Keegans Export

It doesn't have nothing to do with it because we aren't going to sign players and not have them in the CL squad (4th choice keeper not withstanding) I think we have 24 first team players, plus Osula who I'm not sure whether he has to be registered or not and Miley who definitely wouldn't have to be. Only one of those 24 is homegrown (Longstaff) so we can have a squad of 22 I think? Assuming one of the keepers isn't registered that means we've already got one first team players picking up a wage but not being part of the squad and that's without making any signings.

As I said, it's perfectly reasonable to say that 90% of what they've done has been positive but have a desire to crack the remaining 10%. I also don't think there are many managers out there who could have achieved what Howe has achieved after three transfer windows without a first team addition. Of course, PSR has been a massive issue but look at sponsorship - Sela, Adidas, Noon, all great. But we've made no movement on other opportunities eg. training ground, training kit. Even £2.5m/year for each of those would more than cover Isak's proposed pay rise. It's nearly nine months since Eales announced he was going to step down and we still haven't got someone in. Some things we do move at a glacial pace. Again - pointing out areas where we/they could do better doesn't mean I don't appreciate/respect what they have done. If our ambition is to be #1 then that's what it's going to take - with the rules in place to stop us, everything we do is going to have to be near enough perfect.

Absolutely not, they've been fantastic for the club. However, nobody made our (and PIFs) Chairman go on camera and say he wants us to be "Number One". If that's the goal then great, go out there and prove it. Don't give 9-figure sums to some of the teams between us and #1. You can both be delighted and grateful for what they have done for the club and hope for more.

I don't know what the prize money for the CWC is but I wonder whether those clubs will benefit more from PIFs money than we have? I'm talking in terms of PSR-qualifying income rather than day-to-day running costs.

Well it starts with them sponsoring a competition we aren't in so 🤷

Make the most of this one, we'll never see him in a Newcastle shirt again

It's really frustrating that, from a PSR perspective, we'd be better off selling Miley and bringing someone like Hayden Hackney in. I don't like the idea of selling him for a number of reasons, not least that we need another CM anyway and it'd mean we'd probably have to keep Willock and Longstaff because I can't see us brining in two midfielders.

Don't leave me hanging! What have I missed?

We either take the risk of signing unproven players on less expensive deals, or we take the risk of paying big fees/wages for the proven talent but not having the numbers to compete on multiple fronts. Personally, I prefer the former because I trust whoever is recommending targets - not just the ones we've signed but the ones we were tracking who have gone on to become very good players (eg. Pedro, Ekitike, Szoboszlai and so on)

Nope

It's not a "strong chance" if he always wanted to go to Man Utd, a team that both wants, needs and can afford him ffs

It's only really the financial outlay that's up for discussion isn't it? If we go big on him, a CB and another £20m+ on a keeper are we then scrabbling around the bargain bin for any other signings? As good as he is we'd still be buggered if Tonali does his ACL or Isak is out for a prolonged period. The issue in 23/24 was not having the numbers to perform on multiple fronts - players have to play more minutes, more injuries pile up and on it goes.

He can still only play one position at a time. He gives us flexibility but not as much flexibility as signing both a RW and a striker would. Obviously I've got no idea what our budget is but we aren't one player away from consistently being able to compete both domestically and in Europe, however good that player is.

That's what the Community Note says, it's not his account

The problem over the past couple of seasons hasn't been the starting XI, it's the drop-off from the first 12-13 players and the rest of the squad. That's the reason I've never been 100% on Mbeumo at £50-60m. Does he improve our XI? Yes, considerably. But when we've got a CL game on the Wednesday and a big PL game on the Saturday I'd rather have the option of a new RW and a striker, even if that means going down our list of targets a bit. The Villa game this season stands out. I still maintain our XI that day was better than theirs but whereas they could make four or five changes from their midweek team we had to send out the same players for their third game in a week.

Deloitte's numbers for 23/24 would have us as the 3rd highest revenue in Serie A, about £15-25m behind AC Milan and Inter. Earning money isn't the problem, it's spending it. Presumably there is some form of PSR in Italy? Edit - actually the only Italian club that has spend more than us since the 20/21 season is Juventus

We'll never be close to PSG in terms of revenue I imagine, not with PSR as it is anyway. But we aren't miles behind Inter and they're in the Champions League final so 🤷🏻‍♂️

...and yet if you do make the CL, you still probably won't be able to invest enough to build a squad capable of competing in Europe and finishing top 4/5 domestically so at best it's one season in, one season out. The more I think of it the more I think Eddie is working absolute miracles. To have gone 4th, 7th, 5th while being the 10th biggest spenders in that time (12th in the past two seasons) is remarkable.

Seems unlikely?

They've presumably decided to really go for it now, bringing in a DOF and giving her almost a clean slate. Will inevitably put a lot of pressure on Langley, quite an ask for a 30-year-old with relatively little experience.

The issue is that their income over the 3-year cycle (including this coming season) is miles behind everyone else. Burnley will still have their 23/24 PL income included in their calculation and the closest would be Leeds because they were also outside of the PL in 23/24 and 24/25 but their income is considerably higher than Sunderland's regardless. Although they aren't losing a huge amount compared to a lot of clubs, they also aren't allowed to lose as much because of those two seasons in the EFL. They've also got the same issue as us - namely that they can't afford to sell anyone worth any reasonable amount without also having to replace them. They could sell Bellingham for a decent wedge but then you're already one starting CM down before you've kicked a ball. Ultimately it'll depend on what the ambition of the owner is. They could go for it, take the risk and spend £100-150m or he could just bank the extra £100m+ income from a season in the PL, plus the parachute payments and aim to be a yo-yo club.

It's not as difficult a conundrum as it might seem from the outside. All they have to do is set their moral compass back to September 2021 and everything is hunky dory 👍🏻

Definitely the latter. Partly because people don't really understand the former but mainly because if we were going to spend £400m that's going to generate a lot more clicks than saying £100m

I'm going to be absolutely devastated when this goalkeeper I hadn't heard of until about a week ago and still know essentially nothing about inevitably signs for someone else