80

I hear his boss is very accommodating to staff who want to move on to fresh pastures. Doesn't believe in standing in their way.

All players we sign gain several yards of pace, this is well established N-O lore.

We need more people who speak like that, not less.

I'll be surprised if he does start against Wimbledon, personally. Happy, but surprised. Wilson would be the first choice, if he's fit. Second half for Osula if we're already ahead.

Was he? Not disputing it but he seems to have been pretty backseat when it comes to actually running the club. I just recall several news articles after Eddie had first been rejected saying Yasir had been most impressed with him but the collective board had chosen Emery. And Amanda later essentially confirmed that in an interview.

He'll definitely want it all to work out, and I'm not saying he'd get rid of them over Howe even if it's true. But he looks to be a very shrewd customer, was one of Howe's earliest backers - pre-Emery - and has received nothing but results and dignified conduct in return since then. I could see him finding Eddie's representations far more persuasive if the worst comes to the worst - I think he'll have a very low tolerance if he spots any bullshit.

You can see Pope ruins Gordon's day with the player description just after 1:27

That F365 article is just based off the Sun's article. Not taking it seriously for the time being as some parts don't quite add up and it's 'too' perfect a shitstorm. As an aside, just a gut feeling but counterintuitively I think Yasir would be more inclined to back Howe over Mitchell and/or Eales if it came down to it - subject to how this season goes. He's probably Eddie's closest senior ally nowadays, when I think about it.

Safe bet that Southgate isn't on Gordon's Christmas list Quietly destroyed his managerial practices there. Pretty clear he's been affected by all that, with Liverpool bubbling away in the background at the same time to top it all off. Optimistic that this latest England trip will help hit the reset button - having both Eddie and Carsley rock solid behind him will do wonders.

If there are guarantees about clubs not going under e.g. all funding provided up front by owners, I couldn't give a shit if transfer fees went into the billions. If billionaires and trillionaires want to pump their money into our economy, let them.

Spot on.

Unless they find a way to rig it so they do e.g. heavily modifying the price and salary caps of players downwards if their club has not qualified for CL at least twice in the past 5 years.

It's basically what you can get away with, as things stand. Internally to the Premier League, there are guidelines about transfers being conducted in good faith, but who determines that is anyone's business.

He's been sick of the place for ages. Give it a few weeks

I don't quite agree with this point. The signs are we're moving towards a model where the head coach really is a coach. By rights then, a Sports Director should take on a lot of the mantle of a traditional manager in many significant areas. It's one of the things I don't like about the position in general as things stand today - it tends to attract people who want the power and wealth of managers while still skulking around and evading direct scrutiny, garotting other staff members to distract when the temperature gets too hot.

He knows all the words!

As I said the other day, Howe did his press conference and dipped his hand in the blood, which was a good thing. Mitchell hasn't, which is concerning.

I have similar experience and what you say makes total sense. Such people tend to succeed because others around them either can't or don't want to read them, though.

I'm sympathetic to a lot of what you're saying, but football does really need it's supporters. And generations are going to be locked out at this rate, with the average age of matchgoers being pensionable in the next decade or so. Massive growth is the best chance of enabling more people to support the club and keeping prices from skyrocketing even higher.

I think you can make the argument that 'hey, we would've grown their value even more if we'd paid £10m less for each of them!' but it does feel a bit like a successor grasping for self-justification, given the growth we have actually achieved. What's odd is we've done this 'Newcastle tax' chat before, and it was widely agreed in the industry that we'd successfully dampened that down. Splash the cash is an inaccurate characterisation. To give the claim its due, I think you can argue last summer was the window we appeared to let ourselves get edged up. I remember Livramento's fee seeming to crawl up from about £23m to £40m over a long period. Barnes too, as I recall. But is Mitchell in a position to know Everton would've sold Gordon for £30m?

I think we need to remember very clearly which side our bread is buttered. Especially when it comes to issues where we don't have cast iron evidence and are relying on trust.

Indeed, but maybe it suits others to have him portrayed that way... And Tonali, who he 'fell in love with'. And he's been sweet on a number of others who didn't come off, like Ekitike and Nmecha, off the top of my head. It's a false narrative.

Haven't read others' responses to this yet, but for me: I'm not minded to be generous in assessing what he says for a variety of reasons, so with that in mind, everything there comes across as a lot of hot air and politics. There's barely anything substantial to it that an outsider with passing knowledge couldn't say. The idea the Guehi saga has publicly drawn a line in the sand and shown our strength to other clubs is fanciful. Also his grammar is horrific - "Was, let’s say, the scouting network, the lengths and breadths of our process bigger and broader enough?" Happy to judge him on his future actions instead, but nothing here has impressed me.

They are! Just have to make hay while the sun shines. Listing just home or away skews the picture. It's pretty well balanced overall.

Sticking this in here for the more hardcore PSR people. Does anyone know for sure how fee amortisation works? I've heard a couple of assumptions, but nothing really concrete. What I'm asking is is it worked out on a daily basis, or some other way? In other words - a £50m fee amortised over 5 years, £10m p/a. Does that mean it counts as approx £27k for each day that passes from the moment of purchase? So if you buy that player 3 days before the June deadline, it goes down as approx £80k on that year's PSR? Was wondering just how advantageous having a little money to spend in June is. I've also heard suggestions you can move the weight of a deal around i.e. even though you bought with three days of the PSR window left, you can absorb a full year's worth of amortisation for that current year if you want to use up some slack you have. Is this true? Finally, another question on a similar note: if elements of a fee are conditional, how are the additional sums factored in once they're triggered? Going back to our £50m player, let's say an extra £10m is due if he wins the CL. It happens in year 2 of the 5 year contract, paid at the beginning of year 3. Would that sum amortise over the shortened tail of the contract? I.e. £10m p/a becomes £13.33m for the remaining 3 years of his contract? Or something else? No complaints if no one knows, by the way...