web analytics

Newcastle Again Linked With Target Who Was Bid For Last August

Newcastle came close to nabbing Watford forward Joao Pedro last August. The Magpies continued negotiations after a round of bids were rejected with the final one totaling around £30m.

Further bids never materialized as Newcastle decided to make a much bigger splash with the signing of Alexander Isak for a club-record fee. Watford eventually tied Pedro down on a new long-term deal to 2028 with Isak now the toast of Tyneside after his recent displays.

The Athletic is reporting that Pedro is still on The Magpies’ radar as they continue to track his progress. However, Watford’s demands will only increase if any clubs come knocking this summer. There is little chance Newcastle will meet Watford’s valuation after coming up short nine months ago.

The 21-year-old has bagged 9 goals with a further 2 assists in the Championship this term. His versatility, an aspect of his game that Eddie Howe covets, has been on full display. He has been deployed across the front three as well as a number 10.

Watford are struggling in their return to England’s second flight. They are currently in 10th and 5 points adrift from a playoff place. Failure to gain promotion could affect the Brazilian’s desire to remain at Vicarage Road.

Pedro has other admires in England as well as Serie A giants AC Milan. Watford’s sporting director Cristiano Giaretta is unfazed by the interest in his star telling Tuttomercatoweb the following:

“I can say that he has an ‘England’ price, we haven’t received any requests or proposals from Italy.

“He has many admirers in the Premier League but the truth, and we are happy about it, is that he is 110 percent focused on our run-up to the play-offs.”

If Watford hold firm to their demands, the ship on a move to Newcastle has likely sailed for Pedro. Newcastle showed in August they will not bow to meet Watford’s valuation. That is unlikely to change this summer despite what is expected to be a larger budget.

189 comments so far

  • Raj of Hailsley

    Mar 22, 2023 at 6:53 PM

    Comment #161

    You must have seen my posts so this is not just directed to you but anyone who thinks there can be any less than six, we struggled this year to deal with three fronts, how can we realistically expect to compete on four if we don’t bring in a minimum of six.

  • Apex Predator

    Mar 22, 2023 at 6:54 PM

    Comment #162

    This summer will see so many big name players on the move and hugely inflated market so expect to see lots of near 100mill signings from man c.. Arsenal.. Chelsea.. Bayern.. Real.. Manure.. Psg etc

  • Ruddy Marveaux-lous

    Mar 22, 2023 at 6:54 PM

    Comment #163


    Fulham had a good start to the season but are reverting to type and will likely end the season 10th or worse as they’ve tailed off badly. Should we qualify for CL football and demonstrated an interest in Palhinha, it could be enough to unsettle him to the point we could get the deal done for a reasonable price. Fulham would make a profit, we get a good deal for an excellent player, player moves to a CL club. Win-win-win


    I’ve watched him a fair few times and he’s an absolutely cracking player. Intense presser, physical, great ball retention, wonderful pass on him, but also a bit of a sh*thouse too. If I’d the pick of either Rice or Palhinha, I’m taking Palhinha every day of the week.

    NY Mag

    I’ve a different view on that game in that while I think Rice had an excellent first half and started the second half well, I think Jo got the better of the rest of the contest and had Rice’s number for certainly the last half hour. Rice was excellent though, but as you say, the price would likely be prohibitively expensive.

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 6:55 PM

    Comment #164

    Fair point on Fulham Raj but they could slip by the time the FA are done with Mitro. Are Fuham going to be ambitious in the summer is another relevant question – I suspect they won’t be.

    I was just agreeing with Ruddy that Palhinha would be a very good signing IMO and certainly a lot cheaper than Rice.

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:00 PM

    Comment #165

    Raj, I think my reply at the time was “so If we signed 4 top players with a smattering of youngsters and bargains we cant compete?”

    I just don’t see 6 top players coming in because if that didn’t work out we have likely boxed ourselves into a corner FFP wise.

