Chubas latest post on his socials

[atypical_boro]

My view is that with promotion being worth about 180mill that it would not be worth the risk of letting Chuba go for less than 25mill, anything less than 25mill and we are better off retaining his services to try and get us up next season.

I would really only sell for 25mill if we had firm plans in place on who we were going to get as replacements with deals agreed and Chuba made it clear he was desperate to go.

Otherwise we are going to end up blundering into the market with everyone knowing we have a load of cash we are desperate to spend.

What I'm saying is that my major concern is that we effectively end up swapping Chuba for the next version of Gestede.

Fair enough. It’s all about opinions.

My personal opinion is that the club has finally found a model and way of operating that hopefully means we are not too dependent on a particular player or manager, and it’s a while since we’ve had that (if ever) but it’s something everyone has been crying out for.

I’m not saying someone will score 29 goals next season (I’m not sure Chuba would either) but whether he stays or goes I think we’ll be in the play-off spots at least. The Scott/Carrick/Woodgate et al thing is working out so far and I’m prepared to back it, I think Gibson will be too, and if they collectively decide they could do more with the £20m (give or take) than keep a player with one great season under his belt who could leave for nothing soon at the peak of his career’s worth, I’ll trust it.

 

[Caesium137]

What I'm saying is that my major concern is that we effectively end up swapping Chuba for the next version of Gestede.

But what if we signed Archer on a permanent? Or a relatively unknown striker like Gykores for under £2 million, who goes on to score 20+ plus goals in back to back seasons?

Like I said earlier in the thread, I can totally see both sides of selling or keeping him......

But a lot of people seem pretty black and white on Chuba will be near enough the same next season, despite his last month or so (and the rest of his career pretty much). And additionally, that if the club did need to replace him we'd massively overpay for a spud like we did about 7/8 years ago, who would barely score.

Both of those may be true, but there's an equal chance they won't be.

We sold Tav last year in the same position to prevent us losing him for nothing, I assumed then that was a new direction from the club after losing a lot of high profile/big earners for no fee in recent seasons, we were trying to be a bit more self sufficient on the transfer fees front.

Surely this is exactly what Scott is for? He'll have a list of Champo strikers and number 10's he thinks we can get, who can emulate what Archer and Chuba did last season when they were on song.

If they're either significantly younger and/or significantly cheaper salary wise than the previous two, then that's a win for the club.

People have derided our transfer dealings and losing players for no fee for years, and insisted the club should follow the Brentford model of selling players for good fees and reinvesting that in the squad for incremental gains for the good of the club.

Isn't that what selling Chuba would represent?

 

[atypical_boro]

But what if we signed Archer on a permanent? Or a relatively unknown striker like Gykores for under £2 million, who goes on to score 20+ plus goals in back to back seasons?

Like I said earlier in the thread, I can totally see both sides of selling or keeping him......

But a lot of people seem pretty black and white on Chuba will be near enough the same next season, despite his last month or so (and the rest of his career pretty much). And additionally, that if the club did need to replace him we'd massively overpay for a spud like we did about 7/8 years ago, who would barely score.

Both of those may be true, but there's an equal chance they won't be.

We sold Tav last year in the same position to prevent us losing him for nothing, I assumed then that was a new direction from the club after losing a lot of high profile/big earners for no fee in recent seasons, we were trying to be a bit more self sufficient on the transfer fees front.

Surely this is exactly what Scott is for? He'll have a list of Champo strikers and number 10's he thinks we can get, who can emulate what Archer and Chuba did last season when they were on song.

If they're either significantly younger and/or significantly cheaper salary wise than the previous two, then that's a win for the club.

People have derided our transfer dealings and losing players for no fee for years, and insisted the club should follow the Brentford model of selling players for good fees and reinvesting that in the squad for incremental gains for the good of the club.

Isn't that what selling Chuba would represent?

Great post. Summed up my thoughts better than I did.

 

[Caesium137]

Great post. Summed up my thoughts better than I did.

Took me longer to type than yours like , you posted as I was typing and I thought, yeah that's what I meant.

 

[McMordie]

My view is that with promotion being worth about 180mill that it would not be worth the risk of letting Chuba go for less than 25mill, anything less than 25mill and we are better off retaining his services to try and get us up next season.

I would really only sell for 25mill if we had firm plans in place on who we were going to get as replacements with deals agreed and Chuba made it clear he was desperate to go.

Otherwise we are going to end up blundering into the market with everyone knowing we have a load of cash we are desperate to spend.

What I'm saying is that my major concern is that we effectively end up swapping Chuba for the next version of Gestede.

To be fair, Gestede was brilliant for me on Championship Manager with Harrison providing the crosses.

 

[Redwurzel]

We sold Tav last year in the same position to prevent us losing him for nothing, I assumed then that was a new direction from the club after losing a lot of high profile/big earners for no fee in recent seasons, we were trying to be a bit more self sufficient on the transfer fees front.

Interesting comparison - I would say we have a slightly better team now than 12 months ago, are in a stronger financial situation, have a better managment team. I also think Tav had had several years in the first team and felt he was ready to develop more. Chuba has only had one good season.

