Bradley Dack

[Mattyblue]

9 minutes ago, RoverCanada said:

Uh... may I humbly suggest that my complete guess as to how much we could recoup for Dack in a scenario where he has only recently recovered from a ruptured ACL (who knows what player he'll be when he returns), he has 12-months left on his contract, and perhaps is agitating for a move and thus we're trying to get what we can for him before he leaves on a free is unrelated to Gallagher's reported transfer fee  (I'm honestly unsure if I'm completely overlooking ironic intent in your post or just not getting your point haha)

I would agree that we should try not to buy assets who grow in value exponentially only to suddenly rupture their ACL, throwing into doubt their transfer value just as they are approaching 18 months left on their deal  (But now it is good to know that we essentially have Dack 'under control' for 30 months!)

I presumed you were hypothesising about a potentially fully recovered Dack, as let’s be honest there’s a good chance he’ll never be the same again and we’ll be lucky to get 500k.

[K-Hod]

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/18143539.bradley-dack-olivia-couple-goals-instagram-rovers-star-recovers-op/

Bradley Dack and Olivia are couple goals. 
Is this journalism??

[Stuart]

22 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/18143539.bradley-dack-olivia-couple-goals-instagram-rovers-star-recovers-op/

Bradley Dack and Olivia are couple goals. 
Is this journalism??

Just glad they put it in the “news” rather than the “sports” section - avoids confusion.

[RoverCanada]

2 hours ago, DE. said:

Assuming we extend his contract to 2022 and opt not to sell him before then (not sure there would be much point if we're only going to get £5m for him) then he'll be, what, 28 and a half by the end? That's very late to get a move to the Premier League for a player who has never played there and recently recovered from a serious injury. At that point I think his best and only shot would be moving to a Championship club with aspirations of promotion. Certainly no guarantee there and if that club doesn't get there quickly he'll soon be 30, at the tail end of his career and very unlikely to make the step up to the PL by that point. 

If we can still sell Dack for £5m at some point, that would still be a pretty huge profit for us! His transfer will be fully amortised, so that would be pure profit (ok ok, Gillingham would get a small share...) That'd be ~33% of our annual turnover, and a big boost to staying under FFP...

Anyway, it's all baseless speculation and let's not get too hung up on my completely made up £5m number. Who knows where he'll be at. I was purely commenting on how the fact that we have an option year gives us... options *ba dum tss*

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

I presumed you were hypothesising about a potentially fully recovered Dack, as let’s be honest there’s a good chance he’ll never be the same again and we’ll be lucky to get 500k.

What I was getting at is what if we did not have an option for 2021-22 and he was fully out of contract in summer 2021. Suppose he is starting to come back to fitness in December 2020, maybe in training but uncertain if/when he'll be fit to play (hypothetically, bear with me). So highly unlikely there'd be any prospect of flogging him in January. But, maybe he gets some game time in the spring, he surprises and shows some of his past sparkle... suddenly him being out of contract in a few months is a nightmare.

If he's still looking to be in rough shape (obviously a good chance of that too), we can decline the option or maybe renegotiate on a lower wage and see if he can make a comeback. Maybe he appreciates Rovers helping him recuperate all year and he's worth signing to a new contract, even if he's not quite his former self. Whatever the case... I still don't understand your reference to our transfer policy at large haha. I guess my overall point is let's hope we can salvage whatever we can from Dack, as a player, transfer asset, or both, and having an option year helps that!

[DE.]

Just now, RoverCanada said:

If we can still sell Dack for £5m at some point, that would still be a pretty huge profit for us! His transfer will be fully amortised, so that would be pure profit (ok ok, Gillingham would get a small share...) That'd be ~33% of our annual turnover, and a big boost to staying under FFP...

Anyway, it's all baseless speculation and let's not get too hung up on my completely made up £5m number. Who knows where he'll be at. I was purely commenting on how the fact that we have an option year gives us... options *ba dum tss*

I'm more worried about where our squad will be by that point in all honesty. If FFP really is a problem and we have to start selling our better players to keep our heads above water, we could end up back where we were in 15/16 with a rapidly worsening team and all money from sales disappearing into the FFP void. Selling Dack for whatever price, whether it's £500k or £5m or even £10m may help us stave off FFP but the loss of such a key player with no means of bringing in a worthy replacement could mean another exit from the Championship causing a much bigger financial headache.

