24 Jul 2026 03:59:07
All a bit weird.
We have spent 34 plus both new boys wages.
If we say spend 40 on Trafford. Our budget I thought was 90-100. That only leaves us 26 for the others. Mainly and importantly a good striker. Am lb minimum. Know we going to maybe sell one or two but we might not. Would rather the 40 go on striker. See what unfolds.

1.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 06:19:49
I wonder if we may see Jayden Leinou as back up for Gudmonson at LB.
Farke doesn't have the best track record with young players, though, but it could save us some £££.

2.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 07:06:53
Was thinking the same, Mighty. He's just signed a new 3 Yr contract, so is clearly rated.

3.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 09:04:19
As I have said before, if we can get Trafford, hopefully sell Perri to offset the fee, and look to pick up a decent lower league keeper as a number two.

4.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 09:09:58
It's amazing, some of you blokes have been banging on about getting a quality keeper for a number of seasons now, and heavily lambasting all the ones we've had.
Now that it looks like we are getting, perhaps, a future England number one, you'd rather be spending similar money on a striker, which, incidentally, we already have in DCL for the time being, not forgetting an injury free season in the last one.

With his new regime and training methods, there's no reason he can't complete another injury free season with 15+ goals.
Good number nines are rare, and they come at a premium for Premiership standards.
We can't afford that, and relying on goals by the rest of the team is what we have to do.

We are not an elite football club.

On the goalkeeping subject, maybe you'd prefer to keep Perri as our number one?

5.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 09:26:09
Err, OP, peeps have already answered your
points in the thread immediately below and other threads. Have a gander. ?

6.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 10:27:22
Good post, Op. I get people saying it's crazy to be spending £40 million on just a Gk over a striker, personally I believe they are of equal importance.

Many posters highlighted (myself included) how Mezz errors cost us promotion, a £200 million bounty delayed for another season, but in reality, no striker can guarantee goals, however much you spend. Look at Dcl vs Isak and their respective seasons.

So what's wrong with spending the majority of your budget on a proven quality keeper, England international, if we can pull a few more Dcl type rabbits out of the hat.



Finally, I believe it's really exciting and shows tangible growth if we're breaking our transfer record every season, if it's for proven quality.

We have to trust the process, which, contrary to a lot of views last year (including my own) , were slating Underwood, but his signings kept us up last season, so why not believe we can do it again.

The alternative is just too depressing, unless "I told you so" is of greater importance of course.

7.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 11:15:22
Meslier was an absolute calamity of a keeper, Class, and thankfully we had the very reliable Darlow instead

You mention Isak. Yes, he had an injury-plagued season for Pool, but he scored barrel loads for Newcastle

Personally, I would rather sign a reliable, good keeper for much, much less (they are definitely available for much less) than £40 million or more

And then still be able to spend on a striker, and still have money for other positions, rather than have to scour only for free transfers / free agents (which is a much, much smaller choice of players and talent)

P.S.

You also didn't mention the buy-back clause, OP and Class

What are your feelings, fellas, if Citeh insert a mandatory buy-back clause in the contract and the buy-back fee is only relatively marginally more than the transfer fee we were to pay Citeh? Hmm.

8.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 11:29:47
Yes, we have spent £34M and added two big earning players, but we've also removed a few from the payroll - Struijk, Schmidt, Wober already, and maybe Harrison and others to follow, and will likely earn something in transfer fees when we make a few sales, all of which will offset our spend on new (hopefully better) players.

9.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 11:33:20
That's my point, Baz, with regard to no guarantees with strikers; you cannot legislate for serious injuries, irrespective of how much you spend on a striker.

But absolutely Isak's goals record, as reflected in his transfer fee, is infinitely better than Dcl's and should remain so over time, but we don't shop at the Harrods store as yet; Sunderland and Bournemouth have proved you can find strikers within our budget like Brobbey and Kroupi.



Personally, I wouldn't accept a buy back clause, Baz. In fact, I would prefer to buy Steele from Brighton as he travelled with the England WC party and is so consistent.
But again, I have no problem with the premise of spending the majority of our budget on James Custard if that's what the club chooses to do.

10.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 11:38:21
Fair enough on your follow up post, Class..
I like Jason Steele also.

11.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 12:24:24
Not that simple anymore under SSR Aus. Clubs are not allowed to spend over 85% of their income/revenue, so this includes transfers, wages, merchandising, etc. So, I would guess we do not know how much we have to spend and how much room we have now, but the club does. ?

12.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 12:25:15
Where has this talk of a buy back clause come from in the first place?
I'm certain it's not from the Elland Rd or Etihad boardrooms.
If there is anything behind it, it will probably be Trafford's agent figuring more ways to make more money.


I'm not sure there would be many clubs who would pay that high transfer fee with a buy out clause attached to it, and I don't think Parag would go for it either, especially for a goalie that hasn't hit the top level yet.

13.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 13:08:19
You're right, Vid, about the 85% squad spending ratio, but you only get a points deduction if you exceed 115% - automatic 6 points.
A club can spend up to 115%, but there is a rolling period, and any underspend in following seasons is used to offset the excess this year.


The gamble might be to spend up to 115%, improve the squad enough to ensure safety, so that over the next couple of seasons the spending could be below the 85% level and incur no financial penalty.
We're also pursuing Leicester for £35m, so there might be some cash from that as well.

14.) 24 Jul 2026
24 Jul 2026 13:54:32
I thought that too, actually, Dunelm. In theory, we can overspend this window, but make sure we unload a few before it's too late. A gamble, but doable.