kramer wrote: ↑Sat Aug 15, 2026 11:00 pm
If you could guarantee four quality years, it’s basically a no brainer.
I think the issue is that the cliff could come anytime for a 30 year old at the most physically demanding position on the pitch and we’re almost certainly going to find it during whatever contract we’d offer him.
I think it’s a deal you have to do with an expectation of two good seasons. Anything less is a disaster. Anything beyond that is found money. Either way, we need to be shopping for his successor next summer.
It’s lighting a big chunk of money on fire from a financial rules compliance point-of-view but we all know how essential a right back is for the balance of the side and we’re in a healthy enough position with the overall age and value of the squad (we have a few assets who could raise a bunch of money today plus a few that could be extremely valuable with a season or two of good form) that we can afford to do one deal like this.
Yes and I think I'd prefer spending maybe double a 2 season Grealish on a 2-4 season Munoz.
We'd go from maybe the league's worst RB situation to maybe one of the league's best RB situation immediately.
Whereas Grealish doesn't massively move the needle for our current wing options (especially considering how we seem to be knocking the ball around one-touch with pace- it kind of leaves Grealish as one of the slower less useful (but certainly far from useless) options for big bucks.
For me it’s the difference in quality that justifies the fee
If we were already on a AWB or Ben White level, you would question the price given that the step up, although still an improvement, wouldn’t be worth the cost (and hence why we have a decent chance of getting him as other, better, teams may see it this way).
However as we are effectively going from my nan to an international level player, just pay the fucking money.
To be fair if Rohl was the new signing, an unknown kid from Germany, we’d be on here talking about maybe uncovering a gem at right back after yesterday.
Rohl is a great back up to have at RB and has proved that he can play there. He will start at RB against Palace but it’s not a long term solution for us or the player.
We have to get a starter in. It feels like Groundhog Day but we are a week away from the start of the season and it’s still not sorted. I am hoping Munoz will sign because he will change everything for us. But the club should have other options as backup in case it doesn’t come off.
On Munoz, I am really not bothered about his age. He may gradually fall into that right back position from RWB as he gets older, and we should get a few good years out of his contract / transfer fee. It’s a no brainer and immediately sorts the issue out with a quality signing.
Bornblue88 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2026 2:52 am
I’ve got a feeling part ownership deals aren’t allowed in this country and it was a buy back clause I think for a low fee. They activated it when there weren’t many academy graduates in the squad and the president at the time wanted to have one. It was political rather than due to valuing his talent.
Yeah that’s what I thought regarding dual ownership. Was the issue with Manny Fernandez too
Bumble wrote: ↑Sun Aug 16, 2026 7:20 am
To be fair if Rohl was the new signing, an unknown kid from Germany, we’d be on here talking about maybe uncovering a gem at right back after yesterday.
Its not fair to him to play him at right back, he is a midfielder. He looks good when in action but he would cost us some goals as a right back. Yesterday he was constantly 1-3 meters lower than the other defenders, destroying the defensive line.