  • Raj of Hailsley

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:01 PM

    Comment #166

    Paulinha it is then 🙂
    I’d still prefer Gallagher 😀

  • Raj of Hailsley

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:03 PM

    Comment #167

    We’re getting new sponsors and we need to start flexing our muscles soon. £150/80M isn’t outrageous and certainly shouldn’t box us in.

  • onmeedsun

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:08 PM

    Comment #168

    We can’t load too much of our budget onto one player, in Rice. Just doesn’t make sense. Would have a detrimental impact on the other signings we need to make, and the wage structure is important. So no Rice for me. And he doesn’t score many.

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:10 PM

    Comment #169

    It does Raj, even with a great sponsorship deal. CL If we make it will have a huge positive impact on all aspects of our commercials though.

    I am not sure exactly what “£150/80M” represents but we cant sign 6 of those.

  • Raj of Hailsley

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:11 PM

    Comment #170

    I think Darren Eales has to work a bit more magic before we’re in the picture for that level of trophy signing from other PL clubs.

  • Ruddy Marveaux-lous

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:11 PM

    Comment #171

    Well considering that the following players are likely to leave this summer:

    – Karius (expiry)
    – Ritchie (expiry)
    – Dummett (expiry)
    – Dubravka
    – Darlow
    – Manquillo
    – Clark (expiry)
    – Hendrick
    – Lewis
    – Gayle
    – Fraser
    – ASM (possibly)
    – M. Longstaff (expiry)

    Ignoring Clark, Hendrick, M. Longstaff and Gayle as surplus to requirements, and recognising that Lewis, Dummett and Fraser have no future at the club due to multiple players being ahead of them in the pecking order, that means we currently have 20 recognised first team players (incl. Gillespie, so really only 19 players) to compete across 4 competitions.

    When we put it like that, a minimum of 6 players who can genuinely play a part in the first team isn’t a bad shout.

  • valle

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:13 PM

    Comment #172

    Regarding money, dont forget:

    1. We just sold a share for 57 million.
    2. We sold Wood for 15 million
    3. We sold Shelvey (10 million, based on the Wood price?)
    4. We have shirt sponsor coming in. Some say an upfront 300 million deal for 10 seasons, but at least 20 million per season right?.
    5. We have new sleeve sponsor coming in (last deal was 7,5 million for this season).
    6. Further money from commercial deals, player sales and so on.

    So allot of incoming dough.

  • Raj of Hailsley

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:14 PM

    Comment #173

    Just been speaking to Darnik there, he’d be very interested in the Soton game if we can get him a ticket.
    Calling all members and ST holders 😀

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:18 PM

    Comment #174


    Exactly, things snowball. Sign Rice and he will want huge wages, then others (existing and potential players) want that too.

    Meanwhile we need to comply with the new wages to revenue rules and even with a season in the CL and a great sponsorship deal we don’t come close to the revenues of any of the big 6. Nor can we just raise 100M or more from player sales in a single window as the likes of some of the others can.

    We have to build in stages. Our owners have said this consistently yet at the first opportunity people start ignoring facts that are staring them in the face.

    Our trajectory is upward. We are doing great. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

  • valle

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:19 PM

    Comment #175

    Regarding our young players and loans… I really think we need to do better, and Im not sure that Shola is up to the job. I think we have failed in this areas for years. In fact I cant remember an outgoing loan that I was really impressed with.
    Either the player this get any playing time, or the level were to low, being in league 1/2 or one of the smaller clubs in Scotland.

    At the same time, clubs like Arsenal have players on loan in France and Holland, playing top football and turning into stars. I get that Arsenal simply have better young players than we do currently, but those few good ones that we have, have been mismanaged for years in my opinion.

  • valle

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:21 PM

    Comment #176

    Some gibberish in that last post, but hopefully my point still got through.

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:22 PM

    Comment #177

    Valle, the share sold is irrelevant really, it was to provide cash to the club without diluting existing shareholders stakes in the club. It isn’t magical extra transfer money we can just use.

