The 2025 Transfer Flops XI: Analyzing the Biggest Waste of Money in Football’s Summer Window
The transfer market is full of stories, big wins and painful misses. The 2025 Transfer Flops XI is our look at the other side: the signings this summer that cost clubs real money and returned very little.
For every bargain or home-run signing there was a move that looked smart on paper but failed on the pitch.
Some players were injured, some didn’t fit tactically, and some simply couldn’t handle the weight of the price tag.
Trending
The first half of the season tends to show patterns. You see who settles, who needs time, and who never seems to find the right feet.
That’s what this piece aims to do, not just list names, but explain the patterns that turned hopeful signings into expensive headaches.
When clubs spend big, fans demand results fast. If those results don’t come, the headlines turn ugly and the money spent becomes the story instead of the player’s talent.
What made Summer 2025 different
Summer 2025 was loud. Big clubs spent big again: record fees for young midfielders and wide recruitment drives from teams trying to reset quickly.
There was a clear trend of clubs buying younger, high-profile players in big deals. That gamble paid off often, but it also created a long tail of expensive players who didn’t settle.
Our criteria for this “Flops XI” are simple: big fee or significant expectation, little to no return in playing time or impact, and clear evidence that the signing did more harm than good for the club up to now.
This review looks at the first half of the 2025–26 season and focuses on real, trackable impact, not just guesswork.
The numbers back that up, a handful of Premier League clubs spent huge sums in the summer and a few stand out as top spenders overall.
When so much cash moves around, the margin for error shrinks, a single misfire can haunt a club’s budget and season.
Clubs that spent the most this summer were expected to show immediate returns, but when they didn’t, the criticism was louder for the simple reason that the stakes were higher.
Formation of The 2025 Transfer Flops XI: 4-2-3-1… but built out of mistakes
Goalkeeper — Mads Hermansen (West Ham)
Hermansen left Leicester in the summer of 2025 and joined West Ham as a promised starter. Many saw him as a ball-playing keeper who could help play from the back.
West Ham made the signing to shore up their goalkeeping position and bring youth.
Hermansen’s first weeks were rough. Conceding a number of goals in the early fixtures left fans and staff uneasy.
Some of the goals were defensive problems ahead of him, but a few were basic goalkeeping lapses or positioning issues.
You can’t pin every conceded goal on a keeper, but at this level a shaky start builds pressure quickly. Early reports even suggested the club were already looking at alternatives.
A signing that looked sensible on paper but hasn’t settled. It’s possible he recovers, keepers can bounce back but in the short term it’s been an expensive gamble that hasn’t paid off.
What makes a keeper signing feel like a flop is rarely one error. It’s a steady accumulation of doubt. Fans notice the little things, delayed punches, shaky distribution, communication that isn’t crisp.
Add in a few conceded match-defining moments and the narrative takes over. For Hermansen, the style West Ham asked for, more build-up from the back may have exposed him to situations he hadn’t faced regularly at Leicester.
That mismatch between player experience and tactical demand can magnify small weaknesses into headline errors.
The back four: expensive signings who never perform
Centre-back — Malick Thiaw
Thiaw left AC Milan for a big Premier League club in the summer. The fee was significant and the expectation was that he’d step straight into a starting role.
Thiaw arrived with praise for his physical traits, but he’s found himself in a new league and a system that demands different positioning and quicker build-up play.
In a few matches he looked out of sync with his defensive partner and the defensive unit left spaces he wasn’t used to closing. In short: the move was not a smooth fit.
Thiaw still has the potential, but this was one of those moves where the context, manager, system and teammates didn’t match the player’s strengths.
A center-back’s job is about partnerships. If the player beside you favors stepping up high and you prefer a deeper block, problems appear fast.
Thiaw’s situation underlines how important the co-defensive relationship is. It’s also a reminder that players who flourish under one tactical outlook can struggle when asked to do the opposite.
The headline fee only increases the spotlight on those mistakes.
Centre-back — Jorrel Hato
Hato was a much-hyped Ajax youngster who moved in the summer of 2025 for a big fee. Expectations were that he’d become a long-term starter.
Young defenders can be raw. Hato’s reading of some Premier League situations looked slower than required; the speed of the league exposed hesitation in recovery runs.
The pressure of being an expensive teenager at a top club is real and it showed in a few poor moments where he was caught out of position.
This one is a combination of price and youth. Not a write-off, but not delivering the expected standard yet.
Fans often forget how much cognitive load is placed on a young defender moving to a top league.
It’s not just the physical step-up: the mental speed, dealing with crowd pressure, and being targeted by seasoned forwards all change how a player reads the game.
