Football 2025-26

[thetime]

2 hours ago, charlierc said:

Technically 4 if you count Rhys Williams, although I don't think he's played much for Liverpool since the lockdown season in 2021 when everyone else was injured.

 

Indeed the Guardian said as such - their article about Isak seemed to go against the tide by saying that signing Ekiteke means Liverpool feel the priority should now be a defender. Plus you can argue Salah and van Dijk getting a pay rise doesn't exactly free up wage bill space.

 

Begs the question imo if Isak has hindered himself waiting this long to say he might want a move. Arsenal are close to signing Gyokeres, Chelsea just signed two strikers, Spurs could afford him but probably don't have the wage structure, Barcelona just signed Rashford, etc. I'm not saying this as copium but rather wondering if the options for those who can pay 300 grand a week just aren't there in the same way they would've been if this request came a month ago. Well unless he joins a Saudi club or something.

 

If Liverpool sell Diaz and Nunez, they will still be light up front. Diaz heavily linked to Bayern and Nunez Saudi. I'd imagine selling both of them will pretty much pay for Isak, plus a big chunk of the wages. 

 

So could be a waiting game, if/when Liverpool sell them 2 first. 

[Neil]

Some people might say Liverpool are trying to buy the league title, they don't need to buy it they already own it 

[thetime]

6 minutes ago, Neil said:

Some people might say Liverpool are trying to buy the league title, they don't need to buy it they already own it 

 

They are just spending what theyve saved in recent season. A quick calculation, there net spend last 3 seasons is around the £40 million mark. 

 

Which is astonishing really. Compared to the Uniteds, Chelsea, city, arsenal, Newcastle etc. 

[Neil]

40 minutes ago, thetime said:

 

They are just spending what theyve saved in recent season. A quick calculation, there net spend last 3 seasons is around the £40 million mark. 

 

Which is astonishing really. Compared to the Uniteds, Chelsea, city, arsenal, Newcastle etc. 

They spent the courtiho money very well. And also bought a few cheap and developed them; Robertson, & salah as examples.

[lost]

I genuinely thought all that fuss over Salahs contract was because it was pushing them to the limit ffp wise and would tie their hands for its length. Apparently they have now gone and handed a similar deal to van dyke and then gone on and dropped what they have this window.

 

Feels like night and day compared to how the club was run under Klopp? Isn’t there a clip of Klopp complaining he can’t compete with Newcastle and City and can only sign promising talent?

[Neil]

1 minute ago, lost said:

I genuinely thought all that fuss over Salahs contract was because it was pushing them to the limit ffp wise and would tie their hands for its length. Apparently they have now gone and handed a similar deal to van dyke and then gone on and dropped what they have this window.

 

Feels like night and day compared to how the club was run under Klopp? Isn’t there a clip of Klopp complaining he can’t compete with Newcastle and City and can only sign promising talent?

As a team they've become too reliant on Salah and they need to Refresh the squad before salahs performances drop. These new players will have passed the moneyball stats checks. so while expensive they should probably grow in value.

[thetime]

16 minutes ago, Neil said:

They spent the courtiho money very well. And also bought a few cheap and developed them; Robertson, & salah as examples.

 

They certainly did. 

 

Unfortunately its one club that can afford to splash without breaking any rules. 

[Neil]

41 minutes ago, thetime said:

 

They certainly did. 

 

Unfortunately its one club that can afford to splash without breaking any rules. 

well managed - even thru the barren years. other clubs with expectant fans, try to buy success with players they cant afford and paying off sh*t managers.

[kaosmark2]

4 hours ago, charlierc said:

Technically 4 if you count Rhys Williams, although I don't think he's played much for Liverpool since the lockdown season in 2021 when everyone else was injured.

 

Indeed the Guardian said as such - their article about Isak seemed to go against the tide by saying that signing Ekiteke means Liverpool feel the priority should now be a defender. Plus you can argue Salah and van Dijk getting a pay rise doesn't exactly free up wage bill space.

