Thursday deadline.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

9 hours ago, danger19_80 said:

This whole loan-to-buy thing that a lot of people are assuming will be the answer to our problems is a strange one to me. For a start the pool of players available for loan will be limited compared to those we could have potentially bought and they will be of a different profile. Also anyone who thinks the likes of Peterborough and Forest will loan out Maddison and Brereton now when they could just keep them and potentially sell in Jan is mad.

And that's all before the concern that, if a player does well, the price will inflate massively when it comes time to buy them.

Don't think this is the answer some are clinging on to.

Can you imagine this 're Maddison 

1. Now that window has shut Premiership clubs know which players they will loan out. Peterborough bring in loan player in Maddison position.

2. Rovers agree loan to buy (with contractually pre-agreed fee) - and pick up all his salary.

3. January - Rovers complete purchase.

Don't think there is a good or bad time to buy - but the worst thing to do would be to buy the wrong player. Now the window has shut clubs will be in a better position to decide which players they will keep or loan out. TBH I would imagine the horse trading will continue unabated until end of August - with loan to buy being the way around the new window.

Edited August 10, 2018 by DavidMailsTightPerm

[BigBar]

I would take James Collins on a free. 34 but would do as cover and no fee plus experienced, could do a job. I am very aware we are not signing top end players at this time so don't need any backlash ?

Bakary Sako also a free agent...I was always oddly a big fan!

Edited August 10, 2018 by BigBar

[Neal]

29 minutes ago, BigBar said:

I would take James Collins on a free. 34 but would do as cover and no fee plus experienced, could do a job. I am very aware we are not signing top end players at this time so don't need any backlash ?

Bakary Sako also a free agent

Collins at this level would be a good signing. I know people are hesitant signing players at that age after Etuhu and Murphy but we also had Berg and Short at centre half when they were about 35... Sako wages would be silly. 

[MarkBRFC]

I can't see Mowbray bringing in anyone around that age to be honest.

[Tugay's Right Foot]

Sad to say, I guess I didn't miss much of the final day of perm transfers. Wee bit disappointed with all that talk of signings bandied around. Let's see what kind of loans we can get in now then. Will be watching Millwall in anger

[Neal]

2 hours ago, dinglebasher said:

How do you know he passed on it? Perhaps the players in question told him they weren’t interested in signing for us. 

Preston and Ipswich are both established Championship teams and are arguably more attractive than newly-promoted Rovers. 

I don’t think the window has been particularly inspiring, but some of the conjecture on here could be toned down a little. 

Perhaps potential targets would also prefer loans to see whether they would consider signing for us permanently, given that we are a newly-promoted team with a chaotic background and a recent relegation. 

Rich Sharpe asked Mowbray if we were interested and was told that weren't in for him. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by Neal

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

I think that what is clear from this last window is transfer fees/wages have hit a tipping point.  Clubs are going to seriously have to review their recruitment strategy and become more realistic with valuations.  Players are also going to have to become more realistic with wage expectations in the next few years.  The valuation of average Premier players is just too high for anyone outside of the European elite. 

Take Man U.  Wouldn't buy Alderweireld (sp) aged 30 as no value in the deal (no sell on) deal over 3 years including wages would be £75 million.. or Maguire at £70 mil plus wages but would have taken Varane for over £100 mil plus wages due to young age and 'class' of player. 

On that basis, Maguire will have to run down his contract, if he has any ambition to leave, as he is priced out of a move.    

 

It seems nobody wants to invest in players aged 30 and above (Ronaldo being a unique situation) as the buying club has to write off a large transfer fee.  These players will undoubtedly sit with their clubs until their contracts expire.  There will be a saturation of good players -aged  over 30 - on the market within 2 years.  You would imagine then, that these older players would have to take a significant drop in wage to secure a new deal. 

Potenialally, the age bracket that is being shunned now, will become the 'value' in a couple of years time. 

[JHRover]

The biggest surprise for me is seeing how many people actually believe that we were bidding £5 million and £4 million for players and have that sort of money to spend.

NOTHING that has happened since 2012 suggests that level of finance is or ever has been available for recruitment.

 

[Stuart]

The only way one can make sense of the permanent transfer dealings is: we have no money.

I still think Chapman will come in on loan and we will be looking so sign him on the cheap. When is he out of contract?

What is frustrating is the talk of massive money to spend. That then only makes sense if we have a poor or non-existent scouting team who didn’t spot potential signings until other teams were interested or even gone.

