11 Aug 2026 14:14:21
What do people make of the rumours of Myles Lewis-Skelly being offered to both us and Chelsea?
Personally I'd snap Arsenal's hand off at the chance to sign him.
11 Aug 2026 15:47:45
I'm a bit dubious of a rival offering us a player of theirs. I know we are nowhere near their level at the minute, but why are they offloading so easily to us at what will be a hefty price?
Also, is he that good? I think we need to be looking at those players ready to take the step up, not fall down a bracket.
I tell you who looks pretty decent. Young lad at Newcastle named Lewis Hall. Reckon if we act fast could get in there before Newcastle get some money in and have time to replace him. ?
I do like the idea of Seys, though. Hopefully will be another Lemmens and will have him to help settle whilst challenging with Shaw.
11 Aug 2026 16:42:18
I like Lewis Skelly. He's a young lad, and we don't know how high his ceiling is.
But I also agree on Hall. I'd pay whatever they want (within reason). He is excellent, and could be here for 10 plus years.
It does seem we are looking for value for money, and are not prepared to pay big bucks, even for the really good players.
11 Aug 2026 18:16:19
Lewis Hall would undoubtedly be a great signing, but who would be the better signing?
Hall for 80m or Lewis-Skelly for 40m plus 5m in add ons?
Is there that much between them? Both homegrown, both comfortable playing LB or CM, both young, with a lot of potential. On one hand, you could argue that Hall has a stronger grip on his first team place at Newcastle, but, on the other, Lewis-Skelly is younger and has held down a place at a title winning club, and started in the UCL final.
Hall also has a slightly sketchy injury history, while Lewis-Skelly has practically never been injured.
I'd say it's very close between the two of them, and for me there isn't an outright winner. So, it might come down to which one is more achievable this summer. Also, if they are so closely matched, can you really justify spending significantly more on one than the other?
11 Aug 2026 18:16:36
Don't see us paying what Arsenal will want for one of their rejects. They also have a lot of games and a big squad. If he's not good enough to make it as an alternative in any position, they can't rate him that highly.
11 Aug 2026 19:25:21
Lewis Shelly solves Lb and 4th CM.
Very sensible signing.
Any question marks on his personality? Does he only want to play CM?
11 Aug 2026 21:06:55
Dare I suggest a swap deal with Rashford......
11 Aug 2026 21:11:03
19-year-old left-footed England player who started the Champions League final. Plays CDM and LB. Makes incredible sense.
Hall and Lewis-Skelly would be brilliant.
11 Aug 2026 21:59:23
imo, Hall is miles better. I just don't think Skelly is that good.
And also, what Adam said about Arsenal wanting to get rid.
12 Aug 2026 07:26:26
Squad depth is poor.
One injury to new lad Santos, and there is no DM in the squad.
There is also no natural striker apart from Sesko.
Couple of injuries can easily derail the season. Hopefully the decision makers address this before the window.
12 Aug 2026 08:51:36
Nobody is going to take Rashford, unfortunately, by way of any means, sale or swap, until he drops his ludicrous wage demand. He simply isn't worth that money. The End.
12 Aug 2026 11:58:53
Fizz, no way he should drop any wages to move somewhere. The club were stupid enough to offer him a massive contract and that's what he gets.
He can see out his contract, move for free, and get a nice sign-on somewhere else.
12 Aug 2026 11:51:23
Right now I think Hall is a shade better than Lewis-Skelly, but then he is two years older and more experienced.
Who has a the higher ceiling? Who knows, ultimately though it's not about who has the most potential but who ends up the better player. Hall has had a few injuries, that concerns me as our biggest flaw in defence is having too many injury prone players. While it's hard to develop and reach your potential from the physio's table.
Both have been in and out of their clubs first team, and both for the same reason (the managers wanting a more physically dominant player there to help with aerial balls). Oddly both are playing at clubs where the managers have often deployed more natural CB's in the full back positions.
Apparently Lewis-Skelly still sees himself more as a midfielder who is playing at LB, where as Hall now sees himself more as a LB who used to play in midfield. Maybe Lewis-Skelly really wants to play in midfield, or maybe he will accept that his senior career is better suited to LB.
Who knows why Arsenal are prepared to sell him. Maybe they don't think he's good enough, or maybe they need to balance the books and selling a former youth player releases more money as pure profit. Especially as he isn't a nailed on first choice starter under Arteta. Selling a talented, albeit squad player for pure profit probably balances the books far more adequately than either selling 2 or 3 squad players to make the same money back, or having to sell a first choice option.
They have Calafiori as first choice, with Hincapie and even Timber who can cover LB and play in a more similar way/more natural replacement for Calafiori. While they've just signed Bruno G to be first choice in midfield along with Rice, meaning Zubamendi and Merino are the depth options. So less need to keep Lewis-Skelly as back up for midfield.
Ultimately Arsenal have more experienced and better suited options for how the manager wants to play in their squad, making Lewis-Skelly probably the biggest expendable asset they have to raise funds. That doesn't mean he's a bad player, Newcastle sold Elliott Anderson to Forest to balance the books and because they had more experienced options in their squad. Does that make Anderson a bad player?
Sometimes top sides actually ruin young players by keeping them, but not playing them regularly enough for them to fully develop into the players they're talent suggests they could reach.
Look at ourselves for example, we held on to Dean Henderson because he was "too good" to sell. In doing so we stunted his development and created issues within our own squad. Fast forward to this summer and we have agreed to sell the highly talented Vitek to Middlesbrough rather than stunting his development sitting on our bench behind Lammens. However, we have maintained the option to potentially bring him back in the future or benefit further from a big sale to another club. Meaning if Lammens doesn't work out, or if he wants to move on to another club in a couple of years time, we could potentially bring Vitek back if he's good enough.
Well run clubs should be allowing youth players to leave if that is in the best interests of the player and ultimately the club. The problem top clubs have is they have a tendency to attract the best youth players, but it's hard to give them the game time they need to grow during their formative years in professional football. Some might benefit from a loan, others will need to leave permanently to continue to develop. If the club is being run well they will let them leave but insert clauses/ways to bring them back in the future if they reach their full potential.