[Archived] Summer Transfer Topic

[philipl]

I suspect we could be very grateful to Pulis for blocking Beattie "from strengthening a rival"

Not surprised we cannot get a work permit for Andronik although it is bad to have asked and been refused.

[Iceman]

why do we do such things, as give players extended contracts when they still have 3 or 4 years left on their existing deals. We have very little money, yet the little we have we feel the need to wast e on new contracts.

[PAFELL]

You dont seem to be on your own, but a non existent budget that will pay out 38k a week for a has been ...that figure seems extremely generous to me and i'm sure it will to over 50% of the footballing world.

Anyone who champions Beattie or Benjani for Rovers, right now, in my eyes, is not a true Rovers fan, as all you do is do a great disservice to Blackburn Rovers football club and harm any positive short term ambitions for the first team.

Maybe you should write a pleading letter to the club, asking them to increase season tickets / match day tickets and try to fleece as much money off you as they can. You cannot have cheaper tickets in the prem and then expect a mega transfer budget.

Nobody has said 38k a week for beattie. Nobody knows what will be offered. But we know it will be cheaper than Roberts, as that is one of the aims.

Rovers, like anybody else cannot grow cash on trees. They can only spend within their means. Maybe they should do a leeds or a pompey, spend what they do not have, not be able to payoff debts, get relegated, go into administration. Although not ideal, I would rather beattie, than experience the latter.

You are doing a diservice to the club by you childish attitude. The reality is Rovers do not have a large transfer kitty. Replacing Roberts with Beattie reduces the wage bill a little more.

[bluebruce]

why do we do such things, as give players extended contracts when they still have 3 or 4 years left on their existing deals. We have very little money, yet the little we have we feel the need to wast e on new contracts.

Riles me as well, have to admit. I'm sure people will jump on such comments..."We have to SECURE them to the club"..."we have to keep the players happy"...come on. We all know that their security and happiness will instantly transform the moment a big club comes sniffing. I see UTTERLY NO REASON to even initiate contract talks with any player until he is in at least the final 2 years of his contract. We reward the players when they've had one good season- but we all know it is impossible to get them to agree to a pay-cut if they have a bad season (or THREE, Mr. Pedersen). Loyalty should go both ways, and if it won't, let's just look after our own interests.

[JAL]

Maybe you should write a pleading letter to the club, asking them to increase season tickets / match day tickets and try to fleece as much money off you as they can. You cannot have cheaper tickets in the prem and then expect a mega transfer budget.

Nobody has said 38k a week for beattie. Nobody knows what will be offered. But we know it will be cheaper than Roberts, as that is one of the aims.

Rovers, like anybody else cannot grow cash on trees. They can only spend within their means. Maybe they should do a leeds or a pompey, spend what they do not have, not be able to payoff debts, get relegated, go into administration. Although not ideal, I would rather beattie, than experience the latter.

You are doing a diservice to the club by you childish attitude. The reality is Rovers do not have a large transfer kitty. Replacing Roberts with Beattie reduces the wage bill a little more.

Its well known that James Beattie earns 38k a week,even Nicko posted that fact a couple of days ago PAFELL. Its unbelievable but you can easily see why Stoke want to offload him as soon as possible.

[Iceman]

Its well known that James Beattie earns 38k a week,even Nicko posted that fact a couple of days ago PAFELL. Its unbelievable but you can easily see why Stoke want to offload him as soon as possible.

yet they splashed 8mill on Jones, and wanted to spend 10mill on an unproven Remy, and 12mill on Carlton Cole. They wanted to get rid of Beattie, because he is not worthy of 38k a week, not because they couldnt afford to pay him that.

[PAFELL]

Its well known that James Beattie earns 38k a week,even Nicko posted that fact a couple of days ago PAFELL. Its unbelievable but you can easily see why Stoke want to offload him as soon as possible.

Just because he is on 38k at Stoke does not mean he would get that at Rovers. Maybe Stoke want to get rid first because of the fall out he and the manager had, also Stoke have signed Jones, making Beattee surplus to requirements etc. I am not saying that Beattie is the ideal choice, but when any club has to operate under the money restraints Rovers have, they have to go for cheaper transfer, basement players. Rovers need experience to go with kalinic and Diouf - who else is available for the little money Rovers have to spend. Who else is in Rovers budget?

Also Sam has a history of extending the playing careers of older / experienced players. I therefore suggest that he is the one who would be able to get the best from Beattie.

To be honest I doubt if it will happen, unless Beattie is so peeved off with the stoke manager, turns down Rangers and signs for Rovers to spite the stoke manager.

[Fife Rover]

He averages 12.55 goals per season and scored 22 goals in 2007/08

If only we knew who you are referring to Bucky, that might be a very useful and informative statistic.

[Eddie]

He isn't going to go from 38k to 20k, so he's going to be picking up a pretty big wage. Minimum 30k, which is far too much for a player who

a) won't be guaranteed to start

is too old

c) simply isn't deserving of that sort of wage

Then look at Chimbonda, Diouf, etc and we don't have to ask why we have no money and why our wage bill is far too big.

