sushimonster85

6 minutes ago, rebelrouser said:

Already did that for Trippier.  

True, but Trippier is on (supposedly) just over 100k a week. So far as I was aware I biggest earner pre-Trippier was Joe on 80k? Pulisic is currently on 150k a week, and would likely want a better deal to move to a none CL club. 

Wonder if there will be a Sky Sports News post 5pm signing update. They tend to wait till after people finish work to drop the big updates. 

9 minutes ago, Caleb70 said:

Love to see Pulisic here. Like has been said a big improvement on what we currently have. Pretty sure his wages will be a stumbling block.

Yeah, likely would be. Like, I do think he is worth being the highest paid player at the club, but its whether they want to break the wage structure this early. Personally think it's next Summer that gets adjusted. 

Pulisic is a totally different level to any other wide forward type player we currently have at the club, ASM included. Would walk into the side and immediately be head and shoulders above everyone else in that role. Which is why I don't see it happening. He won't be short of offers. Personally reckon he ends up in Italy. He'd get into the top sides there easily. 

7 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

It seems fairly obvious after losing out on Ekitike, bidding for Pedro and allegedly having interest in Ramos, that we have a pretty specific criteria for the forward role.

Yeah, can see the database filters working in real time. 

36 minutes ago, toon25 said:

It is according to 'Wolfpack', mind 

The fuck does Kevin Nash know about young, Portuguese forwards??

5 minutes ago, Tomato Deuce said:

He’s good enough to start for Chelsea even if he doesn’t, though.

Yeah, not sure how Mount gets in ahead of him. 

45 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

It's not assumed, it's under their control. The sleeve sponsorship alone would raise that projected FFP transfer budget to 23/24 to £140m.

 

Most business operates on the basis of projections rather than the right now. It's all guesswork but saying that we're operating on the basis that our revenue will potentially stay the same as it was under Ashley sounds pretty unlikely to me.

What I'm saying is the guesswork comes in terms of knowing how much any future sponsorship will be worth. Yes its incredibly likely to be more, how much more is what they don't currently know.

Like I said in my original post, things happen. Hopefully good things that only increase our ability to attract high value commercial partnerships. As a brand we're already way more attractive than we were previously. However any number of things can happen between now and said deals being signed. Not saying they will, or even that they're remotely likely. But everything we have seen from the consortium so far suggests they're playing things very sensibly. 

1 minute ago, Dokko said:

Wonder if they'd take £20m + Wood. 

Know this is bantz, but £25m + Ritchie is actually something that could work for everyone. 

Gameweek 3

Tottenham 3-1 Wolves

Crystal Palace 1-1 Aston Villa

Everton 0-1 Notts Forest

Fulham 2-2 Brentford

Leicester 2-0 Southampton

Bournemouth 0-3 Arsenal

Leeds 1-2 Chelsea

West Ham 1-1 Brighton

Newcastle 0-3 Man City

Man United 1-3 Liverpool

Just now, Jackie Broon said:

 

Yes we can, and we will, we've already got Saudi Amazon on the sleeve for a reported £7m per season.

I agree it's incredibly likely we will, but until stuff is actually in place they won't speculate on assumed income. 

2 minutes ago, Jackie Broon said:

That drops to £100m if projecting to 23/24 with the assumption of no revenue growth from when Ashley was owner. The reality is our revenue will have increased since then and will dramatically increase over the next two seasons.

Really don't think the current owners, or any responsible owners, are the type to spend money on the assumption of a dramatic increase in revenue until there's at least some clear evidence for it. Like, we know Fun88 are off at the end of the season, so it's more than reasonable to suggest that shirt sponsorship revenue will increase (likely dramatically) from next year. But they don't know that for sure, and they don't yet know what the actual increase could be.

Literally anything could happen. Say there is another 'Khashoggi' type incident in April, or things in Yemen get dramatically worse. Whether it actually should or shouldn't, I think there's no question that would make major brands reluctant to associate with us. And now the rules have changed on related sponsors, we can't pull the City trick of just sticking Saudi Air (or Golf, or whatever) on the front of our tops for £40m a season without it causing a huge stink. 

4 minutes ago, Gaztoon said:

I know one thing ... I'm booking deadline day off 

I know we seem to be leaving things till later in the window, but I do still think we will have our business done before then. Maybe a loan will come in on deadline day, but even doubt that. 

Wonder if there is an additional cost to Pedro due to Dennis already being sold. Not such a pressing need to sell anymore, and would be the second important attacking player they lose in a week. 

Piece from Adam Leventhal (The Athletics Watford guy) suggesting the bid actually went in late last week. Shows how locked down things are now that nothing came out about it till Monday evening.

1 minute ago, TRon said:

So we've been told he's not for sale but are preparing a second bid. Interesting.

Seems like he maybe the one. There were people on here who always said that the one we end up with (or at least make a big play for) would be someone out of left field that hasn't been mentioned.

6 minutes ago, Beth said:

Yes I understand that, even if we had offered £60m for him theres no way they were going to accept £12-15m a year spread over 4/5 years.

 

 

 

Why not? That's how most transfers are structured. 

I said this to a mate last night, Chilwell could be one to watch next Summer. Even when he is back fully fit I imagine Tuchel is going to go with Cucurella over him. Start of the Summer had us looking at more progressive LBs, before sticking with Targett. Wouldn't be shocked if Chilwell is available next Summer, and if he is (assuming we have had another good year and are then looking towards European qualification in 23/24) we should be going in for him.  

1 minute ago, elbee909 said:

It's bonkers but I'd go for Antony.

That is ridicu....

2 minutes ago, elbee909 said:

Which I know is ridiculous before anyone says so.

Nevermind. 

8 minutes ago, sempuki said:

Probably add a year on as a condition of going on loan as a lot of clubs do these days.

Hopefully along with that they also stipulate a fee should we wish to buy next Summer, similar to the Targett deal. Excited by CHO, think he could finally have that breakout year under Howe. 

6 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

Garner would be a decent, affordable pick up in midfield.

I wouldn't hold your breath on him actually being available, given Man U's current recruitment strategy seems to involve floating ideas on Twitter and deciding what to do based on how people react to them. 

23 minutes ago, TBG said:

Can see us getting Pulisic before the EPL Draft closes.

Surely we're gonna need to free up some cap space??

2 minutes ago, gdm said:

Can’t say I’ve paid to much attention to Pulisic. Would he be a good signing? Doesn’t seem to get many goals or assists looking at his stats 

He can blow a little hot and cold for Chelsea. One of those players who tends to get into purple patches of form, before then dropping off for a few games. That being said, Pulisic off form offers way more than Almiron on form. I like Almiron, but Pulisic is just several levels better. 

1 hour ago, The Butcher said:

He knows fuck all that Almeida fella.

You mean the Portuguese Sean Casey??

We're not signing Paqueta this window. People need to let that go.