imy9 Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Like someone else said, why should we accept anything less than what Chelsea/Man.City paid for Bridge? £7-10m please. We can ask for that amount but unless Man City are interested in him then realistically we will get about £5 million, similar scenario to RSC, if Man City are interested then it could be over £15 million but without we are looking at about £12 million. We need at least THREE pacy, adaptable midfield players in the summer, a few defenders and a few attackers too, the trust simply have to invest in the squad this summer, the only glimmer of hope for me is that we do pay very good wages to players and with Tugay, Ooijer, Aaron M and others leaving we should have a sizeable budget- wages wise to snare some freebies.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
DavidMailsTightPerm Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 I would only sell Warnock if he wants to go - if he does, then I would be looking for more than £5m. Givet - good though he is - wasn't in his clubs team, and wasn't attracting too much interest - and yet we have to pay £4m - and sell Warnock for only £5m, doesn't add up for me. The biggest concern has to be that this is an example of how Sam is going to set up the team next year. Without doubt Givet is a better left back defensively - but Warnock provides far more to the team going forward. Maybe what we have seen so far - is an example of how we line up next season - with little pass and move - but plenty ball in the air
gumboots Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Here's a thought... You have to raise £4 million for Givet in a hurry. Do you have the money? Or do you have to sell? And if Warnock is your Player of the Year then I must have been at the wrong games...Samba HAS to get that surely. You looked at the voting? It may have changed a lot but when I last looked Warnock was clearly in the lead.
Guest benmaxwell Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Givet + 1 million quid will be good business for a player who does not want to be part of the Rovers I'm very sorry. Have i missed Warnock coming out and saying he wants to leave? Last time i heard (about 2 weeks ago on RoversWorld) Warnock said he was happy at the club..? Unless i hear otherwise (from the horses mouth), i don't believe this story one bit... I could understand him wanting to leave if we get relegated. I mean that changes things. But if were not. I think it's a non-starter rumour wise...
patrickvalery Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 I'm very sorry. Have i missed Warnock coming out and saying he wants to leave? Last time i heard (about 2 weeks ago on RoversWorld) Warnock said he was happy at the club..? Unless i hear otherwise (from the horses mouth), i don't believe this story one bit... I could understand him wanting to leave if we get relegated. I mean that changes things. But if were not. I think it's a non-starter rumour wise... Some sense at last! Maybe he does want to leave. Maybe he doesn't. But the lad has been 110% commited to the cause and some of these comments about "we don't want anyone who doesn't wanna be here anyway" are a little unfair. Personally i think if we could get a decent fee for him then it wouldn't be the end of the world if he left. But as it stands its the usual Sunday tabloid dross. Figures plucked from the air and a story pieced together around minimal factual information. This being Warnock making poor and misguided comments last summer and Givet's loan running out and us having to meet a pre-arranged fee. Everything else is pure conjecture.
dopper69 Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 “I signed a new contract under the impression that Mark’s going to be our manager. “It’s not that I don’t enjoy the club itself but he was the reason I came. I wanted to play for him. Doesn't really put Warnock in the best light to be fair.
Guest benmaxwell Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 “I signed a new contract under the impression that Mark’s going to be our manager. “It’s not that I don’t enjoy the club itself but he was the reason I came. I wanted to play for him. Doesn't really put Warnock in the best light to be fair. Again... Wasn't that when Paul Ince was in charge? He isn't anymore. We have what i like to consider 'A Premier League Manager' in charge at the moment. If he wants to leave, and wants to make teams aware of this. He needs to go on Paraguayan radio...
RevidgeBlue Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 And as Roque won't be fit enough to be sold - and Givet can take Warnock's left back slot - it should be a case of one in and one out. Selling Warnock, signing Givet and making a small profit looks sensible to me. Selling one of our best players simply to accomodate another of a similar age and standard would be absolutely pointless. If we're struggling with both Givet AND Warnock in the side, how the hell are we meant to improve or cope by swapping one for the other? Still, I'm not surprised to hear you coming up with more guff about Warnock nicko as you spent all last summer trying to offload him to Newcastle. Have you rung Warnock nicko, just to ensure he knows about the Spuds interest?
