NUFC Transfer Rumours

[Monters]

2 minutes ago, STM said:

To an extent, I do agree with @The College Dropouton this and have backed his view on not needing 3 strikers. 

 

Given where we are now and the fact that Wilson MUST be replaced. I'd be happy with either scenario suggested. Either we sign another quality signing, which has the benefit of giving Isak some rest and allowing us to be more flexible with Isak or we sign someone younger who's willing to play second fiddle/learn.

 

If we were to sign, let's say Solanke, I don't see many down sides. Either he and Isak play plenty of games and dovetail (like Isak and Wilson were supposed to) or one of them plays the majority of the games and has an outstanding season.

 

I take the wider point about whether 50m would be a wise use of funds but I suppose that discussion can only happen with knowledge of budgets etc.

 

One thing is for certain, I have full confidence that we will have signed a quality replacement for Wilson come the end of the summer.

It was second striker I was advocating - I would worry if it was Isak -> rotating wide forward.  Isak -> alternate striker -> rotating wide forward all good.

Totally agree budget constraints and we will need to sell to fund etc. but given stocks in other areas of the squad this should be doable (hopefully)

[midds]

24 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Don't make me say the other guy man.

 

We could've diligently spend £40m on a RW.

I agree. But some players won't have wanted to come up here so suggesting player x, y or z is fine but they may not have ever been an option on the table. We signed who we signed and I think it's a bit pointless picking faults and being wise long after the window closed. It's all just hypotheticals, no biggie

[Fezzle]

2 minutes ago, midds said:

I agree. But some players won't have wanted to come up here so suggesting player x, y or z is fine but they may not have ever been an option on the table. We signed who we signed and I think it's a bit pointless picking faults and being wise long after the window closed. It's all just hypotheticals, no biggie

Im sure Captain Hindsight spent all summer pre Chelsea getting him telling us all to buy him seeing as hes the expert, definitely not just saying this now he turned out well.....

[The College Dropout]

2 minutes ago, Fezzle said:

Im sure Captain Hindsight spent all summer pre Chelsea getting him telling us all to buy him seeing as hes the expert, definitely not just saying this now he turned out well.....

I'm not a Football Club decision maker with several professional scouts. It's not like one of you signed our players. These are professionals working with other professionals.

 

The fact i didn't know Cole Palmer was this good isn't a poor reflection on me at all. But I did want that profile of player and I thought it was a mistake we didn't get a player there.

[The College Dropout]

If Isak can't play 80% of games - we need to get rid. Solanke can play 80% of games himself. With FFP we can't have a £120m strike force while having Miggy Almiron at RW.

 

32 minutes ago, STM said:

To an extent, I do agree with @The College Dropouton this and have backed his view on not needing 3 strikers. 

 

Given where we are now and the fact that Wilson MUST be replaced. I'd be happy with either scenario suggested. Either we sign another quality signing, which has the benefit of giving Isak some rest and allowing us to be more flexible with Isak or we sign someone younger who's willing to play second fiddle/learn.

 

If we were to sign, let's say Solanke, I don't see many down sides. Either he and Isak play plenty of games and dovetail (like Isak and Wilson were supposed to) or one of them plays the majority of the games and has an outstanding season.

 

I take the wider point about whether 50m would be a wise use of funds but I suppose that discussion can only happen with knowledge of budgets etc.

 

One thing is for certain, I have full confidence that we will have signed a quality replacement for Wilson come the end of the summer.

 

[Nine]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

I'm not a Football Club decision maker with several professional scouts. It's not like one of you signed our players. These are professionals working with other professionals.

 

The fact i didn't know Cole Palmer was this good isn't a poor reflection on me at all. But I did want that profile of player and I thought it was a mistake we didn't get a player there.

How do you know we didn’t attempt to sign him? You think we were offering him the kind of money Chelsea were? 
 

Also how does he fit into our 4/3/3? I love Palmer to, hes on a trajectory to potentially become one of the best English players in years.. but I can also see why we didn’t sign him. Six months ago he would have been a gamble on a young player from City to most on here, and people would have said £40m was to much of a risk - the same as lots said about Gordon (who had played far more PL football than Palmer had when he moved).