I am in the camp of a high price from a Premier League team and Chuba really wants to move, we sell, but my default is keep him.

It depresses me to read players in the past that did not want to leave and say they were pushed out to raise cash e.g Souness and Craig Johnston. If they had played together at Boro in the early 1980s we could easily have been a top 6 team.

 

[erimus86]

But what if we signed Archer on a permanent? Or a relatively unknown striker like Gykores for under £2 million, who goes on to score 20+ plus goals in back to back seasons?

That is a good point. If he wants to leave and it allowed us to sign Archer on a permanent we would have got a good deal overall, particularly as if things went well you'd assume Archer would be an investment too.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

But if he wants away? At 27 with big bucks on the table it’s unlikely he’s going to turn down the PL

If he wants away he goes. But you don't sell him if he doesn't - even if that means we lose him for nothing next year.

There is probably a term for it that someone brighter than me knows, but sometimes to not gamble is a bigger risk than to gamble.

 

[atypical_boro]

If he wants away he goes. But you don't sell him if he doesn't - even if that means we lose him for nothing next year.

There is probably a term for it that someone brighter than me knows, but sometimes to not gamble is a bigger risk than to gamble.

Well my point is that this might be his only chance to play in the PL, and we don’t have enough power in the situation to stop him if that’s what he wants to do (I’d be amazed if it wasn’t what he wanted to do). There are a lot of posts which seem to imply that the ball is in our court, like it’s our choice, it’s not at all, he holds all the cards.

 

[Sheriff_John_Bunnell_ret]

He does yes. Its pretty much presumed these days that if a player wants to go he goes. But you don't sell a player who scored the most goals since was it John o Rourke or Mickey Fenton, you don't sell him for financial reasons.

 

[atypical_boro]

He does yes. Its pretty much presumed these days that if a player wants to go he goes. But you don't sell a player who scored the most goals since was it John o Rourke or Mickey Fenton, you don't sell him for financial reasons.

Well you can’t isolate “financial reasons” from all the other reasons, they are all dependent on each other.

 

[indeedido]

But what if we signed Archer on a permanent? Or a relatively unknown striker like Gykores for under £2 million, who goes on to score 20+ plus goals in back to back seasons?

Like I said earlier in the thread, I can totally see both sides of selling or keeping him......

But a lot of people seem pretty black and white on Chuba will be near enough the same next season, despite his last month or so (and the rest of his career pretty much). And additionally, that if the club did need to replace him we'd massively overpay for a spud like we did about 7/8 years ago, who would barely score.

Both of those may be true, but there's an equal chance they won't be.

We sold Tav last year in the same position to prevent us losing him for nothing, I assumed then that was a new direction from the club after losing a lot of high profile/big earners for no fee in recent seasons, we were trying to be a bit more self sufficient on the transfer fees front.

Surely this is exactly what Scott is for? He'll have a list of Champo strikers and number 10's he thinks we can get, who can emulate what Archer and Chuba did last season when they were on song.

If they're either significantly younger and/or significantly cheaper salary wise than the previous two, then that's a win for the club.

People have derided our transfer dealings and losing players for no fee for years, and insisted the club should follow the Brentford model of selling players for good fees and reinvesting that in the squad for incremental gains for the good of the club.

Isn't that what selling Chuba would represent?

Great post but as someone else posted, I hope we are not trying to "be Brentford", as much as I respect what they have done in their circumstances.
Buying young potential under a progressive manager and sell for profit, which is all reinvested in the squad, is a great sounding model, but increasingly many clubs are trying to adopt this. They won't all make it work.
The choice of recruitment staff and coaching staff will determine success. It is a bigger summer for Scott than it is Carrick
What to sell Akpom for, or whether to hold him?
Who else to sell?
Who to attempt to sign permanently and on loan?
Who to let go out on loan?

I suspect and am hoping that there is far greater alignment from owner through execs to manager, than there was last summer. I think that a lack of alignment saw an underwhelming window last summer. I'm sure Carrick instead of Wilder will see a far more encouraging summer window 2023.

 

[Rofesleg]

It depresses me to read players in the past that did not want to leave and say they were pushed out to raise cash e.g Souness and Craig Johnston.

Not sure about Souness but Johnston always saw us a stepping stone to a bigger club. He jumped at the chance to join Liverpool (although Clough nearly persuaded him to go to Forest).

 

[indeedido]

Not sure about Souness but Johnston always saw us a stepping stone to a bigger club. He jumped at the chance to join Liverpool (although Clough nearly persuaded him to go to Forest).

I've posted about this before.
Craig Johnston wanted nothing better than John Neal to be given money to strengthen a promising Boro squad. The Wolves QF replay defeat was deeply damaging.
The club wanted to sell their best players, who didn't want to leave.
Once it was clear that the club would not be strengthening and would be selling, what did anybody seriously expect Proc, Spike and Craig to do?

I spoke at length to Craig after he had signed for Liverpool and he was seething at how things had been portrayed. I doubt he and McAndrew have spoken since. I know which one I wish had stayed.
There were cliques in that dressing room every bit as divisive as the Hispanic one under Karanka.