NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Mike]

43 minutes ago, andycap said:

Would anyone try for ekitike again? 

It would be a risk with his attitude but he'd be quite cheap you'd think. 

 

Did he have an attitude or a dream? He looked like he could mature into a solid forward but he spurned us and we signed the Henry regen. If he had potential before, he's got it still. Plus the price should be way lower that whatever it was.

[LRD]

He just signed for Frankfurt like 

[The College Dropout]

45 minutes ago, hakka said:

 

Surprised that needed to be asked of you tbf. They all were who jumped to mind.

Like…. It’s a massive statement of intent.  
 

I could be wrong but I don’t think we currently have the PSR headspace to go out and drop £100m on a CB and RW. 

 

When we had the headspace and the need was big enough we’ve gotten damn near the biggest stars we could reasonably attract.  
 

Maybe we neee to shift Tripps and a few others before we can go after the players we really want. 

[The Prophet]

The Barnes crack is class like.  Unreal rewriting of history.

[Theregulars]

N-oni Beduete

[Fezzle]

21 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

The Barnes crack is class like.  Unreal rewriting of history.

The last 20 pages of drivel man, I'm staying in chat til something actually happens before I'm witness to one of this lot having a very real breakdown 

[Away Toon]

Barnes is a player I like a lot and buying him to start at LW instead of ASM is something most of us could have got behind. However he's not starting and unless Howe tells Gordon to play RW he's not going to and that's a problem.  Our first 11 and squad is not good enough to have someone of Barnes ability and G&A record sitting on the bench. If we don't sign an elite RW what is the starting 11, because if either Miggy or Murphy are starting we are extremely unlikely to be making any real progress in the league.

 

I would switch Gordon to the right and start Barnes on the left. Just my opinion. Unless Barnes can play on the right which I don't think he can. They are currently our two best wingers by far so we need to find a way to get both of them starting.

[Doctor Zaius]

We gonna sign anyone or what

[rebelrouser]

Gordon/Barnes on the lw is what we should aspire to for the whole squad.  What a difference from the BigJoe/ASM days of very little goal production.  This setup also allows AG to run wild and be aggressive knowing there is a great backup that can sub in.  

[Away Toon]

5 minutes ago, rebelrouser said:

Gordon/Barnes on the lw is what we should aspire to for the whole squad.  What a difference from the BigJoe/ASM days of very little goal production.  This setup also allows AG to run wild and be aggressive knowing there is a great backup that can sub in.  

This is true but only if we have someone on the right or ideally two players on the right of the same quality and output of Barnes and Gordon.

[TRon]

1 hour ago, Away Toon said:

Barnes is a player I like a lot and buying him to start at LW instead of ASM is something most of us could have got behind. However he's not starting and unless Howe tells Gordon to play RW he's not going to and that's a problem.  Our first 11 and squad is not good enough to have someone of Barnes ability and G&A record sitting on the bench. If we don't sign an elite RW what is the starting 11, because if either Miggy or Murphy are starting we are extremely unlikely to be making any real progress in the league.

 

I would switch Gordon to the right and start Barnes on the left. Just my opinion. Unless Barnes can play on the right which I don't think he can. They are currently our two best wingers by far so we need to find a way to get both of them starting.

 

I think we signed Barnes and Gordon because they were both players we really liked, and we took the opportunity to sign them when it came up. Not exactly balanced squad building, but I think with the top clubs all zoning in on the best talent, we just take our opportunities where we get them.

[Unbelievable]

3 hours ago, Toon1892 said:

It’s a toss up between spending a lot of money on players (which we have done) and then having to flog one last minute.

 

Or reigning in the spending and not having as a good a squad as we do now. What would you have preferred?

 

The real issue was Bruno’s release clause, they didn’t want to sell prized assets if Bruno was to go too. Therefore they had to wait until the last week. That isn’t their fault. Now that release clause has expired we’re in a much better position.

 

You have to look at the full picture.

 

The full picture is that as a club constrained by PSR and low commercial revenue we have to both buy well and SELL well. Buying Minmteh for 8m and selling him a year later for 35m is obviously a prime example of both. I doubt our plan going into last season however was to gamble on a 18 year old from the Norwegian league quadrupling his value and attracting concrete interest from clubs of a similar stature as ourselves with money burning in their back pocket.

 

Like it or hate it though, but it is much more likely that the plan was, and will be going forward, that we may need to sell one of the crown jewels when their stock is high, i.e. a 26, running on 27 year old Bruno at >100m, or a 24, running on 25 year old Isak for let's say >150m. The PSR headroom such a sale would create would allow the owners to double or triple that income to allow for reinvestment into a number similar level players. Darren Eales referred to this plan specifically in January:

 

Quote

"On any player, at any time, it depends on circumstances. It's difficult to hypothesis but, if we're offered £1bn for one of those players, then no-one could argue against that making sense.

"Any decision we make will always be against the backdrop of the medium to long-term benefit for the club. It's difficult to say specifically on certain players, but I can say that, if we're going to get to where we want to get to, at times it is necessary to trade your players.

"Whether that is because of the contract length of the player in question, the offer is too good to refuse, you need to reload in certain areas, but all of this could make sense to trade that player. It is counter-intuitive and part of the inherent system of PSR that there is an incentive to trade your players if you want to re-invest, by the nature of the boundaries."

 

It's quite conceivable that we didn't get the offers we expected for our more saleable assets and had to do some last minute panic selling as a result (which we did well in fairness, but surely can't be considered a viable way forward for future PSR deadline days).

