timeEd32

I'm not following your timeline. If they wrote it against this season's books (i.e. 23/24) then that's the same as the sales they reportedly need to make in June. On Lukaku it won't help in terms of pure profit, but if the fee mentioned with Roma happens then it would offset almost £40m of their remaining amortisation charges.

He's not, that's why it's a loan to buy. Though it's actually fair to question whether it helps them in June since in theory that should be a July 1 purchase.

Feel terrible for him. Literally the only good news so far in our injury crisis was that nothing had happened that would impact next season yet and Tonali is only going to miss two games. That's out the window now though.

Among defenders he's 6th in aerial duels won (9th per 90 and behind Lascelles). He's 9th in % of aerial duels won.

The Botman news has to fundamentally change our summer plans unless we already planned to invest in one. Or.... Burn is a CB again?

Hall, Maatsen and Lukaku's release clause could get them there. Then there's James, Chalobah, and Broja. There's definitely a possibility they can do this while holding Gallagher.

"If we beat Wigan..."

If Bruce had come first I might dislike him more, but Pardew epitomizes the Ashley era for me. The two are inextricably linked and combined to make me not care at all. I was only mildly interested in Rafa and often didn't know when we were playing under Bruce. It was all a very pointless exercise and that became clear during the Pardew years. I can't even fully enjoy highlights of the Tiote 4-4 goal because I cringe every time it cuts to Pardew's dumb fist pumps.

I've been to SJP and White Hart Lane (and Hillsborough and Millmoor, though a long time ago). It's a bit like stepping back in time and I mean that in the absolute best possible way. Everything a bit smaller and more cramped than the 21st century ideal, minimal comforts, and a singular focus on the game because you couldn't do anything else even if you wanted to. The best comparison I have is the old Yankee Stadium and especially its right field bleachers. The concourse, if you could even call it that, was dim with a place to piss and basic beer/food stands but not anywhere you'd want to spend an extra moment. The experience was all about the stands and the game. And on special nights it was loud. They tried with the new one. They brought back the facade and the monuments, they kept the dimensions and the bleachers. Objectively it's a cool building right next door to the old one. But with the wider concourses and larger seats (which meant 5k less of them) came the loss of the old place's soul and character. It's too comfortable and too expensive, and it's not the same field that Ruth and Mantle played on. It's a good example of how you can do so many things right -- they even preserved the old location as a field for local kids -- and yet miss on the most important parts (for me; the owners are plenty happy). There are a lot of parallels here to the idea of building a new stadium near SJP.

As long as he didn’t bet on Newcastle I think we’ll be fine. I’ll be quite annoyed with him if he showed up here and immediately started gambling on his new club.

Zero interest in the world of NFTs and digital cards, but very happy to see a new deal. Hopefully the first of a few.

Where are you seeing £16m for the Emirates? That deal is weird and complicated but I've never seen an estimate that high. The Etihad deal obviously comes with many questions. I agree though that for a new stadium we'd be in the £10m range. Maybe a bit higher.

I don't think it's very vague More seats More expensive seats / "experiences" More corporate options More food and drink at various price points More non-NUFC football events with all of the above More non-football events with all of the above (Beyonce, Bruce Springsteen, and Rihanna should not have to go to Sunderland. Ever.) That's before you get into anything like events spaces, hotels, etc. And yes, naming rights for a new stadium are a whole different thing compared to renaming.

This all sounds so perfect that it reads like total fantasy to me.

Something like this would be my favorite version if it wasn't for the UEFA complexity.

City playing four preseason games in the US against Celtic, Milan, Barcelona, and Chelsea. The Chelsea game is at Ohio State University's 102k capacity stadium. Chelsea doing six games, including Celtic at Notre Dame Stadium (Rudy) and Real Madrid in Charlotte, NC.

I'm imagining Isak doing Everton like runs on a regular basis in training with the way Tino and Lascelles reacted.

I can see why this would be easier and faster to judge and I haven't put nearly as much thought into it as someone like Wenger, but it really does seem ripe for unintended consequences.

Very much the same. On the training ground I'd be satisfied with an update that just shows it's still a priority. We should get an update on the stadium coming out of the feasibility study. I think it'd be a bit telling if it all went quiet. But I appreciate it's a complicated decision made even harder by the logistics of Euro 28. Far and away my top priority is seeing us continue to make progress on commercial revenue. I think we did well with Sela on an accelerated timeline and very well with Adidas, while also doing a ton of hiring. We need to keep up the momentum and we're getting closer to the hard part. Training sponsor, a couple corporate partners, maybe something unique or creative. We need to double our current number just to get to 50% of Spurs.

I’ve said it before and I’m in the same boat. I’m reserving judgment on the owners and executive team until the new season kicks off. I will be very disappointed if we haven’t made demonstrable progress on some of the biggest items - commercial revenue, the training ground, and the future of the stadium.

Honestly not sure how much stock to put in their level of cash reserves given they are in hyper investment / growth mode (my hunch is not much). They also got an 8% stake in Aramco a week ago. There are all sorts of solutions to any liquidity problems they may have. But also this is why I'm far less interested in rule changes that might enable us to cut corners in the short term than I am in seeing us grow the various revenue levers in a sustainable way. Ultimately NUFC needs to be able to stand alone.

That's the thing. I'm all for the current setup to fall apart just for Masters to fall on his face and the slim possibility that the league isn't run by the red clubs and Levy. But even if there was a ruling from a regulator tomorrow that it's illegal to prevent investment we'd still need to comply with UEFA's requirements. Unless someone is able to get financial regulation thrown out across Europe there is really only one path to consistent success -- increasing revenue.

It's not though. The current rules have the Premier League handing down points deductions based on no pre-defined penalties. That's an awful system no matter the regulations a club needs to adhere to. And, in our case (and anyone with European ambitions), if the new rules do end up mirroring UEFA's in some way then we'll need to abide by them anyway.

Said it before, but I'll say it again -- there aren't any new rules yet. They only voted to move towards new rules.

His dates are off by a bit but he's otherwise nailed it.