Unbelievable

He’s contractually obliged to stay with us, and he seems happy here, so I don’t see that risk of him leaving against our wishes and not on our terms this summer

A little less so, hence why that would probably be the time to sell and re-invest if he's not willing to commit to our project longer term.

I suspect he'll go to Chelsea or some such and probably end up spending his days on their substitute bench. I hope we look elsewhere in any case. Didn't think he was worth what was touted and he hasn't exactly changed my mind this year.

Haaland is on insane money, but he's more proven and over a longer period of time than Isak is. I would assume to tempt Isak into a contract extension we'd have to offer well in excess of 200k/week for his services. I don't see why we would do that (adding 4-5 million per year to our outgoings) if it does not then allow us to rinse clubs who may want to pry him away from us in the future. He's on a 3 year deal and we can ask whatever we want as it stands, so we shouldn't be in a hurry to deteriorate our bargaining position. I would loath to lose Isak and (as I've said before) I think he's the least replaceable of our "purples" but should we lose him in the next two years it should be for a fee that then allows us to build from that and become stronger overall. I see some people say they'd happily run down his contract if he wouldn't want to extend. I disagree with that position. As a club and with PSR in mind that would set us back massively. We need to either build around him for the next 5+ years or sell for a king's ransom at the optimum time (probably after next season if we cannot keep him).

I'd indeed explore the "free" transfer market for the likes of Jonathan David (long shot), Angel Gomes, Dominic Calvert-Lewin, Jonathan Tah and Kyle Walker-Peters (signing on fee and/or higher wages will mean there is still a significant layout) in the hope of plugging a gap or two for a relatively low outlay like we did with Kelly last year. I'd also explore the loan market for loans with option to buy for top talent rotting away on other club's benches (like Arda Guler, Ansu Fati, etc.) Depending on how much that leaves and which positions we still need to fill I'd then go for Trafford (20m), a RW (30-40m) and a RCB (25-30m). I don't think the likes of Mbuemo, Huijsen etc. will be reachable with our restricted budget and list of positions to fill, so we'd have to rely on Paul Mitchell earning his corn here. Also I'd like us to continue to strengthen the academy. January was a bit disappointing in that regard. We need to build that conveyer belt of players that we can bleed into the first team in years to come or sell at a profit to fund investment into other players as a matter of priority, so I'd reserve a good 20% of any budget for that alone.

It would have to represent a deal that improves our situation by either keeping him at the club for longer and/or not capping our potential future transfer fee below his current market value in return for bringing his wages in line with others of his play level. If the best Isak and his agent could offer was to cap his release clause at his current asking price and doubling his wages I would expect our club to just kick the can forward a year.

What would be the point of that for us? We’d have to pay him higher wages and lose him for less than he’s worth in a year’s time. Could see it with an extension and say a 200-250m release clause.

I think you’ve misunderstood the question

What?

I say let them talk and write whatever they want. Isak is our player, seems to love life with us at the moment and is on a three year contract when this season finishes. All they are achieving is driving up our determination to keep hold of him and driving up the price level at which we may start entertaining a deal. In the end, whatever happens will benefit Newcastle United. My guess is he’ll want to wait what happens with CL qualification (this year and next) and squad strengthening over the summer before deciding on his future this time next season, whether by renewing or by indicating a willingness to move on at that stage. Should the latter happen, we would at least be able to fund the next stage of our squad rebuild and we’d still end up much better off for having (had) him.

From Uefa: last four CL winners and four top placed teams in Uefa club ranking (based on last five years of European competition). In short, it’s a windfall for the clubs already streets ahead of the others

Am I the only one who cringes every time TCD uses the term “baller”..?

Ouch Lamina Yamal, that was bad

VVD is so gonna miss

3-3

Was that not offside? Edit: close, but maybe not. Great goal tbf

It's a decent article, but I fundamentally disagree with the notion that an ownership as integral to our (relative) success should not have been allowed to share in the on field celebrations. I doubt the author would have batted an eyelid if it was still Mandy lifting the trophy and making that "first of many" statement. In my view it is possible to support NUFC and appreciate how the ownership are developing the club since the takeover whilst at the same time to disagree fundamentally with Saudi internal politics. I have no choice or say in either matter anyway

Someone should tell that clown what we did to PSG over two legs when we were not as good as we are now

Let’s hope Real Madrid don’t fancy him, or they’ll already be working on a deal to sign him on a free after his current contract expires, as is their MO.

Thank you for the update Paul Mitchell

2-1 Reijnders. He's a bit good this lad

Dean Huijsen coming on to make his debut For the wrong team

Holland v Spain shaping up to be a decent game. 1-1 atm. Gakpo looking sharp. Odd (but nice) that Slot didn't play him at the weekend.

There are not, which makes our decision to (presumably) not follow up on our reported interest last year so frustrating. Lad will likely be making his Spain debut this week ffs. We could have had a real, potentially world class talent on the books for the price of your average Championship player.