Hugo Ekitike - Welcome to LFC

[rudedog]

You dont whack 80m on a backup though?

Or 120m on a backup if Ekitike keeps on going.

I think there is a longer term plan when Salah leaves to have both in there maybe?

I don’t think we signed them as 2 number 9s, one main and one backup.

Injuries, form, fitness and opposition will mean they will be rotated. I think Ekitike will also be rotated with Gakpo on the left.

We need to move away from the idea of a ‘best 11’ or nailed on starters - last season showed the shortcomings of this approach with how we were dismantled by PSG in the CL and Newcastle in the league cup final. The team was running on fumes at that point.

[Exiled_red]

I see what you mean.

That's the surprising part. That we went so big on both, instead of one big ticket signing and the other a more opportunistic, lower fee type.

But if we look at last season, we played over 5000 minutes.

Isak in a good season gives you around 3000 mins. He isn't a Salah or a Virgil in that regard. That leaves 2000 plus for Ekitike at No.9, plus he'll probably get another chunk at LF.

Transfer fees in general are crazy but when players like Sesko, Cunha. Mbeumo, Gyokeres, Kudus, Pedro, are going for £50-65m, not sure the £70-80m we may end up paying is going that big. I don't think there is great value in that £50-65m range of the market

We brought Jota in 5 years ago for £40m, spending £60m now on an equivalent tupe player doesn't seem that excessive, adding £10m to get a better option is probably a smart move

[Mark79]

Transfer fees in general are crazy but when players like Sesko, Cunha. Mbeumo, Gyokeres, Kudus, Pedro, are going for £50-65m, not sure the £70-80m we may end up paying is going that big. I don't think there is great value in that £50-65m range of the market

We brought Jota in 5 years ago for £40m, spending £60m now on an equivalent tupe player doesn't seem that excessive, adding £10m to get a better option is probably a smart move

Knowing that we were after Isak and that would require £120m+ and having already shelled out £116m for Wirtz, I personally wouldn't have predicted us spending £70-£80m on the other CF option.

If we pay the full amount, then we've broken our transfer record 3 times in one window, so the Ekitike signing is still a big money one imo.

[Exiled_red]

Knowing that we were after Isak and that would require £120m+ and having already shelled out £116m for Wirtz, I personally wouldn't have predicted us spending £70-£80m on the other CF option.

If we pay the full amount, then we've broken our transfer record 3 times in one window, so the Ekitike signing is still a big money one imo.

It's true that it would mean us having beaten our transfer record 3 times if we play all the add ons,but adding some context, it wouldn't have been the case if we had paid the full fee for Nunez, and if we counted football inflation the fees for VVD and Alisson would almost certainly been higher. Given the revenue of the club now I don't think we are as bothered about that as we were, also you could get a top player for £40m 5 years ago, now some fairly average PL players are going for that now.

[Mark79]

It's true that it would mean us having beaten our transfer record 3 times if we play all the add ons,but adding some context, it wouldn't have been the case if we had paid the full fee for Nunez, and if we counted football inflation the fees for VVD and Alisson would almost certainly been higher. Given the revenue of the club now I don't think we are as bothered about that as we were, also you could get a top player for £40m 5 years ago, now some fairly average PL players are going for that now.

Yeah, but we didn't pay the full fee for Nunez

More context is, you don't get many strikers with only one good season in terms of goal return going for £70m+ (Even if you include past transfers adjusted for inflation)

All things considered, I still say it's a relatively big outlay. I'm not complaining at all though.

[Corndog]

He played very well against Everton and showed great work rate too.

I feel like he does come deep very often and if you see his touch map for that game, there are only a few touches in the box.

That suggests to me that if he gets more in there, he will probably score even more but also that he could do a job in the 10 behind Isak too.

Kerkez put a couple of dangerous early crosses in and not one of the forwards or AM attacked them whereas a Nunez or a jota might have. Just shows that the attack still hasn’t quite clicked yet but when it does, it should be very exciting

[baitman]

He played very well against Everton and showed great work rate too.

I feel like he does come deep very often and if you see his touch map for that game, there are only a few touches in the box.

That suggests to me that if he gets more in there, he will probably score even more but also that he could do a job in the 10 behind Isak too.

Kerkez put a couple of dangerous early crosses in and not one of the forwards or AM attacked them whereas a Nunez or a jota might have. Just shows that the attack still hasn’t quite clicked yet but when it does, it should be very exciting

Isak might be more of the striker, but maybe ekitike has more versatility and can cover more positions.
It was a messy game for isak to come into. Im sure we will see him start to do his thing.m soon.

[Catrin]

Lovely goal from him today, starting with diligently getting back onside because at the start of the build-up he was trying to press their keeper. Timed his run perfectly then his little touch with the outside of his foot just before his finish, so smooth and controlled.
He seems to be enjoying life as the supporters have clearly taken to him and he’s feeling the love.

[Exiled_red]

Yeah, but we didn't pay the full fee for Nunez

More context is, you don't get many strikers with only one good season in terms of goal return going for £70m+ (Even if you include past transfers adjusted for inflation)

All things considered, I still say it's a relatively big outlay. I'm not complaining at all though.

