Summer Transfer Window 2025/26

[Matthew Le God]

28 minutes ago, Chez said:

Cajuste is another of their CMs. I think he plays for the Swedish national team.

He was on loan from Napoli. He isn't currently due to play for them in the Championship.

Edited May 30 by Matthew Le God

[Sheaf Saint]

17 hours ago, trousers said:

If Fernandes stays I will personally volunteer to have his babies. Can't say fairer than that.

Steady on Trousers old chap. We don't want to actively discourage him from staying, do we?

[Saint_clark]

18 hours ago, trousers said:

If Fernandes stays I will personally volunteer to have his babies. Can't say fairer than that.

Never before has "I know who wears the trousers in that relationship" had so many different interpretations. 

[Football Special]

7 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Is it safe to say he is quicker than Vestergaard?

 

Tella really should have done better, thankfully we sold him 

[trousers]

1 hour ago, Football Special said:

Tella really should have done better, thankfully we sold him 

Yeah, agree. I always judge players on a single video clip too...

[Verbal]

2 hours ago, Football Special said:

Tella really should have done better, thankfully we sold him 

Exactly! He probably cries himself to sleep at night clutching his Bundesliga winner's medal.

[AlexLaw76]

 Is that “Trent” has gone, I see the Liverpool have signed ‘The best Right Back in the World’(tm)

 

[chownie20]

7 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

He was on loan from Napoli. He isn't currently due to play for them in the Championship.

Yep, really good player but him and Phillips are off. The latter is probably a relief.

As I said, Morsy and Taylor, and very little spending power given recent splurges.

[Turkish]

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

 Is that “Trent” has gone, I see the Liverpool have signed ‘The best Right Back in the World’(tm)

 

Tiresome isn’t it. England’s 4th choice right back goes on a free transfer where else in the world does anyone care?

[AlexLaw76]

7 hours ago, Turkish said:

Tiresome isn’t it. England’s 4th choice right back goes on a free transfer where else in the world does anyone care?

Give it 3 games (max) into the new season where this new lad will be labelled as ‘The Best Right Back in the World’(tm)

[BarberSaint]

Watched the game. 

 

No.

 

That's for Quarshie, btw (edit).

Edited May 31 by BarberSaint
Identify the player I was talking about.

[Badger]

14 hours ago, Verbal said:

Exactly! He probably cries himself to sleep at night clutching his Bundesliga winner's medal.

He probably lies there pining for Burnley. 

[Badger]

19 hours ago, chownie20 said:

Their CM consists of Morsy (age 67) and  Jack Taylor?

Strikers are Hirst and Al Hammiry.

Aside from a few flair players and a solid defence I am not sure they are in a great position

They were linked with the 19 year old Spanish wonder boy from Chelsea on loan (Guiu). Not sure they’ll be as depleted as we might hope.

But just get our own incomings right and no need to worry about them. 

[Saint_clark]

See Liverpool are scraping in the bargain bin once again with their £109million bid for Wirtz. I love the narrative their fans (and Klopp for some reason) comes out with that they don't spend huge amounts. 

[Convict Colony]

Just saw this banter, James Madison showing off his shirt collection in his house and I spotted Jack Stephens one there 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[Saint_clark]

8 minutes ago, Convict Colony said:

Just saw this banter, James Madison showing off his shirt collection in his house and I spotted Jack Stephens one there 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

I thought maybe he had one for every prem team or something, but nope. Look at the players he's got up there alongside it ffs! 

[Badger]

11 minutes ago, Convict Colony said:

Just saw this banter, James Madison showing off his shirt collection in his house and I spotted Jack Stephens one there 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

Did Stephens play in the 0-9 ? That might have made it a souvenir worth having.

[Badger]

40 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

See Liverpool are scraping in the bargain bin once again with their £109million bid for Wirtz. I love the narrative their fans (and Klopp for some reason) comes out with that they don't spend huge amounts. 

The other scouse whine I’ve heard recently is bemoaning the possibility that Trent is good mates with Bellingham who has had a quiet word and ‘tapped him up’ whilst on England duty.

samestandardsdontapplytoLiverpool# Volume37

alwaysthevictims#

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 minutes ago, Badger said:

The other scouse whine I’ve heard recently is bemoaning the possibility that Trent is good mates with Bellingham who has had a quiet word and ‘tapped him up’ whilst on England duty.

samestandardsdontapplytoLiverpool# Volume37

alwaysthevictims#

At least that's something they'd never do 😀

I saw the Opta team of the season (also doubling as Man Utd's Scouting list) had 10 other players alongside Trent, marking it out as different from the Fawning Commentator team of the season which was just him. 🙂

[saints-til-i-die]

3 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

See Liverpool are scraping in the bargain bin once again with their £109million bid for Wirtz. I love the narrative their fans (and Klopp for some reason) comes out with that they don't spend huge amounts. 

