NUFC Transfer Rumours

[LFEE]

1 minute ago, TRC said:

 

If they leave due to lack of ambition that they were promised it harms us getting potential replacements. 

The club does not lack ambition. It lacks the ability to spend the money it has at its disposal due to rules that have recently been introduced. Big difference.

[Yorkie]

22 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

They could, but there is a bigger danger they leave if we have a poor season. Not signing players do send out a negative signal.

 

22 minutes ago, Sean said:

There is a difference between someone playing so well that we are unable to keep hold of them, and them leaving because they don't see the club being able to match their ambitions. But you knew that right?

 

I accept that signing better players increases the possibility of a good season. What it doesn't do is remove the temptation Bruno might have to join Man City/Real Madrid, or remove Gordon's interest in a vengeful redemption arc in the city of Liverpool. 

 

Players might leave - that's something you just have to come to terms with. Raising the point in the context of a lack of signings just reads like trying to find yet more reasons to be miserable and critical.

[TRC]

Just now, LFEE said:

The club does not lack ambition. It lacks the ability to spend the money it has at its disposal due to rules that have recently been introduced. Big difference.

We can spend though this summer, if we dont get anything done that looks like a lack of ambition.

[nufc123]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

 

I accept that signing better players increases the possibility of a good season. What it doesn't do is remove the temptation Bruno might have to join Man City/Real Madrid, or remove Gordon's interest in a vengeful redemption arc in the city of Liverpool. 

 

Players might leave - that's something you just have to come to terms with. Raising the point in the context of a lack of signings just reads like trying to find yet more reasons to be miserable and critical.

I think its fair concerns raised, but fair enough call it out like you want.

[Fak]

1 minute ago, TRC said:

We can spend though this summer, if we dont get anything done that looks like a lack of ambition.

 

We've already spend around £60m. Maybe the club is trying to be a bit more careful not to get their fingers burnt with PSR again?

[LFEE]

1 minute ago, TRC said:

We can spend though this summer, if we dont get anything done that looks like a lack of ambition.

 

We will spend if we can. However the new rules are double edged. If you waste the money it will mean sales required next season. Absolutely nothing to do with the clubs ambition. We’ve allegedly being trying to break the clubs transfer record for the last three weeks. Which would Max our allotted spending this window (£110m approx).

[Izakaya]

7 minutes ago, LFEE said:

The club does not lack ambition. It lacks the ability to spend the money it has at its disposal due to rules that have recently been introduced. Big difference.

What the club hasn't done is helped itself expand that spending power by finding new sponsors and revenue streams. The only new sponsors we've managed to find in three years is a fake events company in Saudi Arabia that's already owned by our owners. 

[Bimpy474]

7 minutes ago, Fak said:

 

We've already spend around £60m. Maybe the club is trying to be a bit more careful not to get their fingers burnt with PSR again?

 

Aye, and with virtually nothing of value to sell from the squad before the takeover, our overall position was shite to start with. Generating money is hard enough without any thing to trade. So now we might have to trade one of our post takeover signing to even keep up.  And to make that even more vomit inducing, it could be we might end up selling to one of the scummy six, it's such an unfair situation.

[Elliottman]

Craving an embedded 

[Bimpy474]

8 minutes ago, Izakaya said:

What the club hasn't done is helped itself expand that spending power by finding new sponsors and revenue streams. The only new sponsors we've managed to find in three years is a fake events company in Saudi Arabia that's already owned by our owners. 

 

We literally announced a new sponsorship deal (VT Markets) a week or so ago. And spent our tour in Japan drumming up as much interest as possible.  Also, there's been lots of announcements over the last couple of years, I think most are new 'Official Club Partners' you can find listed on the clubs website.

 

You make it sound like they done nowt, which is cobblers.

[SUPERTOON]

Just now, Bimpy474 said:

 

We literally announced a new sponsorship deal (VT Markets) a week or so ago. And spent our tour in Japan drumming up as much interest as possible.  Also, there's been lots of announcements over the last couple of years, I think most are new 'Official Club Partners' you can find listed on the clubs website.

 

You make it sound like they done nowt, which is cobblers.

They have done quite a lot of sponsors, however most of them where an open goal in terms of how easy/obvious they where to do. 

[Izakaya]

5 minutes ago, Bimpy474 said:

 

We literally announced a new sponsorship deal (VT Markets) a week or so ago. And spent our tour in Japan drumming up as much interest as possible.  Also, there's been lots of announcements over the last couple of years, I think most are new 'Official Club Partners' you can find listed on the clubs website.

 

You make it sound like they done nowt, which is cobblers.

 

Yeah little club partners, fair enough. 

 

I was more talking about big name, big money, front of matchday shirt, training ground, training kit, warm up kit type sponsors.  

[Roids]

A lot of wailing in here 

 

 

 

[madras]

1 minute ago, Roids said:

A lot of wailing in here 

 

 

 

Visibly upset.

[TRC]

Chelsea definitely need to shift Chalobah, noone seems to be linked with him?

[NSG]

16 minutes ago, Elliottman said:

Craving an embedded 

 

 

[Nucasol]

3 minutes ago, TRC said:

Chelsea definitely need to shift Chalobah, noone seems to be linked with him?

He’s the one I’d take if we don’t want Guehi. Allows us CB/RB presence at a decent level. Fee won’t cost the earth either. Could probably sell him for minimum loss or par and upgrade next summer. Or he does well and we keep him.

[Matt1892]

Would Chalobah improve our starting eleven when everyone is fit?

[TRC]

1 minute ago, Nucasol said:

He’s the one I’d take if we don’t want Guehi. Allows us CB/RB presence at a decent level. Fee won’t cost the earth either. Could probably sell him for minimum loss or par and upgrade next summer. Or he does well and we keep him.

He hasnt played much in his career mind. I think Todibo was the one we should have prioritised.

 

 

[TRC]

Just now, Matt1892 said:

Would Chalobah improve our starting eleven when everyone is fit?

Would Guehi?

[Matt1892]

Just now, TRC said:

Would Guehi?

Yes, he is a level above Schar.

[Elliottman]

5 minutes ago, NSG said:

 

 

The loading gave the hit I needed to be fair 

[soyt]

4 minutes ago, NSG said:

 

 

It was craving, not gravy tbh

[gbandit]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

Yes, he is a level above Schar.

I’d say he’s a better passer and better on the ball under pressure although Schar is an excellent passer as well and better at driving forward with the ball. Defensively I’m not sure how much there is between them in terms of positioning and in the air but Guehi’s passing is exceptional 

[UncleBingo]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

Yes, he is a level above Schar.

Not for me.

 

He's younger but Schar is a better player.