Well, I for one wasn’t expecting that.

A signing before we’ve even appointed a manager - we’re firmly in uncharted territory. Fulham have made a signing before July and it’s Jonah Kusi-Asare.

The 18-year-old signed from FC Bayern Munich for a fee worth around €6m following his loan last season. He hardly pulled up trees during his loan spell, so why are Fulham going ahead with this one?

Another Tony Khan signing?

Tony Khan gave a fantastic interview to Jack Kelly earlier this month in which he hinted that Fulham’s transfer strategy wouldn’t be changing but he had learned lessons from his time working with previous managers and making signings without their full backing - but has he?

When speaking to JK about JKA (confusing I know), he said the following. “I think Jonah can be a great asset potentially, so I am open to that and interested in that for sure. I think Jonah still has a lot of development in his young career and I think he's doing fantastic."

It appeared to everyone that Jonah was signed without Marco’s full backing last summer, so has TK hit the button again without speaking to a prospective manager? Has Arbeloa been consulted?

A financial win

Buckle up people, it’s time to put the accountant hat on. The Premier League SCR rules mean that clubs must spend a maximum of 85% its total football revenue. JKA appears to be a good financial opportunity for Fulham, a young prospect who looked good for our U21s and has a buy-back clause with Bayern Munich. It’s the type of business that would be hailed as a success down at Brighton, Bournemouth or Brentford.

I’m not saying that JKA will come in and set the world alight immediately but for €6m we could do a lot worse than him. He’s incredibly raw and will be given space to develop in our U21s while serving as a third-choice striker (because surely we won’t start the season with just him and Muniz).

Not the finished article - but that’s OK

Expanding more on my last point, the club cannot look at JKA as the answer. Because if he is, I’m unsure on the question. Fulham still need a striker regardless of this signing, and JKA needs time with Hayden Mullins in the youth setup.

Arbeloa (if he ever signs) reportedly wants to bring youth through so this presents a fantastic opportunity for JKA and a fantastic opportunity for Fulham to start to become a more sustainable club in the transfer market. Buy low, sell high, rinse and repeat. It’s worked for other clubs who have knocked down the European door, why not Fulham?

Ah, the summer of 2001.

Those of us around with memories of that time will all have different experiences. My recollections come as a 14 year old, who was so excited to finally be able to join the Premier League conversation.

For years I was subjected to Accrington Stanley-style jibes when asked who I supported.

“Fulham? Who are they?”

Even when we were scalping the likes of Southampton, Tottenham, and Aston Villa in the domestic cups, it was the easiest line to draw a laugh.

But that all changed in 2001 after we romped the old Division One.

The weeks following the end of the 2000-01 season were some of the most exciting I remember as a Fulham fan, as we prepared for our Premier League debut. I will try to recapture some of that magic in this series.

It all started with the unveiling of our new badge - the 10th in our history.

All things considered, it remains the most divisive element about our club (aside from perhaps Tony Khan). And when it was introduced in 2001, less than three weeks after the end of the season, the reaction wasn’t particularly warm. If there was social media back then… well, you can imagine the uproar.

But with the internet in its infancy, the reveal was made in the form of a glossy brochure sent out to season ticket holders and members, detailing the rebranding procedure, following club-issued research that showed just 14% of football fans actually recognised the club’s current crest, which was at that point six years old. The pamphlet was awash with classic marketing spiel, from detailing fan consultations to talk of ‘brand identity’.

"The new image has been designed to reflect the core values of the club,” MD Michael Fiddy said at the time.

A simple black and white shield was a nod to the centrepiece of our previous crest, while the red FFC monogram running down the middle was an homage to initials-based badge that adorned the shirts of our 1975 FA Cup finalists. I’d argue that the monogram is not quite the “optical illusion” The Sun recently purported it to be (and if you didn’t notice it said FFC until that rag pointed it out, then I dunno what to tell ya).

Core values and brand identity aside, the new badge was about the club safeguarding future revenue as a member of the richest league in world football.

Whether you believe the argument that the Hammersmith and Fulham Council own the rights to the old crest or not (there appears to be some debate over this), the club’s decision to create a new, fully ownable insignia makes complete sense, and so it’s proved.

I’ve never been shy about professing my love for the badge. It’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but it’s been present for the most successful period of our history, from our highest-placed Premier League season to the Europa League final and beyond. But to this day there’s still sections of the fanbase desperate to revert to our Division One-winning crest, particularly when it made a comeback on last season’s away kit.

Nevertheless, a quarter of a century ago this 14-year-old was buzzing to see a new badge to signify a new era. And the most exciting parts were to come: the signings…

I was sitting here on Monday evening wondering what on earth I was going to write about this week.

The weekend brought us nothing, and I (along with other members of Fulhamish I speak to daily) were starting to get a little bit restless. Where’s our new manager? Who are we looking to sign? Are Fulham real or is this all just one big simulation? All very valid questions, but as the week progressed, we seemed to get at least a few answers. Let’s take a look.

Incomings

Starting with the sizeable elephant in the room, what is happening with Alvaro Arbeloa? David Ornstein reported on Tuesday morning that a deal between the two parties was getting closer, but Fulham were still insisting that two candidates were in contention. A three-year-deal has been offered to the Spaniard, and the ball appears to be firmly in his court.

I think that might be the first time I’ve seen a report that a club was closing in on a deal but other managers are still in contention. Alas, Fabrizio Romano followed this up with a cryptic tweet hinting that the deal’s progression looking closer thanks to a tweet from Guillem Balague. I’ll spare the details of Balague’s tweet as Drew wrote a piece yestreday laying it out, but get excited - get very excited.

Angel Garcia of Spain has come out and said that if Arbeloa is to join, he will look to bring 19-year-old defender Victor Valdepeñas with him from Real Madrid. Elsewhere, reports in Germany are suggesting that Fulham have had a €3m offer rejected from FC Bayern Munich for Jonah Kusi-Asare. Fulham see potential in the Swedish striker who was with us last season and are expected to go back in for a second bid.

