortunately a string of injuries and dodgy hamstrings have meant he's never quite lived up to his potential but still a hit.

Pellegrini - very good signing. Bit prone to injury but on his day one of the best players at Roma.  Hit.

Moreno - only played 5 matches for Roma but they made a small profit on him when they sold him the following summer.  Neither a hit nor a miss.

Gonalons - similar story.  Played 20 matches and did OK.  Then spent a few seasons out on loan and the fees / transfer fee when he left covered his initial purchase fee.  Not a hit but not really a miss either.

Kolarov - excellent player.  Big hit.

Defrel - signed for his potential which never really worked out and so he spent most of his time out on loan.  I think Roma signed him for €5m on loan originally which would have been OK.  But signing him permanently was an odd one.  Miss.

Schick - this is a difficult one really.  At Roma you'd definitely class him as a miss (50+ appearances and I think 8 goals) but he's done really well in the Bundesliga and is a key player at Leverkusen.  Sometimes players just don't work out at a club or in a specific league.  A good example of the right player at the wrong club?  A (expensive) miss for Roma but a (great value) hit for Leverkusen.

Silva - cheap emergency 6 month loan so ignoring this as it was only ever to provide depth following injuries.  n/a

Nzonzi - probably the worst of Monchi's signings.  Although he was a fixture in Roma for the season he was there it never looked like being anything other than an expensive flop.  Big miss

Pastore - there is a lot (and I mean A LOT) of evidence that Monchi was told to buy Pastore (against the advice he gave the owners) who thought he'd be the big name signing they wanted to fill the hole left by Totti's retirement.  I mean quite honestly without spending upwards of €50m Roma had no chance of replacing Totti.  Pastore was definitely not the answer.  But I don't think you can pin this on Monchi.  I suspect he'd say that he should have stood up to the owners more and refused to do as he was instructed.  This signing above all others is the one that is used to beat up Monchi but 95% of the blame in my opinion sits on the President of the club at the time.  So I'd mark this one as n/a.  It is similar to trying to blame the recruitment team for the signing of Coutinho (except Pastore was a much bigger flop).

Kluivert - signed as a promising 18 or 19 year old for something like £15m I think.  Probably never quite hit the heights that he might have expected to - although I thought he looked decent for Bournemouth last season.  Although I think that it was a gamble worth taking I think you'd probably have to mark this as a (near) miss.

Santon - again there is lots to suggest that Monchi was told to sign Santon by the club President.  So it is hard to pin this on Monchi.  I've marked this as another n/a.

Zaniolo - as I have said multiple times in the Zaniolo thread - this guy was nothing short of sensational when he arrived at Roma.  It's a bit like signing Cole Palmer or Phil Foden as an 18 year old for £5.5m.  Up there in my top 5 favourite players for Roma since I first saw them back in the 1980s.  Injury scuppered what would/could have been one of the best signings of the last decade.  Whatever you might think of Zaniolo's time here - when he first broke through he was Roma and Italy's big hope for their next generational superstar.  Massive, massive, massive hit.

Olsen - wasn't convinced at Roma.  Not convinced here either.  Miss.

Coric - another youngster signed for around £5m.  Didn't make it at Roma and been out on loan pretty much the whole time.  Miss.

Bianda - pretty much as above.  Miss.

Cristante - probably one of Roma's most important players (arguably their most important player).  Big Hit.K

Mirante - the archetypal reserve keeper (now at AC Milan).  It is always difficult to judge the success of a player signed to pretty much never play.  His stats when he did play were decent so a very small Hit.

Fuzato - another reserve keeper brought in to be backup to the backup.  No stats. I'll call this one a small Miss.

Marcano - signed on a free transfer to provide defensive cover.  Made a dozen appearances and sold the following season for €3m (all profit).  Small hit.

In total I think Monchi spent something like €250m whilst at Roma but that brought in 21 players so works out around €12m per player.  You can look at Karsdorp, Pellegrini, Kolarov, Zaniolo and Cristante as being very good signings.  There's a handful of reserves who were gambles either way.  But at the end of the day I would say that your view on how Monchi did at Roma probably comes down to your views on three signings (assuming that Cristante and Pellegrini counterbalance Nzonzi):

(1)  Who was to blame for the signing of Pastore (and to a lesser extent Santon).  I think based on everything I have read this is one of those situations where the Club President told Monchi to sign him and he did the best deal he could for a player that Roma should never, ever have signed.

(2) Schick.  A big budget signing who failed pretty badly at Roma and yet has gone on to be pretty successful in Germany and will probably be on the radar of a lot of clubs this summer.  Is it a bad signing, an unfortunate victim of circumstance, a player not fitting a particular style of play?

