NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Zero]

1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

But we signed Trippier and Burn for good and valid reasons, the main one being relegation and the previous 15 years of Ashley leaving the squad in a horrific state. And the reason they haven’t been let go is that we also needed to sign another load of players to go with them. And this is while qualifying for the CL twice. 
 

I really don’t think we appreciate the level of work that was required to achieve what we’ve done since the takeover. It’s an incredible level of progress. 
 

Everyone wants better players for less money and no transfer errors. But that’s different to the question of the overall strategy for picking targets. 

 

Burn and Trippier were great transfers because they were available for 15m-ish with more than 3 years of services left for us.

 

The cost and performance were great.

 

Wissa at 55m, 29 years old? This transfer should be banned at all level and yet it went through.

 

if this doesn’t cause the club to change the whole process and reallocate the power, this is fucking unprofessional 

[Zero]

I mean I appreciate the hard work done by all the people involved in the process, I really do. But if the current setup or approach has deteriorated to the point that we allowed such ridiculous transfer to happen, we need to change it. 
 

Wissa should never be signed at that price, even if we badly need one (and in fact we already got Nick at that time). 

 

 

Edited March 24 by Zero

[AyeDubbleYoo]

You won’t find me bigging up the Wissa transfer, but he should’ve been more like a slight overpay than a complete disaster.
 

There was no reason to expect he would contribute nothing. And a serious injury on arrival has to be factored in as well. 
 

Of course you can always argue there is a better and cheaper signing elsewhere, which is fair enough to some extent. 

[Zero]

9 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

You won’t find me bigging up the Wissa transfer, but he should’ve been more like a slight overpay than a complete disaster.
 

There was no reason to expect he would contribute nothing. And a serious injury on arrival has to be factored in as well. 
 

Of course you can always argue there is a better and cheaper signing elsewhere, which is fair enough to some extent. 

 

No fucking way 55m is “slightly overpay”.

 

And you have to think more than that. What’s really wrong is the nature of the “transfer”. If we are talking about getting the rats replacement, we got Nick already. The reason why we paid that 55m was we  are gambling Wissa could bring us instant success. It is purely a gamble. No fucking way it’s for anything else.

 

Now tell me, who asked for the gamble, who sanctioned the gamble, and who should be accountable for the gamble?

 

if this is other business or industry like Investment Banking, I guarantee you such kinda gamble 100% would result in discipline action.

 

 

[KaKa]

That Josh Acheampong wants out of Chelsea now too.

 

He's a Hall and Tino level talent by all accounts. Hope we're right in there to try and get him.

 

Really need to keep on good terms with Chelsea. They're going to keep fumbling talented players with this crazy approach they have at the minute.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

That Josh Acheampong wants out of Chelsea now too.

 

He's a Hall and Tino level talent by all accounts. Hope we're right in there to try and get him.

 

Really need to keep on good terms with Chelsea. They're going to keep fumbling talented players with this crazy approach they have at the minute.

Would you pay 40m for him? 

[KaKa]

7 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Would you pay 40m for him? 

 

That feels a bit steep.

 

Probably more of a similar deal to Lewis Hall.

 

Think that was around £28 million with add-ons to £35 million. Something like that would do I think.

[r0cafella]

9 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

That feels a bit steep.

 

Probably more of a similar deal to Lewis Hall.

 

Think that was around £28 million with add-ons to £35 million. Something like that would do I think.

Don't think they would do such a cheap deal now tbh. I think we've seen the market change already. If we want a cut price we will have to include nasty causes like buy backs and % of next sale. 

[TRC]

1 hour ago, Zero said:

 

Burn and Trippier were great transfers because they were available for 15m-ish with more than 3 years of services left for us.

 

The cost and performance were great.

 

Wissa at 55m, 29 years old? This transfer should be banned at all level and yet it went through.

 

if this doesn’t cause the club to change the whole process and reallocate the power, this is fucking unprofessional 

We need more transfers like Burn and Trippier. When people look at PSR its always about profit and they dont count in leadership and experience.

 

Just look at Chelsea, tonnes of talent, no leadership.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, TRC said:

We need more transfers like Burn and Trippier. When people look at PSR its always about profit and they dont count in leadership and experience.

 

Just look at Chelsea, tonnes of talent, no leadership.

Actually disagree. Chelsea are hamstrung primarly because they want patsy head coaches and refuse to buy a goal keeper. 

 

They've obviously pissed lots of money up the wall too but with a proper manager and a keeper they are bankers for CL. Football. 

 

I don't think the owners they have care about winning honestly, just money. 

[nufcjmc]

Just now, TRC said:

We need more transfers like Burn and Trippier. When people look at PSR its always about profit and they dont count in leadership and experience.

 

Just look at Chelsea, tonnes of talent, no leadership.

We have a lot of work to do transfer wise and a lot of older players currently here who while served us well wont be sold to make us any money to bring in their replacements, while I am never against discounting those who get to a certain age due to it not all about being resale value I can see a bigger advantage of bringing the average age of the squad down and buying players who haven't hit their relevant "peak" years. 

 

I don't think we should have a rigid strategy and happy to take advantage of older players who could offer us something but we continue to have to player trade to operate so there needs to be "value" in every signing in case you need to move them on. 

 

I think we have gone too extreme with keeping players around due to them being model pro's we have a lot of full internationals in the side and an established albeit shifting leadership group that should be enough. 

 

[KaKa]

31 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Don't think they would do such a cheap deal now tbh. I think we've seen the market change already. If we want a cut price we will have to include nasty causes like buy backs and % of next sale. 

 

Guess we'll find out what they're after soon enough.

 

I imagine there's only so much they can realistically ask for when the player hasn't broken through fully, isn't being given the chances to do so and now wants to leave.