My point with Nunez was that we would have been prepared to pay £85m or whatever for him 3 years ago had it worked out. So spending a slightly lower amount on a replacement with the way football inflation has gone isn't a problem. I think/hope that now we have a good squad our recruitment is more about getting the right player than worrying too much about the cost.

I agree with the not buying strikers after one good season, I guess you ate hoping that they are on the rise whereas in Nunez and Carroll they just had a one off good season and we went all in.

The other issue of context is while we wanted Isak (and who knows how confident we were inside the club at getting him) when we signed Ekitike we didn't know if he was going to be our big summer forward signing or if we were going to get Isak as well, so we had to bring in someone who we would be happy with leading the line if a deal for Isak went south. If the Isak transfer was wrapped up at the start of the window do we still sign Ekitike? I would hope the answer to that would still be yes. Whatever happened with those signings we needed to bring in two #9s maybe in an ideal world we are looking at spending £50-60m on a second #9 (after signing Isak) but looking at the players going at that mark I would hope we would say there is better value in spending that bit more on Ekitike as he is probably at a similar level, but is younger and had a higher ceiling.

[Mark79]

My point with Nunez was that we would have been prepared to pay £85m or whatever for him 3 years ago had it worked out. So spending a slightly lower amount on a replacement with the way football inflation has gone isn't a problem. I think/hope that now we have a good squad our recruitment is more about getting the right player than worrying too much about the cost.

I agree with the not buying strikers after one good season, I guess you ate hoping that they are on the rise whereas in Nunez and Carroll they just had a one off good season and we went all in.

The other issue of context is while we wanted Isak (and who knows how confident we were inside the club at getting him) when we signed Ekitike we didn't know if he was going to be our big summer forward signing or if we were going to get Isak as well, so we had to bring in someone who we would be happy with leading the line if a deal for Isak went south. If the Isak transfer was wrapped up at the start of the window do we still sign Ekitike? I would hope the answer to that would still be yes. Whatever happened with those signings we needed to bring in two #9s maybe in an ideal world we are looking at spending £50-60m on a second #9 (after signing Isak) but looking at the players going at that mark I would hope we would say there is better value in spending that bit more on Ekitike as he is probably at a similar level, but is younger and had a higher ceiling.

That's all good, but I'm really not arguing against the whys and wherefores of getting Ekitike. Or questioning it in any way. I get the rationale for it and also how we were able to afford multiple big fee signings.

But I think it's fair to say that if you told us at the start of the window that we would not only sign Isak for £125m, but we'd also spend £69m - £79m on the other CF we need, in addition to £116m on a No.10, then most of us would have been pinching ourselves.

[Exiled_red]

That's all good, but I'm really not arguing against the whys and wherefores of getting Ekitike. Or questioning it in any way. I get the rationale for it and also how we were able to afford multiple big fee signings.

But I think it's fair to say that if you told us at the start of the window that we would not only sign Isak for £125m, but we'd also spend £69m - £79m on the other CF we need, in addition to £116m on a No.10, then most of us would have been pinching ourselves.

True, but to be honest I am more surprised at us spending £120m+ on any player. If you had told me we would buy 3 players that cost £70m this summer I might just have believed you, 2 yes and that would have been a big summer, 3 would have been pushing it. If you told me would spend £100m on a player I could have just believed it given the Caicedo bid a couple of years ago, but this summer has been almost fantasy football with the way we have gone about things. There has been a definate change if approach, that has caught many of us off guard.

[RedReet]

I think Isak's injury record also played a part. We played 3 games in 6 days this past week and I'm not sure we would have risked him, even if fully fit. When we signed Ekitike, it did seem a bit excessive continuing to pursue Isak, but if Isak was our number 1 target, then I think it was totally necessary to get in someone else, capable of being a regular starter.

I also think it was sensible to get a CF, capable of providing cover for Gakpo, rather that a wide attacker, capable of covering CF.

I do agree with EL that we likely did factor in the possibility of not getting Isak when we signed Ekitike, but I'm also convinced that even if the Isak deal was sealed, we'd still have went for Ekitike.

I do wonder though if Isak signed for another club, if we'd have bought another CF to provide competition for Ekitike, or a profile similar to Diaz, capable of covering multiple positions.

[RedReet]

True, but to be honest I am more surprised at us spending £120m+ on any player. If you had told me we would buy 3 players that cost £70m this summer I might just have believed you, 2 yes and that would have been a big summer, 3 would have been pushing it. If you told me would spend £100m on a player I could have just believed it given the Caicedo bid a couple of years ago, but this summer has been almost fantasy football with the way we have gone about things. There has been a definate change if approach, that has caught many of us off guard.

FSG have proven they are willing to break records for the right player, I just didn't see a scenario where Isak was that player, I have to admit.

It's not my money, so as soon as we were in for him I wanted us to sign him and think he'll be a success, but at that price, it just didn't seem like an FSG signing for me.

[RedReet]

Just had a look at Isak's stats last time Newcastle were in CL. He only started 2 games directly after CL. 1 he was benched and 3 he was injured.

[Exiled_red]

FSG have proven they are willing to break records for the right player, I just didn't see a scenario where Isak was that player, I have to admit.

It's not my money, so as soon as we were in for him I wanted us to sign him and think he'll be a success, but at that price, it just didn't seem like an FSG signing for me.

There was alot of talk about how Isak was the perfect forward for our system.