Jump to content

NUFC Transfer Rumours


Optimistic Nut

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, STM said:

One of Wilson or Isak needs replaced because the former is a crock and the latter is his fucking apprentice.

 

If out of the pair you want to let Isak go and not Wilson, I'd assume that you been in a serious car accident and hurt your head.

 

Sign a good striker, with a half decent injury record and it will do wonders for everyone, including Isak. It doesn't matter whether they are old or young, it doesn't even matter what type of striker they are because we create chances, it just matters that they are of a good standard and are available.... Isak will do the rest.

Like who?

 

Anyone proven will cost £40m+. Can't afford that for a back-up (although we have done that at LW). Anyone cheaper has a high likelihood of being shit. Would people be happy with a Chris Wood type?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

I'd personally keep Wilson mind. His injury woes are manageable as a #2. He should only start 1 in 3 or 4 games. The #1 having such bad injury problems is the bigger issue.

 

We're definitely keeping hold of Isak though so we need to have a proper back up for him. Wilson can't play for 6 weeks straight without pulling up with something himself so he just isn't reliable. I don't really want to lose Wilson either because I like him as a player here but he still has some value and he isn't getting any younger, so now is probably the right time to move him on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My preference unless we find a reasonably priced, young alternative to serve as a backup striker is:

- Keep Isak

- Keep Wilson

- Sign an elite RW who can also play up front like Gordon

- Limit Wilson to one game per week max. If Isak is hurt and Wilson has played that week then we function as if he's hurt and use either Gordon or the RW.

 

(If we can get a good fee for Wilson then I agree it might be the last chance to sell him, but I don't know what that looks like)

 

 

Edited by timeEd32

Link to post
Share on other sites

Backup striker needs to be pretty much #1 priority this summer imo. We stick with Isak and Wilson and this will happen again and again.

 

You can say either of them shouldn't be playing 4 or 5 in a row - well that's the problem, they will invariably be playing that much because the other one will usually be out.

 

No idea if it's due to the work he's asked to do in our side or he's just a bit injury prone but Isak seems to need someone to share the load with. He's the last player I want us getting rid of so we need to facilitate that however we can. 

 

Ideal scenario is getting a young backup striker and a top RW who can also play there, probably getting rid of Wilson. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Ketsbaia said:

Noticed the other day how many good PL players have come up from the Championship - Watkins, Bowen, Toney, Grealish, Stones, Mbeumo, Eze, Olise, Maddison.

 

That Alex Scott at Bournemouth looks really promising too.

 

Who are the best players down there right now*?

 

* except Jewde Bellend

 

Jobe surely

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

My preference unless we find a reasonably priced, young alternative to serve as a backup striker is:

- Keep Isak

- Keep Wilson

- Sign an elite RW who can also play up front like Gordon

- Limit Wilson to one game per week max. If Isak is hurt and Wilson has played that week then we function as if he's hurt and use either Gordon or the RW.

 

(If we can get a good fee for Wilson then I agree it might be the last chance to sell him, but I don't know what that looks like)

 

 

 


 

Semih Kılıçsoy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

We ran him into the ground on two separate occasions this season, 

Dont know the first one, but the last ran into the ground was three games wasnt it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Like who?

 

Anyone proven will cost £40m+. Can't afford that for a back-up (although we have done that at LW). Anyone cheaper has a high likelihood of being shit. Would people be happy with a Chris Wood type?

 

I'd pay that. Ideally they would be versatile but what we absolutely cannot do is go into next season relying on Callum Wilson. 

 

A good second striker would be worth every penny.

 

I also take your point on RW, that would also be a priority for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

City paid 14m for Alvarez. Now that's an extreme example of good business but surely for double that we could get someone who is young, exciting and mouldable.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Like who?

 

Anyone proven will cost £40m+. Can't afford that for a back-up (although we have done that at LW). Anyone cheaper has a high likelihood of being shit. Would people be happy with a Chris Wood type?

I mean this sounds reductive, but this is the purpose of our scouting and recruitment team? I would certainly hope that they can identify global talent that can come in within our budgetary constraints.

 

Alvarez and other examples have already been mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trossard is an example of a versatile wide forward who only cost 27 million for Arsenal. Of course he plays more on the left (which we don't need) but he's an example of the sort of deal that can be done for someone who could play second fiddle to Isak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

Dont know the first one, but the last ran into the ground was three games wasnt it?

