Winter 25-26 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

And add "o" to English words.

I’ve probably mentioned this before, but when I was younger we went to Venice for a table football tournament with my dad’s mate’s family. His mate, Ian, insisted on speaking “Italiano” which, as you’d said, was literally English words with an “o” at the end.

A Scottish fella I know here when he first arrived probably thought similar and for six months (the locals refused to tell him as he became the local attraction), would ask for a blowjob instead of an expresso. Another one was a Belgium woman who told her neighbour that her young daughter was 'a beautiful prostitute, just like the mother'.

Mind your o's and a's.

[sid1964]

could Pacqueta from the Hammers be our big target this January

[PaulWinch again]

Hope not.

[eamonn]

could Pacqueta from the Hammers be our big target this January

No, he's too phat.

[Toronto Villa]

Chelsea don't pay massive wages do they? What is the incentive for the player to take a step down to them?

Now they've had their initial splurge, he's also the wrong profile for what their owners are looking for in a player now.

Their whole current thing is signing players who could get to Rogers' level for a quarter/ third as much as Rogers would cost, hope that some of them get to that level to build a team but sell on the majority for a bit extra once they have the "prestige" of being a Chelsea player on their CV.

They're an investment vehicle first and foremost.

That’s exactly it now. The media more than Chelsea will see him linked to them. They want 19/20 year olds from South America to flip like an investment him after a few years for a profit. Not established England internationals who won’t have sell on value after they have shelled out £120M.

[Sexual Ealing]

could Pacqueta from the Hammers be our big target this January

No, he's too phat.

Let's not buy any fat West Ham players, or indeed any West Ham players because they all look fat to me.

[eamonn]

Agreed. I do wonder if Julian Dicks was the missing part of our puzzle circa 1997 though.

[Sexual Ealing]

He's a proper c-word.

[Gareth]

He's a proper c-word.

C-heat

[Steve67]

Selling our best player, arguably, to an inferior club with a lower gate capacity and forward momentum? Would question Morgan’s desire if that were the case.

Lower gate capacity.... does that mean some of our lot will be swayed by clubs that playat the Stadium of Light and the one where the Olympics was held? Come on, each seat at Stamford Bridge is prime real estate.

Ooh, let’s sell him then. They are below us in every aspect apart from being in the capital. Basket case of a club.

[dorsetvillian]

Will our healthy position in relation to CL next season allow a more expansive approach to the Jan window?

[PaulWinch again]

I would hope not. We should be doing what we can afford to do based on what we know in terms of income, rather than hope.

[dorsetvillian]

We gambled last year when not in a great position. It will be interesting to see what we can do to 'max' out the rules that are in place to stop us being competitive. We don't need to be reckless but this Jan we are investing from a position of strength..

[Pete3206]

could Pacqueta from the Hammers be our big target this January

LOL

[Dave]

Will our healthy position in relation to CL next season allow a more expansive approach to the Jan window?

My reading is yes, but with a lot of moving parts.

Unless someone has something to the contrary, I think that the whole "can't register new players for your UEFA competition squad while being in transfer fee deficit" thing still stands for the whole season - so if we buy a shit-hot striker for £100m, we can't include them in our Europa Squad in February. But that might not matter, because a shit-hot striker probably doesn't care about that, and will be more interested in the whole "get the team in third place to a Premier League title and inevitable world domination" part of the plan. Which obviously wasn't the case in August when we looked like a big hot mess.

But UEFA might then raise an eyebrow. Because they think that we're being a bit cheeky, and say we're not taking our punishment in the way they intended and decide that next time the accounts aren't as they should be, they're going remember the time that we just ignored their punishment and carried on regardless. 

Then there are the accounts for 26/27. Because right now, today, buying an shiny new expensive player within the rules, we should be fine. We've got the Duran and Champions League money coming into the books, and two buttons, an old-style 50p and a bit of used chewing gum going out on the books. Therefore we look great at the moment, so bring in the £100m striker and win the league.

But UEFA then look at our wages and balances the year after. Those numbers show we broke even on transfer fees (summer '25), Europa rather than Champions League income, still with the wage bill of a club trying to be one of the best sides in the world on an income of one of the top twenty sides in the world and with that massive expensive striker scoring all our goals and decide that we need to be punished again.

But that might all happen while we're sitting there with our Premier League title and new-found clout and we don't give a fuck, like Chelsea and Barcelona didn't when they were punished last summer like we were.

So...big-shrug-of-the-shoulders on what we actually do. But I think the analysis of what we might be thinking about doing is correct.