All Activity

I know it's not this simple and they've still had a terrible season, but Spurs sacking their manager after winning a trophy would be so funny. Proper "that's not what we do here"

I know you're earnestly trying to be a WUM and witty to boot, but it isn't working. Stop being a silly billy.

Aside from sorting out our summer transfer business? What's the point in a little more headroom when you're busy sucking up all of the oxygen?

But not as good as Kellehers, in my opinion of course. Also, I find the Cunha deal a bit strange. Amorim has been quite ruthless in his approach of weeding out the bad attitudes and egos only to have replaced them with another..

Even if you weren't being daft, that's not how FFP works. We don't need the 40m to buy players - money isn't the issue - 'headroom' is. Selling Gordon for 40m + a 30m trade wouldn't mean we have 40m left over to spend.

Marketing. There's an entire generation of under 30s in the wider football world who don't know that. And some very interested parties who would prefer they didn't and want to keep up the Saudi interlopers narrative so they can insist that the Chelseas and Tottenhams deserve special favours based on their historicity.

Are they saying Isak ISN’T signing for Arsenal now But they’ve spent an entire season making their fans believe it was a sure thing. Now they’re saying the complete opposite. Guys, they’re gonna’ protest now.

Not sure that's true any more since Murphy's breakout season. If Mbuemo can actually double as a striker then maybe, but I'm not even sure he plays that role effectively.

Eh?

Why should they? 14 years we had Ashley for, they were not responsible for his actions. Telling people what they largely already know isn’t going to change anything. They only thing they can do is make steps to get us back there and above it.

Down a YouTube rabbit hole I stumbled across this old gem. Love it 😄. https://youtu.be/OBnW-hCS1RM?si=29FZCTx3AgdKI7ad

Near enough two decades really.

The club should really spend a little bit more of it's own time hammering this kind of point home, along with the ongoing discussion in the other thread about how many times we'd have been in the Champions League if it was based on modern standards. We were in a big 4 before there was ever a big 6. Make the Ashley decade look bizarre rather than what's happening now.

This. The narrative that Stavely got us into the shit is itself a load of shit. We're not in the shit. We're further away from being in the shit than we've been for years, thanks in large measure to her. If she hadn't gambled on spending big, we'd probably have been relegated and up to our necks in shit.

You done anything nice this weekend?

Think I've got it cracked. After the past season, Gordon isn't worth the £70 million that was being touted last summer, but maybe we could still do a deal with Liverpool even if their budget is being stretched. We sell them Gordon for £40 million plus Harvey Elliott, spend that £40 million on Jacob Ramsey before FFP day with Villa desperate to make a deal, then offload Longstaff and Willock for something in the region of £30 million combined. Even if we only had £100 million to spend at the start of the window, we are now up to £130 million with two decent additions. That's enough for Mbeumo, Guehi or whoever else we might be interested in at centre back, and of course for Adam Armstrong, who becomes a distant but hardworking and homegrown backup player for up front and the flanks. With another sale or two - Targett maybe - plus some squeezing of the figures, we could also afford a moderately priced goalkeeper. And I think we'd be stronger without having used too much imagination and without breaking the bank.

It’s split for the clubs in the club World Cup to get some players in before it starts. Which we are not so of course we might not do any business in it. We still might get some deals done for players to join when it re opens though.

Liverpool are pretty happy about it

I don’t think we will sign anyone until after the club World Cup. Complete waste of time splitting the window up.

I guess it’ll seem odd these days - but for the first 40 years of the European Cup / Champions League it was for champions only (they didn’t drop ‘champions’ from the name in 1996/97 like they should have). It used to be interesting - Eastern European clubs were competitive, and most nations got a slot in the tournament proper. Real Madrid went over three decades without winning it - it’s a bore fest these days, with the same handful of clubs winning it over and over again, unless they’re propped up by oil money (PSG, Man City). The change to the ‘Champions League’ destroyed much of European football. edit: runners-up (and after that 3rd and 4th placed teams) were added to stave off the threat of a ‘European Super League’ by the petulant ‘big clubs’. They resented having to actually win the league to qualify. That threat has been around for decades …

I agree with the last part, and said so myself. I was just a bit surprised by the fact that we only qualified twice through those 10 years or so. Not qualifying with second place seems brutal, and I had no idea that was a thing.

Eddie said he wanted to move quickly so the next week should be interesting. I hope we don't have another extended negotiation like Guehi. Set your top and then move on.

Bit morbid