This is an interesting one; JKA failed to set the world alight for the first team but did well for the academy. Maybe one to bring in and develop into our third (and maybe even one day second or first) choice striker.

Fulham appear to have been very busy (if you believe everything you read) with Turkish reporters claiming we have put in a hefty €22m + €3m in add-ons offer for defender Chibuike Nwaiwu which was then rejected by Trabzonspor who are looking for closer to €30m. Finally, the Whites are once again interested in Atalanta full-back Raoul Bellanova.

Outgoings

In terms of departures, the biggest news comes from top scorer Harry Wilson, who is yet to sign a new deal at the club.

The Athletic are reporting that Wilson and Leeds United are in positive talks over a deal with the Welshman’s contract expiring at the end of the month. A deal that was confirmed by David Ornstein yesterday. For me, this feels like a deal purely motivated by money.

I know Leeds are a bigger club than Fulham historically, but over the last 10-15 years or so, the balance of footballing power has swung more to SW6. I mean this with no disrespect to Leeds (who I think are doing good business this window), but if he’s being offered the same, why would you uproot you and your family’s lives to Yorkshire to play for another side that also finished mid-table last season?

Elsewhere, there are more reports of Sander Berge departing this summer, this time for newly promoted Hull City. This has come from Sportsboomcom, so take it with a rather large pinch of salt. But as I said last week when the Norwegian was linked to Manchester United: if Fulham can make a profit on Berge, I wouldn’t be opposed to selling.

I’m really starting to like this move.

It looks like Alvaro Arbeloa will be unveiled as our new boss this week - maybe as early as today.

And it’s increasingly looking like a shrewd move by the Khans.

Much of the fan discourse since the reports first emerged have centred on his lack of experience and turbulent five-month spell in charge of a dysfunctional Real Madrid first team squad. But a tweet from Spanish football expert Guillem Balague on Wednesday has shed more light on the appointment and is forcing a shift in perspective.

Balague says Arbeloa has clearly laid out his vision for Fulham. And within that there are some interesting points to dissect.

First, Arbeloa wants to continue our recent shift in transfer strategy, and “put greater emphasis on young talent with development and resale value”. Matt Littlejohn set out earlier this year why this is so vital in the era of SCR.

And what will be music to all our ears, the incoming manager wants to “create a clearer pathway from the academy to the first team”. It’s the biggest stick to beat Marco Silva with. He favoured more established players. Yes, there are a couple of academy grad success stories - Fabio Carvalho and Josh King - but with our category A academy and success in the PL2, there should be a conveyor belt of talent coming through. The reason there hasn’t been is that there’s no pathway.

The immediate beneficiary of this must be Luc de Fougerolles. Adam Farquharson spoke this week about how he’s becoming impossible to ignore in SW6, such are his performances for Canada. I don’t want to start re-writing history, but I’m not sure he comes back after the World Cup as a Fulham first-team member if Marco’s still here. Under Arbeloa it’s all up for grabs.

What’s really interesting for me is Balague urging us not to judge Arbeloa on his ill-fated stint at the Bernabeu - and that it “was a situation in which he had to be ‘the manager he had to be’". We all followed the in-fighting and the battle of the egos during Arbeloa’s tenure. But he came into a near-impossible situation. A square peg in a round hole - and he had to change his own shape to fit.

So, instead when mentioning his Madrid pedigree, focus on his time with the Castilla. And I don’t know about you, but this gets my juices going.

Possession, high pressing, intensity and the desire to dominate games. Flexibility when required, but with one non-negotiable principle: aggressive pressing without the ball.

And then finally there's all the managers who have influenced Arbeloa’s style and philosophy. You can’t argue with that list: Benitez, Mourinho, Pellegrini, Ancelotti, Del Bosque. That’s quite the forest of learning trees.

I’ve kept my powder dry until now when it comes to the Arbeloa reports. But I’m not afraid to say that I’m all in.

Let’s get this new era started and shift our perspectives. Let’s look up, puff out our chests and back our new manager - and hope the board will do the same.

It certainly looks like they’re buying in.

Sammy and Jack are back with Fulham Fives, the Fulhamish series where they count down their top five Fulham-related picks. This week, following Marco Silva’s departure, they rank their top five Fulham managers of all time.

Guests:
Sammy James
Jack Collins

Producer:
Freddie Cooper

Guests:
Sammy James
Jack Collins

Producer:
Freddie Cooper

Read more

At the 2024 Hudl Statsbomb conference in Manchester, a data scientist named Lorenzo Cascioli presented his findings in a panel called “Boot it: A pragmatic alternative to build up play.”

In his study, Cascioli compared how often professional football teams, in the next 10 actions, score in a football game after kicking a ball out of bounds and giving a throw in to the other side (that they can press to try and win back possession) compared to when a squad makes a backwards pass in an attempt to build up possession from the back.

What Cascioli explored was to see if the idea of booting it long pays off, if the player doing the kicking can boot it out of bounds near the other team’s penalty area.

Cascioli came up with this premise when he saw Slovakia at the Euros kick the ball out and then successfully force Jeremy Doku to turn over the ball in Belgium’s penalty area, which led to an easy goal for Slovakia.

He also saw his native Italy fall victim to the same situation against Romania (after Romania kicked the ball out at the start of the match and successfully pressed and scored the fastest goal in the history of the Euros).

As the chart below shows, according to Cascioli’s study, teams that try to build up from a backwards pass have a 0.2% likelihood of scoring in the next next 10 actions, while teams that boot out score 0.34% of the time in the next 10 actions.

So, according to this analysis, teams get into better scoring opportunities more often when they kick the ball out in high value areas and press and win it back than when they try to keep possession and pass the ball into those areas against a settled defense.

