Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

NUFC Transfer Rumours

Guest

by Guest
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheBrownBottle

TheBrownBottle

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ben said:

I think an new potential owners of clubs will think twice before buying now. 

 

I imagine broadcasters will no longer pay a premium for the product as well as sponsors.

No, that’s unlikely.  From the PL’s first TV deal in 1992, it was the biggest TV deal in world football (despite English football being the worst it’s ever been, relative to the rest of Europe).  It was larger than Italian football’s deal at that time. 
 

Quality has never been a reason for English football bringing in big sums

Link to post
Share on other sites
gbandit

gbandit

Posted
Posted

Everything related to transfers is targeted towards long-term. Both in terms of signing young players with significant room for improvement and increases of value. I think they’re looking at players and saying -

 

“In three year’s time, will this player be a better player than they are today and will their value be higher?”

 

If not, no interest. So you have that to contend with alongside FFP, alongside other clubs not wanting to deal with us. That’s a narrow pool of players to be looking at. 
 

I think the approach is extremely sound long-term. My only criticism would be that we’re not taking punts on cheaper players like Brighton have, for players who haven’t quite broken through yet

Link to post
Share on other sites
St1pe

St1pe

Posted
Posted

Last season we were really short of a centre midfielder and we didn’t enter the market despite the fact we were chasing a trophy and European football. Given that this season looks to be getting away from us I don’t think the injury crisis will force our ownership into risking ffp. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Isaksbigrightfoot

Isaksbigrightfoot

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Everything related to transfers is targeted towards long-term. Both in terms of signing young players with significant room for improvement and increases of value. I think they’re looking at players and saying -

 

“In three year’s time, will this player be a better player than they are today and will their value be higher?”

 

If not, no interest. So you have that to contend with alongside FFP, alongside other clubs not wanting to deal with us. That’s a narrow pool of players to be looking at. 
 

I think the approach is extremely sound long-term. My only criticism would be that we’re not taking punts on cheaper players like Brighton have, for players who haven’t quite broken through yet

Our scouting network are therefore being paid to do not much. Unless of course the plan is always long term.

 

That is a dangerous game to play. We need to ensure we stay at the right end of the table now. We may lose our best players otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ikon

Ikon

Posted
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Everything related to transfers is targeted towards long-term. Both in terms of signing young players with significant room for improvement and increases of value. I think they’re looking at players and saying -

 

“In three year’s time, will this player be a better player than they are today and will their value be higher?”

 

If not, no interest. So you have that to contend with alongside FFP, alongside other clubs not wanting to deal with us. That’s a narrow pool of players to be looking at. 
 

I think the approach is extremely sound long-term. My only criticism would be that we’re not taking punts on cheaper players like Brighton have, for players who haven’t quite broken through yet


I like this approach and it’s the way to go until our revenues are better and we are higher up the food chain within time, whenever that comes. Player trading is unavoidable if we wish to progress. Even the biggest clubs “must” sell their players if for example Real Madrid come knocking and are willing to do all it takes to get player X. Real Madrids approach to signing new players has changed slightly though (going for younger too talent).

 

This is also why I don’t understand the Barnes signing?  I have said it way back. He isn’t a player that is suddenly gonna be sold for say 80m in the future. He’s a leftie which we already have options for. Some might argue about Gordon being able to play on the right, I disagree and say no. Yea he can play there but Gordon must play in his best position, end of! I would have understood the Barnes signing a lot more if we were further forward in our development and growth as a club. Because then we wouldn’t still have the issue regarding a proper RW for the 1st team, and despite FFP we could have afforded to sign Barnes mainly for depth and be an option to play when Gordon is injured or needs a rest, or against lesser teams away for example where we will have Moore transitional moves from defence to attack. Barnes doesn’t really offer much different either or isn’t very good in general play or a creative flair player either. Is he a good player? Yes! He is undoubtedly an effective player that scores points. But at the time he shouldn’t have been a priority imo and I also don’t see him as a key player in the future where we will be more of a possession based team in style. This will happen even if Howe isn’t looking to play like Pep for example. As we get better and evolve more and more teams we will have to control possession better as well as be able to open teams up that sit back. To go properly toe to toe with the best sides (especially away) we need players that are better technically and be better in possession overall unless we plan to sit back and look more for the counter and transitional play which I don’t think will work if we aim to get to the very top top level in the PL and Europe. I have always rated Barnes for what he does and offers for many teams, I just don’t think he’s the right buy for us when considering where we are and aim to be. Especially when other areas should have been more of a priority. 
 

Having said this, we should always aim to keep our best players as long as very much possible, of course. Further ahead this will be easier for many reasons. 

 

 

Edited by Ikon

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fezzle

Fezzle

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Ghandis Flip-Flop said:

I’m beginning to wonder if we have a recall option on Joe White's loan at this point, full academy graduate midfield by the end of the season. It worked for Roeder back in 05/06 ? we’d all be over the moon with another 7th placed finish at this point right?