If we weren’t in for Edwards then why the hell not? Bigger ambitions? Well that smacks of champagne tastes on beer money.

[Neal]

3 minutes ago, JHRover said:

The biggest surprise for me is seeing how many people actually believe that we were bidding £5 million and £4 million for players and have that sort of money to spend.

NOTHING that has happened since 2012 suggests that level of finance is or ever has been available for recruitment.

 

Then what are you suggesting then? I can only summise that you're implying that Mowbray is that disingenuous that he's put fake or token offers in for players... 

[MarkBRFC]

3 hours ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

Can you imagine this 're Maddison 

1. Now that window has shut Premiership clubs know which players they will loan out. Peterborough bring in loan player in Maddison position.

2. Rovers agree loan to buy (with contractually pre-agreed fee) - and pick up all his salary.

3. January - Rovers complete purchase.

Don't think there is a good or bad time to buy - but the worst thing to do would be to buy the wrong player. Now the window has shut clubs will be in a better position to decide which players they will keep or loan out. TBH I would imagine the horse trading will continue unabated until end of August - with loan to buy being the way around the new window.

I know you are just using him as an example, but at this rate I think Marcus Maddison might go down in Luca Toni folklore on this message board in years to come.

[JHRover]

1 minute ago, Neal said:

Then what are you suggesting then? I can only summise that you're implying that Mowbray is that disingenuous that he's put fake or token offers in for players... 

Where did I say anything about Mowbray? I don't doubt his integrity and I've no doubt Brereton and Freeman were on his list of targets as people he would like to have brought in. They fit his mould.

Unless I'm mistaken Mowbray hasn't confirmed we were in for either nor was it him who came up with the talk of £5 million bids, it was people at Sky Sports.

[Bigdoggsteel]

2 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Where did I say anything about Mowbray? I don't doubt his integrity and I've no doubt Brereton and Freeman were on his list of targets as people he would like to have brought in. They fit his mould.

Unless I'm mistaken Mowbray hasn't confirmed we were in for either nor was it him who came up with the talk of £5 million bids, it was people at Sky Sports.

You have repeatedly implied that we don't have the money that has been mentioned. Correct? 

[Butty]

Now we've not been able to get our preferred targets the likelihood of Chapman coming back is probably 90%. Loan that's made perm in Jan you'd think. Always seemed as though we could have brought Chapman back as soon as we wanted but instead pursued other avenues, that hasn't worked so welcome back Harry.. If he can fulfill the potential we know he's got we could be fielding 4 or 5 million bids for him in a couple of years. Desperately need a striker though, if Chris Martin isn't in the picture at Derby a loan with a view to a perm would be great, I don't think he'd cost much more than 4 million so IF we have the finance, it's a no brainer.

[Stuart]

18 minutes ago, Neal said:

Then what are you suggesting then? I can only summise that you're implying that Mowbray is that disingenuous that he's put fake or token offers in for players... 

Very easy to stick a £750k bid in early doors. If you get laughed at and the player eventually goes for £4m then it is factual to say that we had a bid in for a player.

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 minute ago, Butty said:

Now we've not been able to get our preferred targets the likelihood of Chapman coming back is probably 90%. Loan that's made perm in Jan you'd think. Always seemed as though we could have brought Chapman back as soon as we wanted but instead pursued other avenues, that hasn't worked so welcome back Harry.. If he can fulfill the potential we know he's got we could be fielding 4 or 5 million bids for him in a couple of years. Desperately need a striker though, if Chris Martin isn't in the picture at Derby a loan with a view to a perm would be great, I don't think he'd cost much more than 4 million so IF we have the finance, it's a no brainer.

Isn't he very similar to Graham though? I would like someone more physical 

[imy9]

2 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Very easy to stick a £750k bid in early doors. If you get laughed at and the player eventually goes for £4m then it is factual to say that we had a bid in for a player.

True to a point, however Sharpe confirmed that a sizeable bid had gone in to Forest and we had the funds to purchase said player.

According to Sharpe Mowbray has turned players down who cost too much, only to go back when the price was right...all three players signed on permanent deals being proof of that.

[JHRover]

9 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You have repeatedly implied that we don't have the money that has been mentioned. Correct? 

Yes. I don't believe we had or have £5 million to spend on one player, and whilst we may have been after Brereton or Freeman I don't believe we were bidding that amount of money for them. It massively contradicts everything done under these owners for the last 5 and a half years.

