Benjamin Šeško (playing for Man United)

[gdm]

1 minute ago, Wolfcastle said:

They weren't nearly as keen to assign the Isak replacement designation to Joao Pedro or Ekitike before the Liverpool attempts at Isak.

 

 

 

Who weren’t ?

[duo]

12 minutes ago, gdm said:

every reporter and journalist has said explicitly or intimated Šeško is Isak’s replacement.
 

we are continuing to talk to Brentford about Wissa as Wilson’s replacement 

 

They are reporting that because logically that makes sense but also doesn't make it so.  We are still a long way to signing Wissa.

[nufcjmc]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

Doesn't 150m potentially give us ~450m to spend because of amortisation and the 3 year rolling psr thing?

The other years though need to be covered through income or outgoing not sure the club would go max now to then have no psr wiggle room in following windows as we have a pile of older players that will need cycling out and replacing.

[Casey]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

Doesn't 150m potentially give us ~450m to spend because of amortisation and the 3 year rolling psr thing?

You can't amortise a sale, so you could drop loads this year but you'd need to keep selling to ensure you losses don't break the £105m each following year. 

[Heron]

2 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

They can absolutely afford him like. PSR expert on Talksport the other day estimated they could spend £400m this summer with no issue and no need to sell.

 

Whether they’re willing to match whatever our asking price is, though, I don’t know.

 

I'd like to know how like - as I'm curious where that puts us. At a guess without CL last year probably down to 250m immediately and then the league position and everything else. Probably £150m?

[Decky]

6 minutes ago, Heron said:

If Liverpool cannot afford Isak - what is fanciful about it?

 

It'll already be done on the basis we get Sesko imo. There's no way we're lumping that money on him without the Isak sale. 

[Zero]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

Doesn't 150m potentially give us ~450m to spend because of amortisation and the 3 year rolling psr thing?

Kinda, assuming no further purchase in the next few window

 

its a three year rolling criteria so even if we spend big this summer we will only got hit 2 years later. 

PSR is not an issue for this window. It might be for 2026 and likely for 2027.

 

[Vinny Green Balls]

2 minutes ago, madras said:

Wouldn't the issue there be that teams would know we need to offload by the PSR deadline so could low ball ? Alternatively he has another good season and Barce, PSG etc enter the race.

 

Edit.... I had Isak down as leaving next summer as well.

 

 

 

Could be mistaken, but we won't have a PSR issue next summer if we got Sesko and Guehi. Not sure that we'd need to offload before the PSR deadline.

[Heron]

Just now, Decky said:

 

It'll already be done on the basis we get Sesko imo. There's no way we're lumping that money on him without the Isak sale. 

I'm not so sure. Maybe we've just realised it's shit or bust time...

[gdm]

1 minute ago, duo said:

They are reporting that because logically that makes sense but also doesn't make it so.  We are still a long way to signing Wissa.

Well yes. This whole conversation is what we think is going to happen. I just happen to agree with the journalists 

[madras]

Just now, Vinny Green Balls said:

Could be mistaken, but we won't have a PSR issue next summer if we got Sesko and Guehi. Not sure that we'd need to offload before the PSR deadline.

Hope so but it would be close, add in Elanga.

[Vinny Green Balls]

1 minute ago, madras said:

Hope so but it would be close, add in Elanga.

As Zero said, it will absolutely be an issue in 2027, but I don't think that we'd need to sell before the PSR deadline. We'd probably have all summer to offload the likes of Isak.

 

But I could be way off base here.

 

 

Edited August 4, 2025 by Vinny Green Balls

[Displayname]

1 minute ago, madras said:

Hope so but it would be close, add in Elanga.

And a CM hopefully.

[madras]

Just now, Displayname said:

And a CM hopefully.

Loan or loan with obligation if need be.

[TRon]

15 minutes ago, STM said:

 

Exactly, the idea that we will end the window with Sesko and Isak is fanciful, the only way that happens is if Liverpool don't even get close to our asking price and only then might we wait until next summer.

 

 

With a starting bid of £110m they aren't going to go to £150m like. Fuck them. 

[LaurentRobert]

Sesko is no way worth this amount of money.

 

Isak's timing for agitating a move has well and truly fucked us. Had he made his intentions clear at the end of the season, then we wouldn't be in such a desperate situation overpaying for players. That, on top of the way he's disrespected the fans, Eddie, and his teammates in recent weeks has left a real sour taste. 

 

I'd still love to see him back in the black n white shirt but it'd take some seriously grovelling on his behalf for me to ever cheer him on as if nothing ever happened this summer. 

 

 

 

 

 

[gdm]

I mean, if I’m wrong and we keep Isak and sign Sesko we are heading for a title challenge. I just can’t see it  

[Decky]

3 minutes ago, Heron said:

I'm not so sure. Maybe we've just realised it's shit or bust time...

 

It's hard to know. Althought when you look at the rumour mill we've Sesko advancing, talk of Wissa this week too and even Guehi popping up again. Theres money coming from somewhere if it's to be believed.

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Doesn't 150m potentially give us ~450m to spend because of amortisation and the 3 year rolling psr thing?

You’d need to deduct the remaining book value of Isak’s contract - and while it gives a lot of headroom in the current rolling three years, once 25/26 drops off you have potential problems if your income hasn’t grown to cover the gap.

 

PSR forces any club which doesn’t have big six income to sell its biggest assets if it hopes to eventually compete - which is why we’ll always be at the mercy of the bigger clubs (unless we add around £150m+ additional income sharpish)

[KaKa]

There will definitely be scope to keep both Isak and Sesko if Liverpool don't pay a fee the club deems worthwhile.

 

The Ramsdale deal saved us a significant amount from what we had set aside for a goalie.

 

And then I imagine we will have also have other affordable options at centre back and central midfield that we can go for if Isak isn't sold.

 

Not beyond the realms of possibility at all.

[madras]

1 minute ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

As Zero said, it will absolutely be an issue in 2027, but I don't think that we'd need to sell before the PSR deadline. We'd probably have all summer to offload the likes of Isak.

Dont say "the likes" man ffs.Isak, deadwood and thats its......OK !

[Vinny Green Balls]

Just now, gdm said:

I mean, if I’m wrong and we keep Isak and sign Sesko we are heading for a title challenge. I just can’t see it  

not if we don't get the other needed players in.

[NSG]

5 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Doesn't 150m potentially give us ~450m to spend because of amortisation and the 3 year rolling psr thing?

No, it means we can spend an extra £150m in total over the next three years and have a net neutral bottom line in PSR terms. 
 

If we spent £450m this summer then over the next 3 years we’d have 3/5ths of that (assuming 5 year contracts) hit the accounts in that time period - ie £270m, meaning we’d be in a net spend of £120m (£270m spent less £150m received)

 

We’d then also have £90m hitting in year 4 and £90m in year 5 and no way to cover it.

[TRC]

90m for Šeško seems excessive. 

[Heron]

1 minute ago, Decky said:

 

It's hard to know. Althought when you look at the rumour mill we've Sesko advancing, talk of Wissa this week too and even Guehi popping up again. Theres money coming from somewhere if it's to be believed.

Somewhen too...