It makes sense. Building the ball up via possession from the back, moving the ball into areas heavily defended and scoring is a very hard thing to do. And as we know from watching Fulham’s central defenders trying to pass through pressure, pressing teams at the back can pay off because the defense is unsettled and there are real opportunities to score when you can win the ball in the other team’s penalty area.

Last season, many Premier League teams took notice of Cascioli’s findings and started booting the ball out of bounds with some success. As Opta analyst noted:

Already in 2025-26, three kick-offs have been booted straight out of play in the final third of the pitch for an opposition throw-in. That’s three times as many occasions as in the last five seasons combined. In other words, it’s happened three times in 30 Premier League games this season, after happening just once in the previous 1,900.

Cascioli’s approach is also being used, notably, by teams in the current World Cup. One Premier League team that didn’t boot it long last season - as we all know - was Fulham. Because our manager, Marco Silva, strongly believed in building from the back, because Fulham was last in the league in terms of sequences pressed (per game) and because Bernd Leno is terrible with his feet and not really able to reliably kick the ball where he wants (although this one time he did kick it right where Cascioli recommends).

Silva in many ways was an anachronistic manager. While he was pragmatic (and changed how we played after Fulham’s promotion) he generally wanted to play beautiful football and not the odds. This was, in my view, sometimes problematic given our team’s constant struggle to score after getting in the final third.

Interestingly, the one area where Silva did play the odds in the final third - and against formerly conventional wisdom - was with long range shooting last season.

He had Harry Wilson shoot more frequently from long range even though these new shots had - relatively speaking - a lower xG - or likelihood of scoring - than balls shot closer to the goal.

Silva was, in this case, implementing recommendations from statistical analysis that originated with a 2021 paper entitled “Leaving Goals on the Pitch: Evaluating Decision Making in Soccer.” The paper, by Roy, Robberechts, Yang, De Raedt, and Davis found that:

Analysis of the popular expected goals (xG) metric in soccer has determined that a (slightly) smaller number of high-quality attempts will likely yield more goals than a slew of low-quality ones. This observation has driven a change in shooting behavior. Teams are passing up on shots from outside the penalty box, in the hopes of generating a better shot closer to goal later on. Our key conclusion is that teams are overcompensating: all teams would score more goals if they shot more often from outside the penalty box in a small number of team-specific locations.

The paper illustrated what they meant in a team-by-team analysis (as the graphic comparing shots by Chelsea and Everton shows below). The redder spots are where teams can have the most success with shooting from distance rather than trying to dribble, pass to closer, higher xG spots for shooting.

Silva changed how Fulham (and Wilson) played in response to this finding.

It was better to have the Welsh wizard take a low xG shot with his magic left foot from the top of the box, when that was open, rather than to try and get to a closer spot (and to be able to get a higher xG opportunity).

As the Athletic pointed out in the heat map below, Harry’s shooting this season changed compared to earlier seasons. He suddenly stopped trying to get closer to the goal and started taking a lot more low xg shots on the edge of the box.

And, the strategy worked. Harry got a lot of (low xG) goals (and as a result exceeded expected xG with actual goals) as did a few other Fulham players.

Note, I haven’t updated this chart since this piece was published but, unfortunately, Harry didn’t score many more afterward. But, the fact that Harry can do this is a big reason why he is suddenly attracting interest from multiple teams.

Hopefully, our next manager can build on what Silva started and implement on field changes to take advantage of additional statistical opportunities on the pitch including, in the right situation, booting it out more and pressing.

It is an opportunity to unwind some of the problematic decisions Silva made including having Bernd Leno continue to start at goal in a league where it is increasingly important to have a goalie who is strong with their feet and to start having Fulham more aggressively press and seek to win the ball back in advantageous areas of the pitch.

A few months ago, the conversation around Luc De Fougerolles centred on potential. Today, it centres on opportunity.

The 20 year old arrived at the World Cup as one of Canada’s youngest squad members and with only limited senior football experience. Yet after two group-stage matches, he has looked increasingly comfortable on one of football’s biggest stages.

While it would be reckless to draw definitive conclusions from a sample size of just two games, it could become increasingly difficult to argue that de Fougerolles should begin the 2026/27 season outside Fulham’s senior matchday plans.

The question is no longer whether he has potential. The question is whether he has already done enough to warrant a place on Fulham’s bench.

World Cup so far

Canada’s opening match against Bosnia and Herzegovina provided the clearest glimpse yet into what LdF could become.

Making his World Cup debut, he played the full 90 minutes and recorded eight clearances, six headed clearances and won 11 duels. For a young centre-back facing a proven Bundesliga striker in Demirović and a physical partner in Lukić.

Those numbers were impressive not simply because of their volume, but because of what they revealed about his game. He was willing to engage physically, comfortable defending his penalty area and showed no signs of being overwhelmed by the occasion or experience/pedigree of opposition.

Canada’s subsequent 6-0 victory over Qatar offered far fewer opportunities for defensive heroics, but showcased another side of his game. While Canada by no means dominated possession (they actually had less of the ball). LdF operated a mix of a ‘Centre-back box crasher’ alongside playing key roles in the high line build up that Canada employed in a ‘quarterback’ role that he wouldn’t often get the time to exhibit in the Premier League.

While Luc was replaced on 71 minutes in both matches, together, the two performances painted the picture of a modern centre-back: comfortable defending his box while also possessing the composure and technical ability required in possession. With tinges of leadership on display, his future is bright.

The Andersen comparison

Any discussion about de Fougerolles’s future at Fulham inevitably leads to comparisons with the players currently ahead of him.

The most obvious benchmark is Joachim Andersen. The Danish international would be described as Fulham’s defensive leader in the RCB spot. While he would formally have been seen as one of Premier League’s most reliable centre-backs, his stock may have fallen a little following a disappointing and quite frankly unprofessional decision towards the end of the season.

During the 2025-26 Premier League season, Andersen accumulated 257 clearances across 33 appearances, won 131 of his 208 duels and 74 of his 103 aerial contests while recording 36 interceptions.

