The Summer Transfer Window (Press Submit)

[roversinmyblood]

The problem we have with Ipswich has been brought on by ourselves. Everyone knows our situation i.e. venkies court case etc. and football is a cut throat sport. They suspect we need the money and that at the last minute we will sell for what they want to pay. They don’t care what the consequences of their negotiating tactics are. 
If Venkies send over a sum of £5m or more, Ipswich will then see that we don’t need to sell. 
We don’t have to sell because of his contract situation, so we are potentially putting the club at risk of relegation just to keep Szmodics happy. If we could only get a decent keeper and keep him I would sacrifice the other positions. Besides loans would be able to fill the gaps. 

[J*B]

1 hour ago, islander200 said:

Rovers are not in the wrong waiting for the valuation to be met .If Ipswich want him then pay the fee 

If we are truly willing to do a deal under £10 million then it is a bargain 

Struggling to see where you are coming from in your post.Rovers should bow down and accept a pathetic £8.5 million from Ipswich because we can't deny Szmodic his move.

I don't know about you JB but I'm a rovers fan first .Sammie can have his move if a club is willing to pay for him 

Let me try this another way:

If Ipswich are the only club seemingly in world football interested and their max bid is £8,500,00 … that means his value is £8,500,000. 

We can all debate his value to Rovers, or in comparison to other players fees or what we think they should be paying. But the market dictates his value. 

This will go south very quickly if we don’t agree terms soon and at that point I don’t blame Szmodics one bit.

The difference with Gestede? He threw his toys out and refused to play after about 48 hours because he wanted his payday. Sammie is still playing and scoring after about 4 weeks. 

[Lucimo]

40 minutes ago, rigger said:

If that is Park's tactic I see nothing wrong with it.

I'm not saying there is. As much as I want Sammie to stay, I'm a realist. But I do feel Ipswich are trying to get him on the cheap and we are within our rights to dig in and hold out for a fairer deal. If this is indeed a tactic, and I wouldn't put it past our lot, then fair play to them.

[Mercer]

18 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

I think we can all agree £9m is not enough, and that Szmodics owes Rovers just as much as we owe him.

Don't think anyone would disagree under 'normal' circumstances.

However, there has to be more to this than meets the eye.

Did Szmodics sign his new contract with Rovers less than 12 months ago on the basis that he would be allowed to move to a PL club for £8/9million (where the 'core' deal now seems to be)?   Seems that way and would explain Ipswich's first bid of £6million given their £15million deal for Delap and the £18million they were prepared to pay Hull for Philogene.  Is all the p1ssing about due to Waggott, allegedly, again, tryiing to move the goalposts during a negotiation?

Edited August 11 by Mercer

[Armchair supporter supremo]

8 minutes ago, J*B said:

Let me try this another way:

If Ipswich are the only club seemingly in world football interested and their max bid is £8,500,00 … that means his value is £8,500,000. 

We can all debate his value to Rovers, or in comparison to other players fees or what we think they should be paying. But the market dictates his value. 

This will go south very quickly if we don’t agree terms soon and at that point I don’t blame Szmodics one bit.

The difference with Gestede? He threw his toys out and refused to play after about 48 hours because he wanted his payday. Sammie is still playing and scoring after about 4 weeks. 

No. The player hasn't officially been transfer listed or told to leave, he's very much wanted and needed by the club, manager and fans, plus he's still got years left on his contract. 

So the club have every right to say well he's not officially for sale... but if you where to pay figure X that changes things and then it would become in the clubs interests to sell him at that price. 

Edited August 11 by Armchair supporter supremo

[Paul Mani]

8 minutes ago, J*B said:

Let me try this another way:

If Ipswich are the only club seemingly in world football interested and their max bid is £8,500,00 … that means his value is £8,500,000. 

We can all debate his value to Rovers, or in comparison to other players fees or what we think they should be paying. But the market dictates his value. 

This will go south very quickly if we don’t agree terms soon and at that point I don’t blame Szmodics one bit.

The difference with Gestede? He threw his toys out and refused to play after about 48 hours because he wanted his payday. Sammie is still playing and scoring after about 4 weeks. 

Let me put it this way, if we tell Ipswich to fuck off with their £8.5m bid , then in two weeks, I’d put my house on someone else, like Bournemouth (who’ve just sold Solanki) or Everton (looking to sell DCL) etc etc putting down £9m and £40k a week on an extremely low risk, potentially high return signing.