To be fair they go some years hardly spending anything and then seem to have an expensive year. They don’t spend anywhere near the amount the other top teams do on a consistent basis.

[Saint_clark]

55 minutes ago, saints-til-i-die said:

To be fair they go some years hardly spending anything and then seem to have an expensive year. They don’t spend anywhere near the amount the other top teams do on a consistent basis.

They are much more thorough at identifying their targets i'll give them that. While other teams are spending £60million to replace a player they spent £50million on two seasons ago, Liverpool spend £70million on the right player and have him for 5+ years. 

[Yorkshire Saint]

Is this the YNWA transfer thread?

Who gives a fuck what they are doing. 

[Ekelund]

29 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

They are much more thorough at identifying their targets i'll give them that. While other teams are spending £60million to replace a player they spent £50million on two seasons ago, Liverpool spend £70million on the right player and have him for 5+ years. 

Darwin Nunez. What’s with this Liverpool love in? Horrible club and fan base.

[Saint_clark]

39 minutes ago, Yorkshire Saint said:

Is this the YNWA transfer thread?

Who gives a fuck what they are doing. 

 

7 minutes ago, Ekelund said:

Darwin Nunez. What’s with this Liverpool love in? Horrible club and fan base.

It's called summertime with no football on. It makes you desperate for something football related to mention.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, Saint_clark said:

They are much more thorough at identifying their targets i'll give them that. While other teams are spending £60million to replace a player they spent £50million on two seasons ago, Liverpool spend £70million on the right player and have him for 5+ years. 

Comparing that to ourselves, part of how we present ourselves to players is a move to a top club within a couple of years. Less, if the buying club hits our price point, or we need to cash in.

Our player trading approach, means the club don't want to have players hanging around for 5 years, although they also don't, have a structure in place that controls when bids come in, and keeps the squad building upwards.

The result is that our squad gets weaker and weaker and  the talents we do have vanish all the faster when we get relegated. We also spend a lot on multiple players we think we can sell on, rather than a better player who we want to stay and make us better over the long term.

1 hour ago, Yorkshire Saint said:

Is this the YNWA transfer thread?

Who gives a fuck what they are doing. 

There, I knew I could make the Liverpool chat relevant to us. 🙂

[Saint_clark]

1 hour ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Comparing that to ourselves, part of how we present ourselves to players is a move to a top club within a couple of years. Less, if the buying club hits our price point, or we need to cash in.

Our player trading approach, means the club don't want to have players hanging around for 5 years, although they also don't, have a structure in place that controls when bids come in, and keeps the squad building upwards.

The result is that our squad gets weaker and weaker and  the talents we do have vanish all the faster when we get relegated. We also spend a lot on multiple players we think we can sell on, rather than a better player who we want to stay and make us better over the long term.

There, I knew I could make the Liverpool chat relevant to us. 🙂

Trying to talk about Liverpool here mate, keep it on topic please.

[Wade Garrett]

1 hour ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Comparing that to ourselves, part of how we present ourselves to players is a move to a top club within a couple of years. Less, if the buying club hits our price point, or we need to cash in.

Our player trading approach, means the club don't want to have players hanging around for 5 years, although they also don't, have a structure in place that controls when bids come in, and keeps the squad building upwards.

The result is that our squad gets weaker and weaker and  the talents we do have vanish all the faster when we get relegated. We also spend a lot on multiple players we think we can sell on, rather than a better player who we want to stay and make us better over the long term.

There, I knew I could make the Liverpool chat relevant to us. 🙂

You are spot on.  It’s a system that will continue to fail.

 

[Saint86]

On 29/05/2025 at 23:55, hypochondriac said:

I didn't realise Delap had a 30 million release clause. Great news for us as it won't make Ipswich much. He'd be worth at least double that without it. 

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

Edited May 31 by Saint86

[Danbert]

Lurch has been released by Tottenham. He played a few times for them last season and looked reasonable when I saw him. I think he CHDAJFU.

[Danbert]

1 hour ago, Saint86 said:

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

It makes it easier to understand that we didn't sign him, if those were the terms Ipswich were prepared to accept.