Of course right now it's impossible to predict the future. Who knows where we'll be by that point, or who will be in charge. If it's still Mowbray then I think the above concerns will be valid, if it's somebody else then it depends who's in the manager's chair and what kind of support he has. We also have no idea how Dack will perform upon his return so for all we know there may not even be any interest in his services. One thing that's been a common theme of Venky's tenure is that the sale of better players never leads to bringing in suitable replacements. They are pretty much always worse, sometimes hugely so. We haven't had to sell any of our best players in some time so I suppose it's easy to forget how bad we have been at replacing good players since Venky's arrived. 

[pk1875]

10 hours ago, DE. said:

I'm more worried about where our squad will be by that point in all honesty. If FFP really is a problem and we have to start selling our better players to keep our heads above water, we could end up back where we were in 15/16 with a rapidly worsening team and all money from sales disappearing into the FFP void. Selling Dack for whatever price, whether it's £500k or £5m or even £10m may help us stave off FFP but the loss of such a key player with no means of bringing in a worthy replacement could mean another exit from the Championship causing a much bigger financial headache.

Of course right now it's impossible to predict the future. Who knows where we'll be by that point, or who will be in charge. If it's still Mowbray then I think the above concerns will be valid, if it's somebody else then it depends who's in the manager's chair and what kind of support he has. We also have no idea how Dack will perform upon his return so for all we know there may not even be any interest in his services. One thing that's been a common theme of Venky's tenure is that the sale of better players never leads to bringing in suitable replacements. They are pretty much always worse, sometimes hugely so. We haven't had to sell any of our best players in some time so I suppose it's easy to forget how bad we have been at replacing good players since Venky's arrived. 

We may at some point end up selling the £7 million and £5 million golden boys that play upfront just to stave off FFP...

I personally wouldn't be to upset at selling these two off at a small profit lol

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

10 hours ago, pk1875 said:

We may at some point end up selling the £7 million and £5 million golden boys that play upfront just to stave off FFP...

I personally wouldn't be to upset at selling these two off at a small profit lol

What do you think we'd get for them ? Magic beans don't count.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[LeftWinger]

1 hour ago, pk1875 said:

We may at some point end up selling the £7 million and £5 million golden boys that play upfront just to stave off FFP...

I personally wouldn't be to upset at selling these two off at a small profit lol

Profit ???

[RoverCanada]

23 hours ago, DE. said:

I'm more worried about where our squad will be by that point in all honesty. If FFP really is a problem and we have to start selling our better players to keep our heads above water, we could end up back where we were in 15/16 with a rapidly worsening team and all money from sales disappearing into the FFP void. Selling Dack for whatever price, whether it's £500k or £5m or even £10m may help us stave off FFP but the loss of such a key player with no means of bringing in a worthy replacement could mean another exit from the Championship causing a much bigger financial headache.

Of course right now it's impossible to predict the future. Who knows where we'll be by that point, or who will be in charge. If it's still Mowbray then I think the above concerns will be valid, if it's somebody else then it depends who's in the manager's chair and what kind of support he has. We also have no idea how Dack will perform upon his return so for all we know there may not even be any interest in his services. One thing that's been a common theme of Venky's tenure is that the sale of better players never leads to bringing in suitable replacements. They are pretty much always worse, sometimes hugely so. We haven't had to sell any of our best players in some time so I suppose it's easy to forget how bad we have been at replacing good players since Venky's arrived. 

Valid concerns/complaints, but it's the reality of being a low-revenue Championship these days. As our recent losses show, we're still trying to keep up a decent wage budget (though at £23m, that'll still be well below average in the Championship, let alone what the parachute payment clubs pay...). It's part of what has helped us avoid becoming a Wigan/Barnsley/Charlton-type since promotion, at risk of yoyoing between L1 and the Championship, despite having similar revenue, but then we essentially have to be a selling club at some point too.