Ive no doubt SS will go, and if the fee is the reported £9m, rising to £12m then it might just be Ipswich left with egg on their face as a more established PL team snaps him up for what is literally chump change!

Edited August 11 by Paul Mani

[tomphil]

I don't blame Ipswich for thinking we might be very keen to do a lower price deal post court case, for all we know someone this end has planted those seeds in their heads.

However as said above they really then risk other clubs suddenly jumping in low then an auction and you end up at a bigger or similar fee anyway.

If they really want him though 9 million with reasonable add ons is fair and i doubt they'll end up paying less whatever happens now.

[roversfan99]

7 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Let me put it this way, if we tell Ipswich to fuck off with their £8.5m bid , then in two weeks, I’d put my house on someone else, like Bournemouth (who’ve just sold Solanki) or Everton (looking to sell DCL) etc etc putting down £9m and £40k a week on an extremely low risk, potentially high return signing.

Ive no doubt SS will go, and if the fee is the reported £9m, rising to £12m then it might just be Ipswich left with egg on their face as a more established PL team snaps him up for what is literally chump change!

Szmodics wouldn't directly replace either of those out and out strikers.

[islander200]

14 minutes ago, J*B said:

Let me try this another way:

If Ipswich are the only club seemingly in world football interested and their max bid is £8,500,00 … that means his value is £8,500,000. 

We can all debate his value to Rovers, or in comparison to other players fees or what we think they should be paying. But the market dictates his value. 

This will go south very quickly if we don’t agree terms soon and at that point I don’t blame Szmodics one bit.

The difference with Gestede? He threw his toys out and refused to play after about 48 hours because he wanted his payday. Sammie is still playing and scoring after about 4 weeks. 

If the bids only reach £8.5 million then we shouldn't sell him it's as simple as that .

If Sammie does as you say and throws his toys out the pram then so what?He might miss a couple of games but he won't go on strike indefinitely and it will serve him no purpose to play poorly here .

Also only palace were willing to bid for Wharton and pay £18.5 million I'm sure you described that as a poor fee received 

[Forever Blue]

Rovers dictate Szmodics price, not Ipswich or spurious notions of the ‘market’. 
 

Ipswich can then decide whether to pay the value we’ve placed on him. 

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

11 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Let me put it this way, if we tell Ipswich to fuck off with their £8.5m bid , then in two weeks, I’d put my house on someone else, like Bournemouth (who’ve just sold Solanki) or Everton (looking to sell DCL) etc etc putting down £9m and £40k a week on an extremely low risk, potentially high return signing.

Ive no doubt SS will go, and if the fee is the reported £9m, rising to £12m then it might just be Ipswich left with egg on their face as a more established PL team snaps him up for what is literally chump change!

Low risk? He’s unproven at PL level and 29 yo with minimal re-sale value. Obviously some PL teams might get desperate closer to deadline day but there’s no guarantee and the later we leave it, the less time we have to bring in replacements.

I don’t ‘want’ him to go but Szmodics market value isn’t getting any higher. If we want/need to sell, this is the right time. Ultimately he’s under contract and we hold all the cards but given Ipswich seem close to reaching the fee we want it seems sensible for all parties to get it done sooner rather than later.

[roversfan99]

The point that Szmodics will still want a Premier League move regardless of winning on Friday night and will likely be pissed off if he is denied it is not mutually exclusive to the fact that we as a club shouldnt feel obliged to accept a bid below our valuation to accomodate it.

[Penwortham Blue]

29 minutes ago, J*B said:

Let me try this another way:

If Ipswich are the only club seemingly in world football interested and their max bid is £8,500,00 … that means his value is £8,500,000. 

We can all debate his value to Rovers, or in comparison to other players fees or what we think they should be paying. But the market dictates his value. 

This will go south very quickly if we don’t agree terms soon and at that point I don’t blame Szmodics one bit.

The difference with Gestede? He threw his toys out and refused to play after about 48 hours because he wanted his payday. Sammie is still playing and scoring after about 4 weeks. 

The salient point your missing is that he is effectively contracted to Rovers for another 3 years. He is paid well and was happy to sign a contract for good money and therefore, we are under no moral obligation to sell, unless it is seen to benefit Blackburn Rovers.  

[islander200]

31 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Don't think anyone would disagree under 'normal' circumstances.

However, there has to be more to this than meets the eye.

