Tino Livramento

[lovejoy]

43 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

All of our players are available for purchase - it’s all a question of other clubs being able to afford them.  
 

The Sky Six have always traded players amongst themselves - our income is dwarfed by theirs, so if they come in with the right money then the player is off.

 

I think Man City - if they’re interested enough - will pay what it takes.  If we get close to double what we paid, the lad is off (the £100m valuations on here notwithstanding, obviously).  The lad looks much better at LB than he does at RB, but he’s not our best LB.
 

I couldn’t give much of a shite as long as all of the money (more importantly headroom) is available for Howe to spend - which it will be.  And if the lad goes, it’s the manager’s call.

 

I’ve no idea where this idea that we don’t sell our players comes from - every club sells their players.  If we are actually going to get to where the ownership claimed, there is a real chance that none of the current squad are there when we do.  

this is bang on.

[TheBrownBottle]

2 hours ago, Shearergol said:

It’s probably more that we don’t want to sell our best players.

If we sell them, we'll buy new ones.  I doubt most of the board were aware of Bruno, had seen much of Isak, or had spent much time thinking about Tonali before we signed them.  I've complete faith in our recruitment capabilities.

[Holloway]

Eddie seems reluctant to shift Longstaff, Willock and Wilson, I'd imagine he's desperate to keep a hold of our Purples

[Novocastrian]

We don’t need to supinely bend over for the ESL6 no matter how much money they offer.

 

Selling our best players to them isn’t a strategy I could get onboard with.

 

if Howe wants to keep Tino the answer is ‘this player is not for sale’ end of chat.

 

I’d be incandescent if we offer Wilson a new deal and sell Tino before we’ve even brought in a first team player.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 06:54 by Novocastrian

[Ben]

3 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

If we sell them, we'll buy new ones.  I doubt most of the board were aware of Bruno, had seen much of Isak, or had spent much time thinking about Tonali before we signed them.  I've complete faith in our recruitment capabilities.

 

We upgraded our existing players with Bruno Isak ect, selling Tino is crackers because he is an outstanding player that will actually get better, I personally don't think an upgrade is possible 

[Sibierski]

No need to sell this summer, if Man City still want him and he still wants a move in 2026 then it can be revisited.

[black_n_white]

If sold he’d need replacing, not got any ideas on who that might be?

[Ikon]

I don’t want him sold, we won’t sell him. Unless it’s an absolutely ridiculous price like around 80m or more. But let’s not kid ourselves if we get offered 80+ then he’s gone. He is irreplaceable as an individual yes, but on the whole we’d be better off when you consider what possibilities it would open up.

 

it’s not happening though, so it’s still a win. He’s brilliant and has his best years ahead of him and he will get even better. 

[astraguy]

If we sell tino for anything less then over 100m with a well on clause , like city do then it's a no. The lad is only 22 has prem experience/champs league etc just won a cup we need to start being ruthless so psr is no longer a issue for us in the long term

[Beren]

Everyone one has a price, I accept that.

 

But he's probably the third most valuable player in the squad for me.

 

The proceeds from his sale would need to allow Newcastle to simultaneously transact on buying both a replacement left-back and a replacement right back (because that's what he is, and part of why Pep wants him in his smaller squad) as well as leaving Newcastle with a meaningful profit to enable Howe to strengthen the squad.

 

Otherwise I don't see the logic.

[Optimistic Nut]

21 minutes ago, black_n_white said:

If sold he’d need replacing, not got any ideas on who that might be?

 

I was wondering this when the links first came about. No idea. Walker-Peters as back up for the full-back positions to Hall & Tino would have been good but not good enough as first choice. 

[Alberto2005]

I don't want to lose any of our good players, but Tonali and Isak are the only ones I think we'd struggle to replace.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 07:46 by Alberto2005

[KaKa]

39 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

I was wondering this when the links first came about. No idea. Walker-Peters as back up for the full-back positions to Hall & Tino would have been good but not good enough as first choice. 

 

The only other player I can think of with Prem experience, that offers similar traits as far as one on one defending, ball carrying, strength, speed and athleticism, and that can play both sides at full back, who is similar in age with potential to improve further is Djed Spence.

 

Spurs would probably ask for £60 million. So Man City should just go over there instead. They can afford him.

[Groundhog63]

1 hour ago, Novocastrian said:

We don’t need to supinely bend over for the ESL6 no matter how much money they offer.

