To reduce the spam of reports regarding the same move during transfer windows we try to allow **only one submission about each transfer saga per day**. The submission in question also needs to contain relevant new information regarding the potential move, and not just being a "no/minor developments" report.
If there are important/official developments or new valuable information about a saga, we will allow extra threads in the same day, but for the rest of minor news please just comment them as a reply to this comment. Please help us reporting unnecessary threads for being duplicates.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, it’s a bulletproof pure profit investment, I’ve studied the market for years and I’m certain i’ll bank 500% profit; the only regret I have is not buying more.
(I know nothing about stocks, blindly trusted my friends advice bc fomo, spent the money I didn’t really have to spend, bought the stock at its recent peak, lost 30% and counting, don’t buy GME)
If we pulled out of the Olise deal over cost and didn’t push for Williams due to the price of the deal, I don’t see a world in which we’d ever make this happen
I mean, I don't believe this is gonna happen either, but this is not such a simple logic.
We didn't want to spend 60m on Ugarte, but spent 115m on Caicedo.
There's really way more decisions to be taken, even on the financial side, bar just the fee.
you're right, but i don't think it's fair, because vitinha has been a monster at his position.. before kante reminding me he's still the man, i don't see anyone besides rice on the level of vitinha
I mean it all depends on the internal valuations. You didn't pull out of those deals because you couldn't afford it or so but because you felt they weren't worth the money (from my understanding at least) but maybe your SD's and Eghbali think Isak is worth a massive fee..
We pulled out of Olise because he gets a percentage of the release clause paid if it's a Champions League club, Bayern were offering around 220k/week + release clause making it closer to 300k/week for us right?
Not sure on the Williams situation though.
Isak would probably demand high wages on top of an already high transfer fee, I'd love the signing as he's absolutely class but I agree with you on the fact it's never going to happen.
Difference is Newcastle is also up against the FFP/PSR limit so some kind of inflated swap deal that benefits both parties is potentially on the cards (though I still don't think it'll happen)
They are interested in Madueke and Gallagher. We are also both trying to sign Jonathan David, so we would pull out of that. But even with both Madueke and Gallagher they would still want 80 mil plus. Very unlikely
Mail Sport understands conversations have taken place between the clubs and the Blues have indicated a want to sign the Sweden international.
They know that any deal would take a club-record fee beyond the £115m they paid for Moises Caicedo.
> beyond the £115m
he's a good player but that's wild if Chelsea are still pursuing that after being told 115m+
That would be the third highest transfer ever
It would be a silly price but they’re also trying to buy a 24 year old striker who scored 21 goals last season from a club trying to compete for European football. They’ll have to overpay to even get Newcastle to listen.
he's amazing for sure but also his injury issues are a concern especially with our track record
jackson did well and we didnt even get to see nkunku much either. in general we also have a better record with mid priced signings than huge fees.
do we really need to splash?
> He is the second best striker in the league
my comment was more aimed at Chelsea being stupid to pay that fee rather than Newcastle being stupid for demanding it.
I don't think we'll strike a deal - what you say is absolutely true (if he's not refusing training or close to contract expiring then why would you sell him for cheap?)
He's arguably worth that much to Newcastle, he's not worth that much to Chelsea - so we'll just enquire, see the price and move on.
How much of that fee do you reckon Bayern will be able to recoup after 4 years? Part of transfer pricing is about whether the player will retain their value.
I’m sure that’s taken into account but it’s mostly about their impact on the pitch. Even if sell on value was a major factor does it justify nearly double the asking price of a striker that is and will be better for the foreseeable future?
When the club inquiring is a direct competitor? Yes. Because how much would it cost for Newcastle to replace him with another striker with similar potential future value and current on-pitch value?
Would it justify them paying it? Probably not. But good luck to them in finding another <25 y/o striker with 20+ goals in a top league who’s available for less.