Did Szmodics sign his new contract with Rovers less than 12 months ago on the basis that he would be allowed to move to a PL club for £8/9million (where the 'core' deal now seems to be)?   Seems that way and would explain Ipswich's first bid of £6million given their £15million deal for Delap and the £18million they were prepared to pay Hull for Philogene.  Is all the p1ssing about due to Waggott, allegedly, again, tryiing to move the goalposts during a negotiation?

If he signed a new contract on the basis he could join a premier league club for a specific fee then why wouldn't have not just been put in his contract?

I'm honestly not  buying this bullshit gentleman's agreement.It makes no sense for it not to be just put In his contract.

Edited August 11 by islander200

[roversfan99]

Im guessing that even though we obviously wont get a reasonable chunk of any Szmodics fee to reinvest, that a sale would at least slightly

Its hard not to fear that there is a chance that because the Szmodics deal is not completed, that we proceed with loans and then the sale is done near the end of the window, weve already filled the positions we needed and the money vanishes again.

Also if our main goalkeeping target is domestic, and why it isnt just revealed I do not know. I suspect it might be a veteran, potentially Ruddy.

Whatever happened to the July deadline? Turned out to be a load of shit. Eustace said post match that it needs to be done soon but he can easily see it running the course of the window.

[Penwortham Blue]

30 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Don't think anyone would disagree under 'normal' circumstances.

However, there has to be more to this than meets the eye.

Did Szmodics sign his new contract with Rovers less than 12 months ago on the basis that he would be allowed to move to a PL club for £8/9million (where the 'core' deal now seems to be)?   Seems that way and would explain Ipswich's first bid of £6million given their £15million deal for Delap and the £18million they were prepared to pay Hull for Philogene.  Is all the p1ssing about due to Waggott, allegedly, again, tryiing to move the goalposts during a negotiation?

If a release clause was included, there would be precious little room for negotiation, meet it and he’s gone. My guess is that no such clause is in the contract.

[Armchair supporter supremo]

11 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Low risk? He’s unproven at PL level and 29 yo with minimal re-sale value. Obviously some PL teams might get desperate closer to deadline day but there’s no guarantee and the later we leave it, the less time we have to bring in replacements.

I don’t ‘want’ him to go but Szmodics market value isn’t getting any higher. If we want/need to sell, this is the right time. Ultimately he’s under contract and we hold all the cards but given Ipswich seem close to reaching the fee we want it seems sensible for all parties to get it done sooner rather than later.

No sorry. The "sensible" thing to do would be to see how the court case pans out first, if it goes against venkys and looks as though we have to sell again to keep the club ticking over for a while longer.. Then yes wed probably just have to take the best offer on the table. But if itcgoes venkys way and they're free to move money in and out again then we'd be in a position to stand our ground and not be rolled over. 

Edited August 11 by Armchair supporter supremo

[Gamst]

33 minutes ago, J*B said:

Let me try this another way:

If Ipswich are the only club seemingly in world football interested and their max bid is £8,500,00 … that means his value is £8,500,000. 

We can all debate his value to Rovers, or in comparison to other players fees or what we think they should be paying. But the market dictates his value. 

This will go south very quickly if we don’t agree terms soon and at that point I don’t blame Szmodics one bit.

The difference with Gestede? He threw his toys out and refused to play after about 48 hours because he wanted his payday. Sammie is still playing and scoring after about 4 

 

Surely the value of something that is being sold is controlled by the seller as they either ultimately decide the price. You could offer me £50 for my car and if nobody else bids and I refuse to sell it to you, it doesn’t mean it’s worth £50. 

[chaddyrovers]

49 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Massively agree with this. They have also spent £15 million on a crap goalkeeper from Burnley, purely because he came through City’s youth ranks. We got badly taken to the cleaners on the Wharton deal because of the stupid, formulaic, arbitrary habits the football recruitment industry. Letting the likes of Ipswich and Palace steamroll us and nick our best players for a song is completely unacceptable. We need to aspire to being more than a Cat 1 Crewe. If we’ve doubled our asking price, good.

Ipswich need to paid us what we want and them not paying what we want and massively messing us around. 

28 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Don't think anyone would disagree under 'normal' circumstances.

However, there has to be more to this than meets the eye.

