NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Yorkie]

1 hour ago, Kid Icarus said:

Replacing Isak and Wilson with Strand Larsen and Wissa and coming out of it with no additional money to spend would be a terrible piece of transfer business like. I really hope JSL and Wissa truly are the Wilson replacements and it's one not both.

 

Why? 

[Mattoon]

9 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Why? 

 

As a fan all we should be bothered about is can they score goals? Yes. Will they be committed to the club? Both seem eager enough, another yes. I think those two options would see us through a grueling season without having to worry about the IKEA nonce.

[Mole]

I feel like it's obvious why, Isak is supposed to be the golden goose. If he's sold and almost all of the money is spent to replace him on a striker rotation nobody seems convinced by.

 

It's all very good selling your prized asset but the least you should able to do is reinvest it across the squad.

 

Spending most of that money on two players is just poor asset management (especially on two players who seem unconvincing long term), I know nobody wants to think about this stuff but with PSR being what it is then it's important to keep in mind.

 

Since I started reading the board again, all everyone keeps saying is the club can't afford to make mistakes but this would seem like exactly that.

 

 

Edited August 27, 2025 by Mole

[TRon]

4 hours ago, Shadow Puppets said:

I thought he was dogshit these days?

 

 

He could well be tbf, I don't follow Italian football, just assumed he was a bigshot on account of the ludicrous wages. 

[Optimistic Nut]

31 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Why? 

 

Think we go from an A+ and D-, to a B- and C+. Less of a drop off, but not that x-factor that'll challenge the top 4 like last season. 

[KaKa]

8 minutes ago, Mole said:

I feel like it's obvious why, Isak is supposed to be the golden goose. If he's sold and almost all of the money is spent to replace him on a striker rotation nobody seems convinced by.

 

It's all very good selling your prized asset but the least you should able to do is reinvest it across the squad.

 

Spending most of that money on two players is just poor asset management (especially on two players who seem unconvincing long term), I know nobody wants to think about this stuff but with PSR being what it is then it's important to keep in mind.

 

Since I started reading the board again, all everyone keeps saying is the club can't afford to make mistakes but this would seem like exactly that.

 

 

 

 

So you think the manager and staff are buying both players thinking they are unconvincing long term?

[Yorkie]

5 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

Think we go from an A+ and D-, to a B- and C+. Less of a drop off, but not that x-factor that'll challenge the top 4 like last season. 

 

It's becoming beyond me what people want/expect at this point. 

[Jonas]

The whole point for us is to improve. Jury's going to be out for a while whether that's what this would be.

Isak, Wilson out and for example Sesko and Wissa in plus a profit to invest in someone else down the line could have been seen as that.

[Mole]

Just now, KaKa said:

 

So you think the manager and staff are buying both players thinking they are unconvincing long term?

I think that a club without a proper management team (no DOF or CEO), being knocked back several times this summer and people being forced into unnatural roles is leading to some less than ideal circumstances.

 

I don't know the inner workings of the club, because there's a human element at play here that I'm not privy to. But personally I think the best thing to do is to buy one striker, tell Isak he is going nowhere and restock once the dust settles and hopefully the management is more like it should be.

 

It just seems like a bad idea to spend 100m on two strikers who on the face of it have a somewhat limited ceiling. But I do know very little as I have pointed out many times, but reading between the lines the idea of buying Wissa and Larsen doesn't seem like a good one for the reasons I pointed to.

[Shak]

I’d be a bit disappointed with JSL and Wissa as the Isak replacements, honestly.

 

Both are really good additions individually but ideally I would like a big chunk of the Isak money to be spent on a young striker with massive potential to go alongside a trusted CF.

 

That said, it’s a bi-product of the shite situation we’ve been put in where we may have to sell Isak at a time when we haven’t got the ideal young prospect lined up.

 

I think they’d do more than decently for a couple of years though, at which point we maybe move Wissa on and get a shiny new young certified ballbagman in to replace him, having spent lots on building up the first team and squad in the meantime.

[lovejoy]

4 minutes ago, Mole said:

I think that a club without a proper management team (no DOF or CEO), being knocked back several times this summer and people being forced into unnatural roles is leading to some less than ideal circumstances.

 

I don't know the inner workings of the club, because there's a human element at play here that I'm not privy to. But personally I think the best thing to do is to buy one striker, tell Isak he is going nowhere and restock once the dust settles and hopefully the management is more like it should be.

 

It just seems like a bad idea to spend 100m on two strikers who on the face of it have a somewhat limited ceiling. But I do know very little as I have pointed out many times, but reading between the lines the idea of buying Wissa and Larsen doesn't seem like a good one for the reasons I pointed to.

 

 

of that £100m only about £45m-£65m ish would be from the isak money though.

 

 

[ads]

At this point, I couldn't give a shit about a players ceiling. Isak had a high ceiling, Eddie and the gang helped him towards it and look how that's turned out.

 

Give me two Premier League proven strikers who have much lower ceilings who WANT to wear the shirt over an entitled cunt like Isak.

