Yea - and there is no way that this seasons budget is minus 7m and huge wage for Brereton. Its is being talked as if we could've spent that figure over 2 or 3 players, or on someone like (Hasta's example) Charlie Austin on loan. I still (regardless of his on pitch impact) believe that this particularly deal was in our available seasonal budget because, a 19 year old with lower wages = more we can spend on a transfer fee. That is pretty much exactly what Waggott is saying. I also think the fee is heavily performance related and structured over a few seasons, thats not costing this budget anywhere near what 6 months of 40/50k PW and a loan fee would do. All old ground, yet still dismissed as "defending" something. Its merely opinion. I'm sorry Kenneth (peep show reference), but I am not wound up by opinions - whether they agree or disagree, and on this most of yours on this echo mine (the age, needing more time etc). If there is one thing that puts me off this site from time to time it is the "you will defend anything" or "mr positive/opposite" or "venky apologist" crap - you should know this. Our opinion differs on the first part though. I think we all wanted or expected more - but this fee/deal is being over blown and criticised due the perceived expense and drain of the clubs coffers, and its closeness to records set in 1998, 2001, or 2012. A transfer fee figure alone, that doesn't reflect the difference between signing someone on big wages compared to a 19 year old probably on his first professional terms before arriving. For instance, Rhodes in 2012 came in for a record 8m and reportedly 35k a week. Hasta (and FM2019) seem to think BB is earning about 1/10th of that sum, so is it fair to say he should be expected to dislodge Graham "cos he cost 7m"? How do you know this. For instance, its reported we wanted Bamford and Celina. Did both of those players want to fit into our wage structure? Did both of those selling clubs want to accept structured deals? Did both of those players want to come to us despite competition from other championship teams? Far too much assumption and in hindsight, Ben might never get in the team - that doesn't mean I can't disagree with those already prepared to write him off. You're relying on a rumour again, I am sorry but I don't buy that sort of thing, you should know that. Most transfer fees are secret i.e. "undisclosed" and I think that you'd have to be completely naive to assume the public ones are simply on the basis of transparency. The simple answer for me is for you to start trying to catch up with the spiralling costs of trying to compete in this league. A really easy way to do that is go through our young players who are in the 18 - and list the ones you'd accept 7m as a reasonable fee for. I can't think of anyone. Yea 3/4 grand a week with incentives sounds about right. Hence why I don't think that there was ever the realistic option to tie so much money up in wages as opposed to transfer fees on younger players we can potentially improve and sell on in future. An estimate with Austin for 6 months could be, say he is on 70k pw reported - 1m loan fee and 1/2 the wages for 6 months- nearly 2.5m after taxes/bonuses etc? For instance, a simple financial suggestion (remember we had those audits) would've been to change the model from signing older free/loan players on established wages, to signing younger risks who represent a potential investment. Wages are simply costs, transfer fees are for acquiring "capital". Im not suggesting it is the most ambitious way to run the club, but it certainly puts us in a better position to demand decent fees for anyone we are receiving interest in, since theres no rush to fill a hole for FFP/huge wage players.

I didn't invent it and it has nothing to do with Bosman. I read what the chairman said about the deal. The price tag is used to put the boot in unfairly. Its compared to deals in 1999 ffs, how is that even relevant? https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/16984616.rovers-have-big-belief-in-brereton-says-ceo-waggott/ "here was a set amount of funding that the owners agreed on which was a very good gesture. “I just asked whether we could flex it between transfer money and wages accordingly, but not breach it. “If someone came along that meant we had to diminish wages to get that player, or vice versa, could we flex it and they said yes.”

