Christopher Nkunku

It's 18 months of bad injuries, with an otherwise excellent record, and not a single injury since last May.
He's been in and out of the side and when he has featured he's played kick-about against European conference teams.

I would not trust his body to play in this demanding league for any sustained period.
 
I quite like the idea myself if we're sensible about the contract/wages. Just think he suits the system well. Amad and Nkunku cutting inside leaving space for two wing backs to overlap would be so much better balanced than what we have now.

Obviously the injury problems aren't ideal, but look how bad Mazraoui's injury problems were and he's not missed too many games yet and been one of our best signings.
 
We have perfect examples of how to get out of the hole we're in, in the shape of Arsenal and Liverpool.

So for each transfer, a good sense check is to ask "is this the profile of buy that propelled them back into regular top four finishes and title contention?"

In this case, the answer is a simple no. Spending big money (or the equivalent) on an injury-prone, 27 year old Nkunku who is already on big wages is exactly the sort of transfer they avoided in their successful purchases.

If we pursued this (and I'm currently not buying that we will) it would be a huge red flag as to our approach under INEOS.

If the price being spoken about was a Trossard/Thiago Alcantara style €22m-€24m ish deal, then maybe you could make a case for it. Maybe. But at anything even in the realm of the valuation Sky were reporting earlier, it would be insanity.

Well said. This would be a very dumb thing to do.
 
We have perfect examples of how to get out of the hole we're in, in the shape of Arsenal and Liverpool.

So for each transfer, a good sense check is to ask "is this the profile of buy that propelled them back into regular top four finishes and title contention?"

In this case, the answer is a simple no. Spending big money (or the equivalent) on an injury-prone, 27 year old Nkunku who is already on big wages is exactly the sort of transfer they avoided in their successful purchases.

If we pursued this (and I'm currently not buying that we will) it would be a huge red flag as to our approach under INEOS.

If the price being spoken about was a Trossard/Thiago Alcantara style €22m-€24m ish deal, then maybe you could make a case for it. Maybe. But at anything even in the realm of the valuation Sky were reporting earlier, it would be insanity.
I'd argue it's a waste even on a free transfer because of the wages.

Not good enough and not fit enough, there were players who were injury prone but managed to play when they were fit because they were very good, if he was any good he would have played when fit, he is not even given cameos unless it's against low level oppo.

I also don't believe the story to be true
 
This would be a ridiculous signing unless it’s a loan until the end of the season.

Chelsea have sold us their seconds and have progressively shafted us more after each signing. Mata, Matic then Mount with the last one being daylight robbery.

Nkunku would be such a bad move because the proof is right in front of us, he was unable to transfer his Bundesliga form to the PL. Add in his injuries and reported price and it might rival the Mount shocker.
 
Look, Arsenal are getting wary of our offloaded players. You need PL PROVEN players, we need to sell them. You will embrace Nkunku…but not to tight, he can be fragile.
 
"Believe in our scouts" they say. When the best they "find" is this Nkunku guy for AM.
 
Whoever is in charge of transfers needs to be fired if this happens. Seriously Garnacho for this trash? We need to have clubs on the never do a deal with list. BVB and Chelsea should be #1 and #2 on that list.
 
I'd be chuffed with a loan deal, I think having him come in along with a half decent wing back could really help us have a much more enjoyable end to the season. Then assess in the summer.

I'd echo those saying that a permeant deal would be really concerning.
 
No thanks, maybe you take him on a loan if it’s short term and only a percentage of his wages. We shouldn’t be helping to line Chelsea’s pockets again.

Yeah should be a loan with option to buy and nothing more. Particularly with those injuries at Chelsea, also would still need to sign goalscorer as he's not a striker that's for sure.
 
I quite like the idea myself if we're sensible about the contract/wages. Just think he suits the system well. Amad and Nkunku cutting inside leaving space for two wing backs to overlap would be so much better balanced than what we have now.

Obviously the injury problems aren't ideal, but look how bad Mazraoui's injury problems were and he's not missed too many games yet and been one of our best signings.
Mazraoui's form has taken a nosedive recently.
 
Look, Arsenal are getting wary of our offloaded players. You need PL PROVEN players, we need to sell them. You will embrace Nkunku…but not to tight, he can be fragile.
The only thing he's proven in the PL is that he actually can't handle the prem
 
It would be cool to sign him so our physios have a new friend and don’t get bored. They’ve probably heard all of Mount’s jokes by now and this would be the shot in the arm they need.
 
Having another look at his injury list and we just cant risk it. He was a quality player in Germany and could still be, but we dont need a player playing 10 games then missing the next 16
 
This feels like a we need a striker PSR stunt.

They buy Garnacho we get £70 million ‘pure profit’ we buy Nkunku for 60/70.

They get Gernacho for nothing /10million and we get Nkunku for £60 but over 5 years which is £12million allowing us £48 million profit on PSR this year meaning we have funds in the summer for at least 3 players.
 
The prospect of signing this guy scares me.

I actually think Felix could be a decent signing for us given his wages have been managed down, we could get him for a decent price and he does produce wherever he has played.
 
Christoper Nkunku? This has to be a wind-up right? I mean he would seem like more of the same for us if we want players not good enough for top clubs who are permanently injured.
Is John Murtough back calling the shots?
 
If this deal go through then I start to believe that the Glazers and their adopted brother's plan is to get us relegated.
 
The scary thing most of us were saying the same sort of things about not wanting Mount because of his cost/injuries/inconsistency and they bought him anyway.

If INEOS buy Nkunku we are screwed…
 
This sounds more like Chelsea putting him on the market more than us being interested.. like Chekri.

I could be wrong now, but I don't think so...
 
If this deal go through then I start to believe that the Glazers and their adopted brother's plan is to get us relegated.
My conspiracy theory since this 25% stake nonsense became a reality has been that from a pure business point of view it doesn't make sense for SJR to improve the club to only buy a futher stake at a much improved price or leave Glazers with the option to re-buy INEOS' stake at a lower price than the value of the club at that time. The only way it works for them is to lower the value of the club further and make it unfeasible for the Glazers to keep owning it without them infusing a lot of money into the club.

INEOS' best option to acquire a controlling stake in the club at a reasonable value is to dig a bigger hole for the club than it is in already.
 
Last edited:
Why are we doing business with Chelsea. We can’t be helping them out by giving them money for their injury prone players
 
Why are we doing business with Chelsea. We can’t be helping them out by giving them money for their injury prone players
This Garnacho for Nkunku deal reminds me of when I was a a young teen playing CM. I would join two clubs and take the best players of one team only to offload the rubbish to another. For example I'd sell Chadwick for 20m and Roberto baggio.

Maybe that's what Chelsea former season ticket holder is doing