(3) Zaniolo.  For me this still ranks as one of the best signings of the last decade.  Basically signed as a youth player and within 3 months was THE big hope for Italian football.  Injuries, some "growing up" issues and a very public fallout with Mourinho have probably tempered the success of the signing somewhat.

[Jareth]

I've no doubts about us bringing in a few new faces and getting them to gel, Unai did exactly that with slippy's squad of strangers, from the get go.

[tomsky_11]

1 minute ago, AshVilla said:

I think we will struggle to finish top 8.

Will be a transition season and not convinced we will sign enough quality to replace what has been lost.

Hope i'm wrong but Unai has a big mountain to climb.

Doesn't look like we are massively affecting the core of the team though does it? Obviously Luiz is a big loss, but Tielemans is settled now and has looked good in a similar role, while Barkley based on his last season and statistical output looks like a perfect match for Luiz.

Beyond that, Emi, Konsa, Torres, Kamara (once fit), Watkins spine remains the same. We'll hopefully add Ramsey and Buendia back to our attacking options alongside Bailey, Diaby, McGinn and Rogers. Bar Luiz, full back positions look like the only obvious ones where we are likely to see new starters, and seems like these should both be improvements on what we already have.

Struggling to finish top 8 just sounds silly when first XI should look pretty similar and squad looks like it will be more filled out.

[AshVilla]

People are going to be in for a shock if they think Barkley is going to replace Luiz.

[villa89]

Just now, AshVilla said:

People are going to be in for a shock if they think Barkley is going to replace Luiz.

People are going to be in for a shock if they think Tielemens is going to replace Luiz.

[The_Steve]

10 minutes ago, AshVilla said:

I think we will struggle to finish top 8.

Will be a transition season and not convinced we will sign enough quality to replace what has been lost.

Hope i'm wrong but Unai has a big mountain to climb.

Why exactly? Losing Dougie is not as crucial as others. It’s still the same squad that got us there - the likes of JJ will be back alongside Emi and Ty. Diaby will be more settled. There’s no reason this squad can’t improve still. New players will give us more opportunities and rotation. It’s not a transition at all. 

[CVByrne]

29 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

The midfield plan is still a little unclear to me.

I guess we have Rogers and Ramsey competing for the spot on the left,  McGinn and Tielemans for the more advanced role (perhaps with Buendia, although I see him being used more as an alternative to Bailey/Diaby), then Kamara holding when he's fit, with Barrenechea maybe backing him up, then Barkley at the moment in the deeper playmaking role replacing Doug (with McGinn and Tielemans to cover in an emergency). 

I'm not quite sure that's the finished article - I think there's still a proper replacement for Doug required - I guess that could be Gallagher, but that one has gone a bit quiet.

Yeah I feel there's a big midfield signing to be made later in the window once we've made our PSR position good.

I do think we might have Barklley and Tielemans for the Luiz position and pair with a Kamara + new 

I think McGinn and Buendia more for the advanced role. I think the return of Buendia and departure of Luiz frees up one of the CM roles for Tielemans basically 

[JPAngel]

5 minutes ago, allani said:

There was an awful lot of stuff going on at Roma at the time Monchi was there - interferring owners / president ( who gave specific instructions on players to sell and buy), a significant tactical change in terms of the way that Di Francesco wanted to play compared to the way that Spalletti did before and the teams that Monchi had previously been involved with, etc.  Probably the biggest issue though was that Roma were trying the Director of Football approach and by most accounts the type of players Monchi was asked to buy did not fit into the style of play that Di Francesco wanted to play. 

Many of those issues didn't apply at other clubs that he has been at and certainly don't apply here.  Our owners don't tend to get too involved in the small things - trusting their senior appointments to do their jobs.  Monchi and Emery seem to be very united in terms of their vision for the team, the style of football they want to play, the players that will fit that system and appear to spend a lot of time discussing those players.  Indeed it seems that Emery determines the type of player he wants, Emery and Monchi discuss players that appear to meet his requirements and then Monchi is responsible for actually doing the deal. 

A good parallel for assessing Monchi's time at Roma would be to compare the form of players here under the reign of Gerrard and their performances with Smith and Emery.  Players who were **** with Gerrard weren't necessarily bad players they were (mainly) good players under terrible leadership.

Monchi was also (in my opinion) unfairly blamed for a lot of the issues that Roma were having (by the owners who were actually the main problem!) and was fired before some of his signings had a chance to settle - in hindsight many of his signings were actually pretty good.  Certainly his hit rate was pretty much in line with what you'd usually expect given that a lot of them were gambles on youth prospects.