We’ll never know. All i’m saying is, you can’t justify asking for nearly double the Kane fee based on potential when Kane will still be better for the foreseeable future. More of a “fuck off” price than his actual value
He is world class and easily has a better all round game than Haaland. He can dribble, run, create assists for other players etc.
Besides Haaland, he's easily the best striker in the Premier League.
Most Newcastle fans would tell you this. The guy is really good.
>He got 0 (2 if you count penalties) assists across all comps in 23/24.
Not disagreeing with your overall point but that's definitely not right. It might be 2 assists and 2 penalties won, but he got assists for Murphy on the last day Vs Brentford, and for Barnes against West Ham
See here at about 50s
https://youtu.be/Pl9j-84NBWE?si=pN21KIGHwjD_HPDh
And here at about 2:30m
https://youtu.be/GrYFVYeTIOI?si=ACeglbzKvQADut3U
See I have a slight issue with speculative statements. The only way to create assists for his teammates is to actually do it.
His xAG is 0.15, which is same as Haaland, similar to Jackson and Havertz, much lower than Watkins, Son and Nunez…
Again, I really like Isak, would love him at Chelsea (won’t happen) but he’s not quite the player OP is trying to claim he is. Nothing wrong with that but if I say Jackson is a good finisher and the stats + output don’t back the claim, it just appears weird
But how do you know he can create assists if he isn't actually creating them? Do the players he's playing with massively underperform their xg? Are they missing sitters all the time? The stats don't seem to back that up.
He was injured for a majority of the season. Judging players by numbers only without any context is not a great way to go.
I guess Nkunku is also bad because his stats were poor (due to him being injured most of the season).
If Chelsea are willing to spend more than 100m on him, then they're seeing something.
By majority of the season you mean 7 PL matches?
First of all, Nkunku played 10 games, 439 minutes. Not a good comparison.
Secondly, I’m not trying argue Isak is bad. I think he’s really good. Just think he’s not world class.
Lastly, don’t know where you’re getting the info that we’re *willing* to spend that. Article doesn’t say that.
Which is fair - just makes you wonder about headlines like this. We know it will be a record price for a striker, so what's the point in making contact?
NUFC has said that he's one of the untouchable players, right? Why pursue?
He absolutely is not if Robertson cost 6mil, Kulusevski cost 30mil and Mac Allister is 35mil.
I think he's worth it *to Newcastle* but comparing every transfer to Antony and Mudryk (and for an incorrect amount of money, no less) is just disingenuous.
You're cherry-picking the "seemingly worst value" transfers, and ignoring every other transfer that happened!
He’s worth that to us though - if Chelsea were to try and buy him then it would take that sort of fee, that’s an important element of this you’re missing
Mate, I said that in my original post;
>I think he's worth it to Newcastle but comparing every transfer to Antony and Mudryk (and for an incorrect amount of money, no less) is just disingenuous.
He's worth that much money to Newcastle, my point was that going "well Manchester United paid £80mil for Antony and Chelsea paid £80mil for Mudryk (they didn't, by the way) so all transfers should be scaled to Antony and the made-up value I'm attributing to Mudryk" is just bollocks.
There's exactly zero chance that Newcastle sell Isak. And there's equally zero chance Chelsea (or anyone else) could afford what it would cost to make a move in any way likely. It would be 150 million+.
I can't see this happening. But can it happen? Absolutely. If Chelsea bid anywhere between 135-150mil. But then this will completely break open Newcastle's ability to spend.
IF this was to happen I feel like one of if not both Gallagher and Madueke would have to go the other way to you guys because you have shown interest in both. There is no way in hell that this deal gets done without players going the other way
I think Journos know that it's easy to go "Chelsea want to sign X" and people will believe it.
*At best* this was a "how much do you want? That much? - nah, you're good" inquiry, and more realistically just absolute bollocks to sell papers.
The only way I see this being anyway true is if they are buying Gallagher in a separate deal.
Maybe they are struggling to pay for Hall so in July they buy Hall and Gallagher and we buy Isak?
