12 minutes ago, Nibs said:

Love that line - Sterling can leave if Felix returns. As if there are plenty of clubs out there willing to stump up a fee for Sterling and pay his massive wages.

That said, don't want Felix but if it was at the expense of Sterling, I would be a Yes.

 

After the Omorodion transfer collapses .... 

we now have to buy Felix in order to give  money  to Athletico for them to buy Conor.

 

Sterling, Mudryck and Noni may all be heading out the door.  Noni for sure, he's been playing well and Newcastle will want him, especially if they lose Gordon to Liverpool.

57 minutes ago, Nibs said:

Love that line - Sterling can leave if Felix returns. As if there are plenty of clubs out there willing to stump up a fee for Sterling and pay his massive wages.

That said, don't want Felix but if it was at the expense of Sterling, I would be a Yes.

 

I agree with your first sentence but can't agree with the second I'm afraid.

I would take Sterling over Felix any day of the week. Sterling at his very worse at least still tries to make things happen, you can't say the same for Felix. The only reason they want Sterling gone is cause of his wages, not cause Felix is better. 

He was pretty much invisible in his 6 month loan. It makes zero sense. Surely this is an off the pitch deal. 

51 minutes ago, TheCeleryKing said:

Had we not signed Pedro, I might have considered Felix.  At the moment we do not need him.
 

We need to sell. A bunch of players.

We dont need any more good or very good players, we have loads, we should only consider world class or elite players.

Winstanley & Stewart should focus on sales only

Edited August 12, 20241 yr by OneTommyLangley

He got a red card in his first appearance and never really recovered Potter got the  tic tac and his loan fizzled out, he's a qual player but the truth of the matter is he's not needed- squad full of similar type of players, if this deal is just a vehicle to offload Conor seems like a lot of money to spend to save money ?

 

6 minutes ago, General said:

He got a red card in his first appearance and never really recovered Potter got the  tic tac and his loan fizzled out, he's a qual player but the truth of the matter is he's not needed- squad full of similar type of players, if this deal is just a vehicle to offload Conor seems like a lot of money to spend to save money ?

 

Exactly...it will be cheaper to keep Connor until they they realise he won't sign a new contract and will go for free next year. So they need to get something out of conner as they at least agreed not to sell him to a Premier league club for more money.

It's a headache!

20 minutes ago, JM7 said:

He was pretty much invisible in his 6 month loan. It makes zero sense. Surely this is an off the pitch deal. 

Disagree, he was one of our most impactful players during that loan spell even when we were sh*t. Not saying he would be my first choice, but he was far from invisible when he was here.

8 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Disagree, he was one of our most impactful players during that loan spell even when we were sh*t. Not saying he would be my first choice, but he was far from invisible when he was here.

Quite the opposite. 

Chances created per 90 - 2022/23 season. 

Ziyech 2.1

Madueke 1.9

Sterling 1.7

Mount 1.7

Havertz 1.4

Pulisic 1.4

Mudryk 1.4

Gallagher 1.2

Felix 0.7

 

Add in his zero defensive work rate, hardly surprising many are upset about this. 

1 hour ago, Nibs said:

Love that line - Sterling can leave if Felix returns. As if there are plenty of clubs out there willing to stump up a fee for Sterling and pay his massive wages.

That said, don't want Felix but if it was at the expense of Sterling, I would be a Yes.

 

Not just that - In reality we could easily afford to lose sterling and still be well stocked in the area. Even with are bloated schedule i dont see how you get game time for by my count 6 Widewide players / Inside forwards as they call them. 

Atletico have offical unveiled Alvarez as their new 82mill signing.

 

So they had the cash without the need to sell Samu. However it appears they are only willing to sign Conor, who they know we will lose for free next season and all that pure profit with him, if we help them out.

And they said Roman did not only how to run the business side properly! We still don't have a shirt sponsor for the second season running .

Edited August 12, 20241 yr by axman2526

13 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Disagree, he was one of our most impactful players during that loan spell even when we were sh*t. Not saying he would be my first choice, but he was far from invisible when he was here.

4 in 16 for statistically the worst attack in about 80 years. Club was in absolute turmoil last time he was here, thought he did pretty well on the whole. 

Don't think he would be anyone's 1st choice given the profile, but for a decent wage and fee, I think he would be a solid addition, also has a decent fitness record too. 

On 19/04/2023 at 18:59, axman2526 said:

I bet they would. He is basically to them what Lukaku is to us.

 

On 19/04/2023 at 18:19, Sconnie Blue said:

Atlético Madrid fear that Chelsea will send João Félix back without any interest in signing him. His performances are concerning. Atleti would be more than happy for a fee of around €80m for Félix.

- @PacojoSER via @atletiuniverse

— Simon Phillips (@siphillipssport) April 19, 2023

 

If the Omorodian deal collapsed due to problems supposedly because of agent fees, then why do we feel obliged to buy Felix instead? Makes no sense just to get Gallagher off the books. We were interested in Omorodian because we needed a striker. We still need a striker. We just bought Neto. We have Nkunku and Palmer in Felix’s position, as well as Carney, who we’re apparently going to sell because he’s surplus to requirements. And now we decide we need Felix for 40m? It’s nuts. If we could get Oblak or a decent CB that would make more sense. But I can’t see the logic here. 

