January Transfer Window.

[Sweaty Gussets]

2 minutes ago, windymiller7 said:

Just read that he's apparently on £63k pw!! We'd need that one heavily subsidised by Barcodes that's for sure. Seeing as it looks like Howe's trying to offload him I suspect that any loan move will mean the loan club picking up most, if not all, of the tab.

good player but he'd be crossing the ball into an empty penalty box!

[Guest]

Spoken to a couple of old firm supporting friends of mine, both were baffled when I asked about the possibility of Porteous playing CM for us. The Rangers fan's exact words were 'but he's a centre back'. 

[dingles staying down 4ever]

32 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

We already had Jones, if we want a central midfielder we should actively sign one, not one who can do a job there.

A better example then would be Paul Warhurst. A central defender Dalglish bought to play centre midfield

[Miller11]

2 minutes ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

A better example then would be Paul Warhurst. A central defender Dalglish bought to play centre midfield

Warhurst was a bit of a one off. Before we signed him he has a crazy goal scoring run as a striker and got called up to the England squad off the back of it. Proper utility player.

[oldjamfan1]

6 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Warhurst was a bit of a one off. Before we signed him he has a crazy goal scoring run as a striker and got called up to the England squad off the back of it. Proper utility player.

Yeah Warhurst was one of those rare players who was top class in any position on the park. The fact that we had two of those in the same squad (Sutton was the other) was remarkable.

[rover23]

1 hour ago, OssyLad said:

Ryan Fraser as been made available, wouldn’t mind him on loan for rest of season. Exactly what we need someone with a bit of pace and a end product 

Surely he’ll get a loan to a bottom 3 PL contender. He’s too good for the Championship. 

[bazza]

Can someone tell me why, with billionaire owners, we cannot afford various players and why we automatically drop down the pecking order when other clubs are in for a player.

If it's FFP surely other clubs are subject to the same rules.

From the way people talk anyone would think we didn't have a pot to piss in.

[tomphil]

4 minutes ago, bazza said:

Can someone tell me why, with billionaire owners, we cannot afford various players and why we automatically drop down the pecking order when other clubs are in for a player.

If it's FFP surely other clubs are subject to the same rules.

From the way people talk anyone would think we didn't have a pot to piss in.

Bigger income we keep getting told so that's how others navigate the FFP better.

Now if these incompetent wage drains running Rovers in England had got a million or two for one or even all of the three that walked for nothing we'd have more in the pot now.

THAT is how some others do it but all we here are crowds crowds crowds blah blah.

[BigBar]

1 hour ago, Mellor Rover said:

Spoken to a couple of old firm supporting friends of mine, both were baffled when I asked about the possibility of Porteous playing CM for us. The Rangers fan's exact words were 'but he's a centre back'. 

"Tony, Jon...would you like to field this one? The football fans need educating again"

Edited January 16, 2023 by BigBar

[JHRover]

21 minutes ago, bazza said:

 

If it's FFP surely other clubs are subject to the same rules.

From the way people talk anyone would think we didn't have a pot to piss in.

Some clubs treat FFP with the contempt it deserves and do whatever they can to work around the restrictions it imposes, knowing promotion to the PL is the priority and confident that if the League did ever try to impose a sanction they could either sell a player or two to get out of it or fight it.

Other clubs treat FFP as a welcome excuse to justify cost cutting and budget reductions. An ideal 'boogeyman' to convince supporters and local media they would love to chuck more money in but can't because of nasty rules. Best of both worlds - don't have to spend and the blame for it lands elsewhere.

It's a shame many have been suckered in by it but as I keep on pointing out - the state of the Club and stadium - neither of which are constrained in any way by FFP - stand as clear evidence that the owners don't want to spend. If they did we would divert some funds into making sure the ground was cleaned or the pitch looked after properly.

[bluebruce]

2 hours ago, Tugayisgod said:

Wouldn't be the first time players have been converted to a different position. Didn't Sam play Phil Jones in a defensive midfield role. Going back even further Fred Pickering started life as a defender before becoming one of the countries best strikers. It can happen , nothing wrong with being versatile.

There's nothing wrong with being versatile, no. But there's a lot wrong with recruiting a player specifically for a position when he has barely played it. If Porteous comes in, the main aim in mind should be to play him at CB. If he can fill in at a pinch for another role and do a good job at it, sure, that's a plus, but nobody should ever be recruited with the primary intent of playing them in their secondary position.

[Tugayisgod]

1 hour ago, Mellor Rover said:

Spoken to a couple of old firm supporting friends of mine, both were baffled when I asked about the possibility of Porteous playing CM for us. The Rangers fan's exact words were 'but he's a centre back'. 

Fair enough, but I'd prefer to hear a Hibs fans opinion on the matter

[islander200]

37 minutes ago, bazza said:

Can someone tell me why, with billionaire owners, we cannot afford various players and why we automatically drop down the pecking order when other clubs are in for a player.

If it's FFP surely other clubs are subject to the same rules.

From the way people talk anyone would think we didn't have a pot to piss in.

Well we did have the biggest net spend in the championship in the summer window.

Also we are not the only club to use the loan market ,a quick glance at all championship clubs and most currently have more loan players than ourselves .

Before I get a post from some saying I'm defending the owners, I'm not I'm in agreement they are shit owners and need them gone asap but for balance we did have the biggest net spend and nearly every single club in the division has more players on loan than we do.

[Mashed Potatoes]

14 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Some clubs treat FFP with the contempt it deserves and do whatever they can to work around the restrictions it imposes, knowing promotion to the PL is the priority and confident that if the League did ever try to impose a sanction they could either sell a player or two to get out of it or fight it.

Other clubs treat FFP as a welcome excuse to justify cost cutting and budget reductions. An ideal 'boogeyman' to convince supporters and local media they would love to chuck more money in but can't because of nasty rules. Best of both worlds - don't have to spend and the blame for it lands elsewhere.

It's a shame many have been suckered in by it but as I keep on pointing out - the state of the Club and stadium - neither of which are constrained in any way by FFP - stand as clear evidence that the owners don't want to spend. If they did we would divert some funds into making sure the ground was cleaned or the pitch looked after properly.

You say the owners don't want to spend but the club's accounts have shown that year on year they are pumping in around £15m +/- £2m. How much more do you think should come in ?

[JHRover]

2 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

You say the owners don't want to spend but the club's accounts have shown that year on year they are pumping in around £15m +/- £2m. How much more do you think should come in ?

I didn't say they weren't spending. I said they don't want to spend more than they need to.

I don't want to pay tax and bills each month but I do because I need to. I think they see Rovers as similar - a burden that they have to meet but don't really enjoy doing.

Didn't we make a profit last year?

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

Championship 2022/23: Which players are out of contract this summer? | Football News | Sky Sports

Fill yer boots, Gregg. 

few decent players. 

for example Barlaser could be target but Rotherham aren't selling yet despite offers from Boro he isn't for sale. 

We need to be looking at the free market from leagues in Germany, Belgium, Scandinavian, Austria, etc. But also emerging talent players from Europe and North America 

[Guest]

BBD to Villeareal rumour doing the rounds. Pre-contract

[Aqualung]

13 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

few decent players. 

for example Barlaser could be target but Rotherham aren't selling yet despite offers from Boro he isn't for sale. 

We need to be looking at the free market from leagues in Germany, Belgium, Scandinavian, Austria, etc. But also emerging talent players from Europe and North America 

Chaddy, do we have someone in Rovers employ to do that job... There's a lot of miles there and expense? 

 

[Mashed Potatoes]

16 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I didn't say they weren't spending. I said they don't want to spend more than they need to.

I don't want to pay tax and bills each month but I do because I need to. I think they see Rovers as similar - a burden that they have to meet but don't really enjoy doing.

Didn't we make a profit last year?

I don't think you've really answered my question - namely what level of funding from the owners do you think is required in addition to what they have usually provided ?

We don't appear to have made a profit last year. The last available set of accounts runs to 30 June 2021 and shows a loss of £6.6m. However that is after making a profit of £13m on the sale of Brockhall - to the owners ! when they paid £17.3m for it.

[ItsRoverZ]

8 minutes ago, JoeH said:

BBD to Villeareal rumour doing the rounds. Pre-contract

Losing him for free is absolutely shambolic 

[chaddyrovers]

18 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Im not going to stop saying it or accept it. Over 8m is a lot more than zero which we will have this summer and is a hell of a lot relative to our general budgets, more than the last 2 summers combined.

Don't we know you won't stop saying it. 

It depends on how much money would be invest and would we got a good enough replacement in. Also bids on deadline day were pointless. Never going to be accept us. 

18 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Its also why I dont swallow this bollocks about projects and the first year being a development one or a few hit. Keeping him and signing 3 loanees, one of whom plays weekly regardless of performance is not in line with that. And now we want more loanees.

We having one loan player to replace one who left us. Maybe the player we want isn't available to the Summer or his club wants too much for him. Plus depending on what the budget and whether you can get a quality player. 

You suggesting signing BBD and signing 3 players but then you are increasing the wage bill which might be over budget. Plus can you sign a quality replacement in this window. Big questions and none we really have the answer to as we don't have access to the budget, what is going on the behind the scenes transfer wise, plus agents, clubs and players demands? 

18 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Ill judge Broughton mainly on transfers and ultimately what happens on the pitch as anything he is supposedly doing should lead to on field results.

Fair enough. I judge him on all 6 departments

18 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Weve supposedly put together a new recruitment team, and now you are saying it isnt easy? Surely theyve been bloody appointed to make best use of resources available and sign as well as possible, otherwise what is the point? Its much easier replacing him with the best part of 8m than with nothing.

no transfer window is easy ss you make you it sound. I don't know if you what the transfer documentary yesterday on Sky one at 9pm last night but what a brilliant insight in football and how clubs, agents and players work in transfer window and before. 

I understand your point about BBD but if clubs want to get him on the cheap then no chance. Plus you got to look replacement's cost and can you bring in the required quality. You are talking at least 5 million for a quality striker to replace BBD's goals then you need a left side midfielder to replace him position wise. In the summer maybe we can do it cheaper or have a bigger budget than this season. We see in the coming weeks and months 

18 hours ago, roverandout said:

Chaddy. It will be the reset button because loan players will return to their clubs.  Bbd will leave for free. Others will follow.  Then it's another rebuild.  There's no continuity.  How can you not grasp this?

We currently have 2 loan players at the club. Garrett and Wharton will replace Morton anyway long term. 

I think BBD will sign a pre contract with a Spanish club. Probably in the near future it will be announce. Said this in the summer also. 

Ayala will go but if we sign the Hibs defender haven't we already replace him plus Carter and Phillips backing this up. 

hardly a rebuild at the minute looking at it but GB and his team will be planning for next season already or should be despite the January window being open. 

4 hours ago, roverstdt said:

I have to admit if we Porteous will be delighted be a fan of his for a while and we have seem to be constantly linked with him for several years.

what are his strengths and weaknesses

4 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

This window won't be helped by the lack of funding combined with the insistence by the owners to let Brereton run his deal down. 

[chaddyrovers]

10 minutes ago, JoeH said:

BBD to Villeareal rumour doing the rounds. Pre-contract

its no surprised. Heard the rumour at the weekend. Think its always been his intention to sign pre contract with a Spanish club for 6 months. 

[chaddyrovers]

9 minutes ago, Aqualung said:

Chaddy, do we have someone in Rovers employ to do that job... There's a lot of miles there and expense? 

 

Yes we have a head of European Scouting Luke Griffin at the club. 

[Tugayisgod]

43 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

There's nothing wrong with being versatile, no. But there's a lot wrong with recruiting a player specifically for a position when he has barely played it. If Porteous comes in, the main aim in mind should be to play him at CB. If he can fill in at a pinch for another role and do a good job at it, sure, that's a plus, but nobody should ever be recruited with the primary intent of playing them in their secondary position.

Completely agree. If he signs I'm sure it's an indication Ayalas contract won't be renewed in the summer.  Just saying that if he can play other positions that's a bonus 👍

[superniko]

Losing Diaz on the 6 month foreign club rule is probably the worst possible situation that could have come from that sorry tale

Would add Villarreal would be a bit of a surprise as they have two highly rated young lads in their ‘wide forward’ positions already. Though it’s a free transfer so I guess they may as well and get a profit on some of them. A very well run, small town, overachieving club. Something we once were 

Edited January 16, 2023 by superniko