 

This hindsight stuff on here is out of control lately 

 

 

Edited February 22 by Nine

[Dr.Spaceman]

Am I missing something with Cole Palmer or is he really that good? I think he's decent but nowhere near Bellingham or Foden levels.

[Kimbo]

Bellingham has arguably been the best player in the world this season tbf. Palmer is having his first season as a first team player and he’s been fantastic. Great work rate, technique, finishing, creativity. He would have been perfect for our RW.

[SUPERTOON]

I thought Palmer became available relatively late in the window, by which time we had already spent our budget.

[Hanshithispantz]

Cannot even wait until Barnes has had a half dozen starts for us before weighing in on who we should have signed instead 

[Pilko]

Barnes has looked canny when he's played, the injury is unfortunate as fuck. He only missed something like 5 or 6 Premier League games in his last 2 seasons for Leicester.

 

I reckon he'll end up having a better goals per game/min record than Palmer if you take away pens and compare them both after a full season next season, assuming both play a fair number of games.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, midds said:

I agree. But some players won't have wanted to come up here so suggesting player x, y or z is fine but they may not have ever been an option on the table. We signed who we signed and I think it's a bit pointless picking faults and being wise long after the window closed. It's all just hypotheticals, no biggie

 

I thought during the summer it'll be 2-3 years before we get the perfectly balanced squad. We probably did want an RW but if the player profile we wanted weren't available/didn't want to come, it makes sense to wait. 

 

Alternatively, we probably didn't think RB was a priority in the summer as we had Trippier plus two adequate backups, but Southampton going down meant a long term successor for Trippier was available there and then, so sign him.

[Shearergol]

19 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

Am I missing something with Cole Palmer or is he really that good? I think he's decent but nowhere near Bellingham or Foden levels.

Yeah agreed. Bellingham and Foden are elite, then you've got Saka, then Palmer's another level down imo.

[Menace]

57 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

Am I missing something with Cole Palmer or is he really that good? I think he's decent but nowhere near Bellingham or Foden levels.

 

He's looked good in a shite Chelsea team. Most of his stats are based on the fact that he's their penalty taker. Decent player but some of the hype around him is nuts.

[Nine]

6 minutes ago, Menace said:

 

He's looked good in a shite Chelsea team. Most of his stats are based on the fact that he's their penalty taker. Decent player but some of the hype around him is nuts.

Hes scored 5/5 penalties for Chelsea with another 10+ G/A from open play in the PL alone.. hes 21 and banging in penalties like an elite striker. It’s hardly a knock on him like. 

 

 

Edited February 22 by Nine

[Menace]

Again, not knocking him but some of the hype around him on socials is a bit crazy right now. Let's see how he gets on next season - Walcott had crazy numbers for Arsenal at one point too

 

Willock on his loan for us too!

 

 

Edited February 22 by Menace

[Joelinton7]

1 hour ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

Am I missing something with Cole Palmer or is he really that good? I think he's decent but nowhere near Bellingham or Foden levels.

99% of his hype is X bots posting

?#ColdPalmer

[midds]

1 hour ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

I thought during the summer it'll be 2-3 years before we get the perfectly balanced squad. We probably did want an RW but if the player profile we wanted weren't available/didn't want to come, it makes sense to wait. 

 

Alternatively, we probably didn't think RB was a priority in the summer as we had Trippier plus two adequate backups, but Southampton going down meant a long term successor for Trippier was available there and then, so sign him.

Totally agree, it's going to take a bit of time and patience to get the squad into the kind of shape we'd all like it to be in, maybe longer given the restrictions that we've been placed under from FFP and FMV etc. I just want the players coming in to be better than the ones who leave and it may be a bit frustrating seeing us miss out on good players in key positions for us for a while yet, it's just how football works, there is no silver bullet any longer. That said, it's still a hell of a lot nicer than watching Bruce and Ashley lowball every fucker for very very average players, christ we lived off scraps for years looking back 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, midds said:

Totally agree, it's going to take a bit of time and patience to get the squad into the kind of shape we'd all like it to be in, maybe longer given the restrictions that we've been placed under from FFP and FMV etc. I just want the players coming in to be better than the ones who leave and it may be a bit frustrating seeing us miss out on good players in key positions for us for a while yet, it's just how football works, there is no silver bullet any longer. That said, it's still a hell of a lot nicer than watching Bruce and Ashley lowball every fucker for very very average players, christ we lived off scraps for years looking back 

 

Aye, it's only 3 years since we had the likes of Darlow, Clark, Hayden, Hendrick, Fraser and Gayle making up 25% of the registered PL squad. We've still got a handful who we will know aren't good enough but who've had to be kept on longer than we've probably liked because FFP means we can't just go out and buy exactly what we want yet. 