Karsdorp - has been a pretty solid performer for Roma since he arrived.  Not my favourite player but you'd definitely put him down as a hit.

Under - a terrific young talent who caused quite a stir when he first joined.  Unfortunately a string of injuries and dodgy hamstrings have meant he's never quite lived up to his potential but still a hit.

Pellegrini - very good signing. Bit prone to injury but on his day one of the best players at Roma.  Hit.

Moreno - only played 5 matches for Roma but they made a small profit on him when they sold him the following summer.  Neither a hit nor a miss.

Gonalons - similar story.  Played 20 matches and did OK.  Then spent a few seasons out on loan and the fees / transfer fee when he left covered his initial purchase fee.  Not a hit but not really a miss either.

Kolarov - excellent player.  Big hit.

Defrel - signed for his potential which never really worked out and so he spent most of his time out on loan.  I think Roma signed him for €5m on loan originally which would have been OK.  But signing him permanently was an odd one.  Miss.

Schick - this is a difficult one really.  At Roma you'd definitely class him as a miss (50+ appearances and I think 8 goals) but he's done really well in the Bundesliga and is a key player at Leverkusen.  Sometimes players just don't work out at a club or in a specific league.  A good example of the right player at the wrong club?  A (expensive) miss for Roma but a (great value) hit for Leverkusen.

Silva - cheap emergency 6 month loan so ignoring this as it was only ever to provide depth following injuries.  n/a

Nzonzi - probably the worst of Monchi's signings.  Although he was a fixture in Roma for the season he was there it never looked like being anything other than an expensive flop.  Big miss

Pastore - there is a lot (and I mean A LOT) of evidence that Monchi was told to buy Pastore (against the advice he gave the owners) who thought he'd be the big name signing they wanted to fill the hole left by Totti's retirement.  I mean quite honestly without spending upwards of €50m Roma had no chance of replacing Totti.  Pastore was definitely not the answer.  But I don't think you can pin this on Monchi.  I suspect he'd say that he should have stood up to the owners more and refused to do as he was instructed.  This signing above all others is the one that is used to beat up Monchi but 95% of the blame in my opinion sits on the President of the club at the time.  So I'd mark this one as n/a.  It is similar to trying to blame the recruitment team for the signing of Coutinho (except Pastore was a much bigger flop).

Kluivert - signed as a promising 18 or 19 year old for something like £15m I think.  Probably never quite hit the heights that he might have expected to - although I thought he looked decent for Bournemouth last season.  Although I think that it was a gamble worth taking I think you'd probably have to mark this as a (near) miss.

Santon - again there is lots to suggest that Monchi was told to sign Santon by the club President.  So it is hard to pin this on Monchi.  I've marked this as another n/a.

Zaniolo - as I have said multiple times in the Zaniolo thread - this guy was nothing short of sensational when he arrived at Roma.  It's a bit like signing Cole Palmer or Phil Foden as an 18 year old for £5.5m.  Up there in my top 5 favourite players for Roma since I first saw them back in the 1980s.  Injury scuppered what would/could have been one of the best signings of the last decade.  Whatever you might think of Zaniolo's time here - when he first broke through he was Roma and Italy's big hope for their next generational superstar.  Massive, massive, massive hit.

Olsen - wasn't convinced at Roma.  Not convinced here either.  Miss.

Coric - another youngster signed for around £5m.  Didn't make it at Roma and been out on loan pretty much the whole time.  Miss.

Bianda - pretty much as above.  Miss.

Cristante - probably one of Roma's most important players (arguably their most important player).  Big Hit.K

Mirante - the archetypal reserve keeper (now at AC Milan).  It is always difficult to judge the success of a player signed to pretty much never play.  His stats when he did play were decent so a very small Hit.

Fuzato - another reserve keeper brought in to be backup to the backup.  No stats. I'll call this one a small Miss.

Marcano - signed on a free transfer to provide defensive cover.  Made a dozen appearances and sold the following season for €3m (all profit).  Small hit.

In total I think Monchi spent something like €250m whilst at Roma but that brought in 21 players so works out around €12m per player.  You can look at Karsdorp, Pellegrini, Kolarov, Zaniolo and Cristante as being very good signings.  There's a handful of reserves who were gambles either way.  But at the end of the day I would say that your view on how Monchi did at Roma probably comes down to your views on three signings (assuming that Cristante and Pellegrini counterbalance Nzonzi):

(1)  Who was to blame for the signing of Pastore (and to a lesser extent Santon).  I think based on everything I have read this is one of those situations where the Club President told Monchi to sign him and he did the best deal he could for a player that Roma should never, ever have signed.