Clearly, de Fougerolles is nowhere near matching that volume of production. Andersen has nearly 3,000 Premier League minutes behind those numbers, while de Fougerolles has only two World Cup appearances to analyse. Any direct comparison must be treated with caution.

However, what is striking is how similar some of the underlying traits appear.

Like Andersen, de Fougerolles looks comfortable defending deep. Like Andersen, he shows a willingness to attack aerial balls rather than merely react to them. Like Andersen, he appears calm in possession and willing to progress the ball rather than simply clear his lines.

Andersen’s greatest strength is arguably his ability to combine traditional defending with modern ball-playing qualities, and some of those same attributes are increasingly visible in de Fougerolles’s game.

Why the sample size doesn’t matter as much as you think

Sceptics will rightly point out that two World Cup matches do not guarantee Premier League readiness.

They would be correct. Hello Ragnar Sigurðsson.

The purpose of a bench role is not to identify players who are already Premier League starters. It is to identify players who are capable of contributing when called upon.

What de Fougerolles has demonstrated is that he can handle pressure, adapt to high-level opposition and maintain his composure in major moments. Those qualities are often more difficult to teach than technical ability.

At 20 years old, he already looks capable of stepping into senior matches without appearing overawed. That alone is significant.

The strongest argument for inclusion

Perhaps the strongest argument for de Fougerolles’ inclusion is not statistical at all.

Fulham have spent years searching for a sustainable pathway between their academy and first team. When a young player performs well at international level, against senior professionals, in the pressure cooker of a World Cup, there comes a point where continued exclusion becomes harder to justify than inclusion.

I am not suggesting De Fougerolles should replace Andersen yet. But a place on the bench is a different conversation entirely providing we find a manager who trusts in young talent.

If a 20-year-old centre-back can start World Cup matches for Canada, win 11 duels on his tournament debut and display the composure of a far more experienced player, then it becomes reasonable to ask why he shouldn’t be trusted as Fulham’s fourth or fifth defensive option - at the very least.

Verdict

The World Cup has not proven that Luc De Fougerolles is ready to become a Premier League starter. What it may have proven is that he has outgrown the category of “academy prospect”.

Football careers often change because of moments exactly like these - two games into the World Cup, De Fougerolles has not forced his way into Fulham’s starting XI. He may, however, have played his way onto the bench.

One thing is certain, if we don’t give him his chance, and a pathway - somebody else will. The biggest remaining question is whether our new incoming manager is willing to open that pathway up.

Jack and Joe are back to discuss Fulham’s fixture release day, with Chelsea awaiting on Monday night in the opening gameweek. The boys also chat about the ongoing speculation surrounding Álvaro Arbeloa.

Guests:

Jack Kelly

Joe Sansom

Producer:

Freddie Cooper

Guests:

Jack Kelly

Joe Sansom

Producer:

Freddie Cooper

Read more

We’ve done this merry dance enough to know that - of course - the order in which you face the 19 other Premier League clubs over the course of the season matters. That’s why fixture release day is so important.

Can we fly out of the blocks and bank some points with a winning run in our first few games? How does our run-in look? That’ll be crucial in the race for Europe, or - dare I say it - the battle to avoid the drop.

Now we know the (rough) shape the 2026-27 campaign will take, we can pick out the most exciting - and potentially pivotal - dates in our maiden campaign with our as-yet unnamed new manager.

1. Chelsea (H) - 24 August 2026

How’s this for a curtain raiser?

The SW6 derby under the lights for Monday Night Football. Woof.

It’s Xabi Alonso’s Chelsea, of course. Could it be a battle of the ex-Madrid managers with Alvaro Arbeloa at the wheel? Who knows, because we’re still moving at a snail’s pace.

But this is an exciting way to set the tone for the season and Craven Cottage will be absolutely rocking for this one. We’ll be full of optimism - and piss and vinegar. Let’s have it.

2. Brighton and Hove Albion (H) - 26 December 2026

A home game on Boxing Day?

This will be only the eighth time since the turn of the century that Fulham fans can head to the Cottage full of turkey and mince pies. The last time we we had a home Boxing Day fixture was in 2020, when of course no one could go because of Covid. I think that day everyone was happy to have missed it, given it was a 0-0 stalemate with Southampton. Our barren Boxing Day run is a fixture computer glitch no one can really explain other than perhaps the Met police favour those lot down the road.

This one will be juicy, with both sides expected to be hovering around the middle of the table. It’s a winnable one, too. We’ve not lost against the Seagulls at the Cottage since January 2017. So, I’ve jinxed us there.

3. Brentford (H) and (A) - 12 December 2026 and 24 April 2027

Yeah, I’ve cheated here (just like last year), but the Bees home and away are just as important as each other aren’t they?

Our home fixture comes in the thick of the congested festive period™, where we have no fewer than six games throughout December. Gathering as many points on the board as possible here will shape the second half of the season, so this is is a really well-placed fixture.

The game at the Gtech is also well-placed as it comes at the start of the run-in. Get a result here and we have home games against Everton, Ipswich and Coventry (more on them in a second), and trips to Hull and Old Trafford (I’ll get onto that too). It could set things up rather nicely…

4. Coventry City (H) - 23 May 2027

This will be our final home game of the season - and it’s a tricky one.

Our record against the Sky Blues is dire. Granted, we’ve only played them half a dozen times in the last 70 years, but we’ve not beat them in 70 years, either. The last time we faced them, in the 2021/22 Championship-winning season, we lost 4-1 away and 3-1 at home. Bogey.

But if we’re looking to achieve anything in 2026-27, be that safety of a top eight finish, we’ll absolutely have to pick up three points here. Who knows what state Coventry will be in at that point, but chances are they’ll be a wounded animal fighting for survival. I don’t fancy this one much at all!

