Jørgen Strand Larsen

[healthyaddiction]

4 minutes ago, JonBez comesock said:

We probably we have around £20m spare ?

Let's be honest, none of us know how much we have to spend. Given we're certainly going to sell Isak next summer at the latest, we are probably able to speculate a bit more.

[relámpago blanco]

1 hour ago, healthyaddiction said:

Let's be honest, none of us know how much we have to spend. Given we're certainly going to sell Isak next summer at the latest, we are probably able to speculate a bit more.

Given we bid 70-80M for Sesko I'd say we have circa 120m without selling Isak.

 

 

Edited August 23, 2025 by relámpago blanco

[KetteringMag]

I’m not sure someone plays 78 minutes with a duff Achilles to be honest 

[toontownman]

1 hour ago, healthyaddiction said:

Let's be honest, none of us know how much we have to spend. Given we're certainly going to sell Isak next summer at the latest, we are probably able to speculate a bit more.

We are also still being linked to another AM/CM and defender, so who knows what we have planned. 

[Matt1892]

If Isak stays we can offer him a buy out clause in his contract that has to be activated before 30th June 2026, which falls in this financial fair play year.

[relámpago blanco]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

If Isak stays we can offer him a buy out clause in his contract that has to be activated before 30th June 2026, which falls in this financial fair play year.

He'd have to sign a new contract for that. 

[Chris_R]

15 minutes ago, relámpago blanco said:

He'd have to sign a new contract for that. 

 

If it was a 3 year contract (or less), with equal or greater wages, there'd be literally no reason for him not to.

[LFEE]

1 hour ago, KetteringMag said:

I’m not sure someone plays 78 minutes with a duff Achilles to be honest 

If it was anything like mine the pain grows over time during a game. Can feel fine initially.

[SUPERTOON]

7 hours ago, Matt1892 said:

If Isak stays we can offer him a buy out clause in his contract that has to be activated before 30th June 2026, which falls in this financial fair play year.

He shouldn’t be offered a new deal at all. 

[Coffee_Johnny]

10 hours ago, JonBez comesock said:

We probably we have around £20m spare ?

Can’t we rely on a big sale next summer? 

[Displayname]

8 hours ago, Chris_R said:

 

If it was a 3 year contract (or less), with equal or greater wages, there'd be literally no reason for him not to.

Well that sets a shitty example if players can get improved contracts with no upside to the club just because they throw a hissy fit.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

40 minutes ago, Displayname said:

Well that sets a shitty example if players can get improved contracts with no upside to the club just because they throw a hissy fit.

 

It's not just throwing a hissy fit though, it seems pretty much true that Amanda (probably rightly) at least heavily suggested a new contract for summer 24 which didn't materialise (or to be more factually we just turned around and said no), then we (again rightly) put a value on Isak that puts him in the elite bracket of player.

 

Put aside the behaviour and a new contract this summer would absolutely have been the right thing to do.

 

Making good on that with a clause - and I like June as it falls in a PSR period, gives the summer to replace and next summer is a WC year which complicates the transfer window - is a pragmatic decision for the club.

 

Big caveat here though, it needs to be incentive driven to get the top wedge even with a potentially lower release fee of we qualify for CL again and the real big one on that there has to be an environment when Eddie and the lads will welcome him back in after a contrite apology 

[oldtype]

Improved contacts almost never have actual upside for the club, you’re mostly just burning guaranteed years by converting them to higher salary and then maybe even adding some post-prime years where he’ll underperform the contract at the end. 
 

The only reason to do it is if you need to keep the player happy. Looking for upside is thinking about it the wrong way.

[Displayname]

1 minute ago, oldtype said:

Improved contacts almost never have actual upside for the club, you’re mostly just burning guaranteed years by converting them to higher salary and then maybe even adding some post-prime years where he’ll underperform the contract at the end. 
 

The only reason to do it is if you need to keep the player happy. Looking for upside is thinking about it the wrong way.

They always get a longer lenght with improved wages.

Would be shocked if you can find an example of a player that just got a wage boost without an increased lenght on their contract.

[Chris_R]

2 hours ago, Displayname said:

Well that sets a shitty example if players can get improved contracts with no upside to the club just because they throw a hissy fit.

Didn't say that's what we should offer him, it was an extreme example. 

 

Plus the upside to the club might be that he knuckles down and starts playing and scoring goals. 

[Displayname]

21 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

Didn't say that's what we should offer him, it was an extreme example. 

 

Plus the upside to the club might be that he knuckles down and starts playing and scoring goals. 

I don't mind giving him a new contract to lift his mood and change the narrative. But it has to include an extension and not just be on Isak's terms.

[Mattoon]

2 hours ago, Displayname said:

They always get a longer lenght with improved wages.

Would be shocked if you can find an example of a player that just got a wage boost without an increased lenght on their contract.

 

It's the increased length that covers the cost of the contract by thinning out the amortisation

[Chris_R]

31 minutes ago, Displayname said:

I don't mind giving him a new contract to lift his mood and change the narrative. But it has to include an extension and not just be on Isak's terms.

 

Do you think there's any prospect at all that he's here in 3.5 years time? I'd suggest the chance of him signing a 4+ year contract are vanishingly small.

 

He's gone sometime in the next 3 years. It's just a question of when, to who, for how much, and what he does with himself in the meantime. If we can help that last part by giving him better terms, it may be worth it.

[Rich]

2 hours ago, Displayname said:

They always get a longer lenght with improved wages.

Would be shocked if you can find an example of a player that just got a wage boost without an increased lenght on their contract.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cde34gnr558o

 

[Displayname]

7 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cde34gnr558o

 

Should have made a diaclaimer of not including players near the end of their careers

[Displayname]

10 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

 

Do you think there's any prospect at all that he's here in 3.5 years time? I'd suggest the chance of him signing a 4+ year contract are vanishingly small.

 

He's gone sometime in the next 3 years. It's just a question of when, to who, for how much, and what he does with himself in the meantime. If we can help that last part by giving him better terms, it may be worth it.

If he gets a release clause with improved wages there might be a chance he signs.

[Rich]

Not as shocked as I’d hoped for.

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

26 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

 

Do you think there's any prospect at all that he's here in 3.5 years time? I'd suggest the chance of him signing a 4+ year contract are vanishingly small.

 

He's gone sometime in the next 3 years. It's just a question of when, to who, for how much, and what he does with himself in the meantime. If we can help that last part by giving him better terms, it may be worth it.

I don’t think anyone realistically expects him to stay beyond next summer regardless of what happens in the remainder of this window, but extending the contract by at least a year, means a buying club is more likely to pay the release clause than wait until his deal expires or tries to bid below the release clause value

[Toon1984]

1 hour ago, Chris_R said:

Didn't say that's what we should offer him, it was an extreme example. 

 

Plus the upside to the club might be that he knuckles down and starts playing and scoring goals. 

So the upside is that he adheres to the contract he already has? Glad you’re not brokering deals for the club.

[Mike]

We talking about that rat? Fuck him and his contract. He shouldn't be offered shit. 225 for LIverpool, 200 million domestically 150 abroad. Let him Anelka around Europe for a decade the fucking pig.