Jørgen Strand Larsen

[KennyUtd]

2 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

I half-watched a couple of Wolves games last season as I was sat on the sofa listening to 120bpm chuggy techno and the telly was only on as a mild visual distraction

 

And this lad caught my eye, he looked like he was decent

 

And that's all I have to say about that

 

 

Don't do drugs kids. 

[The Bonk]

Just now, KennyUtd said:

Don't do drugs kids. 

or, if you do, get the really expensive ones.

[Chicken Dancer]

I think he’ll score goals but is absolutely not worth anywhere near £60m, like. That’s very contradictory I know, but Andy Carroll or Charlie Austin would probably score goals for us and would be a hell of a lot cheaper. 
 

We’re not dropping £60m on a striker without planning for him to be our striker long term - we simply cant afford any misses for that price. I’d much rather they kicked the can down the road and signed a cheaper player for the short term and addressed the striker situation in the future.

 

I appreciate the positivity of people and of course I’ll be well behind him and hoping he does well - we do have a cracking transfer record - but if you were told we’d be signing him for £60m in May you’d be lying if you said you’d be buzzing. The window has naturally lowered people’s expectations and I totally understand why.

 

If it’s just about getting a body in to get us through the next few months there’s much better ways to use the resources. Desperate times call for desperate measures but I bet Wolves can’t believe their luck. 

[bobbydazzla]

1 minute ago, Chicken Dancer said:

I think he’ll score goals but is absolutely not worth anywhere near £60m, like. That’s very contradictory I know, but Andy Carroll or Charlie Austin would probably score goals for us and would be a hell of a lot cheaper. 
 

We’re not dropping £60m on a striker without planning for him to be our striker long term - we simply cant afford any misses for that price. I’d much rather they kicked the can down the road and signed a cheaper player for the short term and addressed the striker situation in the future.

 

I appreciate the positivity of people and of course I’ll be well behind him and hoping he does well - we do have a cracking transfer record - but if you were told we’d be signing him for £60m in May you’d be lying if you said you’d be buzzing. The window has naturally lowered people’s expectations and I totally understand why.

 

If it’s just about getting a body in to get us through the next few months there’s much better ways to use the resources. Desperate times call for desperate measures but I bet Wolves can’t believe their luck. 

 

 

Tell me you want us to sign Jamie Vardy, without telling me you want us to sign Jamie Vardy

 

[sempuki]

Could have had Pedro at the start of the window for the same fee if we didn't fanny about. That said, I'd take this lad for whatever. Desperate times.

[Mattoon]

I think modern football has got us all too tied up in transfer fees and wages and financial structures, PSR and the like,  not a bean counter and I don't care, that's someone else's job to worry about, I just want someone through the door that's going to turn these losses and draws into draws and wins. JSL looks like he'll do a good job at that with the service we can provide for him and that's all that matters to me right now.

[bobbydazzla]

1 minute ago, sempuki said:

Could have had Pedro at the start of the window for the same fee if we didn't fanny about. That said, I'd take this lad for whatever. Desperate times.

 

No we couldn't have had Pedro for the same fee because he wanted to sign for Chelsea rather than NUFC

 

 

Edited August 27, 2025 by bobbydazzla

[Crimson Cardigan]

1 minute ago, sempuki said:

Could have had Pedro at the start of the window for the same fee if we didn't fanny about. That said, I'd take this lad for whatever. Desperate times.

I don’t think so. He’d have strung us along until Chelsea bid. He’s that type of guy.

[Mattoon]

Just now, bobbydazzla said:

 

No we couldn't have had Pedro because he wanted to sign for Chelsea rather than NUFC

 

ONLY WANTED CHELSEA

[TBG]

£30m + Botman and Willock. Get it done.

[nufcjmc]

9 minutes ago, Mattoon said:

I think modern football has got us all too tied up in transfer fees and wages and financial structures, PSR and the like,  not a bean counter and I don't care, that's someone else's job to worry about, I just want someone through the door that's going to turn these losses and draws into draws and wins. JSL looks like he'll do a good job at that with the service we can provide for him and that's all that matters to me right now.

I agree and I dont have the brains for the finances to really debate it. 

 

However if one massive over spend means the club throw out the line we cant do business due to having no more PSR headway and it all stemmed from a poorly planned massive over spend on a player we would all be more than a little annoyed. 

 

I dont care about how much it is and dont have to worry about how its getting funded we also know the club will spend everything it can be allowed to. However still doesnt stop you keeping a little eye on things and I certainly find myself saying "well if we spend it here and we have an injury or an issue with a player will there be anymore in the kitty to go sort it" or " who will have to be sold next year if this goes tits up and we need to balance the books"

 

Depressing but due to our level of income its a fact of life while any form of rules are in place. 

 

Also to factor in this has been a big outlay summer but still quite a few older players and running out of contract players to sort next summer it never ends really. 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2025 by nufcjmc

[sushimonster85]

17 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Andy Carroll or Charlie Austin would probably score goals for us and would be a hell of a lot cheaper. 

 

No, no they wouldn't. 

[The College Dropout]

He’ll bags goals for us.  
 