Cant remember a single game that season where Roeder played more than Clark or Pattison in midfield, not even sure either started the same game. He still had Parker, Dyer, Emre, Bowyer, Solano, Nzogbia, Faye etc that season

Link to post
Share on other sites
TRon

TRon

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Everything related to transfers is targeted towards long-term. Both in terms of signing young players with significant room for improvement and increases of value. I think they’re looking at players and saying -

 

“In three year’s time, will this player be a better player than they are today and will their value be higher?”

 

If not, no interest. So you have that to contend with alongside FFP, alongside other clubs not wanting to deal with us. That’s a narrow pool of players to be looking at. 
 

I think the approach is extremely sound long-term. My only criticism would be that we’re not taking punts on cheaper players like Brighton have, for players who haven’t quite broken through yet

 

I'd add another criticism to that, top players don't want to be playing for a team where the rest of the season has been written off because we are waiting for the summer window, ahd they are being flogged like horses because the squad is too thin.

 

As has already been said, we don't need top of the pile players, at this point we just need bodies through the door, on loan will do just fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gbandit

gbandit

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Ikon said:


I like this approach and it’s the way to go until our revenues are better and we are higher up the food chain within time, whenever that comes. Player trading is unavoidable if we wish to progress. Even the biggest clubs “must” sell their players if for example Real Madrid come knocking and are willing to do all it takes to get player X. Real Madrids approach to signing new players has changed slightly though (going for younger too talent).

 

This is also why I don’t understand the Barnes signing?  I have said it way back. He isn’t a player that is suddenly gonna be sold for say 80m in the future. He’s a leftie which we already have options for. Some might argue about Gordon being able to play on the right, I disagree and say no. Yea he can play there but Gordon must play in his best position, end of! I would have understood the Barnes signing a lot more if we were further forward in our development and growth as a club. Because then we wouldn’t still have the issue regarding a proper RW for the 1st team, and despite FFP we could have afforded to sign Barnes mainly for depth and be an option to play when Gordon is injured or needs a rest, or against lesser teams away for example where we will have Moore transitional moves from defence to attack. Barnes doesn’t really offer much different either or isn’t very good in general play or a creative flair player either. Is he a good player? Yes! He is undoubtedly an effective player that scores points. But at the time he shouldn’t have been a priority imo and I also don’t see him as a key player in the future where we will be more of a possession based team in style. This will happen even if Howe isn’t looking to play like Pep for example. As we get better and evolve more and more teams we will have to control possession better as well as be able to open teams up that sit back. To go properly toe to toe with the best sides (especially away) we need players that are better technically and be better in possession overall unless we plan to sit back and look more for the counter and transitional play which I don’t think will work if we aim to get to the very top top level in the PL and Europe. I have always rated Barnes for what he does and offers for many teams, I just don’t think he’s the right buy for us when considering where we are and aim to be. Especially when other areas should have been more of a priority. 
 

Having said this, we should always aim to keep our best players as long as very much possible, of course. Further ahead this will be easier for many reasons. 

 

 

 

I agree actually related to Barnes. He’s an outlier of a signing. He’s not someone I expect to improve a lot and not someone who can play multiple roles or increase his value. I don’t think his value will drop significantly but it was an odd signing. I like him and see immediate value to him as a signing but we needed a RW not a LW so everything about that signing made no sense compared to every other signing we’ve made 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yorkie

Yorkie

Posted
Posted
Just now, gbandit said:

I agree actually related to Barnes. He’s an outlier of a signing. He’s not someone I expect to improve a lot and not someone who can play multiple roles or increase his value. I don’t think his value will drop significantly but it was an odd signing. I like him and see immediate value to him as a signing but we needed a RW not a LW so everything about that signing made no sense compared to every other signing we’ve made 

 

Previously I would've agreed to some extent but I think the toll we've seen on Gordon - plus the intention to use him as third choice CF - has demonstrated the thinking on Barnes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ikon

Ikon

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Previously I would've agreed to some extent but I think the toll we've seen on Gordon - plus the intention to use him as third choice CF - has demonstrated the thinking on Barnes. 


Hypothetically we would have more options for the left to still be able to rest Gordon when needled. Miggy has been absolutely knackered too at times really.  We have failed to strengthen the right hand side despite so many windows. 40m for a backup is a lot of money if the purpose is to be able to back up Gordon. Barnes isn’t really a good “investment” either if we look to earn some great profit for FFP which we seem to have to do to evolve.

 

 

Edited by Ikon

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ghandis Flip-Flop

Ghandis Flip-Flop

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Fezzle said:

Cant remember a single game that season where Roeder played more than Clark or Pattison in midfield, not even sure either started the same game. He still had Parker, Dyer, Emre, Bowyer, Solano, Nzogbia, Faye etc that season


I was being facetious, if I recall it was more defensively that we used academy graduates, with the likes of Ramage, Edgar and Taylor. The point still sort of stands though, we had no option but to use the academy kids at that point and I argue in that first season did so fairly successfully

Link to post
Share on other sites
TRon

TRon

Posted
Posted
Just now, JonBez comesock said:

Just been on Sky Transfer centre 

 

Tim Vickery - about 5 mins ago 

 

You must be confident if you are already chucking youtube videos of him on here. Either that or just desperate for it to be true.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...