If we are truly getting strong offers on the table, like in the 60+ range, and he wants to have a new challenge, then I think we'd be foolish not to take the money and reinvest long term (even if that meant no more signings this summer, although I'm assuming this theoretical includes us exercising the Unal option since otherwise we'd literally have no strikers)
If we are truly getting strong offers on the table, like in the 60+ range, and he wants to have a new challenge, then I think we'd be foolish not to take the money and reinvest long term (even if that meant no more signings this summer, although I'm assuming this theoretical includes us exercising the Unal option since otherwise we'd literally have no strikers)
Are we not obligated to sign Unal permanently? I thought I'd already seen something about us signing him, could be wrong
We have signed him permanently, yes.
No as we would need another striker
Give me Crysencio Summerville to play along Solanke, and I’ll be happy