NobbySolano

Play it the other way around: Trippier plays for 10 games, and Krafth or Ashby (lol) plays for 45 games & new LB plays for 40 and Target/Burn play for the balance Or Trippier plays for 10 games, and Livramento plays for 45 games & Burn plays for 40 games with Targett the rest The drop off in quality at RB is massive. The likelihood that you have to play the back up is also likely higher (given age and style of play). Not to mention that Burn plays LB because tactically it fits better - he becomes 3rd CB in attack, freeing Trippier to go forward. This is by design... at least last year. If you have a LB to bomb, you are not going to hold Tripps back to become 3rd CB. You would have both go forward and have to hold Bruno and Joelinton/Tonali/Longstaff to provide cover for the defense. Now, you only need to hold 1 of them back - so who do you rather have in a amore advanced position? a new LB or Bruno? We need to upgrade the squad in general, and LB would be great but not a priority. We know our starting 11 can get the job done, and we know the next 11 are absolute garbage. In a pre-FFP world you upgrade the starting 11 and dump the shit, but not in this world where you have pick your spots. At this time, you have to close the gap to your backups and at RB you are not going to upgrade on Tripps. Its not that different than the problem with Schar - although you could arguably upgrade Schar.

I don't rate Tierney as high as some but that would be a strong window. Assume Anderson improves, Gordon gets better, and Ashby is usable and that's not a bad place to be.

In how many games? I played once last year for 15 mins with 1 goal and assist. I have a better xG + xA than both. ? At least be intellectually honest in your arguments. That's mickey mouse bullshit.

Holy hedge! None of the reasons you use to claim he is not a great footballer are things that can easily be fixed with the right coaching. I'd argue that we have seen them fix those in other players. This is not a veteran player that can't evolve and improve. Apparently ASM is more than capable to adjust and improve but Barnes is just a goal scoring donkey that won't change and improve.

You got it wrong nobody is hating on ASM. We are just realistic about what he can and cannot contribute, and we have landed that Barnes would be a good addition to the team. On the other hand, ASM lovers are so insecure that they immediately jumped up ASM getting sold, and then to say Barnes is shot, which we know it's not true. Objectively, ASM is fun to watch most times, but also frustrating at others, when he is on but his end product is not great. It's hard to tell how many are just emotionally attached because of what he did for the team in the dark times vs people truly thinking that he is all that good. People can't stop pointing out that Almirón had a purple patch and will go back to the mean. But ASM lovers point to his man city performance as if that's his baseline. The guy can't even get on the field. When he does, he struggles to adjust to our tactical plan (he has gotten way better and hopefully he continues to improve). But by adjusting him to our way, he has lost what made him fun to watch. I think it's ok to say that he is not the best fit for how we play, but I think he could get there and I'm in no rush to sell him. But he is also not the guaranteed starter in the team.

For those in the US, it's on CBS.

But if you take their goals away all 3 of those are also shite ? The fucking takes here by those that just love ASM are laughable. Even more so by the assumption that it's to replace ASM. For that, ASM would have to actually be available and playing well.

I didn't see these posted before.

Did not see this posted yet: https://wyayescout.com/2023/07/03/analysing-newcastle-uniteds-new-italian-midfielder-sandro-tonali/

FFS that's a terrible change. In that example, the attacker is blatantly gaining an unfair advantage.

Mount for ManUtd will be a good fit. Still need a keeper and a striker Rice and Havertz also good buys for Arsenal. Surprised to not see them upgrade in the back. Saliba missing showed how weak they really are. Liverpool taking MacAllister is also a big upgrade for them. Villa making good moves - will contend for top 7 West Ham may struggle this year if they take Europe seriously Spurs are meh - Maddison good fit, but losing Kane leaves a big hole. Did they sign a keeper yet? If so, where is Raya going? Brentford signed his replacement already. Whatever is happening with Sanchez at Brighton? I trust the team and think we'll see more action after July 1st. But its clear all other teams are improving somewhat significantly. Tonali definitely an upgrade but we still have an issue with depth in key areas.