5. Manchester United (A) - 30 May 2027

A week later we travel to Manchester to bring the curtain down on 2026-27.

Given we currently have no manager, leaving our transfer strategy even more clouded than it normally is, and no sign of either being rectified any time soon, it will be interesting at this stage to look back and reflect on how the campaign has gone. Have we pushed on on in a post-Silva landscape? Have we regressed? Are we happy? Are we relegated?

Who knows. But if history is any indication (it is not in this instance, but indulge me), the last time we ended the season at Old Trafford, though we lost, we finished in the top 10 in our first season back in the Prem under Marco.

Strap in: it’s all to play for!

It’s been a busy few weeks for the rumour mill with the managerial merry-go-round that seems to finally be coming to a halt… maybe. Departures are beginning to depart and murmurings about incomings and outgoings are starting to bubble. Let’s take a look at how the land lies.

Incomings

The most obvious place to start is with Alvaro Arbeloa, whose move to Fulham seems a matter of when rather than if.

Talks are believed to have progressed smoothly, with Ben Jacobs suggesting the deal is almost done. Jacobs also reported that Fulham had spoke to Ange Postecoglou, (with TeamTalk reporting we even interviewed the Aussie) Kieran McKenna, Thomas Frank, Frank Lampard and Ruben Amorim.

However, Tony Khan has attempted to slow the speculation, saying that there are two standout candidates for the role, saying on FFCTV:

"There are two in particular who have had multiple meetings with the board and who we really like, but we are open to more conversations and talking to more people. We are working on that process right now."

I wrote an article earlier in the week discussing my thoughts on Arebloa so will refrain from giving my thoughts once more, but I did find it interesting just how many people Fulham spoke to. Was Arbeloa the first choice? Was he even in the top five? I’ll leave that to your imagination.

In the player department, Fulham have interest in multiple positions with Sky reporting that we are keen to add another right-back; I wonder what this means for Kenny Tete and/or Timothy Castagne. The same Sky article also says that Fulham are looking at 22-year-old attacking midfielder Luka Stojkovic. Matteo Moretto is also reporting that Fulham are interested in Girona defender Arnau Martinez with the Spaniard having an €8m release clause.

At the moment, I would take all player rumours with an extra pinch of salt, with nobody likely to come in until Arbeloa is confirmed. We don’t know what areas he will look to strengthen and the type of players he wants to recruit. It could be quite an exciting time for Fulham.

Outgoings

Manchester United are keen to take two players off of Fulham’s books this summer with Antonee Robinson the first of those. Sky Sports have reported that Manchester United are looking at either Robinson or Newcastle’s Lewis Hall with £40m likely enough to take the American to Manchester. I think after a poor season, £40m could be very good business for Fulham and a valuation that could rise higher with a good World Cup.

The Athletic are reporting that Sander Berge has emerged as a potential target for Michael Carrick’s side after West Ham’s valuation of Mateus Fernandes was deemed too high. The article also claims that Fulham will be looking to make a profit on Berge after paying £25m for him two seasons ago. Similarly to Jedi, if we can make a profit on Berge I think we should look to take it. I’d be concerned if we gutted the squad too much but I wonder if we didn’t take these potential offers now, would we ever get money like that for either of them again?

Elsewhere, Jorge Cuenca to Benfica is now off. SportsWitness has now reported that Fulham’s valuation of £17m is deemed too high for Marco Silva and the 26 year old is looking more likely to stay at Fulham. That’s good as far as I’m concerned; I think £17m would be a bit low for Cuenca, and he’s a player who is always so dependable for Fulham. In a summer of transition, keep hold of Jorge.

Finally, in the academy, Olly Sanderson has left Fulham to join League One Stevenage on a permanent transfer. This was quite smart by Fulham as Sanderson was out of contract in the summer. Following a good year for Woking, the club have triggered an extension before getting some money for the 22-year-old forward.

Dennis Turner’s name may be familiar to relatively few – but those who encountered him in person know how important he was in Fulham’s off-field history. Indeed, he was the club’s historian, writing two definitive and many smaller books on them by the time of his death in 2014. He also edited the matchday programme for many years, never taking a salary yet producing a publication that was not only packed with authoritative reading but also made the club money when that was in short supply.

Born in 1946, Dennis attended his first Fulham game in October 1952. He rose from supporter status to become a director in April 2009, serving for just over four years prior to the Khan family takeover. He was very much involved with the club in the turbulent period when chairman Ernie Clay sold up and it seemed Fulham Park Rangers would be the result and the Cottage would be lost.

I was recruited to the programme team in 1983 to write a column on Fulham’s celebrity fans. Dennis, Chief Economist for the HSBC (formerly Midland) Bank in ‘real life’, was also a music devotee, and had enthusiastically taken up my idea.

At the end of the season he reverted to banking type and showed the team of volunteer writers a document called a spreadsheet (who knew?) illustrating the money we had helped generate. Probably enough to buy a lower-division left-back!

Things were both different and more difficult in the pre-internet age when it came to assembling a match programme. Dennis organised a team of motorcycle messengers in conjunction with programme printers Ward and Woolverton to collect typewritten (or even handwritten) articles from his writers and deliver them to the typesetters: no internet and very few personal computers in the 1980s! Then he would check the proofs when they came back by bike, and the printed programmes were always there at the Cottage come Saturday morning. Delivered on a wing and a prayer – or in Dennis’ case, cigarettes and a steady stream of black coffee.

As contributor Chris Mason, who initially wrote the opposition ‘pen pic’ biographies, now fondly recalls, “The club itself had very little to do with the programme, other than selling a bit of advertising space – a very little bit of advertising space, as the programme had a limited number of pages and Dennis insisted it had as much purely FFC-related information as possible.