[UpweySaint]

1 hour ago, Saint86 said:

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

I don’t agree. It’s a gamble. If things came together and they stayed up Delap’s goals would have likely been vital. Had they stayed up I presume the release clause wouldn’t have kicked in or been set higher.
 

They’re probably down overall in financial terms but we’re not talking mega bucks comparative to the potential upside of the deal.

 

I would have taken the deal in a heartbeat - we ended up with BBD and Archer instead - both likely to be out of the club and possibly at a loss.

[AlexLaw76]

3 minutes ago, UpweySaint said:

I don’t agree. It’s a gamble. If things came together and they stayed up Delap’s goals would have likely been vital. Had they stayed up I presume the release clause wouldn’t have kicked in or been set higher.
 

They’re probably down overall in financial terms but we’re not talking mega bucks comparative to the potential upside of the deal.

 

I would have taken the deal in a heartbeat - we ended up with BBD and Archer instead - both likely to be out of the club and possibly at a loss.

They won’t be down when you factor in 1 years” amortisation 

[VectisSaint]

36 minutes ago, Danbert said:

Lurch has been released by Tottenham. He played a few times for them last season and looked reasonable when I saw him. I think he CHDAJFU.

See they are also signing Danso for £21m, not sure he looked like a potential £21m player when he was with us. Hojbjerg's move to Marseille will also be permanent. 

[Ted Bates Statue]

The whole Delap thing is tragic on a number of levels. First up, we chase him for years before he was anywhere near a proven goalscorer, only for bloody Ed Sheeran to beat us to his signature in a gamble to stay up. Then when Chelsea come calling as they're so flush from cash after selling the hotels to themselves, Man City get to scoop up all the profit.

Makes me wonder how long will it take for us to get around to replacing Danny Ings, and what would the transfer fee be for a James Beattie in his prime today?

[Badger]

19 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Makes me wonder how long will it take for us to get around to replacing Danny Ings, and what would the transfer fee be for a James Beattie in his prime today?

Perhaps whatever his agent manages to secure for his release in his contract.

It seems that the days of an ‘open market’ for transfer fees are numbered. 

[Chez]

1 hour ago, VectisSaint said:

See they are also signing Danso for £21m, not sure he looked like a potential £21m player when he was with us. Hojbjerg's move to Marseille will also be permanent. 

he might have looked a £21 centre back if he'd had the opportunity, but we played him right back

[Oh no Mick Mills]

3 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

Being a bit pedantic as I appreciate Ipswich have cocked this up but I'm assuming City get 10% of the profit which would be be 3m .

Therefore City made 23m

Add on signing on fee and agent fee ..maybe 2m

Ipswich make a 5m profit? 

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, Oh no Mick Mills said:

Being a bit pedantic as I appreciate Ipswich have cocked this up but I'm assuming City get 10% of the profit which would be be 3m .

Therefore City made 23m

Add on signing on fee and agent fee ..maybe 2m

Ipswich make a 5m profit? 

Minus his wages for a year

[Tommy Mulgrew]

4 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract

The sell-on clause is widely reported as being 20% of the profit made by Ipswich on a sale to another club; bought for £20m and sold for £30m, so City receive £2m is how I believe it will be.  Ipswich benefited from having Dollop for a year but will have paid out wages and fees and amortised his cost price over the duration of his five-year contract.  I expect that would yield a profit for Ipswich but I don’t know how much.  Better than not having him in the first place, I would have thought.

[revolution saint]

4 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

Didn’t we also agree a fee with Man City for Delap? Presume it would have been on the same terms. 
Clearly not ideal for Ipswich but a fuck load better than signing BBD and Archer

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, Tommy Mulgrew said:

The sell-on clause is widely reported as being 20% of the profit made by Ipswich on a sale to another club; bought for £20m and sold for £30m, so City receive £2m is how I believe it will be.  Ipswich benefited from having Dollop for a year but will have paid out wages and fees and amortised his cost price over the duration of his five-year contract.  I expect that would yield a profit for Ipswich but I don’t know how much.  Better than not having him in the first place, I would have thought.

Everything I have seen (even from the all knowing Romano himself) says city get 30% of what Chelsea pay - which will be his £30m release clause.

https://www.si.com/soccer/chelsea-sign-liam-delap-report

https://www.football365.com/news/chelsea-total-agreement-sign-30m-star-romano-confirms-three-reasons-man-utd-u-turn

 

[Farmer Saint]

13 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

It's essentially a loan, but if they stay up they keep him. Reduces the financial risk massively and also helps with PSR for both the seller (City in this case) and Ipswich (as they are selling in the same financial year).