[JHRover]

2 minutes ago, imy9 said:

True to a point, however Sharpe confirmed that a sizeable bid had gone in to Forest and we had the funds to purchase said player.

According to Sharpe Mowbray has turned players down who cost too much, only to go back when the price was right...all three players signed on permanent deals being proof of that.

Sharpe gets his information from the club. I don't doubt the club have been telling him that funds are there to make big signings. They aren't going to tell him to write that there's very little/no money left are they?

[Neal]

9 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Very easy to stick a £750k bid in early doors. If you get laughed at and the player eventually goes for £4m then it is factual to say that we had a bid in for a player.

What you've described there is exactly what occurs when bidding for a player, you start low, they want more, if its out of our budget then it can't be helped. If you don't bid for a player then you have absolutely no chance of getting them at all. If someone like Coyle or Kean was in charge I'd definitely thinking the same but Mowbray doesn't strike me as the sort of bloke who'd play those types of games. Perhaps it's just naivety or blind faith on my part after getting lucky in having a decent manager for once. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by Neal

[Stuart]

4 minutes ago, imy9 said:

True to a point, however Sharpe confirmed that a sizeable bid had gone in to Forest and we had the funds to purchase said player.

According to Sharpe Mowbray has turned players down who cost too much, only to go back when the price was right...all three players signed on permanent deals being proof of that.

Not much of a War Chest (by the usual definition) if a £4m player costs too much. Unless it’s a War of Attrition Chest!

If he has £5m to spend and is trying to use that to buy 4 or 5 players and won’t do deals that make that approach difficult then we really don’t have a great budget after all. Or we have pots of cash and a cautious, dare I say unambitious, manager trying to (not) spend it. It’s one thing only wanting players if you can buy them on your terms but in the current market you run the risk of missing out completely.

[Stuart]

3 minutes ago, Neal said:

What you've described there is exactly what occurs when bidding for a player, you start low, they want more, if its out of our budget then it can't be helped. If you don't bid for a player then you have absolutely no chance of getting them at all. 

If you bid too low for a player then you have no real chance anyway. And you run the risk of the selling club thinking you aren’t serious. Are we such a poor judge of the market prices?

It’s the equivalent of saying “you won’t win the lottery if you don’t buy a ticket” - or more accurately “you can win the lottery you just have to buy a ticket” - which is subtly different.

[Neal]

4 minutes ago, Stuart said:

If you bid too low for a player then you have no real chance anyway. And you run the risk of the selling club thinking you aren’t serious. Are we such a poor judge of the market prices?

It’s the equivalent of saying “you won’t win the lottery if you don’t buy a ticket” - or more accurately “you can win the lottery you just have to buy a ticket” - which is subtly different.

I get what you're saying but perhaps the thinking is if you go in low then it might drive the top end price down... Anyway, it hardly matters. I have no problem with the club sticking cheeky offers in just as long as you can get something out of it at the end of it. They did well to get Armstrong at the price they did, it was dissapointing not to bring in more but we can still strengthen the squad for potentially better value for money in loan buy agreement... I just feel people are making judgement too early. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by Neal

[islander200]

20 minutes ago, Butty said:

Now we've not been able to get our preferred targets the likelihood of Chapman coming back is probably 90%. Loan that's made perm in Jan you'd think. Always seemed as though we could have brought Chapman back as soon as we wanted but instead pursued other avenues, that hasn't worked so welcome back Harry.. If he can fulfill the potential we know he's got we could be fielding 4 or 5 million bids for him in a couple of years. Desperately need a striker though, if Chris Martin isn't in the picture at Derby a loan with a view to a perm would be great, I don't think he'd cost much more than 4 million so IF we have the finance, it's a no brainer.

Martin would be a good signing but would he settle for coming on in the last half hour or when Graham is out.Il be honest they are of a similar standing if we do have 4 mill to spend I'd rather it be kept for someone younger who can develop and take over the reins from Graham next season and beyond.

Martin's attitude is questionable too refused to play at Fulham when on loan as he wanted to go back to Derby when McLaren was re-appointed. Last season he preffered to pick up his wage and sit on the sidelines rather than go out on loan when Sunderland and a couple of other teams made offers

[Hasta]

I think we thought that we might get cheap bids accepted, and that also we might be able to get players to rock the boat to get a move (the lad at Charlton).

It hasn't happened.

We obviously had targets and we failed to get them. Quite why that is we don't know but it's been a relatively poor summer of recruitment up to Thursday. How much money was actually available is all speculation.