My first thought when I saw the links was WTF. After sleeping on it, it’s not the worst thing. He’d be better as an impact sub than Noni or Sterling IMO. But we have to sell those 2 - let’s face it, we’re almost out of shirt numbers!

Still have a starting attack of Jackson/new striker, Nkunku, Neto, and Palmer.

Subs: Mudryk, Carney (hope he stays), KDH, Felix.

Idk, I don’t think it’s all bad. It could even be good!

23 minutes ago, big blue said:

4 in 16 for statistically the worst attack in about 80 years. Club was in absolute turmoil last time he was here, thought he did pretty well on the whole. 

Don't think he would be anyone's 1st choice given the profile, but for a decent wage and fee, I think he would be a solid addition, also has a decent fitness record too. 

Honestly why are we making do with not 1st choice but decent?  Surely with the current squad we now need the star players added to upgrade rather than push out players we bought for their potential to make room for a mediocre option.   There's no point in us buying mid range players to replace mid tier players.  We need a few cherries.

As I've said before we never needed a player in his position.  Olmo was passed around with a reasonable buyout clause and we never even blinked which is strange for Clearlake.  Barca were busy chasing Williams we could have signed him up if that was what was needed and he's more than decent.  This is all situational not football related bullock.

1 hour ago, JM7 said:

He was pretty much invisible in his 6 month loan. It makes zero sense. Surely this is an off the pitch deal. 

So instead of someone with image rights issues we get someone with no image to speak of. Sounds perfect.

7 minutes ago, mwblue10 said:

My first thought when I saw the links was WTF. After sleeping on it, it’s not the worst thing. He’d be better as an impact sub than Noni or Sterling IMO. But we have to sell those 2 - let’s face it, we’re almost out of shirt numbers!

Still have a starting attack of Jackson/new striker, Nkunku, Neto, and Palmer.

Subs: Mudryk, Carney (hope he stays), KDH, Felix.

Idk, I don’t think it’s all bad. It could even be good!

I really don't want us to sell Madueke. He's the one player that has looked decent in pre-season. I don't see the point in signing these young players on long term contracts if we are just going to sell them two seasons later.

1 hour ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Disagree, he was one of our most impactful players during that loan spell even when we were sh*t. Not saying he would be my first choice, but he was far from invisible when he was here.

He created one big chance which came in his first minute IIRC (Hall's bad miss at Fulham).

Could argue he was technically our best attacker but being the best attacker for Chelsea that season was the equivalent of being the friendliest crocodile.

Edited August 12, 20241 yr by Argo

30 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Atletico have offical unveiled Alvarez as their new 82mill signing.

 

So they had the cash without the need to sell Samu. However it appears they are only willing to sign Conor, who they know we will lose for free next season and all that pure profit with him, if we help them out.

And they said Roman did not only how to run the business side properly! We still don't have a shirt sponsor for the second season running .

They could have swept it all up in the Amortisation game and effectively got a 2 for 1 deal

Alvarez - £82m/5 years = £16.4m

Gallagher - £35m/5 years = £7m

£23.4m amortised per year

Omorodion - £35m straight sale. Net PSR profit this year £11.6m.

 

For us Omorodion £35m/5 years = £7m. Gallagher - £35m straight sale. Net PSR profit this year £28m.

If its not Omorodion we will be walking up and down the aisles looking for a player we can pick up off the shelf for £35m ish that don't break our wage structure.

It doesn't matter who the player is. whether its Felix or someone else. It doesn't matter whether they play for the club or not. If they can get a player 25 or under they will feel that there is resale value as well anyway.

 

We told Conor he doesn't figure in our plans.

Then we offer him a 2 year contract.

Apparently now we can only offload Conor if we agree to buy someone we weren't even interested in.

So his pure profit is eaten up by buying someone we don't need.

Brilliant 

2 minutes ago, The Rising Sun said:

We told Conor he doesn't figure in our plans.

Then we offer him a 2 year contract.

Apparently now we can only offload Conor if we agree to buy someone we weren't even interested in.

So his pure profit is eaten up by buying someone we don't need.

Brilliant 

and offer them a 7 + 1 no doubt.

40 minutes ago, big blue said:

4 in 16 for statistically the worst attack in about 80 years. Club was in absolute turmoil last time he was here, thought he did pretty well on the whole. 

Don't think he would be anyone's 1st choice given the profile, but for a decent wage and fee, I think he would be a solid addition, also has a decent fitness record too. 

The club is still in absolute turmoil 

20 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

I really don't want us to sell Madueke. He's the one player that has looked decent in pre-season. I don't see the point in signing these young players on long term contracts if we are just going to sell them two seasons later.

I don't understand this desire to sell Madueke, it's insane 

19 minutes ago, Scott Harris said:

I really don't want us to sell Madueke. He's the one player that has looked decent in pre-season. I don't see the point in signing these young players on long term contracts if we are just going to sell them two seasons later.

Depends on the fee. I'm with the club on this one that we should only sell If Newcastle put down £45-50m.