[Mikky]

7 minutes ago, TRC said:

We need more transfers like Burn and Trippier. When people look at PSR its always about profit and they dont count in leadership and experience.

 

Just look at Chelsea, tonnes of talent, no leadership.

I kind of disagree with this - your next leadership should come from within - from those who are established and are fully connected with the club

 

Bruno - Hall - Botman - Gordon - Barnes at al

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 hour ago, Zero said:

 

No fucking way 55m is “slightly overpay”.

 

And you have to think more than that. What’s really wrong is the nature of the “transfer”. If we are talking about getting the rats replacement, we got Nick already. The reason why we paid that 55m was we  are gambling Wissa could bring us instant success. It is purely a gamble. No fucking way it’s for anything else.

 

Now tell me, who asked for the gamble, who sanctioned the gamble, and who should be accountable for the gamble?

 

if this is other business or industry like Investment Banking, I guarantee you such kinda gamble 100% would result in discipline action.

 

 

I think 40m or so is probably the starting point for any proven PL performer. Who has scored goals, maybe 45m. Team don’t need to sell, add more. 
 

Main point is that he could never have been expected to contribute so little. In fact it shouldn’t have been a gamble at all, it should’ve been a safe-ish bet. 

 

 

Edited March 24 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Menace]

The best thing we could've done was poach Phil Giles off Brentford 

[Ben]

21 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I think 40m or so is probably the starting point for any proven PL performer. Who has scored goals, maybe 45m. Team don’t need to sell, add more. 
 

Main point is that he could never have been expected to contribute so little. In fact it shouldn’t have been a gamble at all, it should’ve been a safe-ish bet. 

 

 

 

 

Those 19 goals he scored last season would be worth £45 million. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, Ben said:

 

Those 19 goals he scored last season would be worth £45 million. 

Well exactly. Even if he’d got 9 or 10 we’d be absolutely fine with the transfer. Point is it was supposed to be quite a safe bet, which would partly justify the decision to pay the fee. 
 

Ideally you wouldn’t need to scramble for 2 strikers while being rejected by them all and losing your best player, obviously. 

[lovejoy]

25 minutes ago, Menace said:

The best thing we could've done was poach Phil Giles off Brentford 

Giles just works to Brentford algorithm though, he does a wonderful job for sure, but we have no idea at this stage if he could lend himself to a club without that algorithm.

[Optimistic Nut]

2 hours ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

You won’t find me bigging up the Wissa transfer, but he should’ve been more like a slight overpay than a complete disaster.
 

There was no reason to expect he would contribute nothing. And a serious injury on arrival has to be factored in as well. 
 

Of course you can always argue there is a better and cheaper signing elsewhere, which is fair enough to some extent. 

 

I was here with him, thinking he'd get us 12-15 goals and be about £10-15m overpaid, but after 14 years of not just getting the deal done so many times when we should have when we've needed just to get a player we needed over the line, I was happy to go along with.

 

It's been an absolutely wretched transfer though. 

 

 

Edited March 24 by Optimistic Nut

[Menace]

35 minutes ago, lovejoy said:

Giles just works to Brentford algorithm though, he does a wonderful job for sure, but we have no idea at this stage if he could lend himself to a club without that algorithm.

 

I'd sign him just for the fact that he pulled our pants down on Wissa

[Deuce]

I’m choosing to believe that this is write off year for Wissa. Long hold out over the summer followed by a lengthy injury to start the season and being dropped into a team with its share of problems.

[TRC]

1 hour ago, Mikky said:

I kind of disagree with this - your next leadership should come from within - from those who are established and are fully connected with the club

 

Bruno - Hall - Botman - Gordon - Barnes at al

Outside of Bruno I don’t see any leadership qualities in any of those players.

 

I think Brighton who were falling like a stone, picked up pascal gross and have been great ever since and he has been ever present.

 

It just takes one or two, look at Brentford with Henderson, mackems with Xhaka.

 

We should have a diverse strategy, but sometimes players come up who may only last a season or two but with the prize money being what it is pays for itself for a year or two.

[lovejoy]

25 minutes ago, Menace said:

 

I'd sign him just for the fact that he pulled our pants down on Wissa

Ha! That’s true!

[TRon]

3 hours ago, Zero said:

 

No fucking way 55m is “slightly overpay”.

 

And you have to think more than that. What’s really wrong is the nature of the “transfer”. If we are talking about getting the rats replacement, we got Nick already. The reason why we paid that 55m was we  are gambling Wissa could bring us instant success. It is purely a gamble. No fucking way it’s for anything else.

 

Now tell me, who asked for the gamble, who sanctioned the gamble, and who should be accountable for the gamble?

 

if this is other business or industry like Investment Banking, I guarantee you such kinda gamble 100% would result in discipline action.

 

 

 

It wasn't really a gamble, we were paying for what we thought were guaranteed goals. It was just bad scouting and poor research since he doesn't seem to have any of the qualities we require from a centre forward to fit our method. 

[Kanj]

We need to do a combo of a few things this summer imho - the obvious being moving on from some of the older guard and bringing in younger players. We need to sell players who are oft injured, we can't keep holding onto individuals who aren't available. We need to retain Hall and Bruno. 

 

On incomings we need to find the next Brunos, Tonalis, Isaks (2 a window) and then go and buy the next Minteh, Livramento, Gordons, and Halls. Finally, we need to be shrewd and get your next version of Trippier and Burn on relaitvely cheap deals. What I've laid is a few "biggerish" outlays on the mid early to mid 20 somethings from abroad who are hungry with careers looking forward, we need either foregin/domestic potential wonderkids who need a season or so before they become potential starters and we need experience and leadership.  

 

They all need to have some technical + physical talent to cope with the PL. 

 

Easier said than done of course but that is the state of play going forward.