Tammy Abraham is still definitely a target for Newcastle United.

There has obviously been a very long period of time where fans have seen a lot of speculation/claims as to what is allegedly going to happen…but with nothing happening.

However, in a refreshing change, Swansea’s Chairman has opened up about the possibility of where Tammy Abraham might end up.

Speaking more like a club boss on the continent, where they tend to shoot from the hip and happily chat away about what might or not happen with transfers, Huw Jenkins has confirmed Swansea’s interest in taking the Chelsea on loan AND at the same time revealed that Newcastle are still competing for the 19 year old forward.

Tammy Abraham helped England under-21s come from behind to beat Slovakia 2-1 in the European Championships and Jenkins says that the player will decide his future after the tournament.

Huw Jenkins:

“We expect any decision will be made (by Tammy Abraham) once that (European Championships Under 21) tournament is over and we will see what he wants to do.

“It’s not just about us. There is a Newcastle link, Rafa Benitez spent time at Chelsea, which has been fed back to us, and he has also been linked with newly promoted Brighton.

“We have made our interest known and we now wait to see the outcome but we understand it is a big decision for the player to make.”

England will exit the competition on one of three dates – Thursday 22nd, Tuesday 27th, or Friday 30th June.

The three group winners and the best runner-up go into the semi-finals.

If England beat Poland on Thursday then they would be guaranteed to top the group and go through to the semi-finals which are played on Tuesday 27 June, with the possibility of a final on Friday 30th June.

If England draw then that would also be enough if Slovakia and Sweden also drew. Then there would also be the possibility of the Young Lions progressing as the best runners-up if Sweden or Slovakia did top the group.

Tammy Abraham scored 26 goals for Championship strugglers Bristol City last season and clearly he and the club will be looking for a higher level this time in order to progress.

A loan deal with a Premier League club looks inevitable.



  • MichaelMaximusMoose

    Me being cynical i`d put Fatso`s money on this lad being our main striker & we wont be buying a premiership standard one anytime soon
    proberbly in January when the alarm bells are ringing

    • Damon Horner

      What if he is Premier League standard?

      • MichaelMaximusMoose

        he may well be, but would you bank on it seeing as we`ve just come back up. it`s along time to January

        • Damon Horner

          I do see your point, there aren’t many likely safe signings though, I like the lad and would like to see him but probably too risky to solely depend on him.

  • Scottpaige

    Well he must have made his decision what he’s doing. His odds to join another club went from all betting sites 2 weeks ago.

  • mactoon

    I don’t get this. We need to buy a prolific striker so why are we wasting time and money on a loan signing who we will just be improving for another club and doesn’t appear to want to come anyway?

    Our current strikers scored the following in the Championship:

    Gayle 1 goal every 1.4 games (injury prone?)
    Perez 1 goal every 4 games
    Mitro 1 goal every 6.25 games
    Murphy 1 goal every 2.8 games

    Abraham only scored 1 goal every 1.8 games so he isn’t better than what we have already. If we keep our current strikers without adding a main forward we could be in serious trouble. Move on from him and get a striker in!

    • Wor Lass

      Well, he`s clearly better than 3 of what we have already based on your stats!

      • mactoon

        But he won’t be our player and doesn’t seem to want to come. I would prefer a premiership proven goalscorer as opposed to a loan deal. I’ve been saying this since before we were relegated

        • HarryHype59

          I agree, but as Mick Hucknall famously sang;

          “moneys too tight to mention”

          Loss of TV money, in addition to millions paid out for duff players we cannot sell, is one reason why NUFC are in the loan market.

        • Wor Lass

          I don`t disagree with you there – I`d much prefer Batshuayi but that one seems to have well and truly disappeared.

          • mactoon

            Rashford anyone?

          • Geordiegiants

            If only!

    • steve

      Take away Messi and Ronaldo and a goal every 1.8 games is prolific by anyones standards. Those goals per games stats are meaningless though when the likes of Mitrovic only plays 5 minutes in half of his appearances.

      Gayle 1 goal every 93 minutes
      Perez 1 goal every 254 minutes
      Mitro 1 goal every 280 minutes
      Murphy 1 goal every 137 minutes

      Abraham 1 goal every 149 minutes

    • Clarko

      You are completely ignoring the financial side of things. If Newcastle bring in Abraham on loan, it allows Newcastle to offload the likes of Mitrovic and Murphy, Newcastle will be bringing in money while, at the same time, “improving” the quality of the squad, the money gained will then be used to further strengthen (other areas of) the squad.