Did Szmodics sign his new contract with Rovers less than 12 months ago on the basis that he would be allowed to move to a PL club for £8/9million (where the 'core' deal now seems to be)?   Seems that way and would explain Ipswich's first bid of £6million given their £15million deal for Delap and the £18million they were prepared to pay Hull for Philogene.  Is all the p1ssing about due to Waggott, allegedly, again, tryiing to move the goalposts during a negotiation?

who says we agree to sell for £8/9m? 

No, the pissing around is down to Ipswich. They know the price and given the amount of money they have spent on average not proven PL players . Szmodics out performed Delap in terms of goals 4 to 1. Yet they paid £15m for Delap. FFS.  

[Paul Mani]

10 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Low risk? He’s unproven at PL level and 29 yo with minimal re-sale value. Obviously some PL teams might get desperate closer to deadline day but there’s no guarantee and the later we leave it, the less time we have to bring in replacements.

I don’t ‘want’ him to go but Szmodics market value isn’t getting any higher. If we want/need to sell, this is the right time. Ultimately he’s under contract and we hold all the cards but given Ipswich seem close to reaching the fee we want it seems sensible for all parties to get it done sooner rather than later.

Mate, they’re signing kids who’ve done nothing for £20m+ and paying them £50k a week.

£9m and £40k a week in the PL is chump change. SS is always fit, absolutely runs his heart out, is a good egg…he might go in, absolutely bomb and never do a thing, or he might get 10 goals and be the difference for a lower end PL team.

[Armchair supporter supremo]

8 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Ipswich need to paid us what we want and them not paying what we want and massively messing us around. 

who says we agree to sell for £8/9m? 

No, the pissing around is down to Ipswich. They know the price and given the amount of money they have spent on average not proven PL players . Szmodics out performed Delap in terms of goals 4 to 1. Yet they paid £15m for Delap. FFS.  

Chaddy makes more sense the more he swears! 

[philipl]

Flogging the players we have already sold has sorted the club surviving for the next 18 months even if zero comes from Pune.

So the situation is very different from the legging over we got from Palace. Rovers are no longer in a must sell, thank you for the penny from the rich man's table position.

If I were Sammy, I'd be seriously wondering about Ipswich. They either believe he is a vital piece in keeping them in the PL in which case the 5m or whatever the difference is becomes core to them earning an extra 170m in 2025/26 or they don't. The Ipswich stance screams they think they are signing a bench warmer/impact sub. Sammy might get his assured millions but will also lose his sharpness and career.

There are other PL clubs out there who are in the market for a Sammy type of player so both Rovers and Sammy should sit tight. 

[KentExile]

31 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Low risk? He’s unproven at PL level and 29 yo with minimal re-sale value. Obviously some PL teams might get desperate closer to deadline day but there’s no guarantee and the later we leave it, the less time we have to bring in replacements.

I don’t ‘want’ him to go but Szmodics market value isn’t getting any higher. If we want/need to sell, this is the right time. Ultimately he’s under contract and we hold all the cards but given Ipswich seem close to reaching the fee we want it seems sensible for all parties to get it done sooner rather than later.

 

11 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Mate, they’re signing kids who’ve done nothing for £20m+ and paying them £50k a week.

£9m and £40k a week in the PL is chump change. SS is always fit, absolutely runs his heart out, is a good egg…he might go in, absolutely bomb and never do a thing, or he might get 10 goals and be the difference for a lower end PL team.

And they are owned by the 6th richest owners in the Prem

Ipswich do not have to worry about resale value

Edited August 11 by KentExile

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, philipl said:

Flogging the players we have already sold has sorted the club surviving for the next 18 months even if zero comes from Pune.

So the situation is very different from the legging over we got from Palace. Rovers are no longer in a must sell, thank you for the penny from the rich man's table position.

If I were Sammy, I'd be seriously wondering about Ipswich. They either believe he is a vital piece in keeping them in the PL in which case the 5m or whatever the difference is becomes core to them earning an extra 170m in 2025/26 or they don't. The Ipswich stance screams they think they are signing a bench warmer/impact sub. Sammy might get his assured millions but will also lose his sharpness and career.

There are other PL clubs out there who are in the market for a Sammy type of player so both Rovers and Sammy should sit tight. 

I’d agree with that. I can’t see him being a starter for Ipswich at Premier League level. Maybe they’re thinking of being back in the championship this time next year.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 minute ago, KentExile said:

 

And they are owned by the 6th richest owners in the Prem

Ipswich do not have to worry about resale value

If they were that smart they wouldn’t be looking at Sammi.