 

Get the right appointments made and the right recruitment setup from younger ages and then some of the players with high ceilings we want are already here...

[Jaqen]

12 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

It's becoming beyond me what people want/expect at this point. 

 

To be fair the club seemed to be saying they wanted and Isak and Wilson replacement. This is really two Wilson replacements both at inflated fees. 

 

We'd be much better of getting one and keeping Isak and using the money from his sale next summer. 

[Jawdaw]

On 19/08/2025 at 16:25, Jawdaw said:

I’ll show my arse in Fenwick’s Window if we don’t sign at least one striker before the window closes.

Actually starting to worry about this now 🤪

[Mole]

3 minutes ago, lovejoy said:

 

 

of that £100m only about £45m-£65m ish would be from the isak money though.

 

 

Well yeah the fact I have zero idea how much they had to spend this summer does play into my feelings somewhat.

 

If 45-65 is correct then it's probably fine, the idea of selling a prized asset under these rules should hopefully all things being well allow you to reinvest for another 2-3 years before needing a massive sale again.

 

As long as you're still able to do that it's probably fine and I'm overreacting.

[TRon]

3 minutes ago, ads said:

At this point, I couldn't give a shit about a players ceiling. Isak had a high ceiling, Eddie and the gang helped him towards it and look how that's turned out.

 

Give me two Premier League proven strikers who have much lower ceilings who WANT to wear the shirt over an entitled cunt like Isak.

 

Get the right appointments made and the right recruitment setup from younger ages and then some of the players with high ceilings we want are already here...

 

But it's only because we bought Isak when he had a high ceiling that we could sell him now and buy those two proven PL strikers with lower ceilings. You can't just dismiss it because it will count down the line. 

[oldtype]

I don't think it's necessarily negotiation incompetence, but it's probably true that if we had a full-time transfer team with a more extensive personal network with European executives/agents, we'd have been given the opportunity to swoop in under the radar for a few targets this summer. There's a big favor trading component to it that someone who's not part of those social circles just cannot match.

[TRon]

Just now, oldtype said:

I don't think it's necessarily negotiation incompetence, but it's probably true that if we had a full-time transfer team with a more extensive personal network with European executives/agents, we'd have been given the opportunity to swoop in under the radar for a few targets this summer. There's a big favor trading component to it that someone who's not part of those social circles just cannot match.

 

Yep, this is no slight on Howe Jr or Nickson, it's not their fault they are filling in on an unfamiliar role, but it is a specialist role for a reason. 

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

Why? 

 

I have to be honest Yorkie, I don't think you're going to accept the answer if you're even asking that question in the first place. 

 

Regardless of whoever or whatever any of us choose to blame for our situation, the situation is that we'd be looking at spending the total profit from our star striker on two players who potentially replace his goals in the aggregate, with no further improvements to the squad or first XI. 

 

Call me ungrateful, but I (and I believe Howe, based on how far down the list of players we are) would have expected those funds to be spent on both higher quality and higher quantity than that.

 

One of the players is Howe's (very public) 7th or 8th choice while still being not far from the same price as our first few choices due to the time left in the window, and the other is an expensive replacement for a player we've known we've needed to replace for years. Again, regardless of who or what you blame, the situation we find ourselves in means that we're not only being bent over a barrell but bent over a barrell for players who are either nowhere near the level we wanted, or a money pit that we'll get at most 4 or so years out of.

 

By comparison, Spurs and Liverpool basically rebooted into the clubs that they are now directly off the back of their golden goose sales.

 

 

Edited August 27, 2025 by Kid Icarus

[Nucasol]

28 minutes ago, Jawdaw said:

Actually starting to worry about this now 🤪

Back, sack and crack ordered I hope?

[LFEE]

52 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

It's becoming beyond me what people want/expect at this point. 

To not panic. If who we want ain’t available then go with what we’ve got.

[Weezertron]

I'd like us to move on from wanting a club that tries, to a club that's professional 

[Sibierski]

If we sold Isak and spend £100m+ on signing Larsen and Wissa, who the fuck do we have next summer or even summer after to move on for a fee to move in the market if we want to keep Tino / Hall / Bruno G / Tonali at all costs.

 

Effectively the only ones with value would be Gordon (if he recovers this season) or Joelinton (if PIF buy him, but then we can’t book that PSR I don’t think?).

[Chicken Dancer]

3 minutes ago, LFEE said:

To not panic. If who we want ain’t available then go with what we’ve got.

Yes, or buy a cheaper player - old or young- as a stop gap. The Real Madrid/Joselu route when they knew they had Mbappe coming in. 
 

Kick the can down the road until next year and just accept we fucked up this summer. Do not be spending £60m on players you never wanted, regardless of how much they want to come. 
 

also @Kid Icarus, perfect summary a few posts above. 

[Ben]

Been out for a few pints in Cala Bona harbour, bit bait, quick turnaround.

 

Any news ?