“Not only did Dennis edit the programme and write the ‘Inside the Cottage’ column but he also acted as its accountant. We contributors were all unpaid but Dennis saw to it that the programme (no pretentious-sounding Matchday Magazine) always made a profit for the club. Not a lot by today’s standards, perhaps, but a profit nonetheless – and all the more remarkable as most home games attracted no more than a few thousand people, about 75% of whom were more than happy to fork out less than a pound for something worth reading.”

Turner’s aim was indeed purely to help the club – so much so that he resisted having colour photos in the programme because black and white was cheaper to reproduce. And, in the opinion of many, more dramatic. (Fellow Fulham legend Ken Coton was, needless to say, the man behind the lens.) He stepped back from editing the programme for a year, letting Chris Mason take over, but regained the reins after a season. Fulham was an addiction for Dennis, and he couldn’t keep away.

He marshalled his programme team astutely, and many well known names passed through the ranks. As well as Alex White, the current club historian and Dennis’ sidekick on the statistics side, there was Alex Ferguson (The Traveller) and Jim Sims (Lilywhite) majoring on awaydays and former players. David Lloyd went on from his programme stint to found the TOOFIF fanzine, a phenomenal publication published over many years.

But, like Hotel California, not everybody was allowed to leave, as contributor Paul Hooper explains. “After five seasons on the programme I phoned Dennis one evening during the close season to submit my resignation. After a pause, he said: ‘Let me explain to you, Paul, how these things work; if you tender your resignation it doesn’t take action until I actually accept it.’ Another pause. ‘And I don’t accept it.’”

Dennis (with Alex White) wrote the first definitive history book on Fulham called Fulham: A Complete Record 1879-1987, following it up with Fulham Facts And Figures 1879-1998. When players had testimonials to fund their life after retirement he was invariably brought in to assist: among the results were benefit-match programmes for Simon Morgan, Gordon Davies and Glenn Cockerill.

DMT, as I always think of him, had started his working life in the late 1960s as an economist for a trade union, moving on to work for the government in Whitehall encouraging economic development and finally the world of banking and high finance. He retired from HSBC in 2011, but enjoyed less than three years of retirement.

After his passing, 1980s striker Gordon Davies referred to him as “A true Fulham legend who never even wore the shirt,” while Les Strong, a 1970s stalwart, said “If anyone was synonymous with Fulham through the decades I’d say that man was Dennis – a true Fulham man through and through.” For long-time matchday announcer David Hamilton, he was “quite simply irreplaceable.” It’s clearly right, proper and Fulhamish to celebrate such an influential and unique character who left his mark on Fulham Football Club in so many ways.

Today’s programme, as Chris Mason reflects, is an altogether different beast to a Turner production. “Glossy it may be. Larger it certainly is. But what of the content? An amalgam of trite populist nonsense, full of advertisements, photos of players needing a shave and brightly coloured silliness. It is presumably designed to appeal to younger supporters, provided their mums and dads can afford the inflated price after they have forked out for match tickets and ludicrously expensive replica shirts.

“Together with his helpers, Dennis produced a well-written, informative and often amusing publication which, in the world of football, was universally admired. I have a feeling he would intensely dislike the current programme because it no longer has what it always did have under his leadership. Integrity, and – above all – heart.”

We all know the narrative: Samu Chukwueze came back from AFCON a different man. It’s almost true.

Now, the fanbase is cool on the idea of Fulham taking up their option for the 27-year-old Nigerian.

It’s a shame, as Samu started the season brightly and we were all quite excited to have him and Kevin as our winger options during the first half of the campaign.

He was really hitting his stride in the five games prior to leaving for the tournament, with three assists and two goals - both of those coming in our humdinger 4-5 loss to Manchester City. It was a man-of-the-match-winning performance that led George Rossiter to proclaim: “We have to pay the fee and give Milan a little extra as a thank you for showing us a truly special player”.

There was no doubt that Samu left for Morocco in the middle of a hot streak - and we were all buzzing for his return.

He endured a difficult AFCON, missing a penalty in the semi-final shootout against Morocco that saw Nigeria exit the tournament.

But that didn’t stop Samu. He scored on his return to Fulham, drawing us level against Brighton at the Cottage, before Harry Wilson added an injury-time winner.

That victory propelled us to seventh in the league and everything was looking rosy for the Whites and for Chukwueze. Then five days later he loses his mother.

The elephant in the room here is grief. From experience, losing a parent is devastating - and grief can manifest in a variety of different ways. It can also take a while to work through.

Amazingly, he declined to take a break, starting for Fulham at Old Trafford just two days later. Again, there’s no rulebook on how to grieve, but there are certainly mitigating circumstances.

Chukwueze made 12 more appearances after that 3-2 defeat to United, and failed to score or assist in any. He wasn’t even in the squad against Newcastle on the final day and there weren’t many eyelids batted.

Three goals and four assists in 23 league appearances is probably not worth £25m, even in today’s market. But we’ve seen more than a few glimpses of what he’s capable of, and I’m still of the opinion he’s worth bringing in, particularly if reports are to be believed that we’re negotiating the price tag with AC Milan.

Speaking to Jack Kelly last week, Tony Khan said the club still has eyes for him.

“I really like Samuel. We’d have to work with the new coach and sit down and work it out with Milan, but there is interest in Samuel returning.”

The biggest concern about signing him is his age. At 27, there’s little-to-no resale value there if we bring him in permanently. With SCR looming and the need to adapt our recruitment style to targeting younger, uncut gems we can make money on, this doesn’t fit the model.

So you’d want an immediate return on the pitch. If 2025/26 was the warm-up, 26/27 would be time to deliver.

Nigeria famously field to qualify for the World Cup this summer. So Samu’s got time to return home and recharge, to process his grief, and to prepare for a huge season.

Because whether that’s at Craven Cottage, the San Siro, or elsewhere, it’s a pivotal campaign for him as a player and as a human being. I wish him success whatever happens.

Sammy and Jack return with Fulham Fives, the Fulhamish series in which they count down their top five Fulham-related picks. This week, they’re ranking their top five worst Fulham signings of all time which sparks some controversy...