Hato’s mistakes have been costly, which is why he’s found himself under harsh scrutiny sooner than many peers.
Left-back — Reinildo
Reinildo arrived with a reputation for being an experienced, robust left-back who could add immediacy to a defence. Some clubs paid good money to bring that experience in.
The issue here has been form and discipline. Reinildo has had a few high-profile mistakes and a red-card incident that left his new team with ten men in a match.
That’s the sort of misstep that changes how managers view a player’s reliability.
When you sign an experienced defender you want reliability first. Reinildo hasn’t given that consistently.
Experience only counts when it comes with consistency. Reinildo’s situation is a cautionary tale, a name and a track record don’t automatically guarantee composure in a new environment.
Clubs expect veterans to steady the ship when they don’t, the disappointment is doubled.
Full-backs who couldn’t handle the modern game
Milos Kerkez (Left-Back)
Kerkez moved for a large fee and arrived with a reputation for attacking juice down the left. Premier clubs paid to add his forward runs and crossing.
The modern full-back has to defend quickly and also be the first line of attack. Some of Kerkez’s early displays showed him out of position defensively and struggling to keep the balance between attack and cover.
Against compact teams he looked less effective. This is a common trap: an attacking full-back moves to a team where he’s asked to do both phases at a higher intensity.
Fans expected instant impact, instead they got inconsistent displays.
Not a total disaster, he still creates chances but a large fee and inconsistent output put him on the Flops XI list.
Kerkez’s case shows how transfer price amplifies perception. If you were a key player at Bournemouth, the move to a team fighting for titles demands instant adaptation.
The narrative becomes less about long-term upside and more about immediate returns. When expectations are sky-high, any uneven run of games reads as failure.
Florian Wirtz
Wirtz was a headline summer signing, a massive fee to bring a Bundesliga creator to the Premier League. The price and hype were enormous.
Wirtz’s main issue has been adaptation and patience. He’s not yet producing goals and assists that match the fee and expectations.
Commentary from pundits and former players suggested he might have been better off elsewhere, and Wirtz himself has been asked to be patient while he settles.
When you pay a world-record-ish fee for a playmaker, anything short of immediate influence gets loud criticism.
A major transfer that needed time. It’s still early for a full judgment, but the price tag makes every slow game look worse.
There’s a human side here that matters. Moving leagues, languages, and life off the pitch all drain energy.
A creative player who looks a touch subdued is often doing inner work most fans don’t see, finding rhythm in training, getting used to a manager’s instructions, and handling media pressure.
Wirtz may yet become what the fee implied but the start has been starker than anyone expected.
Midfield — where engines failed
Defensive mid — Lesley Ugochukwu
Ugochukwu left his club in a 2025 move that had fans hopeful he’d become the midfield shield. Clubs paid a sensible sum expecting him to grow into the role.
He’s had trouble asserting himself in the center of the park. In a couple of matches he was bypassed by opposition runners; the lack of cover from the full-backs and a change of system didn’t help.
This is a theme in several of these flops, the player is fine individually but the wider tactical context was wrong.
The transfer wasn’t a disaster on day one, but his output hasn’t matched the price and the seats he was supposed to fill.
Defensive midfield is a role where context matters more than raw numbers. You need to be protected, and you need a manager who designs the midfield around your strengths.
Ugochukwu’s struggles show how quickly a promising player can be exposed if the roster and system don’t align.
Central mid — Douglas Luiz
Douglas Luiz’s move back to the Premier League (on loan from Juventus in late summer) carried weight, he’s a combative midfielder with an established record.
Luiz’s form in Italy wasn’t eye-catching and his loan return has been hit-and-miss. He’s a clear worker, but this season he’s struggled to link play and influence matches as he once did.
Sometimes a player simply doesn’t fit a manager’s midfield shape, and that looks to be part of this one.
Luiz is not a guaranteed flop by career standards but in the tight spotlight of this season he’s expensive and underwhelming.
Luiz’s case reminds us that familiarity with a league helps but doesn’t guarantee success. Teams change, managers change, and a player’s previous form can be harder to replicate when the surrounding cast is different.
The loan move was meant to be a safe project, the kind that steadies a midfield but it hasn’t been straightforward.
Attack — the big names who misfired
Alejandro Garnacho (Winger)
Garnacho’s switch in summer 2025 was one of the transfer window’s loudest stories. It came with a big fee and real expectation from his new club.
A combination of fan reaction, managerial friction, and pressure has shown in Garnacho’s early performances.
