Brentford links with Leicester man should make Leeds United happy they signed Joel Piroe

Joel Piroe has certainly made quite an impact since completing his move to Leeds United from Swansea City in the summer transfer window.

Footballleagueworld video of the day
The Elland Road club’s need for some further attacking firepower had been evident for some time, and not bringing it sooner was arguably a contributing factor to the club suffering relegation from the Premier League to the Championship at the end of last season.

As a result, it was no surprise to see the club act in the summer market to boost their firepower, parting with a fee reported to be worth more than £10million to bring the Dutchman to Yorkshire, after two prolific seasons with the Swans.

Since then, Piroe has quickly made the sort of impression that Leeds would have wanted from him, with the 24-year-old having already scored four goals in just five Championship outings for the club.

He has also formed a promising partnership with another of the club’s attacking prospects in the form of Georginio Rutter, and it is since that link-up has developed, that Leeds have really started to show signs that they can challenge for an immediate return to the Premier League this summer.

However, it is worth noting things could have been rather different, given some of the other interest there appeared to be in the striker over the course of the summer.

Who else was interested in signing Piroe in the transfer window?
Given Piroe’s success with Swansea in recent years, Leeds were perhaps not surprisingly, far from the only club to be linked with the Dutchman over the course of the summer.

Indeed, the other two clubs relegated from the Premier League at the end of last season – Leicester City and Southampton – were both seemingly also interested in signing the 24-year-old.

Ultimately though, both clubs would go in different directions when it came to their recruitment in attack.

Southampton would go on to sign Ross Stewart from Sunderland on deadline day, while Leicester boosted their forward options, with the addition of Tom Cannon.

Now though, the latest reports involving Leicester and Brentford, mean there is a growing argument that Leeds ought to be happy they managed to get a deal for Piroe over the line when they did in the summer.

Joel Piroe
What could Brentford’s emerging interest in Patson Daka have meant for Leeds and Piroe?
While he has not played for quite some time now, and will have to wait a few more months before he can do so, it seems Brentford’s Ivan Toney is already starting to attract plenty of interest in the lead-up to the January transfer window.

It is being reported that Arsenal are among those keen on the Bees forward, and in response to that, Thomas Frank’s side themselves are eyeing up potential replacements for the former Newcastle man.

According to reports from Football Transfers, one name they are looking at to fill that role is Patson Daka, who remains on the books at Leicester for now, despite a summer of speculation about his own future.

However, Leeds may be pleased they have now secured the future of Piroe with his long-term contract at the club.

Given the aforementioned Cannon is out for some time due to injury, there can be no doubt that if Daka is to move to Brentford this summer, Leicester would need to find themselves a replacement for the Zambian international.

Considering the fact that they were interested in him over the summer, and his proven track record at this level, Piroe would certainly have been an obvious candidate to fill that role.

Indeed, the funds Leicester would likely receive if they were to sell Daka to a Premier League, mean you imagine they would have also had the finances available, to buy Piroe in January had they needed to.

That of course, could have seen the Elland Road club miss out on a player who is rapidly becoming a vital asset for them, to a potential rival for promotion.

Now though, the deal that Leeds got done for Piroe in the summer, on a contract until the end of the 2026/27 season, means there is no chance of that happening, ensuring that in this case at least, acting when they did to strengthen their attacking options, certainly looks to have paid off.