 

No, here's from a post I did a few weeks ago:

 

On 15/02/2024 at 11:36, timeEd32 said:

Because of injuries he was basically a first choice striker whenever he was fit (or fit enough). Here's his season:

  • August and September - available
  • Late September plays 90m + 28m + 69m in a week - injures hamstring
  • After a month off (which included an int'l break) he plays in 6 games in 17 days. This includes 76 unexpected minutes against Dortmund because Isak went off injured. Comes off at halftime of the 6th game with another hamstring injury.
  • After month off (including another int'l break) he's forced to do the following upon return:
    • Dec. 10 - 27 min
    • Dec. 13 - 90 min
    • Dec. 16 - 90 min
    • Dec. 19 - 120 min
    • Dec. 23 - 90 min
    • Dec. 26 - 36 min - calf injury

Everyone is now pissed at him for being made of glass after a freak injury, but what we made a 31 year old with his injury history do in October and December was not fair.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

Backup striker needs to be pretty much #1 priority this summer imo. We stick with Isak and Wilson and this will happen again and again.

 

You can say either of them shouldn't be playing 4 or 5 in a row - well that's the problem, they will invariably be playing that much because the other one will usually be out.

 

No idea if it's due to the work he's asked to do in our side or he's just a bit injury prone but Isak seems to need someone to share the load with. He's the last player I want us getting rid of so we need to facilitate that however we can. 

 

Ideal scenario is getting a young backup striker and a top RW who can also play there, probably getting rid of Wilson. 

 

Hard agree. We're in danger of ruining (or at least minimising) probably the second best striker in the league if we don't take the pressure off Isak. The current situation is utterly unsustainable from the team's point of view as well, and I think we need another striker just to stand still. It's vital. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

No, here's from a post I did a few weeks ago:

 

 

He played a few games around the Chelsea league cup game, and broke down before the peck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, nufc123 said:

He played a few games around the Chelsea league cup game, and broke down before the peck.

 

He played over 400 minutes in less than two weeks. It was reckless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

He played over 400 minutes in less than two weeks. It was reckless.

You could say that. It was two full PL games and the Chelsea game. It should be manageable as he was a sub before that run and after. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Hard agree. We're in danger of ruining (or at least minimising) probably the second best striker in the league if we don't take the pressure off Isak. The current situation is utterly unsustainable from the team's point of view as well, and I think we need another striker just to stand still. It's vital. 


As an alternative I’m pretty sure some years go Simeone had AM playing in such a way that the 2 forwards did very little defensive work. They saved their legs and all their explosiveness for opportune moments with the ball. The other 8 really had to put a shift in.

It’s a system that’s probably very dependent on the players you have available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

You could say that. It was two full PL games and the Chelsea game. It should be manageable as he was a sub before that run and after. 

 

You're missing the CL game. And then he started again three days after that stretch and that's when he got hurt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

You're missing the CL game. And then he started again three days after that stretch and that's when he got hurt. 

Yes I was thinking Isak played the Milan game for some reason. It was maybe too much. Got hurt after the Luton game didnt he?

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, TheInfiniteOdyssey said:

I mean this sounds reductive, but this is the purpose of our scouting and recruitment team? I would certainly hope that they can identify global talent that can come in within our budgetary constraints.

 

Alvarez and other examples have already been mentioned.

No I mean you can choose what other clubs have done. Like you have done with Alvarez. Aye Alvarez is a £50m player bought for £12m. Aye that would be fantastic business in any regard. He would start for us every week though. He’s not a backup striker for us - he’s a starter. 

 

40 minutes ago, STM said:

Trossard is an example of a versatile wide forward who only cost 27 million for Arsenal. Of course he plays more on the left (which we don't need) but he's an example of the sort of deal that can be done for someone who could play second fiddle to Isak.

Again Trossard is a winger by trade. and he was only cheap because he has 6 months left on his contract. His primary role in the squad is backup to Martinelli and a striker backup.  He doesn’t offer anything Barnes and Gordon don’t already offer.  
 

id take a Kudus type. He’s played as a striker, 10 and Moyes plays him off the right. Left footed. But that profile would start for us at RW.  And is just as makeshift a striker as Gordon. 
 

5 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

You're missing the CL game. And then he started again three days after that stretch and that's when he got hurt. 

Agreed. Wilson came back and played 90 minutes 4 times in about 15 days. He can’t do that and it’s not reasonable to expect him too imo.  You’ve added the evidence - thanks. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

Yes I was thinking Isak played the Milan game for some reason. It was maybe too much. Got hurt after the Luton game didnt he?

 

He got hurt in the Forest game, yes.

 

He got injured four times this season.

  • 3 games in a week (hamstring) - Fair to be annoyed by this; he is fragile
  • 6 games / 368 minutes in 2.5 weeks (hamstring) - Not reasonable
  • 6 games / 453 minutes in 2.5 weeks (calf) - Even less reasonable
  • Torn pec wrestling - freak injury

IMO the responsibility for two of his four injuries this season are on the club. A player with his fitness record, who may not have even been 100% fit at the time, can't be asked to do what he did on two separation occasions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...