Sure does, at least internally and to the fan base. "Nobody came for him/nobody paid his release clause". Now the release clause window is gone, and they can take "the best offer", which might be much lower. They are never forced to sell but if they wanted to sell its tough to do so below the release clause. I still dont think we get him just based on the lack of movement and they dont need to sell. Happily surprised though as I do like him and think would be better than Maddison

A couple of good threads on him from Sanjay https://twitter.com/nufcsanjay/status/1673388742252412928

And it was Brentford, Brighton, us, and man utd twice. Lost to man city on a pk. Lost to Emery's villa. Drew with Liverpool. Yes there were lots of draws and 1-0 losses. But the games after getting sacked were Leeds, Southampton, Everton, Wolves, and West Ham. Just a little more patience and i think Vieira gets as many if not more than Hodgson. And I'm not even a fan of his at all

You may be right. I only watched them here and there in the background. I don't think they were better with Hodgson, at the very least they didn't change style of play. It just delivered better results because of quality of opponents. I'll dig out a comparison i saw at the time Vieira got sacked.

I feel for Vieira. They were not playing particularly poorly, it was the run of tough games. Only for this mummy to take over as the schedule improved and they played bottom teams mostly.

When will people realize that we are unlikely to get a Dan Burn replacement? At least not until you have cover for Trippier and also a different profile that would let a LB go out while the RB sits back more to form a 3 in the back as we do now. Not to mention. The drop, if any, from DB to Targett is nowhere like the drop from Tripps to anyone else. And I'm not even a local or a huge DB fan. But the takes here calling for him to be replaced are silly. In any case, this would be a very good add if we can make it happen. Given the buy back clause, and Chelsea not triggering it, i would say that's the ceiling. A deal to be made around 18m

Anyone has any idea what similar hospitality tickets cost at other pl cl clubs? When you do season tickets, do you get special access/pricing to cup or cl matches? It's not "accessible" per se but i don't find it outrageous when compared to US sports. New England Patriots equivalent tickets are $10k each, min 2 tickets, and you just commit to 10 years. Paying first and last season up front. And that's for 8 home games. Playoffs tickets available at a slightly discounted price. Granted it's it's very different. Curious what big clubs charge. We have to get used to the consequences of a better product and ambition to compete.

Then we play Targett. Ideal? No. But you can't have 3 players to every position. If anything, we should get a young LB to get trained up and ready, and not have to spend big $ on a LB in the future. I'll admit that for about the first 1/4 of the season i thought Longstaff was a zero in the team. However he really grew into his role through the rest of the season and at the end, we felt his absence. He could be better with improved finishing and a quicker mind/decision making. But you could do a lot worse. I agree it needs to be upgraded and this is one where we can make a big impact. On the other hand, another summer with Howe might make a big difference.

Don't feed the troll...

All I'm saying it's that it can't be priority over 3 or even 4 other positions. We can't upgrade every position and add depth at the same time.

Exactly what not critical means. Given a limited/finite budget, LB shouldn't be prioritized over a 6/8/hybrid. If we go into next season with Dan Burn as starting LB but with Maddison and zsobo or a certain Italian midfielder, then I'll be beyond thrilled. If we can swing Tierney after that then cool. But honestly more interested in finding backup for Tripper. Way riskier and we haven't seen much from Ashby.

Saying it's top priority it's daft. It just says you don't know what you are talking about.

The mental gymnastics here. Do a job. Yeah I'll say. It's great he can play both cb and lb. If Howe thinks he can play lb then I'll say he is a lb that can cover cb. An upgrade would be great. But I'm not fussed. And even so, i would expect heavy rotation and plenty of time for him at LB.

The guy played a full season at left back, for the best defense in the league, for the best manager in the league last year, and you will say to his face and his coaches that he is not a left back? Would i love a world class left back to compete and take his spot? Sure. At the cost of having no cover for Bruno, relying on ASM to stay healthy, or Almirón to have a better season than last? Go ahead and upgrade that spot, but not after you have improved depth in other much more needed and important areas.