NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

Just now, jigen said:

And this should be a big downgrade. Delap is a good striker but Isak is word class. I hope you improve your team, not downgrade. 

If you’re going like for like it’s going to be hard to improve. 

[jigen]

2 hours ago, JigsawGoesToPieces said:

We cant be splashing £40m on a backup striker, we always seem to buy english players which have an overinflated price.

 

We need a first choice new RM, CB & GK as a mininum then some smarter lower cost squad players to replace the likes of Wilson, Targett, Longstaff, Murphy etc.

 

You should hope this summer Mitchell can be free to work... And Howe stay away from the recruitment. 

[jigen]

3 minutes ago, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

If you’re going like for like it’s going to be hard to improve. 

 

To improve you must keep your best players and then you must be smart and target players abroad and avoid the inflated PL market. You can find several bargains. But does Howe agree? 

[Kid Icarus]

9 minutes ago, jigen said:

 

You should hope this summer Mitchell can be free to work... And Howe stay away from the recruitment. 

That this opinion seems to be canny widespread is mind-blowing to me like. Howe's record (and Hickson's) in the transfer market is outstanding.

[JigsawGoesToPieces]

35 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

That this opinion seems to be canny widespread is mind-blowing to me like. Howe's record (and Hickson's) in the transfer market is outstanding.

 

Dunno like i think a lot of people were disappointed we paid £28m for Hall, £31m for Livramento, £40m for Gordon, £38m for Barnes and £15m for Osula, at the time it felt we paid over the odds for them.

 

Its more down to Howe's coaching ability to improve them to the players they are now which is his strength rather than his eye for a player at a good price. 

 

Hopefully with Mitchell's ability to spot a good player at a good price and Howe's strength on the training pitch we will improve the squad but will probably take another year or two to get rid of the deadwood and improve the quality of the squad depth.

[healthyaddiction]

7 minutes ago, JigsawGoesToPieces said:

 

Dunno like i think a lot of people were disappointed we paid £28m for Hall, £31m for Livramento, £40m for Gordon, £38m for Barnes and £15m for Osula, at the time it felt we paid over the odds for them.

 

Its more down to Howe's coaching ability to improve them to the players they are now which is his strength rather than his eye for a player at a good price. 

 

Hopefully with Mitchell's ability to spot a good player at a good price and Howe's strength on the training pitch we will improve the squad but will probably take another year or two to get rid of the deadwood and improve the quality of the squad depth.

It's mental that your using Hall, Livramento and Gordon as examples of being bad in the market.

[Unbelievable]

12 minutes ago, healthyaddiction said:

It's mental that your using Hall, Livramento and Gordon as examples of being bad in the market.

Not really. As Jigsaw argues (correctly imo) it’s Howe’s coaching ability that makes them goof deals financially, not so much the initial outlay being amazing business in the first place. In any case, we cannot afford to keep spending 30-40m on every player as we have too many gaps to plug, so we need to do better in recruiting in the price bracket below, which is what Mitchell had arguably been brought in for.

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, JigsawGoesToPieces said:

 

Dunno like i think a lot of people were disappointed we paid £28m for Hall, £31m for Livramento, £40m for Gordon, £38m for Barnes and £15m for Osula, at the time it felt we paid over the odds for them.

 

Its more down to Howe's coaching ability to improve them to the players they are now which is his strength rather than his eye for a player at a good price. 

 

Hopefully with Mitchell's ability to spot a good player at a good price and Howe's strength on the training pitch we will improve the squad but will probably take another year or two to get rid of the deadwood and improve the quality of the squad depth.

Surely Howe's ability to coach players into being more valuable is a positive asset that you factor into his buys rather than it being a stick to beat him with for buying poorly based on those players hypothetically not being as good without it?

 

If the end result is still the same (we get players who end up being bargains) it doesn't really matter imo, it's just one of the reasons Howe's mint.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 13:25 by Kid Icarus

[nufc123]

1 hour ago, jigen said:

And this should be a big downgrade. Delap is a good striker but Isak is word class. I hope you improve your team, not downgrade. 

It would be a huge downgrade, but some people in here were going Isak and Delap. We wont have both. Hope listed three striker to come in if we sold Isak, not to compete/assist him.