 

Begs the question imo if Isak has hindered himself waiting this long to say he might want a move. Arsenal are close to signing Gyokeres, Chelsea just signed two strikers, Spurs could afford him but probably don't have the wage structure, Barcelona just signed Rashford, etc. I'm not saying this as copium but rather wondering if the options for those who can pay 300 grand a week just aren't there in the same way they would've been if this request came a month ago. Well unless he joins a Saudi club or something.

My assumption since he came out with this, given the timing being post-Ekitike's move, is PSG. I know Dembele had an outstanding season but he isn't naturally a central striker, and they don't really have any other option when resting/rotating/injured.

 

I wouldn't be shocked by Real Madrid, particularly with the vague word around that they're open to offers for Rodrygo, but like Mbappe/Vini Jr, he drifts between central and left naturally, so that feels like it'd be a bit of a logjam on the pitch. But as you say, other PL clubs have done their business for strikers.

[charlierc]

On 24/07/2025 at 16:57, rock_on said:

 

We are a big club though.

I think this is part of the growing pains that we're experiencing. Best run of league finishes in 20 years, winning a trophy, qualifying for the Champions League and increasing commercial revenue is a sign of a growing elite-level institution. Struggling to upgrade an ageing training ground, taking ages to announce whether they're upgrading or replacing St James', not pulling off several seemingly obvious commercial moves and the total incoherence at executive level, however, are problems.

 

Maybe this would've been an easier project 20 years ago before FFP.

[charlierc]

6 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

My assumption since he came out with this, given the timing being post-Ekitike's move, is PSG. I know Dembele had an outstanding season but he isn't naturally a central striker, and they don't really have any other option when resting/rotating/injured.

 

I wouldn't be shocked by Real Madrid, particularly with the vague word around that they're open to offers for Rodrygo, but like Mbappe/Vini Jr, he drifts between central and left naturally, so that feels like it'd be a bit of a logjam on the pitch. But as you say, other PL clubs have done their business for strikers.

There were whispers of Vini Jr leaving Real Madrid for Saudi Arabia a few weeks back but those seem to be fading out. I agree though that they have Mbappe and Vini as players that can do what Isak does, so unless the plan is to retrain one of those to do that from the right, it would be a bit of wasted resources on Real's part. Even if admittedly it's the kind of thing they'd do.

 

I do think PSG are possible, however, especially as they've not signed anyone yet and reaching the CWC final means they could be more of a factor. Particularly after a Guardian article suggested Liverpool's priority might actually be for a CB.

 

Maybe there is the nature of the beast though given this has felt like the ESL 6 revenge summer, given they're currently the 6 highest spenders. Some of it is ofc cyclical given Liverpool, Arsenal and Man City see each other spending big so go further, but it kinda also feels 2016 where the response to Leicester winning the league, Southampton getting top 6 and West Ham nearly qualifying for the Champions League was for the rich 6 to go f**king nuts. Even moreso given Aston Villa and Crystal Palace's star players seem to have admirers at the top end.

[thetime]

53 minutes ago, charlierc said:

 

 

Maybe this would've been an easier project 20 years ago before FFP.

 

No question about it.

 

When Roman took over Chelsea, it took 2/3 years to win the league after a 50 year gap. 

 

Man City new owners took 4 years to win the title. After a gap of nearly 50 year, which was only there 2nd title. 

 

Newcastle owners have already had 4 years. You cant really see Newcastle bridging that gap to be champions anytime soon. They've done well to get up to that 4th-7th type team. 

 

Edited July 25, 2025 by thetime

[lost]

Newcastle and Villa are the litmus test for me. Villa sold Duran but have still had to sell their womens team to themselves to pass ffp with rumours of further sales. If neither establish themselves I think that could be it. Unless of course City win their court cases.

[thetime]

26 minutes ago, lost said:

Newcastle and Villa are the litmus test for me. Villa sold Duran but have still had to sell their womens team to themselves to pass ffp with rumours of further sales. If neither establish themselves I think that could be it. Unless of course City win their court cases.

 

The potential is there, will just not be a quick fix like City/Chelsea was. 

 

When you think where Newcastle was 5 ir 6 years ago. They can't grumble to much. 

 

 

[charlierc]

11 hours ago, lost said:

Newcastle and Villa are the litmus test for me. Villa sold Duran but have still had to sell their womens team to themselves to pass ffp with rumours of further sales. If neither establish themselves I think that could be it. Unless of course City win their court cases.

Villa haven't signed anyone yet this summer. They seem to be in a similar position to us last year where they've got right to the limit on what PSR will let you do and with no Champions League revenue for the season they're stuck there. They might even have gone beyond given Uefa fined them for breaking their cost control rules, if not by as much as Chelsea.

[charlierc]

11 hours ago, thetime said:

 

No question about it.

 

When Roman took over Chelsea, it took 2/3 years to win the league after a 50 year gap. 

 

Man City new owners took 4 years to win the title. After a gap of nearly 50 year, which was only there 2nd title. 

 

Newcastle owners have already had 4 years. You cant really see Newcastle bridging that gap to be champions anytime soon. They've done well to get up to that 4th-7th type team. 

 

Tbf it helped both Chelsea and Man City that there was less competition and that they were spending to what were at the time unprecedented levels. I think Chelsea were the first PL team to spend £100million on new signings, whereas this season it's plausible 10 or more will do that.

 

We've unquestionably made progress given we've gone from 4 straight bottom half finishes. But people always want more ya know? I mean, Leicester won the f**king league so it would be cool to do it, even if that was a moonshot level difficulty title win. 

 

That and I guess there's that fear about whether Newcastle the club are holding back Newcastle the team. I know a lot of people are divided on Staveley after she left last year but since then there's been a real drop in communication to the fans and pace in decision making, giving the impression of stalled momentum being masked by Howe getting the maximum out of this squad. 

[thetime]

5 hours ago, charlierc said:

Tbf it helped both Chelsea and Man City that there was less competition and that they were spending to what were at the time unprecedented levels. I think Chelsea were the first PL team to spend £100million on new signings, whereas this season it's plausible 10 or more will do that.

 

We've unquestionably made progress given we've gone from 4 straight bottom half finishes. But people always want more ya know? I mean, Leicester won the f**king league so it would be cool to do it, even if that was a moonshot level difficulty title win. 

 

That and I guess there's that fear about whether Newcastle the club are holding back Newcastle the team. I know a lot of people are divided on Staveley after she left last year but since then there's been a real drop in communication to the fans and pace in decision making, giving the impression of stalled momentum being masked by Howe getting the maximum out of this squad. 

 

Chelsea were a bit different to City and Newcastle. Chelsea were already a side consistently finishing between the 3rd-6th league finishes. They were also winning trophies like the FA Cup, League Cup, Cup Winners Cup. They just needed the big money to compete with Fergies Utd and Wengers Arsenal. 

 

 

[lost]

1 hour ago, thetime said:

 

Chelsea were a bit different to City and Newcastle. Chelsea were already a side consistently finishing between the 3rd-6th league finishes. They were also winning trophies like the FA Cup, League Cup, Cup Winners Cup. They just needed the big money to compete with Fergies Utd and Wengers Arsenal. 

 

 

 

Ken Bates though was trying to do the same. The first to set up multiple shell companies offshore, dodgy finance deals to fund Gullit, Zola etc.. Apparently they were about to do a Leeds with their spending just before abramovich stepped in.

 

Before Bates they really were nowhere. They won the old first division once and it was the lowest points total in history.

[thetime]

4 minutes ago, lost said:

 

Ken Bates though was trying to do the same. The first to set up multiple shell companies offshore, dodgy finance deals to fund Gullit, Zola etc.. Apparently they were about to do a Leeds with their spending just before abramovich stepped in.

