ponsaelius

I've always been of the opinion he'd be OK as a 5th/6th choice squaddie but tbh he needs too much gametime to get going. His limited technical ability and fragile confidence makes it particularly difficult to just throw him in now and again.

Osula chaos factor is making this fun

No way that's all the way over IMO. Good keeping.

He probably isn't tbf. He's a 19 year old kid who had big clubs chasing him. Man Utd are just toxic and ruin every player they sign or bring through.

In terms of stadia which include architectural features in keeping with the city they reside in - the Dall'Ara in Bologna is one of my favourite stadiums for this reason. The big iconic tower but also the red brick all the way around and portico. They have a proposed redevelopment to add a roof and expose the red brick entirely by removing the existing exoskeleton - and as much as I like the stadium as it is this could actually be a case of improving its architectural value. Photos from Inter game last season, and some renders of the proposed redevelopment.

The cost of building a stadium of the size we're going for out of sandstone, even using only external cladding for a facade, would be absolutely astronomical. It would end up being finished in faux stone materials and look cheap. Think the Kings Gate uni building on Barras Bridge rather than the former Grand Hotel building immediately opposite. The sad fact is that we were only able to build that way once upon a time because so much of construction was done as philanthropic endeavour - and because construction/safety/labour/regulations were so lax avoiding much of the costs of today. Ultimately while the owners want to invest - they won't want to spend for the sake of it. I agree though with your general point though. I do think it would be great to get some more traditional materials into an external design and some distinct architectural features rather than just being an amorphous blob straight from the Zaha Hadid school of architecture (that's not to say I don't appreciate her/their work in certain contexts).

He's mixed race ffs

Me and @PENKAAA were back row of Leazes Corner lower just next to where the Sky Sports studio was. Being back row meant being able to stand freely. Quite a few around us were too and it was a good atmosphere. Standing at footy is just so much better than sitting. We have to get all like-minded people together who want to stand. If a new ground could help facilitate this it pushes me more towards that side of the argument.

Famous last words but I think Liverpool would only happen if ownership changed tbh. Or if they were able to get those three to re-sign and get big fees rather lose on a free.

Was quite surprised to see they played basically first choice XI on Tuesday night in the EFL Trophy - maybe they're prioritising that and the league over this. I think there is a bit of concern from me that we underestimate this. It's effectively a Championship team away from home that's winning every week. A bit like Sheff Wed a few years ago.

It's informed guesswork, the same as what the club will be doing. The planning issues with building in that location are informed by the constraints I know from working with the nightmare that is the UK planning system every day. The construction practicalities I can't comment on quite so much - but common sense suggests to me just from looking at it that we will almost certainly need to play elsewhere for a period of time with that indicative footprint. Or at absolute best need to play with a reduced capacity for a period of time. Experienced developers will progress ahead with development proposals well aware of the pitfalls and potential risks in doing so at each stage. Even when they 'know what they're doing'. If they didn't nothing would ever get built at all. It doesn't mean that it's not possible, anything is possible, but I personally think it's a process that could be fraught with difficulty and more time consuming compared to other options i.e. Gallowgate expansion, Castle Leazes or the Arena site. Obviously if they think it's the best option then it would be worth the wait/effort/disruption - as we only get to do this once.

The council politically will have a lot of motivation to take the investment no doubt, particularly if it includes the club taking on long term maintenance of a new expanded LP around the stadium or the council getting a load of cash to do so. The issue is the various statutory bodies involved in the process. I personally don't think you're ever going to get Historic England to do anything other than object to this in the strongest terms - and that will mean any approval from the council needing to go against their objection. So you're almost certainly looking at it ending up getting called into the SoS and that could mean we're years and years away from a spade in the ground. I know the Castle Leazes plan also had the same threat to it in the 90s (hence why SJH dumped it) but I do think that would be a far easier sell this time around (particularly if you're not retaining anything but parkland on SJP). Perhaps that's the fall-back option if this doesn't sail. Not unusual to have another option held back up your sleeve.

Obviously the footprint is approximated but still think that will end up being a nightmare at planning. Could see it taking forever and ultimately getting called into SoS if recommended for approval. I also still don't see how you build it without some time spent elsewhere during construction, the amount of which would vary depending on final footprint. Still think Castle Leazes would be far easier...

Rice didn't have one year left, he had one with WHU having an option to extend by another year, which is effectively two years in terms of negotiation. There was also a very unique market demand around that position at that particular time. There's no way Guehi goes for anything near what they have been offered last summer unless he signs a new deal.

He's not, although I initially did (quite understandably) think that was the case. He uses social media like an old man and then seems annoyed when nobody has a clue what he's trying to say.

Season tickets make a lot of sense for any club at any level that doesn't regularly sell out. Guarantee a load of revenue up front, money coming in no matter how the season turns out, allows for owners to plan financially. If you're a club where demand is exceeding supply significantly - then they make almost no sense at all from a strictly financial perspective. Far better to have as many people as possible buying memberships just to have their hat in the ring and a constant cycle or different people on matchdays who are more likely to have additional spend. The fact they even punted those 1000 STs the other year was surprising really.

It looked like the lad wasn't signing a new deal so it's a good sale. Their transfer policy is way more astute right now than I can ever remember it being in my lifetime.

Still think he's a good player. That price will be down to £40 million by the summer.

I don't think it's likely but I still think we'd move for a player we want if they suddenly became available at the right price/payment structure.

This is ridiculous fatalism. They're all on 3+ year remaining on contracts. Any that go this summer will be for stupid money and would open us up to a hugely positive rebuild regardless. There's no way more than one of those players are being sold. We don't have to sell.

When we signed him in the summer Botman was crocked and Hall hadn't yet cemented himself in the team. As a signing he made a lot of sense at the time on a free to cover both positions. Circumstances have changed and he's become an overpriced player (in terms of wages) contributing little. It's a very good opportunistic sale to get this money back now.

It is. Howe will probably outwardly begrudge it but surely he realises we have to be proactive in this way if we want a refresh in the summer.

Incredible deal. Abysmal management from Juve in the market.

Squad isn't that thin, it's just unbalanced and limited quality wise. If anything it's bloated for a 1 game a week season. We massively lack genuine quality in forward areas and players to change a game. I'd get rid of more of the squadies if it could bring one genuine quality forward or wide player in.

If it's a conditional obligation that's not as good. They won't sign him in that case IMO - just plug a gap till end of the season.