NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Sibierski]

10 hours ago, janpawel said:

Isn't he Chelsea's main RW? 

 

Think that opportunity will have passed now

They’re going to have to sell assets each summer to keep their model going, and he’s one who will be attainable. Won’t be unlike them to sign another winger in the summer. 

[Conjo]

13 hours ago, gjohnson said:

The new Haris Vukic

 

Didn't think that joke could be funnier than after we signed Rodrigo Vilca, but somehow it just gets better and better for every prospect we sign.

[Jackie Broon]

6 hours ago, ExiledGeordie said:

Surely Mitchel must have come contacts for players on the continent in the 30m range. Other clubs do it, we’ve done it before. Mbuemo would be a great signing in one sense but he’d cost an absolute fortune in January ffs 

 

I can’t believe that things are so tight again that if we buy anyone in Jan we “have” to sell in the summer. Are things that bad? Mind clearling Wilson out and the rest of the deadwood is desperately needed.

 

I know it's been said before and then we obviously did have a big issue with PSR in the summer, but, I think the club are deliberately playing up the restricted by PSR stuff. The hierarchy at the club clearly think there has been a 'Newcastle tax' and will do whatever they can to play down our ability to spend. 

 

Our position was dragged down significantly by the first year after the takeover, where we still had Ashley level revenue, that season's low revenue has now dropped off the books and been replaced by a season with significantly higher revenue. Clearly we are limited by PSR but I think we probably have more to spend than they are letting on.

 

 

 

 

[Jackie Broon]

Personally I think that messaging is counter-productive, there's a growing feeling of malaise around the club and I think that's possibly feeding into the on pitch performances.

 

Players who have signed for us have said they were sold on a project, the chairman has indicated that we would be competing for titles within the length of their contracts. Now that has been reset to not even being likely to compete within the length of their careers. It's not surprising them losing motivation when all they here is how restricted by PSR we are.

 

Maybe there is a 'Newcastle tax' or maybe we're just going after a small pool of players that other clubs are reluctant to sell and 'Newcastle tax' is a convenient excuse for failings in our scouting and transfer policy. Even if there is, three years of briefing that we're restricted by PSR and a PSR deadline day scramble to sell players doesn't seem to have changed that. The club desperately needs some positivity.

[timeEd32]

1 hour ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

I know it's been said before and then we obviously did have a big issue with PSR in the summer, but, I think the club are deliberately playing up the restricted by PSR stuff. The hierarchy at the club clearly think there has been a 'Newcastle tax' and will do whatever they can to play down our ability to spend. 

 

Our position was dragged down significantly by the first year after the takeover, where we still had Ashley level revenue, that season's low revenue has now dropped off the books and been replaced by a season with significantly higher revenue. Clearly we are limited by PSR but I think we probably have more to spend than they are letting on.

 

 

 

 

 

This is possible. But while revenue has grown considerably since Ashley, so have costs (wages + amortisation). Barring a not-yet-announced rise in commercial revenue the finances are very likely pretty tight.

[Holmesy]

8 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

This is possible. But while revenue has grown considerably since Ashley, so have costs (wages + amortisation). Barring a not-yet-announced rise in commercial revenue the finances are very likely pretty tight.

Doesn't help that we keep giving contract extensions (and no doubt, payrises) to players we should be trying to get off the wage bill

[timeEd32]

3 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

Doesn't help that we keep giving contract extensions (and no doubt, payrises) to players we should be trying to get off the wage bill

 

It depends which ones you're referring to. People are overreacting to the Longstaff/Burn one year extensions.

[Jackie Broon]

15 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

 

This is possible. But while revenue has grown considerably since Ashley, so have costs (wages + amortisation). Barring a not-yet-announced rise in commercial revenue the finances are very likely pretty tight.

 

We had up to £70m available to spend on Guehi, I can't believe we offered that if it would potentially leave us with another PSR deadline day scramble to sell players. The stuff about Gordon's contract changing things doesn't add up, as spoken about above.

[JEToon]

I can’t imagine either Burn or Longstaff are on absurdly massive wage relative to their use/the league.

 

They likely help us slightly when it comes to the wage bill being steady, reliable, home grown players who are of use rather than us having to overspend on HG players for the sake of the squad.

 

 

[nufcjmc]

18 minutes ago, JEToon said:

I can’t imagine either Burn or Longstaff are on absurdly massive wage relative to their use/the league.

 

They likely help us slightly when it comes to the wage bill being steady, reliable, home grown players who are of use rather than us having to overspend on HG players for the sake of the squad.

 

 

Think longstaff is on 40/45k so unless offered a big pay bump it's not alot these days plus English plus home grown plus local lad plus knows our system plus cost us nothing to buy and will make 100% profit if ever sold. All amazing things if you look purely on business rationale however skill and ability Howe likes him too much for my liking for him to just be a use 5 mins squad player when in a pinch. He's looking like he will get regular minutes and I don't think he's good enough. 

 

Issue with burn is different he's shown more than capable at CB and is in the leadership group and is local however it's more his age and lack of any sort of return on the 12/15m we spent on him.