What have I re-imagined about this? ; "You are claiming that is was so vile and abusive you can’t repeat it... give us a clue... was it racist? Regarding his sexuality? Around any physical or mental condition? Maybe they incorrectly assumed his gender and verbally attacked him for it? Don’t tell me the pitchfork wielding, card carrying Klan member sat behind you attacked him for his religious or political views?!?!" Firstly you assumed I couldn't type it because I was offended, when its simply a word in the swear filter. Secondly this sarcastic and (also what id describe as humourless) reply belittles real issues with racism et al. Bringing the modern Americanism "you assumed my gender" into some poorly worded retort including over the top references to other actual serious issues is what I am talking about. Lack of sense, intelligence, maturity - and by the looks of the last sentence - lack of any argument. Price tag exactly. Its the perfect excuse to stick the boot in. As many have pointed out to you, but you and others continue ignore, 7m on Ben is completely different to signing someone for a big fee and big wages. You'd discount the words of the director who actually organised the deal to continue the argument that this deal has compromised the team - you preferred to assume his wage was directly related to the cost of the transfer fee if I recall correctly. I also don't buy that what we see is what we will get. His age is continuously discounted for his price. If you expect a mature, well rounded goal scorer on a nominal wage at 19, even for 7m - you're stuck in 1999. From my perspective - how anyone could judge our recruitment of him by this point is ridiculous. Thats not defending his limited impact so far as Major Miller suggests - its a point of view that wont change by rumours about Waggott vetoing his inclusion in the u23s... How quaint that we get back to rumours to support your perceived annoyance at decision making!

The problem with that scenario is loudmouths are heard, the majority are not. Not that I disagree, I am not arguing that there is a majority of people being overly critical, or vociferously vocal towards the lad. In one sentence - you mentioned mental, racial and sexual insults, and then a "gender appropriation" joke about someone being insulted for "wrongly assuming his gender". I personally probably wouldn't associate racism/sexism and mental health awareness with non-issues because that, coincidentally (from my point of view) is what trivialises actual problems in society - and in a football stadium! This is about the idea I disagreed with the notion "everybody is supported at Ewood", its not about me being offended. Agree - however most fans wasn't the comment. I don't need the majority or most fans to get behind anyone, they will react positively at most games anyway. It is the minority of those singling out him for criticism. For example; His "poor" form is stretching the truth to some extent - from my point of view at least. Surely form is only something you can take from consistent appearances in a preferred position? I know you'd give the claps and support in the ground like I do, but there are plenty who share your opinion on his ability, and thus share it with the rest of the ground..! I mean to suggest he will probably never score, 5 months and 1 league start into his career. Bit unfair really. Especially when he has had two chalked off for offside. I think you make a good point about Nuttall's improvment though- but I don't think he has ever had stick in the ground, has he? Even when the ball bounces off him for 60 minutes. We both know the reason comes down to goals - always the imperial measurement of strikers. He does get some criticism on here due to his limited technical ability - but you can see that training in our system for much longer, working hard with Johnson in the u23s and being given a chance has brought his level up. Nuttall looks stronger, fitter and more switched on - does that not also bode well for giving Brereton time, isn't there a good chance he will improve in a similar way? Have you ever considered that signing Ben has actually helped that process for Nuttall too? Competition for places in the 18 is as good as its been since pre-venkys in my opinion, something you cannot seem to give Mowbray any credit for. You are criticising him for dropping his own signing and using Nuttall (also someone he signed, albeit with DJ's input) instead - we both know you'd be criticising Mowbray if he'd loaned out Nuttall and stuck with Ben. I have never understood this priority to find criticism.