[Majiball]

Also Sam has a history of extending the playing careers of older / experienced players. I therefore suggest that he is the one who would be able to get the best from Beattie.

AT Bolton yes he most certainly did, with his 33 man strong backroom team containing some of the then best names involved in the game. He most certainly does not have that here, they are good but there is no way they can do the same standard of job with the 5 odd people he has at rovers.

[Kremmin]

He isn't going to go from 38k to 20k, so he's going to be picking up a pretty big wage. Minimum 30k, which is far too much for a player who

a) won't be guaranteed to start

is too old

c) simply isn't deserving of that sort of wage

Then look at Chimbonda, Diouf, etc and we don't have to ask why we have no money and why our wage bill is far too big.

Agreed. Paying stupid money for fat cats splits dressing rooms and sends you down.

If Beattie wants to come, he'll have to take a hit. Otherwise, he can go and bang on in a small pond up north.

[Andy]

The Lancashire Telegraph report that initially we were after bringing a young striker in, however after the arrival of Diouf and imminent departure of Roberts. Rovers now want to bring in a experienced physically strong striker. That to me suggests Beattie or Benjani. The paper report that Benjani continues to train with Rovers and could provide a short term solution.

They also report that Teymourian deal is almost dead due to work permit problems. The addition of another midfielder is being looked at but is a secondary priority.

Appreciate everyone wants to believe exciting hints (that never materialise) about signing some big name player, but those links are only there for the red-tops to try and sell papers.

In reality the above quote is the most accurate summary of where we are and what is almost certain to happen now.

If any of the current takeover prospects come to fruition then the whole landscape changes, but if anything does happen on that front (which it's far from certain at present), it'll only affect Rovers in the January transfer window, not now.

Beattie is our best/only bet at this moment in time, however depressing that seems right now.

He's a local boy (which apparently means a lot) and he'd fit Sam's style of play to a tee.

[BuckyRover]

If only we knew who you are referring to Bucky, that might be a very useful and informative statistic.

Beattie.

[philipl]

Rovers linked to loan for Arseal 19 year old midfielder Henri Lansbury

Saw him playing for Watford twice last season and he would need to kick on to be good enough for the Premier League (but would be a step up on Andrews).

[PAFELL]

Appreciate everyone wants to believe exciting hints (that never materialise) about signing some big name player, but those links are only there for the red-tops to try and sell papers.

In reality the above quote is the most accurate summary of where we are and what is almost certain to happen now.

If any of the current takeover prospects come to fruition then the whole landscape changes, but if anything does happen on that front (which it's far from certain at present), it'll only affect Rovers in the January transfer window, not now.

Beattie is our best/only bet at this moment in time, however depressing that seems right now.

He's a local boy (which apparently means a lot) and he'd fit Sam's style of play to a tee.

The reality is that Rovers target is survival in the prem. If that is by the skin of their teeth or by a long margin, survival in the prem is success. Until a big club goes bust, wages and transfer fees go down, the prem is ripped up and started again, that is all Rovers can hope for - at this moment in time.

As much as we want players coming into the club, we may have to accept that Rovers do have a settled side. Other clubs have bought players and it will take time for those players to gell as a team. That could work in Rovers favour imo. If a takeover between now and january happens, then the picture would change again. But in my view Rovers first target is survival. Playing for his local club, may give a boost to Beattie as an individual, he does fit Sams style.

[Iceman]

Appreciate everyone wants to believe exciting hints (that never materialise) about signing some big name player, but those links are only there for the red-tops to try and sell papers.

In reality the above quote is the most accurate summary of where we are and what is almost certain to happen now.

If any of the current takeover prospects come to fruition then the whole landscape changes, but if anything does happen on that front (which it's far from certain at present), it'll only affect Rovers in the January transfer window, not now.

Beattie is our best/only bet at this moment in time, however depressing that seems right now.

He's a local boy (which apparently means a lot) and he'd fit Sam's style of play to a tee.

Really? We might not be able to afford an expensive striker, but if reports are to be believed, then Moa would have cost us 1.5mill. Jelevic at 4mill, for a young striker would have been good business imo if only we would have had that bit extra, and would have gone nicely with Sams vision of playing the young lads on a regular basis.

This whole, Beattie and Benjani are the only options are a load of nonsense. There are good strikers out there, who wouldnt have cost us much, but because we only looked at a certain number of strikers, we now in panic mode because those strikers have suddenly become unavailable. We had so much time to find a replacement, but yet we are about to play our 1st game, with Only Kalinic and Diouf, and Roberts who wants out.

[vizcaya]

Linked with Erik Huseklepp this morning...

Daily Mail

[JAL]

yet they splashed 8mill on Jones, and wanted to spend 10mill on an unproven Remy, and 12mill on Carlton Cole. They wanted to get rid of Beattie, because he is not worthy of 38k a week, not because they couldnt afford to pay him that.

