clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Report: Manchester City lodge humongous offer for Lucas Hernández

COPE say City and Atlético have an agreement for the young defender.

Club Atletico de Madrid v SD Eibar - La Liga Photo by Gonzalo Arroyo Moreno/Getty Images

Manchester City have made a €50 million bid for Atlético Madrid center back Lucas Hernández, according to Cadena COPE. The outlet further states that this offer was sufficient to pique Atlético’s interest, and the player may move to the Etihad Stadium as soon as this summer.

Lucas renewed his contract with Atlético earlier this month. It is a long-term agreement to 2022 with a reported €55 million buyout clause. Manchester City’s offer is within €5 million of that clause, and COPE say that Atleti are satisfied enough to have reached a deal with City: if the Court of Arbitration for Sport at long last lifts Atlético’s transfer ban, Lucas will leave this summer. If the ban is upheld (which, as we wrote yesterday, appears more probable) the 21-year-old will stay one more season and then move to the Premier League for the 2018-19 season.

Lucas and his brother Theo were linked with moves to the blue side of Manchester last summer but Atlético were able to keep both. Pep Guardiola has done his homework, it appears; the older Hernández brother has a massive future thanks to his ability to play as a center back or a left back, his great composure and his sound tactical knowledge. There are questions about the Frenchman’s maturity in light of his arrest on a domestic violence charge in February, but Atleti would be losing a big piece of its defensive future should this transfer happen.

That said, Lucas has made only 26 appearances in LaLiga over three seasons, and this is a huge offer. One may also be tempted to say Atlético should sell high on the canterano.

Poll

Should Atlético Madrid sell Lucas Hernández for €50 million?

This poll is closed

  • 68%
    Yes, Atlético will not get a better offer for him.
    (134 votes)
  • 31%
    No, he’s too important for the future.
    (62 votes)
196 votes total Vote Now