Stuart Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Selling one of our best players simply to accomodate another of a similar age and standard would be absolutely pointless. If we're struggling with both Givet AND Warnock in the side, how the hell are we meant to improve or cope by swapping one for the other? Still, I'm not surprised to hear you coming up with more guff about Warnock nicko as you spent all last summer trying to offload him to Newcastle. Have you rung Warnock nicko, just to ensure he knows about the Spuds interest? Let's assume the interest is true. Regardless of Warnock's feelings, I could imagine Sam would prefer flexibility in defence (LB and CB) as opposed to LB and CM. I expect the emphasis during this transition phase to be on getting the defence to be realy mean and have Ewood as a fortress again. This is what Hughes did when he first came - and he had more money available.
RevidgeBlue Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Let's assume the interest is true. Regardless of Warnock's feelings, I could imagine Sam would prefer flexibility in defence (LB and CB) as opposed to LB and CM. I expect the emphasis during this transition phase to be on getting the defence to be realy mean and have Ewood as a fortress again. This is what Hughes did when he first came - and he had more money available. Nevertheless swapping Warnock for Givet would be a completely negative and pointless move. Getting two or three no hopers off the wage bill like Vogel, Mokoena and Treacy off the wage bill, and using the wage saving to bring in Givet as an addition - now that would be good business.
Amo Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Nevertheless swapping Warnock for Givet would be a completely negative and pointless move. Getting two or three no hopers off the wage bill like Vogel, Mokoena and Treacy off the wage bill, and using the wage saving to bring in Givet as an addition - now that would be good business. Vogel left last month.
RevidgeBlue Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Vogel left last month. No kidding , really? Ergo he is off the wage bill.
Amo Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 No kidding , really? Ergo he is off the wage bill. If I do detect sarcasm, you used Vogel in the same bracket as two players still at the club so I thought I'd let you know. If I don't - Yes, he had a mutual termination from the club.
kandi Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Again... Wasn't that when Paul Ince was in charge? He isn't anymore. We have what i like to consider 'A Premier League Manager' in charge at the moment. If he wants to leave, and wants to make teams aware of this. He needs to go on Paraguayan radio... Unfortunately in Paraguay nobody is interested on Warnock`s further plans....
broadsword Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Nevertheless swapping Warnock for Givet would be a completely negative and pointless move. Let's put it this way, getting shot of Warnock and bringing Givet in, will not solve all of our problems.
Stuart Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Nevertheless swapping Warnock for Givet would be a completely negative and pointless move. Getting two or three no hopers off the wage bill like Vogel, Mokoena and Treacy off the wage bill, and using the wage saving to bring in Givet as an addition - now that would be good business. Not pointless if you view versatility in defence as a priority over versatility per se attack. But before we get carried away arguing the logic, let's give the lad the benefit of the doubt until he does a Bentley!
Hughesy Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 There are a few ways to look at it really. Who's the best Left Back - Givet Who's the best in centre defence - Givet Who's the best attacking left - Warnock Who's the best midfielder - Warnock. Now if Sam plans to resolve our poor midfield then to be honest Warnock becomes redundant as we wouldnt surely want him in midfield? Also I would aregue that Ollson is a better left back for attacking.
Guest benmaxwell Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 I think you mean: Who's the best Left Back - Warnock Who's the best in centre defence - Givet Who's the best attacking left - Warnock Who's the best midfielder - Warnock. Givet's lack of pace at LB is shocking. If we replace Warnock at left-back with Givet. Were going to loose a goal or 2 per season from Warnock. Not to mention plenty of assists... Also I would aregue that Ollson is a better left back for attacking. You would argue... But loose horribly!
RibbleValleyRover Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Just shows what sort of budget Sam will get in the summer if he has to sell Warnock in order to bring in Givet. I'm a big fan of Givet but at the same time when Warnock is in form he is a top player. We should be keeping both... Looks like we won't be spending much and back in trouble again next season.
super_arran Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Why do people believe most newspaper stories? It's daft, especially when's there's no quotes. "Sam Allardyce is looking to sell Stephen Warnock to add funds to his summer transfer budget. Even tho he has been one of Blackburn Rovers' best player this term and looks highly likely to recieve the clubs player of the year award (not to mention the disabled supporters club player of the year award he has already won) but hey, we've gotta publish something"
Bobby G Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Warnocks defending has been much better since Sam took over cause its far more disciplined. He doesnt get caught out cause he is not running like a headless chicken up front and leaving his side empty.
Backroom DE. Posted May 3, 2009 Backroom Posted May 3, 2009 I wonder if Warnock still wants to be allowed to go to Newcastle.
leftfooter Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Joey Barton anyone? The debate rages on in the 'City to sack Barton' thread....
Amo Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Anyone think Viduka might be worth a go? Sam's kind of target man, and should cost peanuts/nothing if Newcastle are relegated.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.