22 Jul 2026 17:44:49
It would appear Garnacho is going to Villa on an initial loan with a so called low threshold obligation to buy clause.
I except it’s up to the player to prove he is undroppable at any club, but in the back of my mind I seem to remember Villa negotiating a similar deal with Liverpool for Elliott.



The player hasn’t pulled up any trees at Chelsea and that’s a shame but as far as I know he hasn’t been unprofessional while with us.

1.) 22 Jul 2026
22 Jul 2026 19:17:23
I understand it is a conditional obligation to buy: not sure what a low threshold obligation is. I would rather we found another club for a sale, otherwise, just like Jackson, he will be back next summer.

2.) 22 Jul 2026
22 Jul 2026 19:24:25
Whatever happened to a straight obligation? Now it's with clauses, and I can see Ganarcho not getting a game for Villa after August, similar to what happened to Elliott, which destroyed his season.

3.) 22 Jul 2026
22 Jul 2026 20:46:34
I think the difference with Elliott was that Emery never wanted him? I'm sure the club have done their due diligence and have learned from the Jackson loan, so will be fairly confident of the obligation being met.

If Football Manager is as accurate in its mechanics as real life (certainly its player ratings are top notch), then there are ways in which to encourage loan clubs to play players.

E.G. reduced contributions to wages for the weeks the player plays. Reduced loan fee for the month etc. So, for example, Villa are paying £1m/month loan fee for Garnacho. If he plays, it's £500k; if he doesn't, it's £1m. If he plays, they pay 50% of his wage; if he doesn't, it's 100%.

4.) 22 Jul 2026
22 Jul 2026 21:23:12
Fuser, what a good idea. Love it, mate.

5.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 03:30:21
Apparently the deal for Elliott not happening could be good news for the Garnacho deal.

It would appear that having to play, say, ten games, can now be shown not to be a low threshold obligation to buy deal, and therefore not qualify as a 45-day player swap. I hope that makes sense?

6.) 23 Jul 2026
22 Jul 2026 23:00:21
I think I understand it. With this UEFA 45 day rule it could not be a sale this year. So a loan of £8million now plus £42.5 million next year. Harrdly any appearences or goals or assists needed so just a way of beating the greedy cheating UEFA executives.

Well done Chelsea FC for stitching said persons right up. Look like A Villa and Chelsea FC have deal to beat said executives. Well done.

7.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 09:34:34
Fabrizio Romano reporting on Garnacho and Aston Villa.

The obligation to buy clause is considered easy to reach, almost 100% guaranteed, and just a way to get around UEFA rules.

Chelsea count on a permanent transfer for 2027, as Garnacho has also signed a four-year deal ahead of the switch.



The second part of the medical is ongoing now.

Chelsea will make a real profit and significant book profit on the player.

8.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 10:15:20
We will still have to pay a percentage to UTD.

9.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 11:09:44
Bill, I don't recall any sell on clause, but as the profit is small, any payout to them, if applicable, would be small change.

10.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 11:45:04
Interesting to see how Garnacho fares under Unai Emery, such a highly rated manager. Clearly, Maresca could not get much out of Garnacho, LR didn't try very hard to, and United had despaired as well after he had seemed such a promising young talent for them when first breaking through into their first team at such a young age.

11.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 11:59:49
Jbs, spot on, mate. It will be interesting. At the end of last season, I had completely given up on Gusto, but a change of manager can change how a player performs.

12.) 23 Jul 2026
23 Jul 2026 12:05:30
Hopefully, but we are the second club it has not worked out for him. Reminds me a bit of Rashford.