CONFIRMED Cameron Archer signs for the Blades - 4 year contract

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Harrisblade said:
Surely the 'buy back option'
only applies if we decide to sell him?
Click to expand...
No. It's a "clause", not an option. It's written in the contract that United, Villa AND Archer all signed.

Snowflake said:
If we stay up we pay the second instalment but if we get relegated we pay no more ?
If Villa want him back they have that option, so it depends on whether they can sell him on for more than the first instalment. If not he is ours to keep, even in the Championship
Maybe I misunderstand the second part of the explanation?
Click to expand...

If United are relegated Villa HAVE to buy him back, it states the clause is Obligatory, not Optional.

Eric_Brooks said:
Problem what Villa will have is that they can buy him from us in the summer, but won't be able to loan him out to a british club, due to the 3 club rule for registration,

The only option they have is doing a deal with another club, but that sounds as complicated as it gets.
Click to expand...

Not true because he hasn't played for another club. Same deal with Reguillon going back to Spurs. As long as Spurs don't play him, which they haven't, he can go onto another club.

In any case, the summer is next season, so it resets.

________

I would say it wasn't only Villa and United pushing for the relegation clause though. I doubt Archer would want to drop into the Championship after proving himself there already.
I guess this covers him somewhat that he'll be a PL player (or at least registered to a PL squad) next season regardless of what happens
 

mattbianco1 said:
No. It's a "clause", not an option. It's written in the contract that United, Villa AND Archer all signed.



If United are relegated Villa HAVE to buy him back, it states the clause is Obligatory, not Optional.



Not true because he hasn't played for another club. Same deal with Reguillon going back to Spurs. As long as Spurs don't play him, which they haven't, he can go onto another club.

In any case, the summer is next season, so it resets.

________

I would say it wasn't only Villa and United pushing for the relegation clause though. I doubt Archer would want to drop into the Championship after proving himself there already.
I guess this covers him somewhat that he'll be a PL player (or at least registered to a PL squad) next season regardless of what happens
Click to expand...
Any obligation can be negated by consent from both parties.
Sorry that should be all three parties as he would have to agree also.
 
Snowflake said:
Any obligation can be negated by consent from both parties.
Sorry that should be all three parties as he would have to agree also.
Click to expand...

I do think there's a deal to be had, but I think Archer holds ALL the cards.

I'm not sure a Champions League, Aston Villa will want/need him - so they'd be open to it.
United could say - "you agreed to buy him back, so if you want us to keep him, we'll call it quits at what we've paid"

Then Archer could say - "not a cat in hells chance guys!"
 
Snowflake said:
If we stay up we pay the second instalment but if we get relegated we pay no more ?
If Villa want him back they have that option, so it depends on whether they can sell him on for more than the first instalment. If not he is ours to keep, even in the Championship
Maybe I misunderstand the second part of the explanation?
Click to expand...
Did you not read it all? It says Villa are OBLIGATED to buy him back in the event of our relegation.

Why on earth would we have gone to the lengths of getting all this stuff in the contract if we had any intent of keeping him in the Championship? Clearly the Prince has no desire to have him on our wage bill in the Championship.
 
Last edited:
Fjortoft's Aeroplane said:
Did you not read it all? It says Villa are OBLIGATED to buy him back in the event of our relegation.

Why on earth would we have gone to the lengths of getting all this stuff in the contract if we had any intent of keeping him in the Championship? Clearly the Prince has no desire to have him on our wage bill in the Championship.
Click to expand...
That depends on what all three parties want if we are relegated.
I doubt Villa want him, we do but cannot afford him, so it comes down to what he wants.
The obligation is only of use if he wants to go back to Villa and then we enforce the obligation.
 
Snowflake said:
That depends on what all three parties want if we are relegated.
I doubt Villa want him, we do but cannot afford him, so it comes down to what he wants.
The obligation is only of use if he wants to go back to Villa and then we enforce the obligation.
Click to expand...
That’s not an option. If we’re relegated it’s activated straight away. He’s agreed a new deal at villa for that scenario before joining us.
 
Danetheblade said:
That’s not an option. If we’re relegated it’s activated straight away. He’s agreed a new deal at villa for that scenario before joining us.
Click to expand...
Sadly the corporate world doesn’t operate within the rules all the time.
Ask our previous owner !
 
Pegster said:
The same Tommy Doyle who played the full 90 mins. for Wolves on Saturday in their 3-0 win over Everton ? We have well and truly missed the boat on that front !!
Click to expand...
He refused to sign the contract that had a relegation clause
 
mattbianco1 said:
No. It's a "clause", not an option. It's written in the contract that United, Villa AND Archer all signed.



If United are relegated Villa HAVE to buy him back, it states the clause is Obligatory, not Optional.
Click to expand...
I heard that United wanted a loan, but Villa needed to sell to because they were in a sticky situation with FFP. So to get SUFC to agree to buy, they promised to buy him back if we got relegated. We probably haven't even handed over any money for him.

So its effectively a loan, but done in a way that lets them balance the books.

I don't think Villa actually want him back
 

I have to say with his pace and athleticism that osula is the better prospect at premier league level
Archer is too slow ,even yesterday he struggled to get away from his man and took too many chances
Conversely though If osula could strike a ball as well as archer he would be the next Thierry Henry
 
When we signed him I thought that’s a very good acquisition .. granted the frontline have been feeding off scraps this season but he just doesn’t seem to look interested at times .. especially in chasing down defenders .. let’s see how the 2nd half of the season goes ?⚔️
 
John Street West Terrace said:
When we signed him I thought that’s a very good acquisition .. granted the frontline have been feeding off scraps this season but he just doesn’t seem to look interested at times .. especially in chasing down defenders .. let’s see how the 2nd half of the season goes ?⚔️
Click to expand...
I think this notion of McBurnie and Archer getting criticised this season for not closing defenders down is a false one.

Does anyone actually think they have been told to press high and waste energy chasing the ball between football playing defenders but are choosing not to?

They’ll have specific instructions of when to press and when not to, we just don’t play a ‘high press’, we don’t have the athleticism in the team to do so.

We have spells of games where we’ll squeeze and look to win the ball back high, but then we drop off. I assume someone is issuing instructions on when to and when not to.

From what I’ve seen of Archer he seems to know how to press, it’s false to say he’s not very good at it. He’s just not asked to do it often.
 
John Street West Terrace said:
When we signed him I thought that’s a very good acquisition .. granted the frontline have been feeding off scraps this season but he just doesn’t seem to look interested at times .. especially in chasing down defenders .. let’s see how the 2nd half of the season goes ?⚔️
Click to expand...
Compare that to Osula yesterday who was desperate to get onto anything, if I have a complaint about Osula is he still looks greedy however the way he is being played at the moment it doesn't matter as there is not usually anybody in a better position to pass to.
 
8lade said:
Compare that to Osula yesterday who was desperate to get onto anything, if I have a complaint about Osula is he still looks greedy however the way he is being played at the moment it doesn't matter as there is not usually anybody in a better position to pass to.
Click to expand...
You’ve got to have that selfishness as a striker
 
Lane Ender said:
You’ve got to have that selfishness as a striker
Click to expand...
Disagree. You have to have the awareness to know what the best option is for a chance on goal. When Jebbison came through he was the same but as I have previously pointed out at the end of last season there was a switch when he started making better decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom