Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[Sweaty Gussets]

2 minutes ago, Mellor Rover said:

Same guy who told me about Brereton's injury last season says the Gallagher/Brittain injuries aren't one or two weekers. Add two more incomings please Gregg!

It's fairly stupid not to buy/loan a 2nd choice RB. Taking Travis out of the midfield isn't ideal. Maybe Carter will play there...

[G Somerset Rover]

1 hour ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Same guy who knew about the ACL of Sam Barnes says:

Gallagher and Brittain out for 6 weeks.....

When it rains...loss of Brittain will be huge as we don't have any options other than Carter (untested at this level and naturally a CB, or Travis - our CM and captain). JRC is not an option.

May put JDT off on going five at the back too, as I can't see how Carter could be a RWB.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Gavlar Somerset Rover!

[RoversClitheroe]

So JRC and Butterworth to be shipped out?

RB

CM

ST

LB

Needed

[Sweaty Gussets]

Blackburn Rovers weigh up formation switch after transfer dealing | Lancashire Telegraph

If we go 3 at the back then maybe JRC might look better as a WB. I realise I'm clutching. 

Buckley can cross a ball so maybe he can fill in there for a few weeks till Brittain is fit. 

[Trinidad Rover]

12 hours to go......!!!

Hoping it ends in surprised revelation not deflated misery.

The fax machine will earn its crust today. Is it working?

[Sweaty Gussets]

1 minute ago, Trinidad Rover said:

12 hours to go......!!!

Hoping it ends in surprised revelation not deflated misery.

The fax machine will earn its crust today. Is it working?

36 hours to go

....a signing every 12 hours. Let's go Gregg!

Edited August 31, 2022 by Sweaty Gussets

[Miller11]

I’m surprised so many are ok with starting a centre back at right back, even in an emergency. The general consensus was we needed someone better at attacking than Nyambe… you certainly aren’t getting that with Carter. So early into the season we shouldn’t be relying on emergency cover anyway. Essential we bring a right back in as I think we can all agree JRC is not any sort of option and we don’t seem to have a youngster breaking through.

[RevidgeBlue]

44 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

I think we're going to get to 800 pages before everyone grasps the concept of an option to buy at an agreed price. 

The irony of the above statement is simply breathtaking. It's you who has completely misunderstood the point.

If it was the normal sort of situation where the player was under contract, the selling Club didn't fancy him that much, and we wanted to have a look at him before we took the plunge, then, yes, a loan with an option at a sensible level would be the perfect option.

This is completely different. Leicester are apparently going to make him sign a new contract first, therefore they must fancy him a bit, and  either think there's a slight chance he might improve further to the extent he might be of use to them, or, they will get top dollar for him if they sell.

We won't be getting him at a bargain price, no matter what he does. Negligible chance he ends up here permanently imo. Another situation where we potentially develop the player and ultimately miss out.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

Blackburn Rovers weigh up formation switch after transfer dealing | Lancashire Telegraph

If we go 3 at the back then maybe JRC might look better as a WB. I realise I'm clutching. 

Buckley can cross a ball so maybe he can fill in there for a few weeks till Brittain is fit. 

Wouldn't be so hopeful... asked him for a timeframe, will post once I know

[RevidgeBlue]

13 minutes ago, islander200 said:

The deal will be agreed Rev.If it's an option then Leicester can't change the terms of it mid season. 

It will be binding if this deal happens.

It will be prohibitive when the deal is signed.

[Angry_Pirate]

A club like Rovers should try to have every loan come with an option to buy. £5m or £500m. You'd hit gold once in a while with no added risk. (There will be outliers like Harvey Elliott of course).

If we had an option on Tosin, Van Hecke or Harrison Reed, we would have been able to secure a reasonable price for key/excellent players.

It's fair to imagine a fee of £5m would have been far over the maximum that City, Brighton or Southampton would have wanted for the option pre-loan. And many of us would have been happy for Rovers to spend that fee a year later.

You don't have to take up the option. So it's commen sense to haggle out a price like they've done here. £5m for Hirst will either be way too much, a bargain, or just right come the end of his loan, so Rovers either buy him for £5m, or they don't. What's the drama?

It's the obligation to buy ones like Luke Varney and DJ Campbell (and Brereton) that irked me.

[CoconutGrove]

23 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

GBE Calculator - Check Player Status & Eligibility | TransferRoom

fail - 8 points. 

It’s odd, it was at 20 points yesterday and is now showing at 11 for Kluivert:

 

[Ghost7]

On 17/08/2022 at 23:56, Ghost7 said:

Last season we loaned Zeefuik because we needed competition at RB. JRC isn't good enough and we still haven't solved that issue. What happens if Brittain gets injured/ takes a dip in form?

The musts for me are 2 CBS, a better quality left back, another CM (That's 4)

I'd then want RB cover and a forward. Potentially 5 or 6 signings needed!

After that you can move JRC and Vale out. It's going to be an interesting 2 weeks, it should be doable with plenty of loan spots still to be filled. Broughton just needs to get a move on!

 

 

This aged well, since that post JRC has put in a stinker of a performance and the lack of cover in multiple positions has lost us points, particularly RB but it will be LB another month and then CM when Travis is out. 

We can all see what's needed, let's not let expectations drop now because we're short on time. According to many this was supposedly the plan all along... wait till the death and watch the bodies come in.

More points on the line again tonight with holes in the squad. Come on Gregg... get some deals done!

[Sweaty Gussets]

4 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The irony of the above statement is simply breathtaking. It's you who has completely misunderstood the point.

If it was the normal sort of situation where the player was under contract, the selling Club didn't fancy him that much, and we wanted to have a look at him before we took the plunge, then, yes, a loan with an option at a sensible level would be the perfect option.

This is completely different. Leicester are apparently going to make him sign a new contract first, therefore they must fancy him a bit, and  either think there's a slight chance he might improve further to the extent he might be of use to them, or, they will get top dollar for him if they sell.

We won't be getting him at a bargain price, no matter what he does. Negligible chance he ends up here permanently imo. Another situation where we potentially develop the player and ultimately miss out.

And what's that got to do with people not understanding the concept of an loan to buy at an agreed price??

[Sweaty Gussets]

2 minutes ago, CoconutGrove said:

It’s odd, it was at 20 points yesterday and is now showing at 11 for Kluivert:

 

it was 8 when i did it!

[Sweaty Gussets]

6 minutes ago, Mellor Rover said:

Wouldn't be so hopeful... asked him for a timeframe, will post once I know

someone else on here has already said 6 weeks.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 minutes ago, Angry_Pirate said:

It's the obligation to buy ones like Luke Varney and DJ Campbell (and Brereton) that irked me.

Ain't that the truth. Reg Varney would have been more use 

"Get that bus out Butler".

[roverandout]

9 minutes ago, Angry_Pirate said:

A club like Rovers should try to have every loan come with an option to buy. £5m or £500m. You'd hit gold once in a while with no added risk. (There will be outliers like Harvey Elliott of course).

If we had an option on Tosin, Van Hecke or Harrison Reed, we would have been able to secure a reasonable price for key/excellent players.

It's fair to imagine a fee of £5m would have been far over the maximum that City, Brighton or Southampton would have wanted for the option pre-loan. And many of us would have been happy for Rovers to spend that fee a year later.

You don't have to take up the option. So it's commen sense to haggle out a price like they've done here. £5m for Hirst will either be way too much, a bargain, or just right come the end of his loan, so Rovers either buy him for £5m, or they don't. What's the drama?

It's the obligation to buy ones like Luke Varney and DJ Campbell (and Brereton) that irked me.

5 million will never be a bargain even if he has a good season at Rovers.  There's no guarantee he will replicate that if we signed him permanently.  His career suggests he's a league 1 player. Try before you buy is a good way to go but then we will be back to square one if he doesn't work out and that's another season wasted.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

someone else on here has already said 6 weeks.

