Yoane Wissa

[r0cafella]

5 minutes ago, andycap said:

Well they are like, difference being he's a striker and strikers go for a lot more money. 

 

 

 

Strikers don't go for 5x defenders. It's all good though the club themselves know they overpaid it was needs must etc. 

 

Hopefully we are more organised and less green going into future windows. 

[andycap]

Just now, STM said:

 

Im not so sure thats true mind. Theres being "available", and being available.

He was training with the squad is all I know, andrews said it was there choice to leave him out. 

[Kid Icarus]

7 minutes ago, Adam P said:

What exactly did Wissa do? He left their pre-season for talks with the owners and then it was leaked that during that meeting he had threatened not to play for them again. Did he then go back to training with them or did he then go on strike?

He briefly went on strike, deleted all his social media posts about Brentford, and then on the second last day of the window released a statement reiterating that he wanted to leave and promises had been broken. 

 

Isak-lite basically

[andycap]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

Strikers don't go for 5x defenders. It's all good though the club themselves know they overpaid it was needs must etc. 

 

Hopefully we are more organised and less green going into future windows. 

He's a proven goalscorer in this league though are you sure we aren't undervalueing him as fans? 

[STM]

Just now, r0cafella said:

Strikers don't go for 5x defenders. It's all good though the club themselves know they overpaid it was needs must etc. 

 

Hopefully we are more organised and less green going into future windows. 

 

Thats the key, the future.

 

I think we are finally in a position where we have a team of "assets" to sell, which we didnt have on day 1 of the takeover.

 

I can see a scenario where every season we sell someone like Harvey Barnes (im not trying to sell him), to boost our kitty and refresh the squad, without the team suffering massively.

[andycap]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

He briefly went on strike, deleted all his social media posts about Brentford, and then on the second last day of the window released a statement reiterating that he wanted to leave and promises had been broken. 

 

Isak-lite basically

But was training with the squad so was still on good terms with the players. 

[Kid Icarus]

Just now, andycap said:

But was training with the squad so was still on good terms with the players. 

Who's to say, but I don't think it changes much. He's basically been a not as extreme Isak who's apologised for it. In isolation it's still shite behaviour, it's more that in the context of Isak it's not quite as bad.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

7 minutes ago, STM said:

 

Im not so sure thats true mind. Theres being "available", and being available.

 

Issues at home?

[STM]

1 minute ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

 

Issues at home?

 Always mate.

[andycap]

5 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Who's to say, but I don't think it changes much. He's basically been a not as extreme Isak who's apologised for it. In isolation it's still shite behaviour, it's more that in the context of Isak it's not quite as bad.

I reckon he would've played for them again had he not got his move. 

[r0cafella]

14 minutes ago, andycap said:

He's a proven goalscorer in this league though are you sure we aren't undervalueing him as fans? 

Yeah I'm sure. As I've maintained very good player but Brentford have had our pants down. Incase you aren't aware they promised him they would sell him for half of what we stumped up. It was needs must I understand why we did the deal. 

[andycap]

2 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Yeah I'm sure. As I've maintained very good player but Brentford have had our pants down. Incase you aren't aware they promised him they would sell him for half of what we stumped up. It was needs must I understand why we did the deal. 

They had an option to extend aswell so I can see how they had a bit more wriggle room. 

[PRL]

He’s 6 months older than Wilson when he signed, Wilson came off the back of a season with 8 goals in 35 appearances (assuming ChatGPT isn’t lying) and cost £20m. With the insane transfer inflation in the last 5 years and Wissa scoring 2.5x the number of goals in an admittedly better team but one of similar profile to Bournemouth, I’m going to try and tell myself it’s not as much of an obscene overpay as I initially thought. 

[Adam P]

15 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Who's to say, but I don't think it changes much. He's basically been a not as extreme Isak who's apologised for it. In isolation it's still shite behaviour, it's more that in the context of Isak it's not quite as bad.

 

Changes the price maybe? If Wissa was refusing to train and saying 'if you dont sell me i will refuse to play', then i dont see how Brentford get 55m. I can see how we only got 125m as Isak went scorched earth. 

[Hhtoon]

I really wish the faux accountants would pack it in. You dont value your assets purely on purchase price and final NBV or else no-one would buy anything ever. You analyse what they brought to the business during their use. He was clearly bought for this purpose and not for a PSR "win".