 

Ideally the youth players we have started to be our squad players and we stop offering contract extensions particularly yearly ones to kick the can/issue down the road on replacing them 

 

Lessons need to be learned on the pre take over massive Murphy contract and the extension to miggy following a purple spell. 

[JEToon]

7 minutes ago, nufcjmc said:

Think longstaff is on 40/45k so unless offered a big pay bump it's not alot these days plus English plus home grown plus local lad plus knows our system plus cost us nothing to buy and will make 100% profit if ever sold. All amazing things if you look purely on business rationale however skill and ability Howe likes him too much for my liking for him to just be a use 5 mins squad player when in a pinch. He's looking like he will get regular minutes and I don't think he's good enough. 

 

Issue with burn is different he's shown more than capable at CB and is in the leadership group and is local however it's more his age and lack of any sort of return on the 12/15m we spent on him.

 

Ideally the youth players we have started to be our squad players and we stop offering contract extensions particularly yearly ones to kick the can/issue down the road on replacing them 

 

Lessons need to be learned on the pre take over massive Murphy contract and the extension to miggy following a purple spell. 

 

Burn has already more than washed the face of his fee in all honesty, he was brought in to help us stay stable and stay in the league and since been a key part of a side who made the CL, more than solid business in the context of fees that kick about in the league these days, we can't just have a squad packed with young sellable players, the squad needs a bit of profile and identity. 

[nufcjmc]

8 minutes ago, JEToon said:

 

Burn has already more than washed the face of his fee in all honesty, he was brought in to help us stay stable and stay in the league and since been a key part of a side who made the CL, more than solid business in the context of fees that kick about in the league these days, we can't just have a squad packed with young sellable players, the squad needs a bit of profile and identity. 

I think the issue is player sales and letting them go for nothing. The chart in the manu thread showed they spent 1.67b and sold less than 400m likes of paul pogba going for nowt. Not saying BDB has been a good buy for the money it's the issue of we need players to go for fees as we don't have the revenue streams in a psr world to allow people to walk for nothing. A wider point is then continuing to offer 12 month extensions help in the short term avoid squad costs and to retain players who know us and to an extent work but don't year on year improve the overall quality of the squad. 

 

I do agree they need a level of respect for what they have done and if there were no financial rules you just keep them round until they are no longer useful but that doesn't help the club advance either. 

 

[nufcjmc]

1 minute ago, nufcjmc said:

I think the issue is player sales and letting them go for nothing. The chart in the manu thread showed they spent 1.67b and sold less than 400m likes of paul pogba going for nowt. Not saying BDB has been a good buy for the money it's the issue of we need players to go for fees as we don't have the revenue streams in a psr world to allow people to walk for nothing. A wider point is then continuing to offer 12 month extensions help in the short term avoid squad costs and to retain players who know us and to an extent work but don't year on year improve the overall quality of the squad. 

 

I do agree they need a level of respect for what they have done and if there were no financial rules you just keep them round until they are no longer useful but that doesn't help the club advance either. 

 

If we aren't careful BDB, Wilson, tripper, kraft, lacelles, schar all go for nothing and cost the club 40+m to bring in and that's not alot of money now but they don't return a fee to reinvest in players either. 

 

 

Edited October 30, 2024 by nufcjmc

[Ronson333]

 

[Ronson333]

 

[Dr.Spaceman]

Inglês?

[The Butcher]

William Gomes has received an offer from Newcastle in England, as reported by his partner

@mabragatchelo

! The English club has not yet presented an offer, but has already spoken with William's staff, who recently renewed his contract with São Paulo. Tricolor will need to sell players this season to meet its budget target and a deal, obviously depending on the offer, could happen.

@arqtricolor

[nufc123]

Brazilian rumours are almost as bad as the Turkish ones. They NEVER happen.

[Harry 209]

William Gomez shirt number with Sao Paulo is......

39

[Ronson333]

 

[KaKa]

Talk of us looking at Kolo Muani if someone comes in for Isak. PSG apparently looking for around £45 million.

 

Asensio has been playing as a false 9 for them upfront and has made that position his own as he's more suited to Enrique's tactics.

 

 

[SAK]

4 minutes ago, KaKa said:

Talk of us looking at Kolo Muani if someone comes in for Isak. PSG apparently looking for around £45 million.

 

Asensio has been playing as a false 9 for them upfront and has made that position his own as he's more suited to Enrique's tactics.

 

 

I’d take him at that price even if we don’t sell Isak, wishful thinking with our finances I know.

 

 

Edited October 30, 2024 by SAK

[54]

17 minutes ago, Ronson333 said:

 

Is that yet another random publication that Bailey has jumped to?

[KaKa]

5 minutes ago, SAK said:

I’d take him at that price even if we don’t sell Isak, wishful thinking with our finances I know.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, would be contingent on Isak leaving.

[Keegans Export]

1 hour ago, KaKa said:

Talk of us looking at Kolo Muani if someone comes in for Isak. PSG apparently looking for around £45 million.

 

Asensio has been playing as a false 9 for them upfront and has made that position his own as he's more suited to Enrique's tactics.

 

 

I'm assuming he'd be on mega money at PSG therefore out of reach even at £45m