Frankly, managing to sell Dack for a decent amount isn't necessarily about finding a like-for-like replacement. If we're skirting FFP or Venky's decide they're not keen on £30+ million losses over 3 years, selling Dack is more about not having to sell the likes of Lenihan or Travis. (edit: should maybe add that we could also sell Lenihan/Travis to keep Dack around! I'm assuming a case where part of it is Dack agitating for a move... but all very speculative now)

Edited January 8, 2020 by RoverCanada

[bluebruce]

12 hours ago, pk1875 said:

We may at some point end up selling the £7 million and £5 million golden boys that play upfront just to stave off FFP...

I personally wouldn't be to upset at selling these two off at a small profit lol

I'd do a victory lap of the UK if we sold those two off at a small profit.

[Sparks Rover]

3 hours ago, bluebruce said:

I'd do a victory lap of the UK if we sold those two off at a small profit.

I'm not sure you'd get 4m combined.

[bluebruce]

Just now, Sparks Rover said:

I'm not sure you'd get 4m combined.

I think we would probably get around that. Maybe fractionally over. Maybe a bit less. Sad state of affairs.

On the other hand if one of them knocks a few in before the end of the season the maths changes. It would take a hell of a lot more than that to reap the big profits they kept talking about though! I think most of us feel certain we will never get close to our money back on these two.

Those deals will never cease looking insane. I'm down with investing in potential, most of us are, but you don't spend nearly your whole budget two summers in a row on potential. Potential is scattered all over the country and the world, far far cheaper than that. You could buy ten promising players for one Brereton and expect at least 2 or 3 to come good.

[Sparks Rover]

Gallagher is about 24, that's his peak mate...there are 16 year olds who are feckin great all over the show

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

9 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

Gallagher is about 24, that's his peak mate...there are 16 year olds who are feckin great all over the show

I think his peak was when he was here previously to be honest.

[Bigdoggsteel]

11 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

Gallagher is about 24, that's his peak mate...there are 16 year olds who are feckin great all over the show

It depends doesn't it. I would say 26 for strikers, 28 for centre halves and 30 plus for keepers. Wingers then would be even younger. Although I have forgotten what one of them looks like. 

[Sparks Rover]

11 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

It depends doesn't it. I would say 26 for strikers, 28 for centre halves and 30 plus for keepers. Wingers then would be even younger. Although I have forgotten what one of them looks like. 

I'm talking about Gally and I think his peak was probably when he was 18 in terms of him on the football pitch. Shocking touch and technically substandard. Bet he was a big unit at 17/18 and dominated his age group.

[Bigdoggsteel]

33 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

I'm talking about Gally and I think his peak was probably when he was 18 in terms of him on the football pitch. Shocking touch and technically substandard. Bet he was a big unit at 17/18 and dominated his age group.

You could be right 

I have been saying him and Brereton need to be in the gym lifting heavy shit. They have their height, so the least they could do is work hard on being big units. 

Edited January 9, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[Sparks Rover]

29 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You could be right 

I have been saying him and Brereton need to be in the gym lifting heavy shit. They have their height, so the least they could do is work hard on being big units. 

They are big, but they both seem like, as my dad would say,  mard arses

[Bigdoggsteel]

2 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

They are big, but they both seem like, as my dad would say,  mard arses

I presume that's similar to "soft shites" 

Lol 

[roversfan99]

32 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You could be right 

I have been saying him and Brereton need to be in the gym lifting heavy shit. They have their height, so the least they could do is work hard on being big units. 

Its not about bulking up necessarily, its their brain that is the biggest problem. Graham isnt massive but he knows how to use his body to hold the ball up. Gallagher and Brereton dont have the footballing intelligence no matter how big they got.

[Bigdoggsteel]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Its not about bulking up necessarily, its their brain that is the biggest problem. Graham isnt massive but he knows how to use his body to hold the ball up. Gallagher and Brereton dont have the footballing intelligence no matter how big they got.

Indeed, but I'm just trying to find something g to grasp onto!

Graham is a master at it. Regularly see him rolling in front of much bigger defenders and using his arse to hold them off. I agree its technique, but the lads dont have that anyway it's clear to see. 