[midds]

Just now, Optimistic Nut said:

 

Aye, it's only 3 years since we had the likes of Darlow, Clark, Hayden, Hendrick, Fraser and Gayle making up 25% of the registered PL squad. We've still got a handful who we will know aren't good enough but who've had to be kept on longer than we've probably liked because FFP means we can't just go out and buy exactly what we want yet. 

Yep and I'd also say that the players we manage to get out of the club will take a few years too as they're sitting on pretty hefty contracts and contributing zero on or off the park. We just need to see a few of them leave each window to create space for the better players we all want, it's just going to take some time, it's not going to happen in 3 windows or whatever, we're realistically looking at the 26-27 season before we can attack the league and cups with a bit of confidence

[midds]

And I'd also finish off by saying it's still going to be a few more years on top of that before we start to see the benefits of padding out the youth teams and have them (hopefully) sending 2 or 3 players through to the first team squad every couple of years too. The Ashley years were barren as fuck and I think people forget how neglected the whole club was. We had no players of value, no operational systems in place, few/no youth products coming through and no willingness to even think about addressing it. Putting all of that right is going to take minimum 6 years. Not beyond the realm of possibility that the kids who are now 12 or 13 will break into the first team by about 2030ish. Sobering obviously but not unrealistic.

 

Right, I'll shut up now

[The College Dropout]

1 hour ago, Menace said:

 

He's looked good in a shite Chelsea team. Most of his stats are based on the fact that he's their penalty taker. Decent player but some of the hype around him is nuts.

 

And this is in a midtable team. This is an excellent playmaker.

 

 

1 hour ago, Menace said:

Again, not knocking him but some of the hype around him on socials is a bit crazy right now. Let's see how he gets on next season - Walcott had crazy numbers for Arsenal at one point too

 

Willock on his loan for us too!

 

 

 

Have you watched him play? I don't know how you watch Palmer, Walcott and even wor Willock... and think the footballing ability is the same. And Walcott and Willock are very good players - with different skillset to Palmer. Outside of goals and assists - watch the lad play, Cole Palmer is a baller. Like James Maddison is a baller. Bruno G is a baller. 

 

But anyway - forget the actual player. We went for the wrong profile of player and have a lopsided squad as a result.

 

 

[Menace]

I have watched him play - I was insinuating it could be a purple patch and to not get carried away into the hype. People were sure Enzo and Caicedo were "complete ballers" too. It's far too early to judge someone off a 6 month spell but he looks good.

[The College Dropout]

3 minutes ago, Menace said:

I have watched him play - I was insinuating it could be a purple patch and to not get carried away into the hype. People were sure Enzo and Caicedo were "complete ballers" too. It's far too early to judge someone off a 6 month spell but he looks good.

Not in the same way though. Caicedo did look good in the Brighton system but that was a functioning system. Chelsea's isn't.

 

Purple patches like Miggy, Lingard or Cisse usually involve a player overperforming their underlying Expected Data or they don't maintain their expected data. The underlying data on Palmer is pretty excellent. And while Miggy was scoring goals -  he's never looked an excellent footballer to me - at least technically. Doesn't beat a man often, never been a creative passer, he's scored some delightful goals but never looked a fine striker of the ball, first touch or basic passing can be erratic. Take away goals or assists, Palmer lad looks a player.

 

Enzo's stood out for me so can't comment. Enzo, Palmer, Caicedo in that Chelsea side, if you didn't know you wouldn't believe Palmer cost half the price of the other two. 

[Menace]

The data looked shite for Gordon at Everton- yet he's got great numbers for us this season despite not even being fully fit. I'd even ague he's probably been our player of the season alongside Bruno. There is no guarantee Palmer would've had the same success he's having at Chelsea for us..