Frenkie de Jong

[Zidane82]

I’ve already explained the concept of inflation to this board. It isn’t caused by assets that are worth their price tag, nor luxury assets that are only affordable by extremely wealthy individuals.

I.e. A single family buying a €3m mansion does not inflate the real estate market, but 100 people renting €2k one bedroom Condo’s does.

Ndombélé is literally outplaying FDJ as we speak, and will demand a similar fee without the hype. He’s doing this in a superior competition no less.

Ndombele has to be the oldest looking 22 yr old ever

 

[Bulgroz]

I'm mentioning you because you wrote Neymar and Mbappe have nothing to do with Barça paying 75m for FDJ, which is not true.
In a market where the most expensive player is CR7 at 94m (2nd Zidane at 75m), a super promising kid will cost 40m.
In a market where the most expensive player is Neymar at 230m (2nd Mbappe at 180m), a super promising kid will cost 80m at least.

That's the truth and I'm not blaming PSG for paying those sums for Neymar and Mbappe. The market will always keep on evolving to higher heights and PSG speeded up that evolution. Just like MU did when they paid 105m for Pogba or 90m for Lukaku.

Regarding Ndombele, he's a great talent that I love, but right now he isn't as high rated as FDJ is by majority of football fans/experts. And these ratings have a big impact on the prices.

Your post is reasonable enough. But reading some people here, you kinda think that PSG broke a market that was perfectly rational and wasn't inflating out of proportion.
As you said, Ronaldo was bought 94 millions euros. Back then, he was a Ballon d'Or winner, he just won the UCL, and was already one of the 2 best players in the world.
4 years later, Real Madrid paid 101 millions for Gareth Bale, who just got out of a great season, sure, but was nowhere close to CR in 2009. To paraphrase what you said, in a market where CR7 was worth 94 millions, Bale should have been worth 50 millions. He was bought for double that price.
Same can be basically said for Pogba.
Lukaku was even worse.

Transfers are getting more and more ridiculous every year. PSG is part of the problem, sure. But so are most of the big teams, honestly. And once again, that's what you're saying, and I agree, but that's clearly not what some people here are thinking.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Your post is reasonable enough. But reading some people here, you kinda think that PSG broke a market that was perfectly rational and wasn't inflating out of proportion.
As you said, Ronaldo was bought 94 millions euros. Back then, he was a Ballon d'Or winner, he just won the UCL, and was already one of the 2 best players in the world.
4 years later, Real Madrid paid 101 millions for Gareth Bale, who just got out of a great season, sure, but was nowhere close to CR in 2009. To paraphrase what you said, in a market where CR7 was worth 94 millions, Bale should have been worth 50 millions. He was bought for double that price.
Same can be basically said for Pogba.
Lukaku was even worse.

Transfers are getting more and more ridiculous every year. PSG is part of the problem, sure. But so are most of the big teams, honestly. And once again, that's what you're saying, and I agree, but that's clearly not what some people here are thinking.

Between 2000 and 2016 the most expensive player in history went from 61 to 105M. That is 172% increase.
between 2016 & 2017 the most expensive player went from 105 to 222 which is 211%
This is unprecedented in modern football, and then they proceed with Mpabbe deal. The effect of those deals is well documented especially for bigger clubs.
Sure market was crazy to some extent, but it was more of "regular craziness" between 2001 and 2016 after the late 90's overspending that hurt the calcio.

 

[Bulgroz]

Between 2000 and 2016 the most expensive player in history went from 61 to 105M. That is 172% increase.
between 2016 & 2017 the most expensive player went from 105 to 222 which is 211%
This is unprecedented in modern football, and then they proceed with Mpabbe deal. The effect of those deals is well documented especially for bigger clubs.
Sure market was crazy to some extent, but it was more of "regular craziness" between 2001 and 2016 after the late 90's overspending that hurt the calcio.

Yeah but you're not taking into account WHO the player is.
Pogba was a good and marketable young player. He wasn't one of the best in the world at all. Neymar was the 3rd best player in the world, a trophy winner playing for the best team in Europe. This pure mathematical argument would stand if Man Utd had bought a player equivalent to Neymar for that 105 million price tag, but they didn't. Same can be said for Lukaku (or for Bale before that).

 

[Newcomer]

Between 2000 and 2016 the most expensive player in history went from 61 to 105M. That is 172% increase.
between 2016 & 2017 the most expensive player went from 105 to 222 which is 211%
This is unprecedented in modern football, and then they proceed with Mpabbe deal. The effect of those deals is well documented especially for bigger clubs.
Sure market was crazy to some extent, but it was more of "regular craziness" between 2001 and 2016 after the late 90's overspending that hurt the calcio.

If you compare the price paid with the money at disposal at the clubs, Zidane was 54% of Real total earnings.

https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/figures-show-neymar-transfer-no-expensive-2001-record/
https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/4ur6sx/most_expensive_signings_as_a_percentages_of_income/
https://www.economist.com/finance-a...s-best-footballers-are-cheaper-than-they-seem

Nothing unprecendented.