      • mactoon

        I’m not ignoring it mate. Any loan deal is money lost in wages and probably a signing on fee. He goes back to his club then we have to replace him anyway. It’s a false economy so we should be aiming for a permanent deal which would still allow us to offload the players you mention.

        • Clarko

          You did ignore it, nothing about the financial side was mentioned in your post and you’re ignoring it again, what would be the net out come if Newcastle loan Abraham and sell both Mitrovic and Murphy? Profit right? Not only will Newcastle make a significant money off of that scenario but, according to the statistics you have provided, they would also improve the quality of the squad.

          • mactoon

            Again, I didn’t ignore it. I took it into account but simply didn’t include it in my post. The difference between your scenario and mine is that we wouldn’t be wasting wages on a player who we would never own and would have to replace anyway. It’s far better financial sense to buy a striker who is proven in the Premiership not waste wages on a young player who may not play or may not be good enough for the Premiership. He’s on loan outside the Premiership for a reason.

          • Clarko

            Do you expect me and everyone else to read your mind?

            “Wasting wages on a player who we would never own and would have to replace anyway”, I cannot think of a word to describe how ridiculous that statement is. It is so stupid, I am genuinely stumped as to how to respond to it. How is paying the wage of a loan player any different to paying the wage of a player you own?

            You state it would make “far better financial sense to buy a striker who is proven in the Premiership not waste wages on a young player who may not play or may not be good enough for the Premiership”. One issue I have with that statement is how do you know it would make “better financial sense” when you have absolutley no clue who that striker is? Another issue I have is your use of the word “waste”, it is a zero risk transfer, we are not paying a transfer fee, we are not tied to a long contract, his wage will be more than covered by the outgoings his arrival would bring and Newcastle would make money from those outgoings.

          • mactoon

            Calm down mate you are being unnecessarily aggressive. You raised the financial side of things, I considered it but didn’t see it necessary to include it in my post which was about loan v purchase. The current players would be moved on regardless of whether Abraham came or not. My point is should we get a loan signing in or buy a proven goalscorer. In my opinion it makes more sense to buy proven quality than pay wages to an unproven youngster.

            I see it could be a waste because we could pay his wages for a season and he might not even play. A season on, he would return to his club and we would still need another striker. That’s double financial outlay regardless of whether we get money from outgoing players. Better to get a proven scorer who will start and not risk paying the wages of someone who might not get a game.

          • Clarko

            “Calm down mate you are being unnecessarily aggressive”, am I being aggressive? Or, are you just assuming my tone?

            “The current players would be moved on regardless”, yes, and those players will need to be replaced regardless, Abraham, who has outperformed those players last year is a “free” replacement.

            Who is this “proven goalscorer” you keep mentioning? The last time I checked Abraham scored 26 goals in 48 appearances in the 16/17 season.

            “I see it could be a waste because we could pay his wages for a season and he might not even play”, you are describing every single possible transfer.

            How is loaning a player “double financial outlay”, can you explain?

            Again, who is this “proven scorer” who is guaranteed to “start” games?

          • Mumbles

            Clarko, I enjoy reading your comments as you have interesting things to say and you’re seldom wrong, but you really need to calm the aggression. I don’t mean to put you down; just a friendly heads up.

          • Clarko

            I appreciate the comment, I absolutley understand that some of my comments seem aggressive, but they’re just words, often it is the tone the reader choses to read in, and that I can’t control.

          • mactoon

            Abrahams wouldn’t be a free replacement he would have cost us up to £50,000 a week (his new Chelsea wages) a signing on fee and a probable agents fee.

            It’s a double financial outlay because the position needs to be filled permanently so to loan a player for 1 season for the costs set out above then buy a player at the end of the loan period is paying out twice. If we buy a player now, we save the cost of the loan.

            The term ‘proven goalscorer’ is by definition a general term and does not refer to a named individual, it refers to a player who has proven he can score in the Premiership. Abrahams is unproven in the Premiership, he scored 26 goals in the Championship so is a risk as he may not step up.

            And he’s going to Swansea so the whole thing’s moot :)

          • Clarko

            It is a free replacement, no transfer fee. You keep mentioning wages, if we buy a player do we not have to pay them wages? Stop talking about wages, every player is payed a wage, that point is non existent. The same can be said for agent fees.