Guests:

Sammy James

Jack Collins



Producer:

Freddie Cooper

Guests:
Sammy James
Jack Collins

Producer:
Freddie Cooper

Read more

Well, we seem to have our answer. Fulham look set to appoint Alvaro Arbeloa as manager following Marco Silva’s departure to Benfica, with reports of the Spaniard taking a two-year deal with an additional year as an extension.

There’s been a real mixed bag of opinions surrounding the former Real Madrid man, but what are the reasons that the Khans have landed at this decision?

Profile

While all that matters is his managerial career, I will quickly go over what he did as a player, with the 43-year-old having some real skin in the game.

The full-back is best known for his two stints at Liverpool and Real Madrid in the late 2000s and early 2010s as well as a good international career for Spain, which included winning the 2010 World Cup as well as the 2008 and 2012 European Championships.

As a manager though, he is yet to have as much credit in the bank. Arbeloa returned to Madrid in 2020, where he was initially appointed as their U14s coach before making a step-up to U19 in 2022. He continued to rise through and took over at the Castilla from Raul in 2025.

The Castilla is Real Madrid’s B side, who play in the Segunda Division in Spain, where he was involved from May 2025 to January 2026 before taking over from Xabi Alonso after he was sacked by Madrid.

Arbeloa’s stint at Madrid was a mixed bag, which saw a dominant Champions League knockout result over Manchester City, but also saw a defeat to second-division Albacete in the Copa del Rey.

Madrid also finished off the pace in La Liga, six points off FC Barcelona, and Arbeloa announced he would step down after six months in a role which included eight defeats from 28 games.

How will we play?

As I’m sure many of you are, I didn’t really know a lot about Arbeloa from a coaching persepctive before having a look at writing this article, so I did some research online following his 5-1 win over Manchester City as well as interviews he did with ‘The Coaches Voice’ and analysis of his time at Real Madrid U19 to get a better idea of what Fulham fans can expect, here’s a summary of all three.

• Arbeloa will play a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 variation most of the time, especially during transition.

• He wants to use width as much as possible and is keen on getting crosses into the box quickly.

• Out of possession during that Manchester City game, Real Madrid dropped a 5-3-2 with one of the CMs (mainly Valverde) dropping in to provide additional support.

• He’s often seen screaming from the touchline, demanding his team to press quickly and in numbers to regain possession.

• He has described wanting his teams to be “full throttle”.

• Arbeloa credits Rafa Benitez, Jose Mourinho, Manuel Pellegrini and Carlo Ancelotti for the learning each of them gave him during his transition from player to manager.

All sounds pretty good in theory right?

It didn’t quite work out for him at Real Madrid, and I know there are the sceptics among us (and those scepticisms are completely understandable), but ultimately Arbeloa is a man with pedigree in Europe and while the positives remain that he will try and bring us attacking and exciting football, which tactically doesn’t look too dissimilar from Marco Silva, it does feel like one of those appointments that either goes fantastically, or he’s gone by November.

Did Fulham “really” want him?

Just to play devil’s advocate on this, was this really the plan? Did all roads seriously lead to Alvaro Arbeloa?

I’m not so sure. When speaking to Jack Kelly last week, Tony Khan said that Fulham didn’t really have a contingency plan and expected Marco Silva to stay - when he didn’t (as you will have known from the articles surrounding replacements), it seemed like there was a scattergun approach (which Khan confirmed in his JK interview, stating there were multiple people they were sounding out).

Ben Jacobs reported that “FFC also spoke to Ange Postecoglou, Thomas Frank, Kieran McKenna and Frank Lampard with Ruben Amorim also ruling himself out” and with Arne Slot also rejecting the job at the beginning of last week, that makes it seven managers Fulham publicly spoke to.

Now I’m not suggesting that Arbeloa was our seventh choice on that list, but the sheer contrast in names on there, both stylistically as well as what they’ve done in the game, is staggering.

I want to believe that Fulham really wanted Arbeloa, but I’m struggling. It was reported last week that all of Slot, McKenna and Frank had turned down the job; Ruben Amorim also ruled himself out, and Ange was interviewed alongside Arbeloa - by that logic, he’s at least fifth choice.

It all just seems a bit chaotic from Fulham, and with Arbeloa only being given a two-year-deal, it hardly suggests he has the full trust and support of the board.

We will all obviously back him come August, but the jury is understandably still out.

According to Fulham’s most recent public financial reports, in 2024/25 Shad Khan, through the various entities he uses to control the club, converted £145m of loans owed to him into equity for a club that he already owns outright.

This brings his total investment in Fulham to £1.158bn, a club he bought for £150m in 2013 and that is, according to Forbes, now worth £681m (or 70% less than his total investment).

And, that total investment figure does not include the reported £62m that Khan loaned to the club in 2024/25, nor the additional tens of millions he’s likely invested in 2025/26.

Why is Mr. Khan spending so much money on Fulham? Does he just love football and the team that much? The answer seems to be no.

While Khan does seem truly committed to Fulham, what he really seems to love is working with family - and his son, Tony.

In an interview with TalkSport last October, Shad was asked why he started buying sports teams, including Fulham. He said:

“Well, I liked sports, but I played cricket (laughs).

And first of all cricket doesn’t exist in the US. I played a little bit of tennis in high school and what have you, but I really discovered sports with Tony.”

Maybe he was, like us, watching the Premier League as a young man? Nope:

“I would have our customers, our suppliers, and banks invite (me) to (sporting) events. And I was like, no, I work 12 hours. I just want to pick up our hamburger on the way [home] for my wife and myself or maybe for my son and I want to go have it and go to bed - that was the life for us. And then Tony had an interest in sports. And [if] he wants to go, so I’ll take someone up on an invitation.”

Shad Khan’s life story is incredible. He worked his way through college by washing dishes, became an engineer and then somehow was able to buy the company he first worked for and turn it into a multibillion dollar, cash-generating auto parts behemoth.

