Manc Rover Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Roque = £8M + Bentley? Obvious long shot but makes sense and a win / win for Rovers and Spuds
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
47er Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Roque = £8M + Bentley? Obvious long shot but makes sense and a win / win for Rovers and Spuds Yeah-just about enough cash left to get Crouch as well! I can dream can't I?
rebelmswar Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Roque = £8M + Bentley? Obvious long shot but makes sense and a win / win for Rovers and Spuds Wonder what Bentleys wages are at now? Quite sure that even if the planets aligned and he decided that he no longer wants to be in London and play European football, he would have to take a substantial wage cut.
Manc Rover Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Wonder what Bentleys wages are at now? Quite sure that even if the planets aligned and he decided that he no longer wants to be in London and play European football, he would have to take a substantial wage cut. It just seems logical for all concerned. I'd love to see Bentley back at Rovers. Won't happen in a million dreams, though!
Amo Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I thought I heard he got less at Spurs, actually.
gumboots Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I thought I heard he got less at Spurs, actually. He does get less than we offered him to stay.
Hughesy Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Think we offered him £50k a week and he took £45k a week at Spurs.
47er Posted January 31, 2009 Posted January 31, 2009 Think we offered him £50k a week and he took £45k a week at Spurs. Crouch on a reported 90000 a week at Pompey would stuff up our wage system wouldn't he ?
Hughesy Posted January 31, 2009 Posted January 31, 2009 Well Roque is on £60k a week, so cant see us breaking that for Crouch. No chance - although we could tie it in the deal that he gets a decent chunk of the deal to allow him to take the cut in wage.
DeadlyDirk Posted January 31, 2009 Posted January 31, 2009 Well Roque is on £60k a week, so cant see us breaking that for Crouch. No chance - although we could tie it in the deal that he gets a decent chunk of the deal to allow him to take the cut in wage. In nicko's thread he said there are ways for it to be done. Maybe we can give him a big signing on fee or something to make the difference up. I'd be looking for him to take a cut one way or another though really, the bottom line is he isn't worth 90k a week and if we save money on swapping Crouch for RSC only to spend the difference on wages then I'd rather keep Roque. I guess if Portsmouth do in deed need to get rid then they may pay some of his wages perhaps to make up the difference. I remember when Leeds were paying wages for several players still years after they have left like Fowler and Viduka etc. Guess it comes down to how badly Pompey need the money and how much money Crouch wants.
mclove Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 I really hope that if santa cruz goes, he goes to spurs, just to spite city for messing us around for a month!!!
thenodrog Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 I really hope that if santa cruz goes, he goes to spurs, just to spite city for messing us around for a month!!! This BBC snippet provides comfort for us without the deep insight and tactical excellence provided by playing Championship manager every waking hour. "City boss Mark Hughes is hoping to push through deals for both Santa Cruz and Newcastle goalkeeper Shay Given before the transfer deadline. But speaking after Blackburn's 0-0 draw with Middlesbrough, Allardyce said: "He had a Blackburn shirt on today, and he will have one on next week." Even better if he'd ended with "And thats that!"
dingles staying down 4ever Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 This BBC snippet provides comfort for us without the deep insight and tactical excellence provided by playing Championship manager every waking hour. "City boss Mark Hughes is hoping to push through deals for both Santa Cruz and Newcastle goalkeeper Shay Given before the transfer deadline. But speaking after Blackburn's 0-0 draw with Middlesbrough, Allardyce said: "He had a Blackburn shirt on today, and he will have one on next week." Even better if he'd ended with "And thats that!" why is there a team photo today or tomorrow morning because I still suspect that RSC is moving
mclove Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 IF RSC is still playing for Rovers after the transfer window closes I just hope those idiots who were still booing him when his name was announced as a sub on Wednesday night will get off his back ... they are only making themselves look like idiots I replying here because dont want to get banned! I think you look like a fool now. Players shouldnt be allowed speak to the media! Roque is following in the footsteps of the great role model Bentley! He looks like a fool, i got banned on the official boards for my views on Roque, i wish he would leave! He has underperformed this season because he thought he would be leaving in January. It would be just better if he left now.
