PlymouthGeordie

No idea if this guy has inside knowledge but he's hinting a new deal has been signed in this tweet (he works at talksport and is a Leicester fan).

I'm not worked up, just debating what is being reported in the national news. I'm sure the club are assured by the fact that you're "comfortable" with them targeting Maddison over Aouar and Brandt though. It's ironic that you fail to realise that you suggesting the club should target alternative players is any different to others suggesting the club could/should approach negotiations differently. In fact, it is one and the same. You're pretty much on the same page as those you're ridiculing. People are essentially saying if we can't afford or won't go to the price of Maddison, Diaby etc we should go for other players and you've gone one step further by actually suggesting players the club could/should target.

I haven't seen people berate the club. I've seen people confused by the approach of both low ball and back loading offers for players whose value is obviously going to be in excess of 50m. Essentially, you're saying people can only have an opinion but only if it's a positive one. You offer up alternative players as if you know better than the club but others can't ask questions on how we've approached bids? I've not seen many (if any) outright criticise the club. Most are just trying to understand the logic behind it.

Well every national and local ournalist around have stated the asking price is 60m. If you're going to respond with "how do they know what Leicester want for him" then a football forum isn't for you. This thread, indeed most threads are created based on information provided by those very people reporting the asking price of £60m.

Leicester, clearly. Diaby and Isaak were valued at similar too. I don't understand why we're targeting a calibre of player we either can't afford or haven't understood the value placed on them.

I don't want it both ways. I just don't understand the logic in targeting players with a value of 60m+ when we're not prepared to go anywhere close to that.

Hold up, when Maddison was first linked you were championing Brandt and Aouar instead (which is fine by the way, but calling others out for also voicing an opinion is a bit pot, kettle, black).

This is just hyperbole. People aren't saying "just pay the money". People are struggling to grasp why we're continually targeting players beyond our budget. We may well get Maddison but we can only go on the information available and Downie, Hope, Edwards etc have all indicated we won't go close to the asking price.

I'm pretty sure them owing £8m on Perez came from that Casey clown on twitter. I haven't seen anyone reputable report it although happy to be corrected. If Leicester's asking price is £60m as widely reported. You would assume £50m plus add ons would be the bare minimum they'd take. Also, they are traditionally tough sellers. They made Mahrez wait 6 months and got top dollar for him, Maguire and Drinkwater.

If 50m is deemed unrealistic by the club (Newcastle) then this whole thing has been a waste of time.

I don't think you can call it a lack of knowledge or nous when we have Ashworth in place. His reputation is second to none. I get that we're trying to stretch our budget as far as humanly possible, I just think we either need to increase the budget or lower the profile of player we've targeted to date i.e. Diaby, Isaak, Maddison etc. A serious bid by all accounts would've started at 50m in my opinion. Although as Prophet has said, it is difficult to decipher what is going on when trying to piece everything together. Hope and Sky saying 2nd bid is 40m, Edwards says 45m, Romano says 50m etc. It could be the club have been given an indication 50m- 55m will get the deal done and are bidding upwards to that amount.

We all only have incomplete information to judge by (apart from the deals we manage to close). Phil Hay and Waugh both reported we'd bid 17.5m and many others implied this. It is a minefield of conflicting information etc but if we have no intention of going to at least 55m on Maddison I'd say the attempt to sign him hasn't been a genuine one. I just think you're extremely partisan when it comes to your view of the ownership which obviously comes from being a supporter but I try to remove that aspect when judging the club. The owners have done some incredible things since taking over but they've also done some horribly amateurish things too. That said, the club is night and day from what I ever could've expected it to be when under Ashley's ownership.

I personally think you're blinded by the romance of the takeover and think the club is incapable of a poor decision or two. Every man and their dog had us bidding for Harrison. The pursuit of Diaby reportedly went on for weeks if not months before we ended our interest.

Well aren't we (the collective we) doing that with Maddison? I believe you started this thread so you obviously give credence to the reports?

We courted Diaby nearly all summer before accepting we wouldn't go to his asking price. We bid 17m for Harrison knowing Leeds want almost double that amount.

Our low ball offers for players are tiresome. I'm not saying we should just pay the amount asked, but we either need to target lesser players or increase our budget. Diaby, Isaak and now Maddison that by all accounts we've been nowhere near the asking price.

I think it would need to be 50m plus add ons that take it up to 60m. We're still 15m shy of their reported asking price.

Whether we've bid 35m or 40m, our offer is well short of their 60m asking price. If you add in the fact we've been "back loading" all of our deals I don't see how this signing happens. A small upfront payment isn't going to entice them to sell.

If Hope's article is anything to go by we won't be getting Maddison.

No to go all Luke Edwards but nowhere in that article did I read we're bidding again. It just says we're considering our options. Obviously the Werner news is very encouraging. Edit: I can see others have already called out the difference in the headline and article.

This explains why Sarr, Cornet etc aren't on our radar. Percy is as reliable as they come so I'd say this means we're definitely targeting players that are a step or two up on the aforementioned players.

Barnes would be amongst the biggest statement signing we could make. Not even based on his ability but mainly because we'd be going to the team that has largely been "the best of the rest" for the last 3 or 4 years and taking one of their best players who would still have their peak years ahead of them. It would send a huge message to the rest of the league. I'm not convinced it'll happen though. Barnes is far superior on thr left than he is the right so we'd have to move ASM across which Howe hasn't really done in his time here.

Yeah the improvement in how the club is run is clear and I get why that gives people greater comfort (myself included) when maybe we don't rate a player or think they're overpriced etc. It goes back to Rafa, he made what appeared to be some strange signings such as Rondon but there was always a purpose or a plan. It's like that now, only it's better because the plan is aligned between the manager, head scout, Ashworth and the owners. We haven't had that in such a long time.

I was just pointing out that inevitably the "in Howe we trust" approach will run it's course (it does with all managers) so where possible I'd always encourage supporters to form their own opinion. To be clear, I'm delighted Howe is our manager. He's doing a brilliant job.

Milner was sold under keegan against his wishes. He was told we'd get schweinsteiger as a replacement.