(2) Schick.  A big budget signing who failed pretty badly at Roma and yet has gone on to be pretty successful in Germany and will probably be on the radar of a lot of clubs this summer.  Is it a bad signing, an unfortunate victim of circumstance, a player not fitting a particular style of play?

(3) Zaniolo.  For me this still ranks as one of the best signings of the last decade.  Basically signed as a youth player and within 3 months was THE big hope for Italian football.  Injuries, some "growing up" issues and a very public fallout with Mourinho have probably tempered the success of the signing somewhat.

Thank you for taking the time to write and explain this @allani

I'm not ashamed to admit that my knowledge of Italian football goes as far as online highlights and season after season spent playing Football Manager. So to have someone sit and give their insight on Monchi's much derided time at Roma is really interesting. Cheers!

[tomsky_11]

1 minute ago, AshVilla said:

People are going to be in for a shock if they think Barkley is going to replace Luiz.

Based on what he appears to have done last season, he's a better option there that McGinn, who should imo never be played in the double pivot. So frees McGinn up to play final third.

[allani]

3 hours ago, Leeroy said:

Team and subs for start of next season:

                           Martinez

New          Konsa     Torres         Maatsen

                    McGinn      New

Bailey              Tielemans             Rogers

                             Watkins 

 

Subs: Gauci/Olsen, Nedeljkovic, Mings, Iling Jr, Barkley, Barrenechea, Buendia, Diaby, Ramsey

 

So two new starting players still needed. Hopefully those players will be Fofana from Monaco and Geertruida from Feyenoord. I still feel that midfield will be industrious rather than classy as we had with Kamara and Luiz and that a player like Mikel Merino in addition to Fofana would be ideal, but I'm keeping expectations modest. 

 

Assuming that Moreno and Digne both go, although I suspect one will stay. I also think we will get a replacement for Duran in attack, unless we believe Rogers can play that role. 

Sorry but (IMO obviously!) McGinn absolutely CAN NOT start where you have him listed.  Defensively he is awful near the edge of our box but brilliant in the opposition half / near the halfway line.  He's also not composed enough on the ball to bring the ball out of defence and is much, much better receiving the ball higher up the pitch.  If you are picking McGinn and Tielemans then I think you have to switch them.  Tielemans is definitely better defensively and in playing the ball out from the back.

[tomsky_11]

2 minutes ago, villa89 said:

People are going to be in for a shock if they think Tielemens is going to replace Luiz.

I agree I'd rather have Luiz than Tielemans starting, but based on improvement Tielemans showed last season, I don't think the drop of is disastrous, while the transfer allows us to build out the squad (which is a massive requirement after being so short last season), avoid PSR issues and perhaps even provide enough financial scope to improve the first xi elsewhere 

[nick76]

15 minutes ago, AshVilla said:

I think we will struggle to finish top 8.

Will be a transition season and not convinced we will sign enough quality to replace what has been lost.

Hope i'm wrong but Unai has a big mountain to climb.

We’ve only potentially lost Luiz of key first team players!  He may yet be replaced by a quality replacement.  The others are improving our depth.  The core of the team is not currently in transition just Luiz.

[Indigo]

When you take into account the listed names of would-be outgoings, I don't really see this window as a "complete rebuild" if it plays out as has been spoken about over the last couple of pages. There were points last season where we could barely put out a starting eleven of players with first-team experience in the match-day squad, and with the schedule for next season being what it is I'd say it's sensible to be as prepared for it as possible by bulking out the quality of the squad a bit. This happens by removing deadwood and replacing them with better players/signing starting eleven improvements and having first-team players drop in status a bit to being quality options off the bench.

Outside of Luiz it's not like we're (hypothetically) ripping up the harmony of the team and replacing the likes of Watkins, Martinez etc. You're talking loan players such as Lenglet and Zaniolo returning, who were only brought in to cover injuries anyway, as well of the likes of Tim, Donk, KKH, Chambers, Hause, Coutinho and so forth that either rarely or quite literally never play. The proof will be in who actually leaves and comes in, but I'm not really worrying about "losing twelve players" or whatever it'll be if in reality it's only one or two of any importance.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

13 minutes ago, villa89 said:

People are going to be in for a shock if they think Tielemens is going to replace Luiz.

He literally did so successfully in a couple of our best performances this season?

Also, I feel people are too focused on this idea of like for like " replacing " a player.

Again, you can create a system/team structure which functions equally or better as a whole with different types of players.

Edited June 20 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN