Totally agree with u on the Wilson being a proper deadly striker. If he’s got the service in, he RARELY misses putting it in the back of the net.. his finishing still is near flawless.. I’ll never forget that clip off the outside of the foot nearly over his shoulder to the far back corner against Forest last season… that was fucking MAGIC
Patience mate - I wasn’t at Crystal Palace and I was behind enemy lines for Burnley. I love to create boozy away blogs but I also like to dive deeper into big talking points rather than just ‘reporting news’. There will be a lot of blogs coming in the next two weeks… from Manchester United to Australia 🇦🇺⏳
Mint as always mate. Who realistically replaces Wilson? Like you said, he's still a proven goalscorer in the prem. Not an easy (or cheap) person to replace
Very good points on why to keep, but I think all those reasons are why you sell him. He is our only asset that is remotely expendable and has value. Miggy could maybe raise us 20M, but after his season and injuries i think he is significantly less than if we had sold in one of the previous two windows. Longstaff again, I don't think his recent vain of form is his true level so selling him now would also be selling at his worst value. Only person I see us possibly getting decent return for is Wilson, Dubz, and maybe even Krafthy. Again if this is a non-PSR world i'd want to sell none of them, but we got to start making shrewd sells, even if it might mean a short term dip. One last point sure not all young strikers work, but some do and like Alvarez. Plus I think Callum's goal scoring can be replaced by committee, eg. more Barnes next season, Minteh or possibly new winger signed and gordon. Look at Kane being sold everyone thought they'd miss his goals, but the team around gelled better and frankly don't miss his goals. Great content as always :)
If Isak scores 3 more goals this season he makes it into top 10 of all time Newcastle PL goal scorers. If he has another season like this next year he’ll be second after Shearer.
He'll always score goals when he plays but it's how often he plays that is the concern. At 32 he will most likely pick up more injuries next season. If we can get decent money for him I would take it + it frees up his salary.
@@Blackandwhitebanter I think it's a question of getting the timing right. At 32 and with his injury record he will need to be replaced now, or after next season IMO. I have always rated him but he can't be relied on. If Isak picks up another injury we can't rely on a player who, on average, misses over half a season through injury. Sooner or later we'll need to spend and if we can get money for him now then is the time not now? Or do we keep him for another season, get some more sponsorship money into the club and if we can only sell him for peanuts next year then so be it.
@@BlackandwhitebanterI don’t get this logic. Why is our striker budget limited to what we can sell Wilson for? We obviously need to pay more for Wilson’s replacement than we could sell Wilson for but there’s nothing wrong with that if it ends up benefiting the team. If we don’t sell Wilson this season he only has a year left on his contract so we get nothing next year, if we can get £15-20m that’s better than £0 next year. We don’t want to spend needlessly but we have to replace Wilson soon, financially it makes more long term sense to get some money for him this summer. He’s also 32 and as you mentioned has a horrendous injury record, even if we extended his contract he’s in decline due to his age and won’t play enough, Wilson is great when he plays but that’s going to be less and less, his performances will probably drop off too over the next year or 2. Even if we have to pay £50m+ for a younger forward that could be worth it if they are fit more often, will have potential to improve and we might even be able to make profit on them if we ended up selling them. We can’t have 2 fairly injury prone strikers with no additional cover so if Wilson stays we need another striker anyway, the rumours are that Wilson doesn’t want to be fighting for his place against 2 other players so that only leaves us with 2 options. 1) We make no changes and are left with 2 injury prone strikers, we can’t do this and have suffered this season because of it. 2) we sell either Isak or Wilson and buy a less injury prone replacement to partner whoever stays, if there’s a choice between Wilson and Isak who would you prefer to keep? As good as Wilson is it’s become a huge risk for us to try and get by with only Isak and Wilson, if he’s not willing to stay with the extra competition from a 3rd young striker then our hands are tied to be honest.
If we receive a £15m+ bid for him during the upcoming transfer window, it would make sense to accept the bid. He's in his 30's and his injury record is bad. Then invest in a young striker (Sesko for example), then buy an olderish striker with Premier League experience (Solanke). This would give us 3 strikers for next season. Sesko has a release clause of £45m and Solanke would cost £20mish.
With so many other positions I think you’re head is in the clouds a bit here mate based off what budget we will have. £45mil for a young striker who will take time to find his feet will be a large part of the budget and surely there is NO WAY on earth solvable goes for £20mil? He’s their biggest asset and you have to consider English tax too
@@Blackandwhitebanter I know that I'm clutching at straws with Solanke, but you know what I mean. But I honestly think that Sesko would hit the ground running in the Premier League, he's that good. Wilson us too much of a risk with his injuries, I absolutely love Wilson, but we need a reliable squad player who can play when the team needs him to, and not to his injury schedule.
@@sirobson4080 Not for £60m he wouldn't. Should be signing South Americans on the cheap. Players like Julian Alvarez for £17m and Murillo for £10.5m. Howe hasn't got that in him. This is why he should be sacked