 

Before Bates they really were nowhere. They won the old first division once and it was the lowest points total in history.

 

Im sure pretty much off football was a bit dodgy in the 70s-90s. Cloughie and fergie to name 2. Im sure nany things were swept under the carpet. 

[charlierc]

9 minutes ago, lost said:

 

Ken Bates though was trying to do the same. The first to set up multiple shell companies offshore, dodgy finance deals to fund Gullit, Zola etc.. Apparently they were about to do a Leeds with their spending just before abramovich stepped in.

 

Before Bates they really were nowhere. They won the old first division once and it was the lowest points total in history.

Yes the talk was that qualifying for the Champions League was essential to keep the lights on as the house of cards had been collapsing over 2002/03. That campaign tbf was before Leeds' descent had truly started, but Bates' finances were seen as having been stretched to the limit and in a fairly similar way to Leeds where not getting Champions League destroyed their balance sheet.

 

Roman had apparently nearly brought Spurs before deciding to buy Chelsea instead so it would've been probably a different journey had he started there, given Spurs were nowhere for much of the first decade of the PL.

[thetime]

20 minutes ago, charlierc said:

Yes the talk was that qualifying for the Champions League was essential to keep the lights on as the house of cards had been collapsing over 2002/03. That campaign tbf was before Leeds' descent had truly started, but Bates' finances were seen as having been stretched to the limit and in a fairly similar way to Leeds where not getting Champions League destroyed their balance sheet.

 

Roman had apparently nearly brought Spurs before deciding to buy Chelsea instead so it would've been probably a different journey had he started there, given Spurs were nowhere for much of the first decade of the PL.

 

I thought if Chelsea didn't make the champions league, he would of took over Liverpool. As both were going for the champions league spot. 

 

Could be wrong though. 

 

 

 

 

[charlierc]

1 minute ago, thetime said:

 

I thought if Chelsea didn't make the champions league, he would of took over Liverpool. As both were going for the champions league spot. 

 

Could be wrong though. 

 

 

 

 

The late Sven Goran-Eriksson gave an interview saying that Roman asked him for advice and Sven said to win stuff at Chelsea would require less surgery to the playing squad than Spurs. There is also another story saying Roman went around the area near Spurs' stadium and didn't like it. Though I've seen a further story that at one point he was contemplating buying Arsenal but was told they weren't for sale so looked elsewhere.

[thetime]

4 minutes ago, charlierc said:

The late Sven Goran-Eriksson gave an interview saying that Roman asked him for advice and Sven said to win stuff at Chelsea would require less surgery to the playing squad than Spurs. There is also another story saying Roman went around the area near Spurs' stadium and didn't like it. Though I've seen a further story that at one point he was contemplating buying Arsenal but was told they weren't for sale so looked elsewhere.

 

Aaahhh makes sense.

 

Either way he did a brilliant job putting Chelsea on the world map. 

[Neil]

2 hours ago, thetime said:

Chelsea were a bit different to City and Newcastle. Chelsea were already a side consistently finishing between the 3rd-6th league finishes.

that was their best finishes in decades - were always a nothing club people took no notice of, apart from the thuggery and racism, and fraudster of an owner.

[charlierc]

One name that just popped up as a suggested Isak replacement is Nicolas Jackson.

 

I tend not to pay attention to transfer rumours because a lot of it can be horseshit but the suggestion there is that Chelsea sign our first choice targets of Joao Pedro and Liam Delap, then we get their cast-offs. Wonderful. Even moreso given his rush of blood to the head moments in both getting sent off at SJP near the end of last season and then doing it again in the Club World Cup.

 

I'm not convinced by the suggestion of Ollie Watkins either. But for different reasons - why on Earth would Villa sell him to us when they have no other strikers and play us first? They'd make any such transaction feel like pulling teeth.