The #LUFC Breakfast Debate (Thursday 3rd September) Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

For everything Leeds United related and everything not - Have your say... the Marching on Together way!
Forum rules
Please be sure you are acquainted with the forum rules outlined within our FAQs.

Help support the site by using our Amazon Affiliate link when making any purchases from Amazon.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ellandback1
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 11878
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 3:01 pm
Twitter: @EllandBack1
Location: The truth is out there

Breakfast Debate The #LUFC Breakfast Debate (Thursday 3rd September) Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

Post by Ellandback1 »



Good Morning. It's Thursday 3rd September, and here are the latest headlines from Elland Road...

Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

Leeds United rejected multiple bids for Noah Okafor this summer, including a late Sunderland offer worth around £30m. The Swiss international winger, signed from AC Milan last summer for £18m (€20m), was the subject of several approaches during the window. One of those came from Sunderland and was reported at €35m (£30m), almost double what Leeds paid a year earlier. The club turned it down, viewing Okafor as a key player, who wanted to stay.

Fabrizio Romano reported that a £30m bid was still on the table on deadline day, yet Leeds held firm. The Athletic and Yorkshire Post separately noted a deadline-day enquiry from Sunderland that was swiftly rejected. Selling a first-team attacker to a league rival comes with risks, and it is not known whether the offer was still on the table when Jean-Matteo Bahoya signed on the dotted line.

Okafor made a solid start to life at Elland Road after a slower beginning. He scored eight goals in 36 appearances in his first Premier League season, including a brace in a 2-1 win at Manchester United. Injury concerns remain part of the picture, however, and he has not always completed 90 minutes. Leeds have faced criticism over outgoing fees. Across 13 departures they generated around £30m including loan fees, with the bulk coming from Pascal Struijk’s move to Brighton (reported in the £18-20m range, potentially rising with add-ons). Other sales and loans included Joe Gelhardt to Hull, various lower-value deals, and several loans such as Wilfried Gnonto to Fiorentina.

Incoming spend was significantly higher. Transfer fees totalled in the region of £89m (€99.70m). That included loans for Melvin Bard from Nice (with a reported £5m option) and Jean-Mattéo Bahoya from Eintracht Frankfurt (loan that becomes permanent next summer for £25m+ range plus add-ons). Major permanent arrivals included James Trafford (£40m from Manchester City) and Tarik Muharemovic (around £34m from Sassuolo).

An extra £30m from an Okafor sale would have narrowed the gap between spending and recouped fees and eased Profit and Sustainability Rules pressure. Instead Leeds chose to keep a player they rate as important to Daniel Farke’s squad heading into their second consecutive Premier League campaign. Whether that decision pays off on the pitch and on the books will be judged over the coming months.




52 Premier League better signings than James Trafford?

Football is all about opinions. Leeds fans are allowed to be biased. Even allowing for that, Athletic journalist Tim Spiers’ ranking of all 155 Premier League summer arrivals has gone down badly at Elland Road. Spiers placed James Trafford 53rd. That is the England goalkeeper, the club-record signing, and the player Leeds have been trying to land in that position for years. In his view, 52 deals this summer were better pieces of business. Leeds did not have a quiet window;

  • Harry Wilson on a free from Fulham
  • Tarik Muharemović for £34.1m from Sassuolo
  • James Trafford for a guaranteed £40m from Manchester City
  • Nico Elvedi for a reported £6.8m–£8.5m from Borussia Mönchengladbach
  • Michael Zetterer for £4.3m from Eintracht Frankfurt
  • Melvin Bard on loan from Nice, with a modest option to buy
  • Jean-Mattéo Bahoya on loan from Frankfurt, with a significant obligation to buy
Spiers ranked those seven 27th (Wilson), 32nd (Muharemović), 53rd (Trafford), 68th (Bahoya), 75th (Bard), 102nd (Elvedi) and 129th (Zetterer). The case for dropping Trafford so far down the list is the fee and a couple of uncomfortable weeks at City last season before Gianluigi Donnarumma arrived. “We will back Trafford to be the former,” Spiers writes of the two possible futures, “but his success is no given and the massive fee drops this down the list a little.”

That is the entire case. A 23-year-old England international, already a World Cup squad member, who conceded 16 goals across a Championship title-winning season at Burnley, who played every match as City won both domestic cups, and who arrives as the long-term answer in the most important position on the pitch is somehow mid-table in a list of 155. Spiers’ criteria include cost-effectiveness, importance to the new club, and whether the player fills a genuine need.