Him being the Wilson replacement is wishful thinking though. 

[madras]

18 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

Andy Carroll or Charlie Austin would probably score goals for us and would be a hell of a lot cheaper

On this line of thinking I'd be prepared to give Billy Whitehurst a short term contract for when/if the snake returns to training.

[Rosenrot]

Glacial

[Chicken Dancer]

1 minute ago, sushimonster85 said:

 

No, no they wouldn't. 

You understand the point I’m making though, surely? Osula would probably hit double figures if he played every week.

 

We obviously don’t want him else we’d have bid for him in June, so why when PSR is so tight drop £60m on a player that’s potentially 6/7th on your list? There’s being desperate but then there’s being stupid.

 

It could be the difference in a year or two from having to keep a Bruno or a Tonali. As I said before our transfer record is so good you have to expect he will do well, but I just think there’s other ways we could have turned in the short term and addressed the striker situation when we have a Sporting Director and competent people in place. 

[nufc123]

I have some concerns about his overall game, but hes good in the box.

[Shadow Puppets]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

He’ll bags goals for us.  
 

Him being the Wilson replacement is wishful thinking though. 

There isn't a "Wilson" replacement in my opinion. We are going to try to buy two good strikers who give us different things. Neither will be Isak quality, but both together will offer more to the squad than we've had.

[Yorkie]

20 minutes ago, sempuki said:

Could have had Pedro at the start of the window for the same fee if we didn't fanny about. That said, I'd take this lad for whatever. Desperate times.

 

Nah, Brighton knocked back ~£50m bids from both us and Chelsea. The player then itched for Chelsea (obvious reasons) and the two clubs got the deal done. 

[LFEE]

22 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

I think he’ll score goals but is absolutely not worth anywhere near £60m, like. That’s very contradictory I know, but Andy Carroll or Charlie Austin would probably score goals for us and would be a hell of a lot cheaper. 
 

We’re not dropping £60m on a striker without planning for him to be our striker long term - we simply cant afford any misses for that price. I’d much rather they kicked the can down the road and signed a cheaper player for the short term and addressed the striker situation in the future.

 

I appreciate the positivity of people and of course I’ll be well behind him and hoping he does well - we do have a cracking transfer record - but if you were told we’d be signing him for £60m in May you’d be lying if you said you’d be buzzing. The window has naturally lowered people’s expectations and I totally understand why.

 

If it’s just about getting a body in to get us through the next few months there’s much better ways to use the resources. Desperate times call for desperate measures but I bet Wolves can’t believe their luck. 

Great post. Even Murphy on the Talksport thought £55m was more than generous hinting that we were already way over paying at that stage even. Thats someone who’d love Isak at Liverpool to add context 

[The College Dropout]

Just now, Shadow Puppets said:

There isn't a "Wilson" replacement in my opinion. We are going to try to buy two good strikers who give us different things. Neither will be Isak quality, but both together will offer more to the squad than we've had.

If we sign Strand Larsen, We are selling Isak imo.  We may not get a second striker but we are selling Isak. 
 

I would prefer that to overspending on 2 strikers in their mid 20’s with lower ceilings.  

[Shadow Puppets]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

If we sign Strand Larsen, We are selling Isak imo.  We may not get a second striker but we are selling Isak. 
 

I would prefer that to overspending on 2 strikers in their mid 20’s with lower ceilings.  

I disagree, but let's see.

[sushimonster85]

1 minute ago, Chicken Dancer said:

You understand the point I’m making though, surely? Osula would probably hit double figures if he played every week.

 

We obviously don’t want him else we’d have bid for him in June, so why when PSR is so tight drop £60m on a player that’s potentially 6/7th on your list? There’s being desperate but then there’s being stupid.

 

It could be the difference in a year or two from having to keep a Bruno or a Tonali. As I said before our transfer record is so good you have to expect he will do well, but I just think there’s other ways we could have turned in the short term and addressed the striker situation when we have a Sporting Director and competent people in place. 

 

I think you're vastly underestimating the level of the PL. If it were that easy to hit double figures way more players would be doing it.

 

I get what you're saying in that he clearly wasn't first on the list. But we are probably talking about two different lists, knowing what we know now. There was the 'Isak replacement' list. Pedro, Ekitike, Sesko. Then there's the 'Wilson replacement' list. I think as this window has gone on with the level of uncertainty a separate category has emerged of lads who could potentially be both. I think that's what they may see this lad as.

[Shearergol]

9 minutes ago, Chicken Dancer said:

You understand the point I’m making though, surely? Osula would probably hit double figures if he played every week.

 

We obviously don’t want him else we’d have bid for him in June, so why when PSR is so tight drop £60m on a player that’s potentially 6/7th on your list? There’s being desperate but then there’s being stupid.

 

It could be the difference in a year or two from having to keep a Bruno or a Tonali. As I said before our transfer record is so good you have to expect he will do well, but I just think there’s other ways we could have turned in the short term and addressed the striker situation when we have a Sporting Director and competent people in place. 

 

 

[BermyToon]

I prefer this lad over Wissa cause of a likely higher resale value and cause he hasn't gone on strike like Wissa has.