 

Selling our best players to them isn’t a strategy I could get onboard with.

 

if Howe wants to keep Tino the answer is ‘this player is not for sale’ end of chat.

 

I’d be incandescent if we offer Wilson a new deal and sell Tino before we’ve even brought in a first team player.

 

 

 

 

Probs not the best analogy but there's a few, on here, with mindsets that are reminiscent of some of my colleagues in the Fire Service when Management were throwing hideous changes to shifts etc etc. 

The gaffers would send out rumours of an extreme shift pattern, for eg, and we'd get lads (then) coughing up their own, slightly more palatable, versions of a shift pattern. 

'course us FBU reps were saying "ram that shit right up ya arse. We'll fight for what we already have" 

 

Now I'm not naive enough to disregard PSR and it's implications but, for me, there's way too much of a "sell Tino" & "if anyone needs to go, sell Gordon" patter. 

 

Mind there's a few saying sell these guys because they don't rate them 🙄 which is worse, obviously. 

 

 

 

[Cf]

54 minutes ago, Beren said:

Everyone one has a price, I accept that.

 

But he's probably the third most valuable player in the squad for me.

 

The proceeds from his sale would need to allow Newcastle to simultaneously transact on buying both a replacement left-back and a replacement right back (because that's what he is, and part of why Pep wants him in his smaller squad) as well as leaving Newcastle with a meaningful profit to enable Howe to strengthen the squad.

 

Otherwise I don't see the logic.

 

Exactly this. 

 

Say we got 100m for him. We've just lost a young world class English LB/RB that could play for us for 10 years and if anything is only going to go up in value over the next few years. That 100m starts to look a bit shit. 

 

I get selling players is a thing. But sign a new CB and we potentially have our entire back 4 sorted for many many years. Selling Tino just doesn't make sense. 

 

And for those saying he's been better at LB and we have Hall there... Yes he's looked good there. But it could easily just be a mixture of form and not having Jacob Murphy in front of him (sorry Jacob). 

[TRon]

9 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

All of our players are available for purchase - it’s all a question of other clubs being able to afford them.  
 

The Sky Six have always traded players amongst themselves - our income is dwarfed by theirs, so if they come in with the right money then the player is off.

 

I think Man City - if they’re interested enough - will pay what it takes.  If we get close to double what we paid, the lad is off (the £100m valuations on here notwithstanding, obviously).  The lad looks much better at LB than he does at RB, but he’s not our best LB.
 

I couldn’t give much of a shite as long as all of the money (more importantly headroom) is available for Howe to spend - which it will be.  And if the lad goes, it’s the manager’s call.

 

I’ve no idea where this idea that we don’t sell our players comes from - every club sells their players.  If we are actually going to get to where the ownership claimed, there is a real chance that none of the current squad are there when we do.  

 

 

Tino is one of our best players IMO, I think he would be difficult to replace, but I said earlier every player has his price. No one wants to lose their best players, but while we are hamstrung with PSR, the only way to improve incrementally is to sell players at a big profit and then trust your scouting network to replace them. 

 

This is no different to Isak. Who would want to lose him, but there's always a price where you can do a deal and make enough money to buy a replacement. 

[TheBrownBottle]

6 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

 

Tino is one of our best players IMO, I think he would be difficult to replace, but I said earlier every player has his price. No one wants to lose their best players, but while we are hamstrung with PSR, the only way to improve incrementally is to sell players at a big profit and then trust your scouting network to replace them. 

 

This is no different to Isak. Who would want to lose him, but there's always a price where you can do a deal and make enough money to buy a replacement. 

Yep, without the restrictions this wouldn’t even be a point of discussion - the only reason to sell would be if the player wanted to leave or the manager wanted shot.  There has been no indication of either in Livramento’s case.
 

23 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said:

 

Probs not the best analogy but there's a few, on here, with mindsets that are reminiscent of some of my colleagues in the Fire Service when Management were throwing hideous changes to shifts etc etc. 

The gaffers would send out rumours of an extreme shift pattern, for eg, and we'd get lads (then) coughing up their own, slightly more palatable, versions of a shift pattern. 

'course us FBU reps were saying "ram that shit right up ya arse. We'll fight for what we already have" 

 

Now I'm not naive enough to disregard PSR and it's implications but, for me, there's way too much of a "sell Tino" & "if anyone needs to go, sell Gordon" patter. 