  • magscar

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:24 PM

    Comment #178

    Not a Rice fan (often put off by excessive media love-in with London players) but suspect he won’t come cheap (english tax) even if WH relegated and there will be competition and no doubt high wages

    I’m not sure we yet have the profile nor wage structure to sway him anyway as he”ll move with intention to win something sooner rather than later

    If he joins no problem just hope he doesn’t consume too much of budget

  • DrGloom

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:31 PM

    Comment #179

    Think Rice will stay in London according to west ham fans at work and be looking for 100k + a week so I guess that’s only Arsenal, Spuds or Chelsea in the running

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:31 PM

    Comment #180

    Valle on your other points, we certainly get 200k pw of the wage bill just due to contract expiry (so not considering any player sales)

    I do highly doubt we got 10M for Shelvey but it is possible I suppose.

    20M per year shirt sponsorship is highly realistic.

    As for the other bits we have actually offload some of the other players which is easier said than done.

  • DrGloom

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:32 PM

    Comment #181

    Valle, FFP is last 3 years income so new in one won’t count until 2024

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:33 PM

    Comment #182

    Sorry mixed a bit of Ruddy and Valles posts there

  • DrGloom

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:33 PM

    Comment #183

    10 million for shelvey!! Did we take up the option on his contract, didn’t think we did as he got injured which means he’d leave for nowt

  • DrGloom

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:35 PM

    Comment #184

    And also tlinthought the share sold for 57 million was to cover ongoing costs …

  • valle

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:36 PM

    Comment #185


    Provide cash to the club for what purpose then? To sit in the bank never to be touched?. I dont believe that. Unless the rules have been changed, an owner is allowed to put in 100 million of their own money per calendar year. By the time PIF bought us, it was said that because of our meager Ashley years, we would be allowed to spend more than 200 million without breaking FFP.

    By the time that the next transfer window opens, we will have received money from the EPL twice, the owners will have been allowed to put in allot of their own money and we will have several new sponsorship deals.

    We will see in the summer, but I just dont get this idea among some fans that we will have money for 1 good player and then buy from the low shelf for the rest. This is Saudi Arabia we are talking about, and yes, they wont pay more than what they think is fair, but they also came in with a plan of winning the EPL in 5-10 seasons. Surely you can’t expect that to happen if you aren’t aggressive in the transfer market.

    I will bet that we will see the most exciting transfer window ever (Provided we dont buy the McTominay’s of this world) this summer. You are welcome to disagree but we shall see if I am wrong when we get to september.

  • valle

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:41 PM

    Comment #186


    The 10 million for Shelvey was a pure guess, hence the ? at the end. It was based on Nottinghams transfer spend in general and the value a player like Shelvey would give them in their relegation fight. I think the amount was undisclosed?

    Surely the FFP loss is on a rolling 3 year period.

    Ongoing cost for??? Tea?… Wages… Transfers? I don’t know. but it was money put into the club. I dont care from which cookie jar they take money for toilet paper and which they use for transfers 😉

  • Essex Geordie Bill

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:42 PM

    Comment #187


    Cheers, glad to hear that you have enjoyed them so far. I really appreciate the reviews and do tell your friends!

    Book 4 is well under way but it is probably going to be towards the end of the year for completion and I am probably going to make it a lot longer rather than going into a 5th book so I would ask for a little patience.

  • valle

    Mar 22, 2023 at 7:43 PM

    Comment #188

    Im not saying anything of what I say is anymore true than what you guys say. None of us knows for sure. It’s just what I believe.

  • The Taco Taker

    Mar 22, 2023 at 8:04 PM

    Comment #189

    Valle, I certainly didn’t say we would only sign one big name player.

    As for the rest of that, you seem to be picking and choosing elements of FFP while simply making up or misunderstanding other elements of it. For a start an owner certaining cannot put in £100M per calendar year.

    Another factor to consider is that we will be subject to two entirely different sets of FFP type rules starting next season as we will qualify for Europe. The PL rules are not the same as the UEFA ones and both are changing year on year to not be in our favour and to prevent upstart clubs like us.

    It will make it all the more fun when win stuff despite all the hurdles we will have to jump.

1 3 4 5

You must log in to post a comment.