BTW don’t think anything of this will happen just trying to think of how this has come about.
To reduce the spam of reports regarding the same move during transfer windows we try to allow **only one submission about each transfer saga per day**. The submission in question also needs to contain relevant new information regarding the potential move, and not just being a "no/minor developments" report. If there are important/official developments or new valuable information about a saga, we will allow extra threads in the same day, but for the rest of minor news please just comment them as a reply to this comment. Please help us reporting unnecessary threads for being duplicates. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The more money you put in, the easier it is for it to turn around, right?
That’s my reasoning behind GME investment
🚀🚀🚀
Funny way of spelling "excuse" and "gamble".
No, it’s a bulletproof pure profit investment, I’ve studied the market for years and I’m certain i’ll bank 500% profit; the only regret I have is not buying more. (I know nothing about stocks, blindly trusted my friends advice bc fomo, spent the money I didn’t really have to spend, bought the stock at its recent peak, lost 30% and counting, don’t buy GME)
Roaring Pussy
If we pulled out of the Olise deal over cost and didn’t push for Williams due to the price of the deal, I don’t see a world in which we’d ever make this happen
I mean, I don't believe this is gonna happen either, but this is not such a simple logic. We didn't want to spend 60m on Ugarte, but spent 115m on Caicedo. There's really way more decisions to be taken, even on the financial side, bar just the fee.
Which is proving to be right as ugarte spent the year riding the psg bench
you're right, but i don't think it's fair, because vitinha has been a monster at his position.. before kante reminding me he's still the man, i don't see anyone besides rice on the level of vitinha
I mean it all depends on the internal valuations. You didn't pull out of those deals because you couldn't afford it or so but because you felt they weren't worth the money (from my understanding at least) but maybe your SD's and Eghbali think Isak is worth a massive fee..
We pulled out of Olise because he gets a percentage of the release clause paid if it's a Champions League club, Bayern were offering around 220k/week + release clause making it closer to 300k/week for us right? Not sure on the Williams situation though. Isak would probably demand high wages on top of an already high transfer fee, I'd love the signing as he's absolutely class but I agree with you on the fact it's never going to happen.
The Olise thing wasn’t real he just chose to go to Bayern over you and you said that
Difference is Newcastle is also up against the FFP/PSR limit so some kind of inflated swap deal that benefits both parties is potentially on the cards (though I still don't think it'll happen)
Honestly, given the current striker market, a points deduction would probably be smaller than the points we'd lose without him.
No chance in hell we sell Isak lool
They are interested in Madueke and Gallagher. We are also both trying to sign Jonathan David, so we would pull out of that. But even with both Madueke and Gallagher they would still want 80 mil plus. Very unlikely
Their asking price is “Fuk U Pay Me”
Mail Sport understands conversations have taken place between the clubs and the Blues have indicated a want to sign the Sweden international. They know that any deal would take a club-record fee beyond the £115m they paid for Moises Caicedo.
> beyond the £115m he's a good player but that's wild if Chelsea are still pursuing that after being told 115m+ That would be the third highest transfer ever
It would be a silly price but they’re also trying to buy a 24 year old striker who scored 21 goals last season from a club trying to compete for European football. They’ll have to overpay to even get Newcastle to listen.
If they sign him for that price, surely Chelsea has to aim for more than just European football with 3 100m+ players and Palmer in the squad?
I mean Newcastle is aiming for European football, so they'll be even less likely to sell Isak.
Kind of feel it’s market price for a young proven Prem striker at this point.
he's amazing for sure but also his injury issues are a concern especially with our track record jackson did well and we didnt even get to see nkunku much either. in general we also have a better record with mid priced signings than huge fees. do we really need to splash?
He is the second best striker in the league, why would we sell him for any less than £150m ?
> He is the second best striker in the league my comment was more aimed at Chelsea being stupid to pay that fee rather than Newcastle being stupid for demanding it.