 

 

Edited yesterday at 16:27 by Unbelievable

[Bondedcrown]

1 hour ago, Unbelievable said:

 

The full picture is that as a club constrained by PSR and low commercial revenue we have to both buy well and SELL well. Buying Minmteh for 8m and selling him a year later for 35m is obviously a prime example of both. I doubt our plan going into last season however was to gamble on a 18 year old from the Norwegian league quadrupling his value and attracting concrete interest from clubs of a similar stature as ourselves with money burning in their back pocket.

 

Like it or hate it though, but it is much more likely that the plan was, and will be going forward, that we may need to sell one of the crown jewels when their stock is high, i.e. a 26, running on 27 year old Bruno at >100m, or a 24, running on 25 year old Isak for let's say >150m. The PSR headroom such a sale would create would allow the owners to double or triple that income to allow for reinvestment into a number similar level players. Darren Eales referred to this plan specifically in January:

 

 

It's quite conceivable that we didn't get the offers we expected for our more saleable assets and had to do some last minute panic selling as a result (which we did well in fairness, but surely can't be considered a viable way forward for future PSR deadline days).

 

 

 

Who you buying to replace Isak!

 

[Shearergol]

3 hours ago, The Prophet said:

The Barnes crack is class like.  Unreal rewriting of history.

We wanted Barnes for ages. But of course people on here have decided it was a spur of the moment decision. 👍🏻

[gbandit]

I’d say Barnes is close to ticking all the boxes for Howe, he’s exactly what he wants in a player aside from the fact that he’s limited to only playing one position. As a manager, having a player that you know exactly what they’ll do game after game successfully is massive. We’ve also seen his game develop under Howe to show more creativity and clever passing. He’s a great player in spite of his game having a few limitations (not searing pace, not a great dribbler) as his strengths, shooting (probably second to Palmer in wide players in accurate shooting in the league), movement and reading the game

[Vinny Green Balls]

12 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

We wanted Barnes for ages. But of course people on here have decided it was a spur of the moment decision. 👍🏻

and frankly, why not with his goal scoring record?

[SUPERTOON]

Haven’t read the last few pages, why are we talking about Barnes again ?

[Menace]

N-O bingo

 

Did we need to sign Barnes when we needed a rw?
Did we need to sell Minteh to satisfy FFP?
Did we really have a good recruitment last season?
*insert random shit transfer rumour that people take as gospel*

Has Almiron left yet?

Is Wilson injured again?

[STM]

Anyone talking about the last summer transfer window, without mentioning our injuries this season, is being at best deceptive and at worst being a flat out cunt.

 

If we had even a quarter less injuries we finish 2 places higher and nobody can whinge.

[andyc35i]

23 minutes ago, gbandit said:

I’d say Barnes is close to ticking all the boxes for Howe, he’s exactly what he wants in a player aside from the fact that he’s limited to only playing one position. As a manager, having a player that you know exactly what they’ll do game after game successfully is massive. We’ve also seen his game develop under Howe to show more creativity and clever passing. He’s a great player in spite of his game having a few limitations (not searing pace, not a great dribbler) as his strengths, shooting (probably second to Palmer in wide players in accurate shooting in the league), movement and reading the game

I love the way he gets a shot off at goal in tight situations. The winning goal against West Ham was a great example of what he adds with the quick fire finishing 

[Vinny Green Balls]

1 minute ago, STM said:

Anyone talking about the last summer transfer window, without mentioning our injuries this season, is being at best deceptive and at worst being a flat out cunt.

 

If we had even a quarter less injuries we finish 2 places higher and nobody can whinge.

 

Have some faith. They'll find a way.

[andyc35i]

1 minute ago, STM said:

Anyone talking about the last summer transfer window, without mentioning our injuries this season, is being at best deceptive and at worst being a flat out cunt.

 

If we had even a quarter less injuries we finish 2 places higher and nobody can whinge.

That December / January period when we had no players to rotate really killed the season. If the injuries weren’t so bad, we could be talking about a completely different season 

[Unbelievable]

51 minutes ago, Bondedcrown said:

Who you buying to replace Isak!

 

I love Isak. He is world class on his day. But he is also quite injury prone, and there are absolutely no guarantees we will see the best of him over the next couple of years, or if we do that he will want to stay if we don’t strengthen to bring in more players of his level. To be able to do that we have to sell players in their prime and at the top of their value for the foreseeable future, until we can compete with the likes of Man U and Man City in commercial revenue. That is the sad reality of our situation, and why we sometimes will have to sell a crown jewel for the greater good.

 

Besides, as good as Isak is, I think with 300m to spend he can be replaced in such a way that it strengthens us, yes. I trust our scouting setup to identify the players that enable us to do that, as they have proven they can over the past 3 years since the takeover.

[LiquidAK]

16 minutes ago, andyc35i said:

I love the way he gets a shot off at goal in tight situations. The winning goal against West Ham was a great example of what he adds with the quick fire finishing 

Being in the ground for that is probably the best thing that's happened to me at least post-Covid

[Bondedcrown]

4 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

I love Isak. He is world class on his day. But he is also quite injury prone, and there are absolutely no guarantees we will see the best of him over the next couple of years, or if we do that he will want to stay if we don’t strengthen to bring in more players of his level. To be able to do that we have to sell players in their prime and at the top of their value for the foreseeable future, until we can compete with the likes of Man U and Man City in commercial revenue. That is the sad reality of our situation, and why we sometimes will have to sell a crown jewel for the greater good.

 

Besides, as good as Isak is, I think with 300m to spend he can be replaced in such a way that it strengthens us, yes. I trust our scouting setup to identify the players that enable us to do that, as they have proven they can over the past 3 years since the takeover.

Doesn’t answer the question though?