[RoverCanada]

For sake of argument, thought I'd check out a couple recent estimates of the aging curves for forwards and wingers. Plenty more estimates out there, but to quote a couple:

https://statsbomb.com/2016/07/player-aging-attacking-players/

- Main conclusion (obviously generalised from the median number, so you can't blindly apply to everyone...): wingers peak at 26, forwards at 27-28

- Shot, key pass, and 'scoring contribution' rates remain fairly steady from the early 20s through to the late 20s, but they start to drop a bit from 28+ for forwards, while they drop fairly steadily for wingers from 26+

- However, the curves for dribbles, fouls suffered, and crosses all drop pretty steadily from the early 20s onward for both positions, suggesting aging players learn to still generate chances from know how over raw athleticism. So it may depend on the 'type' of striker/forward.

- Key caveat is from what I can tell this is filtered on players who played a minimum amount, so there will be some 'survivor' bias as the worse older players drop out, but you can maybe assume that the rate of aging-related decline for top players is similar to that of the mediocre, and this may only be more of a problem when looking at players in their 30s+, where the true athletic freaks start to stand out.

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/blog/tactics-and-analysis/67/post/3056495/soccer-age-curves-show-goalkeepers-and-central-defenders-peak-latest

- The charts annoyingly seem to be missing, but going by the text of the article, the analysis gets around the 'missing old players' problem by first looking at minutes played (wingers peak at 23, the text doesn't mention strikers on this measure...)

- Looking at a time series of individual players over time (seems like the obvious way to measure this to me given the data's freely available, so I'd say this finding trumps the rest!): strikers' shot rates decline steadily over time, but they make up for that by taking higher quality shots, peaking around 26-27, and then declining from about 29 onwards.

- The study ranks positions from most to least 'age-sensitive': wide attacking midfielder, central attacking midfielder, full-back, central midfielder, striker, center-back, goalkeeper (generally fairly intuitive, I would think)

Interestingly, this recent study, as part of showing the average age of Champions League teams has gradually been rising, shows that the average age of forwards has shown the steadiest/strongest increase: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6360147/, but that may just be a comment on how truly elite strikers have been developing rather than strikers in general (the above studies are looking at PL strikers, so perhaps the numbers do not generalise to lower leagues)

Edited January 9, 2020 by RoverCanada

[DE.]

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Graham is a master at it. Regularly see him rolling in front of much bigger defenders and using his arse to hold them off. 

Dack does the same thing, much like Graham he's got the intelligence to compensate for his lack of speed and bulk. I think it's part of the reason they were able to link up so well, and it isn't the same with Gallagher or Brereton. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

5 minutes ago, DE. said:

Dack does the same thing, much like Graham he's got the intelligence to compensate for his lack of speed and bulk. I think it's part of the reason they were able to link up so well, and it isn't the same with Gallagher or Brereton. 

Ya, Dack is brilliant at it too. What game was it he got sent off for doing it? That was ridiculous

I'm tellig ya, the 2 lads learnt that stuff slogging around in the lower leagues of mens football. It seems younger players are more pampered these days. Gallagher has mostly played under 23 football, with some loans to the Championship. Brereton mostly under age football. Dack was in the conference, League 2, Danny Graham division 3 at the time, League 1. That certainly stood to them. No way Dack would be the player he is if he came through somewhere like Southampton now. 

[DE.]

4 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Ya, Dack is brilliant at it too. What game was it he got sent off for doing it? That was ridiculous

I'm tellig ya, the 2 lads learnt that stuff slogging around in the lower leagues of mens football. It seems younger players are more pampered these days. Gallagher has mostly played under 23 football, with some loans to the Championship. Brereton mostly under age football. Dack was in the conference, League 2, Danny Graham division 3 at the time, League 1. That certainly stood to them. No way Dack would be the player he is if he came through somewhere like Southampton now. 

I always felt Adam Henley desperately needed some time in the lower leagues to toughen up. He had talent but was too fragile and now he's in League 2 permanently with Uncle Gaz. 

Lowe might have benefited from some time in the lower leagues too.