The College Dropout

Liverpool do need another attacker. They’ve got 4 but they’ve sold their positionally flexible players.

Think it's a risk worth taking. A Wilson replacement not a Isak replacement though. Maybe in the literal sense of not actually playing.

Loan with an option would've been nice

Let's swap then. The squad as it is today - is stacked. I didn't include Savinho, Rico Lewis, Ederson or any of the kids i'm less familiar with. A number of which will be good PL players already as we've seen. Like I said - Pep likes to focus on a core of players. If he wants to play Bilva at LB before playing Khusanov at CB, that's on him like you say. It doesn't make the squad any less stacked. Look at the midfield options, look at the forward line. You have 6 fucking Centrebacks. 7 forwards for 3-4 positions.

And gave the keys to Mitchell and Eales

She knew a good thing when she saw it. If she was still here she would be Eddie level to me. I might not agree with everything they do in the moment but I trust them implicitly. She was right to put a mortgage on big Joe and she was right to do the same with Isak.

12 months later Cole Palmer would win Player of the Year and have 40+ G/A in a single season. He made 25 appearances that season. Pep treating a 21 year-old Cole Palmer like Emile Krafth is his own.

Aye this is why I’m disappointed PIF haven’t more eagerly pushed the rules Chelsea style. IMO it’s the only way to close the gap. A few 999k deals per annum would’ve been enough to give Isak a new deal last season and we aren’t in this exact predicament. ultimately to be successful you need to sign and keep top players and to do that you have to pay them. We need to do everything in our power to do that.

No he’s a flop. Surely 6 goals in 2 seasons is a flop.

Anyone that leaves will be replaced in the squad though. I didn’t list Ederson or Savinho and I’ve got 22 players. In the CL final they won the bench included Foden, Walker, Julian Alvarez, Mahrez, Laporte, Ortega, Cole Palmer, Rico Lewis. Oscar Bobb and Ake were injured - they also had Phillips on the bench. That’s a 20-man squad minimum for 10 spots. His squad’s are massive in quality and depth. He’s a bit like Howe in the sense he would prefer to play Bernardo Silva in 3 different positions before playing Cole Palmer but that doesn’t mean the squad is small.

On Newcastle Online? Among our fans and club? Consensus on here was that he was top 5 itw - maybe higher. We wouldn’t have swapped him for any 9 outside of Haaland, Mbappe on the basis Kane and Lewa are too old. Last season he just proved/confirmed it to the world. We knew. Staveley knew. Howe knew.

Once Isak had 2 elite seasons back to back it was always a risk that we wouldn’t be able to match what he could get elsewhere. I’m not saying any of this to defend Isak btw. His behaviour has been awful and he’s taken things way too far. I didn’t think he has the capacity to behave like this. The 6-year contract is legitimate leverage for the club but we over leveraged it contributing to this problem.

At the end of Isak's previous season many of us thought we had a top 5 striker in the world. It was a risk to decide to keep Isak underpaid purposely because of the remaining length on his contract. That is definitely a risk and we thought it was worth taking. We could've gotten away with it and Isak agreed a new contract in the last 3-6 months. But even then, due to his form - he would've had a substantially bigger salary than the one we would agree in 2024 - another risk Mitchell thought was worth taking. This is football - everything comes with risk. Most of us would've been delighted to give Isak a new 5-year £200k contract in August 2024 - so would Isak it seems. --- I broadly agree with some of what Mitchell said. But he made a lot of poor decisions. This is pure conjecture on my side but By not giving Isak that contract, Mitchell was eyeing up a 2025 sale of Isak to rebuild the squad. I also think he had set up Howe to fail and to be sacked. Without CL - we would need the Isak money more and there would be even more footballing reason to let the lad go. Staveley's atttitude was different. She was betting the house on Eddie and the team. I didn't fully agree with the Joelinton contract extension. Peak selling price for him, a chance to give Anderson a pathway to the side etc. but Staveley backed the squad and the manager and ultimately she’s been vindicated. Without Joelinton we don't win the cup or get CL football, even with 2 years of Anderson in the starting line-up imo. She would've secured Isak for at least another season with that new contract. That contract would've bought us Isak for 2 years no matter what happened with us.

It's a little bit of a myth this. The squad is stacked. Not 1 for 1 exactly - there is no natural RB and only 1 out and out striker but he has players that can play multiple positions in crazy depth. And he has the best academy in England to fall back on if needed: Trafford Ortega Akanji Nunes Dias Stones Ake Khusanov Ait-Nouri Gvardiol Kovacic Rodri Gundogan Reijnders Nico Gonzalez Bernardo Silva Foden Haaland Doku Cherki Marmoush Oscar Bobb

Similarly - we need to sort a new contract for Tonali, or he will be next.

Salah joined in 2017 on a 5-year deal. He secured a new contract in 2018 after scoring 30+ goals in his first season and playing at a world-class level. Assume his pay reflected his standing in the game. VVD & Salah were both exploring leaving on a free and going elsewhere for megabucks; it wasn't by choice that their contracts got so close to expiring. Carragher was calling it a disaster that they let 3 of their best players enter the last 12 months of their contract and he's right. Mitchell overleveraged the fact that Isak had 4 years left on his deal, which is a major contributing factor to the current situation. That much is undeniable imo.

Fundamentally if you don’t offer your top talent the wages they deserve they will leave. It shouldn’t happen like this though.

I don’t agree with the principle. A lot of the world’s biggest businesses ran at a loss for several years before turning a profit. It’s called investment. They purposely took football fans lack of knowledge about business to make these rules sound reasonable. Not being able to spend more than you generate, locks in those that generate the most income at the top.

What’s there to agree about? The rules are built to prevent us rising so obviously not. I dont think the rules are insurmountable with desire, money and skill but we only have 1 of those. Chelseas approach is barmy but they’ve shown desire and skill to subvert PSR. They’ve basically invented a whole new footballing business model. It probably won’t work but they are executing it.

Again debt is a BS metric. im in debt at over £400k. I service the debt with ease and my assets have appreciated over time. Arsenal spend the 4th most in the league and outperform that - consistently now. They have a super squad now though. All of the top 4 do - maybe except Liverpool funnily enough. For the time being.

Chelsea are providing PIF PSR blueprints and PIF refuse to use it. I’m not mad at Chelsea I’m mad at PIF. (I’m not mad I’m disappointed)

Not spend is a bit of a BS metric. Total squad cost and wage bill are the defining metrics for me. For both Arsenal are at the highest 4th in the division. Arteta finished 2nd three times is a positive of his coaching imo. He should’ve won more trophies mind.

@Unbelievable I think he told me a few million in additional sponsorship per year wouldn’t move the needle on our PSR position. But also seems to think a net £2m-3m added to amortisation with a contract extension would’ve been implausible. If it wasn’t him I apologise. But if it was him his positions don’t make logical sense and not worth debating. He’ll defend any position the club takes.

This is so poor from Isak man. You were a hero here lad. He doesn’t have a strong enough leg to stand on.

Nah they would have a chance to negotiate an out. We gave kne to Bruno. If they didn’t they couldn’t act out to this extent.