philipl Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 I replying here because dont want to get banned! I think you look like a fool now. Players shouldnt be allowed speak to the media! Roque is following in the footsteps of the great role model Bentley! He looks like a fool, i got banned on the official boards for my views on Roque, i wish he would leave! He has underperformed this season because he thought he would be leaving in January. It would be just better if he left now. Banned or not, I think most fellow Rovers disagree with you re Roque.
kandi Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 Banned or not, I think most fellow Rovers disagree with you re Roque. He has underperformed because he wasn`t fit.He was carrying an injury.
Amo Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 Let's keep him. Ideally he would like to go, but he hasn't said a bad word against us (quite the contrary in fact). And I think he's smart enough to know if he throws his toys out the pram and underperforms, it will only put off potential suitors in the summer. Not that I'm sure he would sulk in the first place.
mclove Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 Banned or not, I think most fellow Rovers disagree with you re Roque. The banning thing was because original post was in Nickos thread. In what context would other rovers fans disagree phil? He has come out and said he doesnt want to be at rovers on numerous occasions even though he has said he is happy here. If he is so happy here, why would he want to leave? Why has gone out and said he would want a move away? Money is my guess and he is just as bad as the likes of lucash and bentley! he used to be a favourite player of mine, and until he changes the mindset/attitude he wont be a favourite!
kandi Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 Let's keep him. Ideally he would like to go, but he hasn't said a bad word against us (quite the contrary in fact). And I think he's smart enough to know if he throws his toys out the pram and underperforms, it will only put off potential suitors in the summer. Not that I'm sure he would sulk in the first place.
gumboots Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 The banning thing was because original post was in Nickos thread. In what context would other rovers fans disagree phil? He has come out and said he doesnt want to be at rovers on numerous occasions even though he has said he is happy here. If he is so happy here, why would he want to leave? Why has gone out and said he would want a move away? Money is my guess and he is just as bad as the likes of lucash and bentley! he used to be a favourite player of mine, and until he changes the mindset/attitude he wont be a favourite! Were you at yesterday's game because i couldn't see a lot wrong with his mindset or attitude. He worked hard for the team and with a slightly less good performance from their keeper could have won the game for us because if we'd once scored there was no way the Boro were coming back. I'll repeat what I said earlier. He knows he's important to us and the manager would like to keep him. If he felt that we were just holding out against City for the sake of it he might resent it but there seems to have been considerable efforts made to replace him so that we can free up cash and strengthen other areas and he'll have been made aware of that. He must also know that City are so far not willing to bid the kind of over the odds sums for him that they have for other players who they really want which suggests that the bosses are not really backing the manager he wants to play for and that must create doubts around the stability of the management team. Of course he wants the money - wouldn't we all like it - but he has not thrown a wobbly or done anything other than make remarks which like most footballers he didn't think would be picked up over here about liking the ides of a move if it's possible and suits the clubs.
mclove Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 Thanks for bringing me down to earth gumboots!
Guest Kamy100 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 The Lancashire Telegraph reports that they believe that City have given up their pursuit of RSC. City believe that Rovers cannot be pursaded to sell.
JAL Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 The Lancashire Telegraph reports that they believe that City have given up their pursuit of RSC. City believe that Rovers cannot be pursaded to sell. Lets put it to bed and move on, to sell now is way too late. Did City really ever have the money for Roque?
Guest Kamy100 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Lets put it to bed and move on, to sell now is way too late. Did City really ever have the money for Roque? I wish we could but I gotta feeling that City will try one more time. The only way a deal can now happen is money plus Sturridge, that is someone who Sam wanted originally so if City REALLY want RSC then they know how to get him. Of course it would mean Sturridge agreeing to the move and that isn't cut and dried.
Hughesy Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 It would mean Sturridge + top dollar. If they want it to happen then they will have to agree a fee before 1pm at the latest. Otherwise there wont be enough time to make it happen.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.