Thats what I meant iceman.

[Iceman]

Because if a player has worked hard and improved then they deserve to be incentivised financially. If they start looking at other players, thinking that they get paid more than them yet they have a similar squad status, then problems will arise, especially in the footballing world.

completely agree about rewarding them financially, but why when they still have 4 years left of a contract, do we find the need to reward them after 1 good season, with another 4 year deal? We should be rewarding the guys with another contract, if they have had 2 or 3 good seasons, and with 1 year left of their existing contract.

[Iceman]

Thats what I meant iceman.

I know what you said Jal, i was merely pointing to the fact that they could easily have afforded to keep Beattie on 38K. I dont think it was about the money, more the fact that he is not good enough, and Pulis doesnt see him in his plans.

We clearly cannot afford to pay a 32 year old 38K a week. Its ridiculous the amount of money that Beattie, and Jason Roberts are on.

[G Somerset Rover]

The Lancashire Telegraph report that initially we were after bringing a young striker in, however after the arrival of Diouf and imminent departure of Roberts. Rovers now want to bring in a experienced physically strong striker. That to me suggests Beattie or Benjani. The paper report that Benjani continues to train with Rovers and could provide a short term solution.

They also report that Teymourian deal is almost dead due to work permit problems. The addition of another midfielder is being looked at but is a secondary priority.

Basically we are skint, and cannot compete in the transfer Market in any meaningful way, so we are going down the cheap and cheerful route. I would suspect that Sam will jump ship at the earliest available opportunity if we are not taken over.

As I predicted all summer but an absolute joke all the same.

So we're planning on selling Roberts and bringing in Beattie/Benjani for roughly the same wages. With in all probability no further signings unless somebody wants to come in for a two month trial, without being paid.

So what's happened to the McCarthy money?

Where's the £2.5 million warchest?

I wouldn't blame Sam for jumping ship one bit. How we've survived this long in the top flight is remarkable, but the board seem insistent on giving relegation a bloody good attempt each season.

[JAL]

Just because he is on 38k at Stoke does not mean he would get that at Rovers. Maybe Stoke want to get rid first because of the fall out he and the manager had, also Stoke have signed Jones, making Beattee surplus to requirements etc. I am not saying that Beattie is the ideal choice, but when any club has to operate under the money restraints Rovers have, they have to go for cheaper transfer, basement players. Rovers need experience to go with kalinic and Diouf - who else is available for the little money Rovers have to spend. Who else is in Rovers budget?

Also Sam has a history of extending the playing careers of older / experienced players. I therefore suggest that he is the one who would be able to get the best from Beattie.

To be honest I doubt if it will happen, unless Beattie is so peeved off with the stoke manager, turns down Rangers and signs for Rovers to spite the stoke manager.

If James was to accept less money per week at Rovers what would happen is he would receive a signing on fee that would boost his overall package.

Reading between the lines though it seems like Rovers want at least one striker off their books in maybe JR, losing 30k per week but they want to possibly bring in Two strikers for around 50-60k per week mark.

[imy9]

completely agree about rewarding them financially, but why when they still have 4 years left of a contract, do we find the need to reward them after 1 good season, with another 4 year deal? We should be rewarding the guys with another contract, if they have had 2 or 3 good seasons, and with 1 year left of their existing contract.

Problem is that players left with 2 years on their contracts and who are refusing to sign another deal are worth a lot less because they can simply wait for their deal to end and then leave on a free. Hanley, Olsson, Jones needed to be given longer contracts as in all likelihood in 2/3 years time they will go anyway and we need them to be on long term contracts so that we can benefit.

On a separate point I am happy with Diouf on a season long deal- by what Nicko has inferred we are not paying a fee or wages (may have misread this)

So we should have at least £2.5 to spend on a striker plus wages, so end up with Beattie or Benjani, is depressing. I would rather sign a midfield player instead.

[JAL]

I know what you said Jal, i was merely pointing to the fact that they could easily have afforded to keep Beattie on 38K. I dont think it was about the money, more the fact that he is not good enough, and Pulis doesnt see him in his plans.

We clearly cannot afford to pay a 32 year old 38K a week. Its ridiculous the amount of money that Beattie, and Jason Roberts are on.

True iceman, the key here is James Beattie simply isnt good enough to get into the Stoke City side but hes deemed OK for Rovers.

[Hughesy]

Stoke want rid of Beattie because he crossed Pulis....no other reason - prior to that he was in their 1st team plans.

When they signed him he saved their asses. Now im not over the moon with Beattie, but Beattie for Roberts, for the same money & same wages is a good deal for us....he will score more than Roberts, he will put much more effort in that Roberts and also he is a local lad so will give that extra 10%. The only worry has to be signing Beattie before Roberts moves on, as we might get stuck with Roberts (Suggestions he wanted 30k a week from QPR).

I still however want to see a better 'CASH' signing - whether it be midfield or a young striker.