I don't think we'll strike a deal - what you say is absolutely true (if he's not refusing training or close to contract expiring then why would you sell him for cheap?) He's arguably worth that much to Newcastle, he's not worth that much to Chelsea - so we'll just enquire, see the price and move on.
Wow inflation is a crazy. The second best striker in the league last year got sold for £85m.
Minor difference of him being 30 vs Isak being 24
He was also free to negotiate a free transfer with the interested club <150 days after the day Bayern bid for him.
Older or not Kane in the next 4 years at least will still be a level above Isak
How much of that fee do you reckon Bayern will be able to recoup after 4 years? Part of transfer pricing is about whether the player will retain their value.
I’m sure that’s taken into account but it’s mostly about their impact on the pitch. Even if sell on value was a major factor does it justify nearly double the asking price of a striker that is and will be better for the foreseeable future?
When the club inquiring is a direct competitor? Yes. Because how much would it cost for Newcastle to replace him with another striker with similar potential future value and current on-pitch value? Would it justify them paying it? Probably not. But good luck to them in finding another <25 y/o striker with 20+ goals in a top league who’s available for less.
Depends on the team I think, I don’t reckon Kane would have matched Isak’s goal tally in that Newcastle side last season.
We’ll never know. All i’m saying is, you can’t justify asking for nearly double the Kane fee based on potential when Kane will still be better for the foreseeable future. More of a “fuck off” price than his actual value
It’s not just for potential though, he’s already the real deal.
Ok but bias aside do really you think he's really worth 150m+, or is that price heavily influenced by his long-term contract with a wealthy club?
He is world class and easily has a better all round game than Haaland. He can dribble, run, create assists for other players etc. Besides Haaland, he's easily the best striker in the Premier League. Most Newcastle fans would tell you this. The guy is really good.
He got 2 assists across all comps in 23/24. Not to say he isn’t good, but world class is just thrown around too easily
>He got 0 (2 if you count penalties) assists across all comps in 23/24. Not disagreeing with your overall point but that's definitely not right. It might be 2 assists and 2 penalties won, but he got assists for Murphy on the last day Vs Brentford, and for Barnes against West Ham See here at about 50s https://youtu.be/Pl9j-84NBWE?si=pN21KIGHwjD_HPDh And here at about 2:30m https://youtu.be/GrYFVYeTIOI?si=ACeglbzKvQADut3U
Fair enough, stat sites are really making a mess of it.
He's also assisting Jacob Murphy and Sean Longstaff rather than Bernado Silva and Phil Foden. I'd also go for goal rather than pass.
Believe you’re trying to say he’s *not* assisting Jacob Murphy and Sean Longstaff
That’s mostly because he was playing with almiron and Jacob Murphy though
See I have a slight issue with speculative statements. The only way to create assists for his teammates is to actually do it. His xAG is 0.15, which is same as Haaland, similar to Jackson and Havertz, much lower than Watkins, Son and Nunez… Again, I really like Isak, would love him at Chelsea (won’t happen) but he’s not quite the player OP is trying to claim he is. Nothing wrong with that but if I say Jackson is a good finisher and the stats + output don’t back the claim, it just appears weird
I think you have to factor in the quality of the movement of your teammates too so that he can actually set up assists
Sure, but again, that’s speculation which makes a bad basis for an argument
Saying better teammates make you a better player isn’t really speculation
Is it a certainty?
But how do you know he can create assists if he isn't actually creating them? Do the players he's playing with massively underperform their xg? Are they missing sitters all the time? The stats don't seem to back that up.
He’s one of the best strikers in the world which surely makes him world class
Trust me he is like, he’s played with Almiron and Longstaff supplementing him - he’s absolutely world class
He was injured for a majority of the season. Judging players by numbers only without any context is not a great way to go. I guess Nkunku is also bad because his stats were poor (due to him being injured most of the season). If Chelsea are willing to spend more than 100m on him, then they're seeing something.