            It is not double the financial outlay, it is a postponement of the financial outlay, we are not paying twice for a player. that point is also non existent.

            Again, who is this “proven goalscorer” who is guaranteed to “start” games? This is now the fourth time I have asked that question.

            This thing is not “moot”, this applies to any potential loan signing.

          • mactoon

            Make your mind up do you want me to take the financial side of things into account (ie wages) or ignore it! Paying for a player on loan then buying another player at the end of the loan is paying twice. With regards to the name of the striker I have said before I haven’t mentioned anyone in particular. I am saying rafa should identify a player with a proven goalscoring record and buy him now thus saving the expense of a loan deal.

          • Clarko

            We are discussing the difference between a loan deal and a permanent transfer. Do both include paying a wage to a player? Yes they do. Yet you keep using it as a reason not to use the loan market.

            You are being silly with this “double the financial outlay” argument just for the sake of being silly. How much would a Premier League striker cost? For arguments sake lets say £20m, which I think is a fair valuation. A loan fee for Abraham would cost in the region of £1m (via Daily Mail). Now, is ~£21m “double the financial outlay” of £20m? It’s not is it.

            You state that “Rafa should identify a player with a proven goalscoring record”, Abraham was that player.

            Can I ask you a question, why do you think loan deals exist if it is so expensive and it is so much more beneficial just to buy a player?

          • mactoon

            Don’t get me wrong I totally understand and agree with the importance of the loan market in terms of getting a better financial deal and it has worked for us in the past. My opinion is that we have needed a prolific goalscorer for ages (probably since Demba Ba left) We need to build a team for years to come and spending money on a 1 year loan deal wouldn’t fit into my plans. That’s why I wouldn’t be going in for a loan deal

          • Clarko

            “Spending money on a 1 year loan deal wouldn’t fit into my plans”, the amount of money spent on that loan deal would be negligible.

            “We need to build a team for years to come”, do we? I think we need to build a team that will absolutley guarantee Premier League survival.

            “My opinion is that we have needed a prolific goalscorer”, I question whether you think Abraham would by our first choice striker in the Premier League? I don’t, without signing anyone else Abraham would still be second choice to Gayle, and I would expect Newcastle to sign another striker even if Abraham signed.

            Abraham would be a “free” improvement over Mitrovic and Murphy. Why wouldn’t that “fit” your plan?

          • mactoon

            Because a loan deal is usually a short term fix unless it leads to signing the player like Atsu. I would prefer to have permanent signings. I would keep Gayle, move Mitro and Murphy on and replace them with permanent signings. You’re right the first aim is to survive next season but that has to be part of a longer term plan which should not include loan deals if we can get permanent deals in.

          • Clarko

            Replace them with who? Who would you replace them with who is better than Abraham? This is now the argument, you need to give an example.

            To clarify, you are against improving a newly promoted squad with loan signings?

          • Malcolm Fisher

            Right on pal

          • Geordiegiants

            He is aggressive in every post. There is no talking to him, his replies are just total boll’cks. He will say anything at all to try and be right. In fact his post contain, “I’m right and your wrong” regularly.

          • Clarko

            It’s *you’re.

          • Geordiegiants

            Absolutely

          • Clarko

            Bitterness is a greater failure than failure.

          • Geordiegiants

            I know your right and I’m wrong.

          • Malcolm Fisher

            Also a man short

          • Clarko

            Does it really matter? Just for you lets just forget I ever mentioned selling Murphy, now does that hurt my argument in any way? It doesn’t does it.

  • Mal

    If Rafa’s keen on him, which seems to be the case, I hope he comes.

  • Albert Stubbins

    newcastle, swansea or brighton- difficult choice that one?? let’s move on- he obviously has his head up his own a*** if he can’t make the distinction between these three!!

  • Vodkamagpie

    It’s about where he would get more game time, if I was him, Brighton would be my destination. Not about the size of the club, it’s minutes

    • HarryHype59

      The Shields Gazette mention that Tammy thinks Newcastle may be “too far” from London. Looks like it will be Brighton for this guy.

  • Steven05

    For what it’s worth, according to today’s Daily Mirror, he’s playing for Swansea next season

    • 1957

      There are two or three papers reporting this, presumably he sees Swansea as somewhere he will get more starts, maybe Clement is just more persuasive than Benitez.