Trafford ticks every box except the first if a club-record fee is treated as automatically disqualifying. Goalkeepers of this profile do not come cheap. Illan Meslier and Karl Darlow left on frees. Leeds needed a massive upgrade not just in shot-stopping but in distribution, something the club has lacked for more than two decades. They paid the market price for a proven young English keeper. That is how this market works. Wilson on a free is an excellent signing and deserves to sit high.

Muharemović replacing Pascal Struijk for a similar fee to what Leeds received for the Dutchman is smart, high-upside business. The rest of the window is sensible squad building. Trafford is the one that changes the ceiling. A mid-table Premier League side with a 23-year-old international goalkeeper who can play with his feet and command his box is a different proposition from the one that spent last season relying on Darlow. Plenty of other observers saw it that way. Some rankings published while the window was still open put Trafford first overall. That feels closer to reality than 53rd.




Rodon injury expected to alter starting XI against Brighton

Leeds United take an unbeaten start and a perfect away record to the Amex Stadium on Saturday as they face Brighton in their third Premier League game of the season. Daniel Farke’s side have won both visits to Nottingham Forest this campaign, 1-0 in the league on the opening weekend and 2-0 in the Carabao Cup, and remain unbeaten after a 1-1 home draw with Brentford last Sunday. That result came at a cost: Joe Rodon hobbled off with a hamstring injury and is a major doubt.

The transfer window closed on Tuesday night, but Leeds were able to add defensive and attacking cover after Rodon’s setback. Nico Elvedi, who replaced the Welshman against Brentford and adapted well, stands ready to start. Left-sided wing-back Gabriel Gudmundsson completed a full week of training and was an unused substitute last weekend; he is now in contention. Long-term absentees Mateo Joseph (recovering from MCL surgery) and Ilia Gruev (knee) remain out, though Gruev has been edging closer in training.

Brighton also have a growing injury list. Former Elland Road favourite Georginio Rutter missed Sunday’s defeat at Chelsea with a minor unspecified issue. Manager Fabian Hürzeler indicated Rutter has a better chance of making the squad than Jack Hinshelwood, suggesting the French forward could return this weekend. Hinshelwood and several other attackers, including Yankuba Minteh and Kaoru Mitoma, are longer-term concerns.

Leeds sit eighth with four points from two games. Brighton are ninth with three points after a 4-0 opening win over Aston Villa and a loss at Chelsea. The visitors will look to extend their strong start on the road while managing a thinner centre-back group; the hosts will hope Rutter’s availability and home form can halt Leeds’ early momentum.




Noah Okafor, James Trafford, Joe Rodon
User avatar
The Subhuman
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 78736
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:03 am
Location: God's own county

Re: The #LUFC Breakfast Debate (Thursday 3rd September) Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

Post by The Subhuman »

Not sure how Muha being double the cost of Struijk is similar...

I do think we overpaid for Trafford and that has to effect his position but 53rd is too harsh. Top 20 buy this summer

The rest look about right tbf ...
Last edited by The Subhuman on Thu Sep 03, 2026 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A mind is like a parachute, it doesn't work if it's not open"
User avatar
Barlow Boy
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 11727
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2023 9:32 pm

Re: The #LUFC Breakfast Debate (Thursday 3rd September) Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

Post by Barlow Boy »

Dim Tim can say what he likes, Trafford will turn out to be one of the better signings we made.
Don’t cry because you said goodbye to your pet, smile because you said hello
Jammy 07
Manager
Manager
Posts: 3778
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2020 10:09 am

Re: The #LUFC Breakfast Debate (Thursday 3rd September) Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

Post by Jammy 07 »

So after a summer of reading that Okafor was possibly looking for a move away it turns out that all along he very much wanted to stay and also that the club had no intention of selling him.

Perhaps less idle speculation in future would be appropriate.
ruttermania
Reserve Player
Reserve Player
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2023 9:47 am

Re: The #LUFC Breakfast Debate (Thursday 3rd September) Whites rejected £35m bid for Okafor

Post by ruttermania »

In the context of this Transfer Market and the inflated values applied to so many players particularly in any of the transactions involving on at least one part members of the 'big six' the price paid for Trafford doesn't seem that high . We tried to do the 'new keeper on the cheap' trick last year and it backfired spectacularly so we had to pay a premium to give everyone that extra level of reassurance that we were getting a keeper we could rely on. If Darlow had stayed would they have gone the extra mile to get Trafford or would they have punted on someone available a bit cheaper on the basis that if it didn't work out they could always rely on him for an acceptable level of cover? At the end of every transfer window I always ask myself why I get sucked into this maelstrom of speculation , lies and rumour mongering but I'm still wasting valuable time on it despite the fact that I should know better .
Post Reply