No he wasn’t injured for the majority of the season - why do people pedal this? Just instantly shows you know nout
By majority of the season you mean 7 PL matches? First of all, Nkunku played 10 games, 439 minutes. Not a good comparison. Secondly, I’m not trying argue Isak is bad. I think he’s really good. Just think he’s not world class. Lastly, don’t know where you’re getting the info that we’re *willing* to spend that. Article doesn’t say that.
Fuck me Isak's numbers are astonishing if he was injured for more than half of the season.
I swear this management has a spending fetish
Good player, but not worth want they'd want for him.
Which is fair - just makes you wonder about headlines like this. We know it will be a record price for a striker, so what's the point in making contact? NUFC has said that he's one of the untouchable players, right? Why pursue?
Yes he is
He is not worth 115m💀
He absolutely is if Caceido/Enzo cost 100, the likes if Mudryk and Antony and Hojlund around 80m
Lmao I never thought about that actually. Fair enough.
He absolutely is not if Robertson cost 6mil, Kulusevski cost 30mil and Mac Allister is 35mil. I think he's worth it *to Newcastle* but comparing every transfer to Antony and Mudryk (and for an incorrect amount of money, no less) is just disingenuous. You're cherry-picking the "seemingly worst value" transfers, and ignoring every other transfer that happened!
Dios mio the way you said this with your chest too
He's correct, tho Isak isn't worth anywhere near the fee Newcastle would want for him to Chelsea
He’s worth that to us though - if Chelsea were to try and buy him then it would take that sort of fee, that’s an important element of this you’re missing
Mate, I said that in my original post; >I think he's worth it to Newcastle but comparing every transfer to Antony and Mudryk (and for an incorrect amount of money, no less) is just disingenuous. He's worth that much money to Newcastle, my point was that going "well Manchester United paid £80mil for Antony and Chelsea paid £80mil for Mudryk (they didn't, by the way) so all transfers should be scaled to Antony and the made-up value I'm attributing to Mudryk" is just bollocks.
Lmao this is ridiculous bro
There's exactly zero chance that Newcastle sell Isak. And there's equally zero chance Chelsea (or anyone else) could afford what it would cost to make a move in any way likely. It would be 150 million+.
I would be pissed if we paid what Newcastle would want for him.
Comparable to me making enquiries for Margot Robbie on Instagram. Not gonna happen.
Have you tried though? Maybe she’d respect the game and give you a shot.
Hahahahahaha
Fuck off
They can get fucked
I can't see this happening. But can it happen? Absolutely. If Chelsea bid anywhere between 135-150mil. But then this will completely break open Newcastle's ability to spend.
IF this was to happen I feel like one of if not both Gallagher and Madueke would have to go the other way to you guys because you have shown interest in both. There is no way in hell that this deal gets done without players going the other way
I don't think we are interested in Gallagher anymore because Joelinton signed a contract. Might have maduke and academy players
>and academy players Stay away!
I really think Chelsea need therapy at this point.
I think Journos know that it's easy to go "Chelsea want to sign X" and people will believe it. *At best* this was a "how much do you want? That much? - nah, you're good" inquiry, and more realistically just absolute bollocks to sell papers.
Would take £150m at least
Yeah we aren’t signing isak lol 😂
Well that's not happening
I swear to God Chelsea want to create the new Epstein island at Stamford Bridge , how many U-25 players is enough for Todd B and Egbali?
The only way I see this being anyway true is if they are buying Gallagher in a separate deal. Maybe they are struggling to pay for Hall so in July they buy Hall and Gallagher and we buy Isak? BTW don’t think anything of this will happen just trying to think of how this has come about.
Would need player swaps to be remotely feasible.
Just an enquiry but there is intent here for sure. Hedge funds have way more money than I thought wow
Hmm I think Gallagher will be involved in this deal somehow
Ah yes, another 80M attacker will solve all their problems. The last piece of the puzzle.
Lukaku swap deal incoming…
£115m for him? lol why?
He's class. There aren't many strikers better than him and replacing him would cost a fortune.