He’s talented, but the move forced him into a new environment and that’s taken a toll on confidence and form.
When you have a young winger used to a certain role, a mid-season move can break rhythm.
Talent is obvious, but the problem is timing and context, the move created questions that affected output.
For players with a big personality, the move isn’t just tactical, it’s emotional. Fans can turn on a player quickly when expectations aren’t met, and that can accelerate a loss of form.
Garnacho is young and fired by raw talent, he might find his spark again, but the first months have been bumpy.
Jamie Gittens
Chelsea paid significant money to sign Gittens from Dortmund in July 2025. The expectation was a young dynamic winger to help the attack immediately.
Gittens has dealt with adaptation issues and injuries, plus a crowded attacking group at Chelsea.
He’s still young and those problems are fixable, but the price and his limited early output make him one of the signings that hasn’t delivered yet.
Another case of patience vs. pressure. He may recover, but initial signs were underwhelming.
Gittens’ move is the kind scouts dream about: young, talented, and with a pathway to a top team. But a top team is also the hardest place to win minutes.
When injuries and rotation hit, the narrative tilts toward disappointment. The challenge for Chelsea will be to keep faith without dumping him in a permanent loan-backed exile.
Striker — Benjamin Šeško
Šeško moved for a hefty fee to a top Premier League club and arrived as the expected striker of the future.
Goals haven’t come. Whether it’s down to chance, the service he’s getting, or positional instruction, a striker who doesn’t score quickly gets labeled as a flop.
Šeško has looked isolated at times and the system hasn’t made him comfortable.
Managers sometimes keep faith, but fans sometimes don’t. For now, the price and the lack of goals put him on this list.
He’s Still young and still has time. But the start has been poorer than anyone hoped.
Strikers live and die by chances. If the service dries up, goals become a lottery. For Šeško, the narrative is raw, a boy with a big fee and few early headlines.
But strikers can turn quick, a few good games and the whole story shifts. That uncertainty is why this list is provisional, the season can change opinions fast.
Common threads — why so many big signings failed
1. Tactical mismatch. Many players were bought for a system that changed or didn’t suit them. That’s a simple reason thrown around a lot, but it’s true: fit matters more than reputation.
2. Price pressure. Paying large fees increases scrutiny. Young players especially suffer when they’re expected to perform to a number on a cheque.
3. Rushed scouting or panic buys. Some moves were last-minute or feel like an answer to a problem, not a long-term plan.
4. New league adaptation. The jump to the Premier League or a tactical switch to a different league still causes problems. Physicality, speed, and different refereeing standards all matter.
Beyond those four, there are human factors, homesickness, family upheaval, language issues, and the mental load of public expectation.
Clubs can mitigate these with strong onboarding, stable coaching, and patience.
Many of the flops on this list could have been saved by slower ramps into the first team, less public pressure, and a clearer game plan that suited the player’s strengths.
The ripple effect — impact on clubs and players
Wasted money can affect budgets for other positions for clubs. It puts pressure on managers and can lead to poorer results which then forces more change.
For some clubs, these are multi-million-pound lessons that reshape planning.
But for players, bad spells hurt confidence and value. Loans, bench time, and public criticism are common next steps.
Some will fall out of favor while others will train, adapt, and come back.
The consequences can be long. A club that spends badly might have to sell in January or suffer Financial Fair Play scrutiny later.
For players, the hit to market value can be brutal, clubs stop seeing them as assets and more as problems. But redemption stories happen too.
Players who resisted pressure, changed attitudes, or found a manager who trusted them have come back stronger.
The transfer world is cyclical, some flops become late-blooming legends, and some never recover.
The 2025 Transfer Flops XI shows a harsh truth, transfer success isn’t just talent plus cash. It’s talent plus fit, plus management, plus timing.
A huge fee can make a player’s learning curve look like failure, even when it’s not. A number of players on this list are young and might still turn it around.
The season isn’t done, football loves redemption arcs.
But these signings should be a wake-up call for clubs. Spend smart, scout properly, think about system fit, and don’t let the loud market pressure force bad decisions.
January 2026 will be an interesting time, expect clubs to act differently because of lessons learned this summer.
If there’s one practical takeaway for clubs it’s this, prioritize the right fit over headline names. If you must gamble, do so with a clear plan to protect the player and the squad.
For fans, remember that the narrative can change quickly. Some names on this list will find their feet, others won’t. The transfer market is rough, expensive and that’s what makes football feel real.
Do you agree with our Flops XI? Who would you move into this list? Who did we miss? Leave a comment below and tell us which signing from Summer 2025 you think was the worst value for money.