People on here were saying Brereton's was a 2 week sprain! I don't doubt the info but thought I'd pass on what I hear in case it differs

[Danny O.Brien]

People are missing the point with hirst. Whatever happens this season if he has a good season we sign him on already agreed terms. After which we are free to then either sell on if we choose or keep the player here. Think of jovic the lad who signed for Frankfurt a couple of season's back. Then was immediately sold on for more than double what they paid to Madrid.

Or he does nothing goes back to Leicester and bar the wage contribution we have lost nothing. Every transfer is a gamble whether it's a couple of thousand or a hundred million. This is a lot better than previous loans where players have done well here to earn themselves a move elsewhere. That only benefits the player and the parent club.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Danny O.Brien

[islander200]

19 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The irony of the above statement is simply breathtaking. It's you who has completely misunderstood the point.

If it was the normal sort of situation where the player was under contract, the selling Club didn't fancy him that much, and we wanted to have a look at him before we took the plunge, then, yes, a loan with an option at a sensible level would be the perfect option.

This is completely different. Leicester are apparently going to make him sign a new contract first, therefore they must fancy him a bit, and  either think there's a slight chance he might improve further to the extent he might be of use to them, or, they will get top dollar for him if they sell.

We won't be getting him at a bargain price, no matter what he does. Negligible chance he ends up here permanently imo. Another situation where we potentially develop the player and ultimately miss out.

There will be a fixed fee Rev.

The option will be in our favour up to us wether we take up the option or send him back.

They can't change the terms of the option it will all be on paper and binding.

[Neal]

55 minutes ago, TruRover said:

We will only be paying 5m if he shows he is worth it in the championship. If he’s not, we don’t pay it.

I don’t know why this is so hard to understand. 

It's easy to understand but seemingly what you're failing to understand is that everyone's view of what a good deal looks like is subjective. We're agreeing in principle to spend 5 million on a lad who was about to be out of contract, deals for players in that situation are usually done for pittance and you get the high upside if he smashes it. That's smart business. On top of that, there was seemingly not much of a queue of championship clubs queuing up either so we should of seemingly been in the driving seat with regards to the negotiations. People are discussing this like there's no risk, the risk is he has a decent season for us, we risk 5 million then flops for us the following season and he's Gallagher MK2. 

[roverandout]

5 minutes ago, Danny O.Brien said:

People are missing the point with hirst. Whatever happens this season if he has a good season we sign him on already agreed terms. After which we are free to then either sell on if we choose or keep the player here. Think of jovic the lad who signed for Frankfurt a couple of season's back. Then was immediately sold on for more than double what they paid to Madrid.

Or he does nothing goes back to Leicester and bar the wage contribution we have lost nothing. Every transfer is a gamble whether it's a couple of thousand or a hundred million. This is a lot better than previous loans where players have done well here to earn themselves a move elsewhere. That only benefits the player and the parent club.

We have lost another season playing a player contributing nothing which could have gone to someone who is maybe proven at this level or higher. Think pukki who was brought In then helped Norwich to promotion 

[RevidgeBlue]

8 minutes ago, roverandout said:

5 million will never be a bargain even if he has a good season at Rovers.  There's no guarantee he will replicate that if we signed him permanently.  His career suggests he's a league 1 player. Try before you buy is a good way to go but then we will be back to square one if he doesn't work out and that's another season wasted.

Exactly this, he's patently not an Elliott, and almost certainly not a Tosin, Reed, or JPVH either. 

For those type of players such a deal might be worth a go. This guy obviously isn't in that bracket.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

42 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

That's the same with every player. and has nothing to do with the clause Rovers have apparently inserted. 

No, but it also means that having an option to buy isn't a cast iron guarantee in the club's favour.  

Anyway.  I'd be delighted if someone scored 20 goals for us this season.  Can't see where the next one is coming from at the moment!