Talk:List of most expensive association football transfers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Split managers

Non-productive

I must say, when I first came to this article in summer and saw that there were managers included I was surprised. Do managers even transfer? Where we have lists of people related to football clubs, the managers and players have separate list articles. Of course, I had no involvement in curating that list so just left it. But someone is editing and giving edit reasons that explicitly say they want to make the managers appear more important. Holy POV, Batman! Just give the managers their own listicle like everything else, they'll be the most important there. Kingsif (talk) 16:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managers clearly transfer, as the 40+ reliable sources in the section clearly demonstrate. There is no need to create a new article as the section isn't too long or large in size. Also, please remove your lies where you claim I "explicitly say they want to make the managers appear more important". This never happened. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 16:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We can have a philosophical debate about managers moving being more like an office worker changing company than the concept of a player's club representative affiliation, but your argument here hinges on a split not being needed. Except, splits aren't only performed when an article is too big. When related but clearly distinct content ought to be separated, it gets split. Especially in lists. Some list articles host multiple related lists, but I did not come to this article expecting to see managers exactly because all the other association football lists have separate articles for players and managers.
As for "lies", lol, here's your edit reason mate. If you're saying you think putting women above managers makes them appear more important, exactly what are you trying to do by moving managers up if not that? Kingsif (talk) 16:56, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather not have a philosophical debate with somebody who unironically calls people bro, cheers. Bayern spent £25m to bring Nagelsmann to their club, imagine thinking that's what happens when an office worker moves jobs. If you propose a list of expensive football managers has its own article as it's related but "clearly distinct content", shouldn't you also propose a list of transfers that aren't the most expensive in football, only in womens football, also moves article? Oh and that edit summary is me disagreeing with your forced prominence on inexpensive football transfers, not me "want[ing] to make managers appear more important", please learn to distinguish between different rationale. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I use bro sarcastically, don't worry, bro. Now, thing is, I would have put the women's transfers at a different article in the first place, if not for the fact that (where not too long) player lists in football are currently including women and men at the same article. As I say above, different markets but same subject.
Sure, perhaps this was not the case two years ago, but the lists of players that I have encountered have either already been like that, or there are overwhelming questions at the talk page asking to put the women in with the men. You keep trying to belittle women in football (right here you say "forced prominence" as if they aren't just actually prominent), but the general attitude of these lists is the opposite. (I know what you meant with the edit reason, but it also shows you either fundamentally believe or want to argue for your own side that higher=more important. And you want the managers higher. Please learn associated logic.) You might be a little behind the times (and by times I mean the general attitude of editing).
In any case, if we are making splits on relevance, managers get split before a different subset of players. And clearly you afford some importance to less-expensive subsets of players, or "most expensive African", "most expensive teenager", "most expensive goalie" wouldn't all be things on this list. Speaking of, I would also be more than welcoming to creating whole other tables for different positions, especially if introducing sources with ample commentary on why certain positions demand higher fees or why some positions see more transfers. And different confederations if we have commentary on the history and development of transfers there. It's an interesting subject, all around. Kingsif (talk) 17:25, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WALLOFTEXT. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 17:52, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
I have no idea if this spat was intentionally the target of the {{Split section}} for the women's list, but I've put a more formal proposal to split that specific section in #Split women and edited the template's talk page link accordingly. -Socccc (talk) 01:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As the article lead says, this article is for the highest transfer fees ever paid for players. There is no mention of managers, which will be because the transfer market of managers is a different concept to the transfer market of players. Since the list of women's players has been split out based on having much smaller differences (league specific issues) to the men's players, it makes no sense to keep managers attached to men's players. Transfers of players and transfers of managers are different scopes, and the only argument to retain the managers here presented so far has been that the price tag for managers is closer to men's players than the price tag of women's players, which is not only OTHERSTUFF but irrelevant - we wouldn't include a list of potatoes on the "most expensive tomatoes" list just because they were closer in price to tomatoes than cherry tomatoes were. Separate scope, separate article. Kingsif (talk) 21:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reason managers aren't mentioned in the lead is because the lead is far too short at the moment. The article isn't called "List of most expensive association football transfers for players", there's no reason to create an article for managers. Also, the argument for retaining managers here wasn't due to price. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 21:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Isak?

Newcastle bought isak for 70m euros, which would place him 38th on this list, is this true? Habat1165 (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

70m is the max price, including incentives. Which aren't included for other players. Yeetmaster25 (talk) 23:29, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Highest Transfers in Football

Christiano Ronaldo's transfer to Al Nassr is not listed. 2003:CD:3721:D771:1D6A:42C9:E653:BAD1 (talk) 18:02, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What was the transfer fee? All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 18:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, because it was a free transfer... 0 DOLLARS. Yeetmaster25 (talk) 23:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split women

Per the {{

WP:CORRECTSPLIT are unclear or absent on what to do if someone else adds {{Split section
}} but doesn't initiate a discussion that actually proposes what the split should be.

So I guess

I? propose splitting the women's list to List of most expensive women's association football transfers, in parallel to other articles in Category:Women's association football-related lists and Category:Women's association football records and statistics and as a supporting article for the recently created (as in, since the December discussions/arguments above) Professionalism in women's association football. The section is already large and well-sourced enough to make its own page, and there are several factors unique or uniquely prominent among transfers in the women's game that aren't well served by being positioned as a section on a list primarily describing men's transfers:

  • the relative prominence of the NWSL and its different domestic systems of player rights/trades/discovery/
    NWSL allocation money
  • retaliatory trades and transfers documented in the
    2021 NWSL abuse scandal
    , particularly at KC Current, Chicago Red Stars, and Orlando Pride
  • economic and historical issues touched on in Professionalism in women's association football w/r/t sporting bans and relative lack of investment
  • labour issues touched on in Labour relations in women's association football, particularly in Argentina's professionalization via lawsuit over a refused transfer
  • transfers involving relationships between players (1), or spouses in other leagues (1) or sports (1)

-Socccc (talk) 00:51, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Commment. The NWSL's weirdness makes including allocation money transactions frustrating. Many NWSL transactions that involve allocation money don't solely involve it. It also excludes by definition every notable domestic NWSL transaction from before the existence of allocation money in 2020. Should there separately be a list similar to
List of largest National Football League trades for notable transactions? Do those belong on NWSL records and statistics? It all dents the conventions of the section as framed like men's or Euro-centric transactions. -Socccc (talk) 00:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Though I find it generally unnecessary to separate men's and women's players when there are no length concerns - especially after reading many comments at the talk pages of mostly captain list articles from non-editors asking directly for the men and women to be at the same article - the note of the weirdness of the NWSL as well as the player-related history of women's transfers that you note, are reason to support a split based on the subject having an additional scope that is not present in men's transfers at large. With the allocation money being weird a main reason to have a separate list, I think it would make sense to perhaps move the trades to their own list at the new listicle - should this conversation be moved there? Kingsif (talk) 21:03, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Raised there in Talk:List of most expensive women's association football transfers#Breaking out or removing domestic NWSL trades -Socccc (talk) 20:33, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

saudi club transfers

what about the club record transfers from saudi Arabia? did all the players joined them as free agents or smth? I seriously doubt kante's transfer wasn't as a free agent, even mané. Credmaster 20 (talk) 20:05, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Saudi transfers are nowhere near making a dent on this table, surely? Jordan Henderson went for £12m. Neves went for £47m, that's peanuts compared to some of these figures. PeachyBum07 (talk) 20:11, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you can provide sources that show any of the transfers were above approx €70m/£60m, they can be included. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]