[skintsaint]

18 hours ago, saints-til-i-die said:

To be fair they go some years hardly spending anything and then seem to have an expensive year. They don’t spend anywhere near the amount the other top teams do on a consistent basis.

Not to mention they pay about 450m a year in wages...

[gio1saints]

15 hours ago, Wade Garrett said:

You are spot on.  It’s a system that will continue to fail.

 

Agree with you and @Farmer Saint- It’s the designed-in result that they required.
 

Sell-on clauses for promising youngsters that have been hoovered up by the wealthiest clubs simply protect the investment interests of those big and rich clubs. Those with the biggest and best national and international scouting infrastructure. Not those that cannot afford to maintain even regional academies anymore. 

The rest of the teams - and the leagues - are, quite literally, feedstock. 
 

Any perception of this being anything to do with “fair play” or anything remotely worthy of what many consider the importance of football for our society is just the wealthiest investors PR firms doing what they do. 
 

It’s cynical beyond belief. Yet few actually see it. The last few decades jumping in on Women’s football, BLM and LGBQT+ for example are essentially the same principle that the Saudis are using by sportwashing in the kingdom. 

Edited Sunday at 08:36 by gio1saints

[gio1saints]

Post script to the above : 

If you had to say what does football - one of the very few if not alone by itself universally understood languages of the earth -  really teach our kids today one answer might be : greed is good, money is god, fame and fortune are the most important things in life. It’s a very low bar sadly. 

Edited Sunday at 08:41 by gio1saints

[Chez]

9 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Everything I have seen (even from the all knowing Romano himself) says city get 30% of what Chelsea pay - which will be his £30m release clause.

https://www.si.com/soccer/chelsea-sign-liam-delap-report

https://www.football365.com/news/chelsea-total-agreement-sign-30m-star-romano-confirms-three-reasons-man-utd-u-turn

 

Plenty of other reports saying it's 20% of profit, for example:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/man-city-set-transfer-windfall-31748652

...which makes a lot more sense.

In the end, all that matters is whether Ipswich can replace him with someone decent helping them take one of the promotion places. Hopefully not.

[Badger]

1 hour ago, gio1saints said:

Post script to the above : 

If you had to say what does football - one of the very few if not alone by itself universally understood languages of the earth -  really teach our kids today one answer might be : greed is good, money is god, fame and fortune are the most important things in life. It’s a very low bar sadly. 

It’s not a game to set any moral standard to kids growing up (with the fascination of collecting the cards etc if they still d of their heroes). Quite the reverse.

Greed, grasping, and celebrity status, where they think the same standards don’t apply to them despite being role models (Rooney prime example, with his granny shagging).

Growing up in the 70’s even then you thought Rugby Union showed a better set of ethics. Professionalism and ‘Bloodgate’ have seen that theory go for a bit of a shit though.

[Convict Colony]

I like this pivot from the liverpool transfer window to the ipswich transfer policy

[gio1saints]

45 minutes ago, Badger said:

It’s not a game to set any moral standard to kids growing up (with the fascination of collecting the cards etc if they still d of their heroes). Quite the reverse.

Greed, grasping, and celebrity status, where they think the same standards don’t apply to them despite being role models (Rooney prime example, with his granny shagging).

Through that lens these  “ transfer windows” are seen for what they are - simply the equivalent of Xmas or Black Friday for the biggest and wealthiest clubs. The best and purpose designed time to make returns for their investors. Not a shinpad or dab of ralgex required. 

Put more bluntly it’s the primary reason for club investment and by virtue of that club existence. To make profit by player trading. And to try to make it continue to be attractive for investors there must be profits.
 

As a spectacle football today is about as much to do with “ fair play” despite the disingenuous virtue signaling as pitching Christians up against lions in the colosseum.

[Smirking_Saint]

17 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Reality is that they'll basically lose money on delap when you consider his signing on fee and any agents fees. Absolutely crazy to sign him for £20M with a 30% sell on clause back to city, and then put a 30M release clause in his contract - it's almost like recruitment and contracts were in different departments that didn't talk to each other. They've essentially lost their best player for zero profit and will need to replace him on a smaller budget - and that was always going to be their best case scenario... He could have flopped and been a £20M waste, and if he did well they would break even at best 😅. Schoolboy stuff from Ipswich 🧑‍🎓

Wasn’t it just a relegation release clause ? Not a pure release clause

I mean… Im guessing the gamble was to make them more competitive in the prem.. which it almost certainly did