But he was not interested in sports or football until Tony came along. Family and Tony are the key. The TalkSport interviewer asked him how special it was to work with his son, and Shad replied:

“Being born in Pakistan, pretty much everything is like a family business - you survive as a family. I worked with my dad ever since I could walk. Just the personal satisfaction you get… most people, unless they’re working as a family to survive, don’t get that. So I have really enjoyed that and want to be able to support him (Tony) to have the success he’s enjoying. It’s such a fulfilling thing, frankly it’s really hard to describe.”

I think the passion in this answer is notable in contrast to how Shad usually talks about Fulham where he tends to say nice, but not very passionate, things.

Shad got into sports to be able to work with his son - like he did with his Dad - and it paid off for him emotionally and, outside of Fulham, financially. The Khans have more than doubled their money on the Jaguars - now worth $5.6bn according to Forbes - and reportedly spent $100m to start a new wrestling federation that is now valued at $2bn.

Tony is the key. Getting to work with him is the main reason why Shad owns sport teams, including Fulham. What does Tony say about getting to work with his Dad? In another TalkSport interview from February this year, TK said:

“I’m very blessed to be able to spend this much time with him and to work in businesses that I really love and I’ve learned so much from him before I was working when I was in school when I was growing up and now as an adult and working professionally with him.”

The Khans often like to refer to Fulham as a “family club.” And, they mean it - it is the Khan Family Football club. Tony is not a nepo baby employee who got his job because his Dad owns the club. He is the reason why his Dad owns the club.

So, did Tony love football? Is that the reason why his Dad bought Fulham? I don’t think so. And while I believe Tony has, over time, come to love Fulham. But back then, what Tony loved was sports.

I think the reason Shad became our owner was because Tony was (and still is) passionate about sports management and analytics and that the Premier League was an exciting new area for both.

Look at the Jacksonville Jaguars site where Tony is described as a “a thought-leader in the world of sports analytics and insights.” The (not very recently updated) team bio, which presumably Tony approved, describes his role at Fulham:

“Khan has played an integral role in the identification, recruitment and signing of the players while continuing to oversee the club’s statistical research department, which he created in 2015 to analyze football player performance and develop proprietary football performance.”

Data and recruitment are Tony’s main interests. He wants to make his name by building successful sports teams using analytics. Tony is not (according to this reasoning) ever going to stop being involved with transfers as long as the Khans own Fulham.

Here’s how Tony described his role at the club to the Athletic in a 2023 interview:

Recruitment at Fulham, (Tony) explains, is a collaborative process involving himself, Silva and Mackintosh, as well as a team of data, analytics and scouting experts to look at every target in almost forensic detail. It is an exhaustive, time-consuming process and life can be hectic when Khan is also the co-owner of the Jacksonville Jaguars, as well as running his All Elite Wrestling empire and having various other work commitments.

“I lean heavily on data and analysing information,” says Khan, whose Boston-based company, TruMedia Networks, is one of the big hitters in the world of sports data. “Marco is also very analytical, but not looking so much at the databases. We’re looking (at players) in different ways and coming together on a lot of shared philosophies. We agree on almost everything and the players who have come in over the last two years have, overall, been very successful.”

This quote is telling about who the Khans will seek to hire as Fulham’s next manager - someone that Tony will like to work with on transfers and that will allow him to continue playing his role as chief of analytics (and Director of Football).

I know this might be frustrating to hear, but while Alistair Mackintosh could be set aside for the right new Fulham manager - as recently happened with top Jaguar executives when the Khans hired a new head coach for their NFL team - Tony will not be moved and, in fact, will mostly likely be the key decision maker in what manager we hire next.

I say this because, as far as I can tell, the Khans divide their work at Fulham thusly: Shad focuses on the Riverside Development and Tony focuses on the team.

As Tony said in his interview with TalkSport in February:

“Dad’s project has (borne) incredible fruit with the Riverside stand and the development there.That was a dream and he’s built something that will truly stand the test of time. He’s taken a timeless property and a timeless place and something that has so much beautiful magic with Craven Cottage and he’s added something incredible that I really believe in with Fulham Pier and the Riverside stand and I care so much about the football and the results of the football and I’ve never been the person who has the most sight on building out the stadium. and the ticketing revenue and things like that.”

I do think that Shad will be involved in selecting a new manager, because it is ultimately his money. He is a smart guy and incredibly successful businessman who understands that his billion-dollar investment might go up in smoke if we pick the wrong manager and get relegated, but Tony is likely going to be the main voice in room because, again, Shad is doing all of this mainly to be able to work with Tony. And what Tony wants to do is to be able to do what he thinks is the fun stuff at the properties they own.

God help us.

But, the good news, fellow Fulham fans, is that Shad Khan’s modus operandi is to not give up and to keep on investing until he wins and is successful (even more so because this is about his family and son).

Here’s what he said after the Jaguars finally - after many years of mediocrity (and a lot of criticism) - made it to the play-offs in 2017 (the equivalent, I guess, of getting to Europe):

“Well, I had been through life when I was a laughing stock in whatever business I was in, auto parts or what have you,” he said. “You have to stay in it and success comes. It’s a story of perseverance.”

And, as his continued investment of hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars shows, Khan is putting his money where his mouth is, which he can continue to do given that he is worth a reported $15.3bn and owns a company that generates hundreds of millions in cash every single year.

Jack Collins is joined by Jack Kelly a couple of days after Jack’s big interview with Tony Khan live on X. The pair analyse some of Tony’s responses, discuss the rumour that Fulham are in talks with former Real Madrid manager Álvaro Arbeloa, and finish by reflecting on Raúl Jiménez’s fantastic tenure at the club after his move to Wolves was confirmed.

Guests:

Jack Collins

Jack Kelly

Producer:

Freddie Cooper

Gu…

Read more