 

Mind there's a few saying sell these guys because they don't rate them 🙄 which is worse, obviously. 

 

 

 

Gordon and Livramento are good footballers, which is why they’d attract good money.  The situation is what it is - are people going to hoy a leppy when the club does sell a first teamer that we wouldn’t necessarily want sold?  All seems a bit soft to me tbh - football has always had player trading.  I’m happy if we get to the summer with nothing but new players and no-one is out the door - but there’ll also be zero anger from me if any of our players is sold (provided it’s for a good price and Howe sanctions the sale). 

[johnny36]

Would Conor Bradley at Liverpool be realistic.. Id imagine hes frustrated that Trent is leaving and them bringing in Frimpong would reduce his gametime

 

 

Edited Sunday at 09:08 by johnny36

[Kimbo]

Given that I can’t see a reasonably priced replacement that is as good as him in the premier league, and we have enough on our plate with the various holes in our squad, I’d rather just not sell. 

[r0cafella]

3 minutes ago, johnny36 said:

Would Conor Bradley at Liverpool be realistic.. Id imagine hes frustrated that Trent is leaving and them bringing in Frimpong would reduce his gametime

 

 

 

Injury prone and not a patch on Tino. 

[TRon]

2 minutes ago, Kimbo said:

Given that I can’t see a reasonably priced replacement that is as good as him in the premier league, and we have enough on our plate with the various holes in our squad, I’d rather just not sell. 

 

I think that is the club's position as well tbf, Romano seems to be saying the same thing. City want to buy him but we are pricing him out of a move. 

[mighty__mag]

2 hours ago, KaKa said:

 

The only other player I can think of with Prem experience, that offers similar traits as far as one on one defending, ball carrying, strength, speed and athleticism, and that can play both sides at full back, who is similar in age with potential to improve further is Djed Spence.

 

Spurs would probably ask for £60 million. So Man City should just go over there instead. They can afford him.

 

Vanderson Monaco 23 and Munoz of Palace, but 29.

 

Bellanova ?

 

Tbh, we should be all over Vanderson even with Tino staying put, perfect cover with Tripps probably off.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 10:40 by mighty__mag

[Gawalls]

39 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Yep, without the restrictions this wouldn’t even be a point of discussion - the only reason to sell would be if the player wanted to leave or the manager wanted shot.  There has been no indication of either in Livramento’s case.
 

Gordon and Livramento are good footballers, which is why they’d attract good money.  The situation is what it is - are people going to hoy a leppy when the club does sell a first teamer that we wouldn’t necessarily want sold?  All seems a bit soft to me tbh - football has always had player trading.  I’m happy if we get to the summer with nothing but new players and no-one is out the door - but there’ll also be zero anger from me if any of our players is sold (provided it’s for a good price and Howe sanctions the sale). 

I’m telling you if we sell Gordon or Livramento I’ll be so fucking indifferent because I trust the system.

[duo]

10 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

All of our players are available for purchase - it’s all a question of other clubs being able to afford them.  
 

The Sky Six have always traded players amongst themselves - our income is dwarfed by theirs, so if they come in with the right money then the player is off.

 

I think Man City - if they’re interested enough - will pay what it takes.  If we get close to double what we paid, the lad is off (the £100m valuations on here notwithstanding, obviously).  The lad looks much better at LB than he does at RB, but he’s not our best LB.
 

I couldn’t give much of a shite as long as all of the money (more importantly headroom) is available for Howe to spend - which it will be.  And if the lad goes, it’s the manager’s call.

 

I’ve no idea where this idea that we don’t sell our players comes from - every club sells their players.  If we are actually going to get to where the ownership claimed, there is a real chance that none of the current squad are there when we do.  

I disagree - I think the club is so financially secure we don't have to sell our best players and some players are - atm - untouchable - unless someone offers a ridiculous offer.  The club are trying to build a team to compete, we have CL football next season so we need to add quality not sell our best players. And the club/owners know that and Tino falls into that bracket.  The lad was one of our most consistent performers last season and his versatility helped us win a cup and gain CL football. Players like him aren't that easy to replace. Yes Clubs like City sell but only players who tend not to be getting enough games or no longer part of their plans.  

 

 

Edited Sunday at 09:54 by duo

[High Five o]

We should never sell Tino unless it’s a incredibly stupid fee.