 

Burn - if we were to let him go for free this year, would you say we'd made a £15m loss? Fuck no - he's helped deliver higher league positions and champions league which bring huge ££ benefits. And then how much do you value a trophy and the feel good factor to the fans?

 

Wissa - if he replaces a good % of Isaks goals for the next 4 years, it could/will result in the same as the above and the financial benefits would hopefully outweigh some of his fee. Not to mention players dont die at 33  We may well recoup some cost. 

 

He might tank of course, but I'll reserve my judgement until he's actually kicked a ball for us and beyond 

[wyn davies]

If we've overpaid for him,it's immaterial,  as the return in goals, league position, cup  positions, and if we qualify for knock out stages CL thanks to his goals, then the returns will far outweigh what we paid for him.

[r0cafella]

57 minutes ago, Hhtoon said:

I really wish the faux accountants would pack it in. You dont value your assets purely on purchase price and final NBV or else no-one would buy anything ever. You analyse what they brought to the business during their use. He was clearly bought for this purpose and not for a PSR "win".

 

Burn - if we were to let him go for free this year, would you say we'd made a £15m loss? Fuck no - he's helped deliver higher league positions and champions league which bring huge ££ benefits. And then how much do you value a trophy and the feel good factor to the fans?

 

Wissa - if he replaces a good % of Isaks goals for the next 4 years, it could/will result in the same as the above and the financial benefits would hopefully outweigh some of his fee. Not to mention players dont die at 33  We may well recoup some cost. 

 

He might tank of course, but I'll reserve my judgement until he's actually kicked a ball for us and beyond 

We will recoup some money but that's not the point nor should it be the objective. We will be revenue constrained in comparison to those we are chasing for a long time and this player trading is important to augment our revenue. 

 

Given your terminology I'm sure you understand this point. 

[andycap]

I'd rather have a wissa who looks damn good, his game is taylormade for our style a lot more  than isak was.

I can't see him going missing like isak used to against certain teams. put him on penalties and there's no reason that he can't hit isaks numbers or higher. 

[Elric]

1 hour ago, Hhtoon said:

Not to mention players dont die at 33  

 

I know what you mean, but... uhh... 😅

[Hhtoon]

9 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

We will recoup some money but that's not the point nor should it be the objective. We will be revenue constrained in comparison to those we are chasing for a long time and this player trading is important to augment our revenue. 

 

Given your terminology I'm sure you understand this point. 

 

Fundamentally disagree myself, this is not black and white (pun intended) and you can't choose just one revenue stream to judge success. Well you can of course if you want, it's anyone's perogative based on their outlook or agenda. Same as stats 

 

Players generate revenue outside of just their trading - higher league positions and competition runs increase prize monies and tv revenues and in turn higher sponsorship etc etc

[Geordie Magpie]

If we think of Wissa as £25m + Kelly & Longstaff (£30m) the deal doesn't sound bad.... We won't give a fuck about £55m when he starts banging the goals in!

[KaKa]

 

[Hhtoon]

4 minutes ago, Geordie Magpie said:

If we think of Wissa as £25m + Kelly & Longstaff (£30m) the deal doesn't sound bad.... We won't give a fuck about £55m when he starts banging the goals in!

 

Exactly this! People get so hung up on the financials but would you rather see Wissa bagging 20 goals to get used top 4, or another Minteh who never plays for us but gives us that sweet, sweet £30m PSR dopamine hit 

[Yorkie]

Not trying to engage in any mental gymnastics because I don't rate Wissa's actions, but the biggest difference in his case (for me) is that he was leaving a club that made it absolutely clear that they buy to sell and have no meaningful impressions on progress. Why wouldn't a player like him want to go to someone like Newcastle after the summer they'd had?

[TRon]

1 hour ago, andycap said:

He's a proven goalscorer in this league though are you sure we aren't undervalueing him as fans? 

 

 

Too many people are undervaluing him. Look at the quality of his goals, they aren't flukes. 

 

If we paid a premium it's because we need guaranteed goals, and he's as close as we were going to get to that. These posts bitching about the money will all look really silly in a year's time. 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2025 by TRon