timeEd32

Or at all. The last thing I tried to order was the matchday jacket for my son and it got canceled a month later.

I find it oddly enjoyable seeing the best team in the world need a scrappy set piece goal to win.

The club was bought in October 2021, but we had a little problem called relegation. First order of business a new manager and then an insane January transfer market where they were all learning on the fly. Then they go on a hunt for a DoF and CEO and we get Ashworth and Eales in by summer 2022 along with a Chief Legal Officer. First up for Eales and co. is finding a Chief Commercial Officer, so we get that squared away around October 2022. The first order of business for most of these people is hiring. Ashworth puts together an overhaul of our scouting and youth coaching operation. In July of 2023 we announced a Chief Financial Officer In August of 2023 we hired a Partnerships Director. In September 2023 we hired a Director of Brand, Marketing and Digital. In October of 2023 we added a Retail & Licensing Director. It's really just in the last 6 months that we've got all the pieces in place on the business side and my guess is all of them are spending time hiring people, while also trying to get things rolling. We're just getting started.

The timing couldn't be more perfect. He'll want to move on from Leverkusen after this season because it's going to be difficult to replicate/maintain.

Going to be very interesting to see how this plays out. I'm glad we're not involved.

Yup, I think it means we've reached the public stage of contract negotiations. Not ideal, but also not really out of the ordinary. I think he'll end up signing unless Bruno's future becomes a factor.

It's also the training ground, entertainment zone, and dependent on whatever the hell these performance bonuses are based on: The club’s Wast Hills training ground will be renamed The Knighthead Training and Academy Grounds. A new fan ‘entertainment zone’ @ Knighthead Park, will be built, situated on club-owned land close to the Tilton and Main Stand at the Stadium. The deal is based on an annual sponsorship fee, a Men’s First Team performance-related bonus and a Club wide social media performance-related bonus which could deliver £6,241,666.67 for the remainder of the season and £9,450,000 for the 2024/25 season. Knighthead will also receive physical and digital branding rights across the stadium, training grounds and all club-owned channel

I'd say this is the exact opposite of ruling himself out: "At the moment, I am really happy here and enjoying my work here. I'm feeling each day and each game is a challenge and we are in an intense but in a beautiful journey here in Leverkusen and I am trying to give my best to help my players be ready for the next thing, and that's my goal. "What will come next, I don't know."

These minutes really are gold. The derby broke them. This was the opening statement: We are not swayed by extreme points on social media - that should never be the barometer of fan feeling – but we are very confident in what the mood of the majority of the fanbase is. The Emirates FA Cup third round tie was a complete mess, and whilst this debacle alone has had an impact on how supporters perceive the way our Club is run, it has also brought into focus what are now long-standing concerns. The message from fans to the owners and decision makers at the Club is very clear. We have had enough. We have had enough of being taken for granted. We have had enough of being an afterthought. We have had enough of "pound-shop" merchandise - when it's actually in stock. We have had enough of a level of customer service that would make a League Two Club blush. We had enough of the lack of pride in the Stadium and in the Institution that is SAFC. We have had enough of decisions that walk all over the sensibilities and pride of generations of Sunderland supporters. They are mad about: the allocation Black Cats bar being open at all Speaking directly to the owner: he, and the management team, had completely misjudged the importance of an SAFC versus NUFC derby, both today and historically. This decision, and its consequences, will be thrown in the faces of Sunderland fans forever and is one of the worst decisions the Club has made since taking over the Club. An emergency board meeting was held when the bar pictures started coming out

I hate Liverpool as much as anyone, but...

I think it was the first retirement that he backtracked on that led to a bad season. 2001 I think.

Found him very unlikable as time went on, but without him Pep’s City would have walked to six straight titles. No Klopp and no Salah soon enough definitely opens the possibility of regression for them. Great news.

We started here: We got here: We ended here: If we're not past it now then we're good because it's quite clear we're not making any big purchases without sales. Sell to buy, not sell to comply. Glad we ended up in the same place @Isaksbigrightfoot.

No one has disputed the fact FFP is real. You have been wrong multiple times in the last hour but still insist you're right. And now you just added this line, which no one would dispute. We are cutting it close, which is why we would need to sell to buy.

They've been £13m and £16m the last two years according to Swiss Ramble's estimates. I assume it will be at least £16m again to balance the books. Remember we're adding Sela, Champions League money (£37m), and the sales of Maxi and Wood. Our revenue is going to go over £300m. There's no doubt it's going to be close, but there hasn't been anything to suggest we need to sell to meet FFP. We need to sell to buy.

Sorry, but you're wrong. FFP allows for things like investments in infrastructure, women's football, youth development, and community to be deducted.

I didn't mean the last two seasons. I know what the losses were and you're forgetting the allowed deductions. The numbers are more like £60m in 2022 and £58m in 2023. We need roughly a £13m profit in the 2023/24. I'm asking why you think we need to panic sell to hit this?

What are you basing this on?

Yeah, I said it the other day but if you boil down our transfer strategy to one thing it's been preying on the financially vulnerable. Domestically this primarily means clubs who have put themselves in a financial hole, whether that's via relegation or FFP concerns. Abroad it's about flexing Premier League financial muscle on clubs that can't turn down the fee and/or match wages we can offer. I'd say the second factor, which sometimes overlaps, is opportunity. A player we think is talented who is cheaper at that moment because of a downturn in form (Gordon, Isak) or just available in the first place because of other circumstances (Hall). I think Tonali is the only possible exception to those two things, and even then it was reported at the time that some thought Milan may need the money. Their 2022/23 accounts did show a profit of €13m before tax (compared to a €60m loss the year before), but that was with a run to the CL semifinals and a €40m increase in their broadcasting revenue as a result. So I still think you could file this under the second bullet point, though we now also know there may have been other factors involved.

It's been the driving factor in every domestic purchase for the last 18 months, so certainly not a coincidence. Pope - relegated Barnes - relegated Tino - relegated, ACL Gordon - form, FFP, deteriorating relationship Hall - FFP, squad size

Obviously this wasn't part of the plan. But calling out the club for their risk mitigation under these circumstances is ridiculous. It's like saying all restaurants should have been prepared for a pandemic that put the world on pause. Aside from Bruno's health, we've hit a <5% outcome on how this season could have played out. It's just not realistic to expect it to have been planned for.

3 wingers for 2 places is preferable to 3 (maybe 4) CMs for 3 places. I think between Barnes, Murphy, and Willock it's also fair to say Willock carries the highest risk coming back (which is why I said maybe 4). If we don't sell Miggy and/or bring in another CM then I think it's likely we end up with Gordon or Miggy (or both) in the midfield at some point this season. None of this is ideal of course, but I can definitely see why we'd entertain the idea of selling our first choice and only fit RW to improve the midfield situation (and get younger).

I'd say the fact we don't need to sell just to be compliant means our planning was pretty appropriate given no Europa League and a much lower league place as of now. Certainly means we didn't push things too far. I'm not sure how fair it is to critique the club's risk management when it's gone levels beyond any reasonable amount of planning. No one would ever do anything if you had to account for the "we'll spend large chunks of the season without an entire first XI, which will include three of our four best midfielders, our GK, and 70% of our summer transfer spend" scenario.

Would much prefer to sell Miggy than Wilson, particularly with the fee likely to be higher also. Wilson will improve any of the PL teams that have been mentioned.

Anyone who says that has no idea what they are talking about.