 

[khaled_a_d]

If you compare the price paid with the money at disposal at the clubs, Zidane was 54% of Real total earnings.

https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/figures-show-neymar-transfer-no-expensive-2001-record/
https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/4ur6sx/most_expensive_signings_as_a_percentages_of_income/
https://www.economist.com/finance-a...s-best-footballers-are-cheaper-than-they-seem

Nothing unprecendented.

This is a bad measure tbh, because sellers don't care what is your revenue and how you are getting your money back.
And if anything this means market was cooling down before that deal, which further proves the original point. Only player since 2001 that costed more than 20% of record revenue is Cr7 who was a generational all time talent at the age of 24

 

[Newcomer]

This is a bad measure tbh, because sellers don't care what is your revenue and how you are getting your money back.
And if anything this means market was cooling down before that deal, which further proves the original point. Only player since 2001 that costed more than 20% of record revenue is Cr7 who was a generational all time talent at the age of 24

You said unprecedented, i showed you a precedent.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Yeah but you're not taking into account WHO the player is.
Pogba was a good and marketable young player. He wasn't one of the best in the world at all. Neymar was the 3rd best player in the world, a trophy winner playing for the best team in Europe. This pure mathematical argument would stand if Man Utd had bought a player equivalent to Neymar for that 105 million price tag, but they didn't. Same can be said for Lukaku (or for Bale before that).

Pogba was considered one of the best midfielders in the world when he was sold tbh, he is very comparable to Neymar actually, and he isn't worth less than half of the price of Neymar.
Actually, a year before many though if a club came with 150M for Neymar (his buyout before renewal) we should be happy because it is huge sum that will land us another WC player like Pogba and another huge amount of money to spend on other players.

 

[El Flaco]

Says €4m bonus received by Frenkie's transfer to Barca will allow RKC Waalwijk to replace its artificial turf with natural grass

https://www.ed.nl/nederlands-voetbal/natuurgras-bij-rkc-als-eerbetoon-aan-frenkie~ae39e105/

 

[Bulgroz]

Pogba was considered one of the best midfielders in the world when he was sold tbh, he is very comparable to Neymar actually, and he isn't worth less than half of the price of Neymar.
Actually, a year before many though if a club came with 150M for Neymar (his buyout before renewal) we should be happy because it is huge sum that will land us another WC player like Pogba and another huge amount of money to spend on other players.

You can't seriously believe that Pogba was "very comparable to Neymar" when he got sold. He got 15th and 14th place for Ballon d'Or in 2015 and 2016. And he's a CM, not a striker or a winger.

Neymar ended up 3rd twice, he was one of the best players during the 2014 WC and was a well established member of the Selecao, had already won the UCL, and was arguably the 2nd most spectacular player in the word, definitely the 3rd best player overall.
I think you're forgetting how people judged the price paid by Utd for Pogba back then (and, once again, Lukaku was probably even worse).

 

[khaled_a_d]

You can't seriously believe that Pogba was "very comparable to Neymar" when he got sold. He got 15th and 14th place for Ballon d'Or in 2015 and 2016. And he's a CM, not a striker or a winger.

Neymar ended up 3rd twice, he was one of the best players during the 2014 WC and was a well established member of the Selecao, had already won the UCL, and was arguably the 2nd most spectacular player in the word, definitely the 3rd best player overall.
I think you're forgetting how people judged the price paid by Utd for Pogba back then (and, once again, Lukaku was probably even worse).

I am not forgetting it at all, Pogba is one year younger and looked like he is one step away from being best midfielder in the world. Neymar was better and looked the best of his generation for sure, but Pogba was a player that was expected to be most expensive player in the world.
Sure Neymar was going to break the record, but he was never worth 150% of the Pogba price,never mind 211% of the Pogba price. You can't seriously believe that.

 

[Bulgroz]

I am not forgetting it at all, Pogba is one year younger and looked like he is one step away from being best midfielder in the world. Neymar was better and looked the best of his generation for sure, but Pogba was a player that was expected to be most expensive player in the world.
Sure Neymar was going to break the record, but he was never worth 150% of the Pogba price,never mind 211% of the Pogba price. You can't seriously believe that.

I don't believe he was worth twice the price, but I do believe he was worth much more. But more importantly, if Lukaku was worth 90 millions, then Neymar was definitely worth 220 millions.

 

[khaled_a_d]

But more importantly, if Lukaku was worth 90 millions, then Neymar was definitely worth 220 millions.

No he wasn't. Even the record after Denilson wasn't in such ratio, and surely I would take Lukaku over Denilson

 

[DonAK]

Lukaku was coming off a 25 goals + 6 assists season in the Premier League with several MOTM performances. Very few people in England thought the price for him was way over the top. For a 23 years old CF that was physically dominant, for a team that needed a new CF.

It might not have turned out as expected, but unless Neymar wins a CL with PSG as their leader neither will his 222m price tag be seen as justified.

 

[Jair Ventura]

Lukaku was coming off a 25 goals + 6 assists season in the Premier League with several MOTM performances. Very few people in England thought the price for him was way over the top. For a 23 years old CF that was physically dominant, for a team that needed a new CF.

It might not have turned out as expected, but unless Neymar wins a CL with PSG as their leader neither will his 222m price tag be seen as justified.

His fee is already justified. Purely from fan interest, sponsorships, broadcasting deals, etc.