[nufc123]

3 hours ago, JigsawGoesToPieces said:

We cant be splashing £40m on a backup striker

We wont. Its strikers we have on the list if Isak is sold.

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

1 hour ago, jigen said:

 

To improve you must keep your best players and then you must be smart and target players abroad and avoid the inflated PL market. You can find several bargains. But does Howe agree? 

Like when Liverpool sold Coutinho you mean? 

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

Bruno, Tonali, Botman, Isak. 4 out of our best starting 11 are European buys.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 12:32 by Shays Given Tim Flowers

[Groundhog63]

1 minute ago, Shays Given Tim Flowers said:

Bruno, Tonali, Botman, Isak. 4 out of our best starting 11 are European buys.

 

 

 

All bought against Howe's wishes. He wanted Sean Yates, Harry Winks, James Tarkowski and Raheem Sterling, apparently 

 

#buybritish

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

1 hour ago, healthyaddiction said:

It's mental that your using Hall, Livramento and Gordon as examples of being bad in the market.

 

These people have made their minds up and facts will not sway them. 

[Keegans Export]

I wouldn't say we (or Howe) have been bad in the market. Really the question is - could that money have been spent better? Would Kerkez and Kluivert plus £20m have us in a better position than Hall and Osula? That's just an example obviously. I don't blame Howe at all for going for known quantities, he's the one who'd pay with his job if we took those punts and they didn't pay off.

 

What I'm trying to say is that we can agree that we have brought in very good players but that doesn't mean we couldn't have spent that money better.

[gbandit]

Jigsaw gone to pieces again?

[Unbelievable]

Mental discussion. We have a sporting director, one of the best in the business, tasked with player recruitment and a manager, equally one of the best in the business, tasked with getting the most of the players we recruit. Ideally they work together and the sporting director brings in players the manager can get playing to their potential. There is absolutely no reason to believe this is not how things will work. To those who think the manager should be in charge of recruitment, how would you feel if the sporting director was in charge of determining who plays and who sits on the bench..?

[andycap]

The players I think we Overpayed for are

Chris Wood 

Tino livramento - Southampton at the time where going down and he had been injured for a long time to command that type of money. 

Gordon- by about 10 million. 

Lewis hall- paying for potential. 

 

Now they seem well worth it. But at the time they where well inflated except wood. 

[TRon]

3 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

That this opinion seems to be canny widespread is mind-blowing to me like. Howe's record (and Hickson's) in the transfer market is outstanding.

 

It's been good, but not fantastic as we've paid big money to secure his preferred targets, albeit most of them have been successful. We need Mitchell type of signings now where we buy players before they hit high values.

[KaKa]

54 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

Mental discussion. We have a sporting director, one of the best in the business, tasked with player recruitment and a manager, equally one of the best in the business, tasked with getting the most of the players we recruit. Ideally they work together and the sporting director brings in players the manager can get playing to their potential. There is absolutely no reason to believe this is not how things will work. To those who think the manager should be in charge of recruitment, how would you feel if the sporting director was in charge of determining who plays and who sits on the bench..?

 

The signs are looking really good that it's going to end up working out really well.

 

Think we're going to be in really good shape going forward tbh.

 

Might have been awkward initially, but the change was necessary, and it seems to now be coming together nicely.

[The Prophet]

Our business in the transfer market since the takeover has been very good. 

 

However the types of deals that we were doing i.e almost exclusively minimal risk at a premium, were unsustainable under PSR.

 

I think both things can be true. It also doesn't mean that we need to bin off the previous approach entirely moving forward.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 15:06 by The Prophet

[KennyUtd]

4 hours ago, Groundhog63 said:

All bought against Howe's wishes. He wanted Sean Yates, Harry Winks, James Tarkowski and Raheem Sterling, apparently 

 

#buybritish

😂🤣😅😆

[Joelinton7]

Who the bloody hell is Sean Yates 

[mattypnufc]

Just now, Joelinton7 said:

Who the bloody hell is Sean Yates 

Cyclist? 😂

[Groundhog63]

9 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said:

Who the bloody hell is Sean Yates 

Meant the dirty one, Forest lad 😂😂😂