I know most players are applauded off but the point was I didn't think the majority at home to Newcastle got behind BB. There is a difference between abuse and being behind someone - I mean, I aint saying half the ground are baying for blood - I merely disagreed with the notion all is positive with him at Ewood. Case in point, the lads behind me. As I said, I couldn't write the words they used on here - and there was a palpable (over) reaction to everything he did. The fact that @gumboots is sarcastically suggesting the round of applause was relief sums up how many fans are seeing his impact thus far. I just think thats premature. I did reply to the earlier post and question but did that stupid thing where I clicked next page before posting and it disappeared. To summarise what I said about his ability, the key part; - its too early to say exactly what he has or hasn't. Looks to strike a ball well (see preston/bournemouth disallowed goals) can run with the ball, looks strong, and gets into the right positions largely - if you read back, I also said I think he is second guessing most things at the moment, being used out of position and not quite up to the intensity that TM wants. I take back what I said about politics. The two charlatans you mentioned have a huge hand in taking this country into a whirlwind of nonsensical arguments. All this from the bloke who was having a pop at fans the other day for not being criminally underwhelmed and criticising transfer business! If any fan wants to be racist or sexist, or any member of the public around me for that matter - they will be pulled up on it. I am not sure why you are belittling these issues, or even referencing them since I merely mentioned that some nasty comments I have heard towards his contributions wouldn't pass the swear filter on here! Again, I am not sure why you have made light of racism/sexism issues either. Those issues at Ewood aren't worth joking about, in fact ask @S8 & Blue what one of the lads behind me said about Kodja earlier in the year. That was reported to the stewards and club, and Id expect anyone including yourself to do the same if you hear racism, sexism and anything else like that at Ewood. I said all fans aren't behind him. The swear filter probably wont let me type the regular comment from the bloke who sits directly behind me, thats not suggesting the player is impacted by his specific comments. However, if you can't hear the overall noise whenever he makes a mistake, loose pass, loses possession - id suggest getting some hearing aids - and if you think all 19 year old lads have thick skin for that - you'd be wrong. Hold on, the comment was the fans are behind him. You cannot surely behind someone if you are standing up to shout abusive comments less than 5 minutes into a game after one bad pass. I am not insulted or upset by that either I am merely pointing out that moaning/groaning is an example of NOT being behind a player. I think if we are accusing people of something - i.e. being over sensitive, It might be worth stopping reacting with such anger when anyone pulls you up for one of your daily assumptions. I am unsure how you've come to the conclusion Davies got it worse. For instance, Davies played 20 odd times for us, and I can't remember a single comment from the Riverside towards him. Remember plenty of "we're shit" commentary at the time, and I particularly remember Davies getting a lot of credit for the game against Charlton - which was one of the only wins in the first half of the season. I don't remember swathes of fans standing up shouting specific "7m, your a shit @#/?, Davies" at his first misplaced pass 3 minutes into games. Maybe it is the area of the ground that I sit now, or perhaps its the empty seats that make single voices carry further. Either way - all the comments above still don't change the initial retort and point - "at games, people get behind everyone" is simply untrue. Edit - as you can see, the swear filter doesn't allow the word that is seemingly saved for Ben where I sit!

Not true. Some of the comments I have have heard at Ewood would be removed if I posted. He was applauded off against Newcastle, and that is his only start at Ewood.

Yea but anyone who comments on our season, particularly our signings of strikers has a choice. They either lambast the signing of a 19 year old who hasn’t broke the first team, for an “obscene” fee or they praise the club for bringing in a 22 year old in who has thrived, even in a position he probably doesn’t see himself playing. I guess I speak for a lot of others when I ask, why do you always plump for the criticism? Perhaps Armstrong’s success at less than half the potential price ramps up the spotlight!

PB is as welcome to his opinion as you are, and in the same way I am. Nobody has convinced me that this signing is a complete "blunder" (Mercer Jan 2019) or has ended up costing us an "obscene" (Blueboy Jan 2019) amount of money. Without going over this AGAIN in detail, I am still firmly in the camp that his wages mean more was available for the fee (Waggott September 2018), it is highly structured, appearance and performance related (many news reports since). I actually said "I think HE WILL" which I don't think you could compare to trying to get people to vote for something that is the equivalent of trying to take an egg out of an omelette (Brexit). Whilst you talk a lot of sense about politics, the notion you saw the impact travis would've had on our midfield before his inclusion is ridiculous 47er. If you listened to Mulgrews interview on RL other day, he couldn't quite believe it either - and he has trained with him for how long? I also think its fairly ignorant to forget Travis benefitted from being used in his preferred position and given consistent starts. When has Ben had this? Your fear about him being a waste of money (5 months into his Rovers career, 1 league start) is related to the fee and not the player in my view. Hence Grabbi and Davies get a mention. I shudder to think what either of them would've cost now - you're talking in the top transfer fees for the Era - particularly with Davies. You know, that season (98/99) - I could only find Dwight Yorke and Jaap Stam who cost a lot more than Davies deal, yet a (future England and current Premier league) manager at that time saw fit to give Southampton that figure AND James Beattie... A fantastic example of poor business. Comparing that to now - the expectation should decrease with what you get for the fee. Of course it was bit of a surprise for us to outlay so much on returning to the championship, but look at the cost of an average championship player these days. Quotes from Mowbray yesterday are prime examples of what is going on, however why not use the other striker we signed last summer? Question marks against Armstrong's ("lazy little tosser" Blue Boy Oct 2018) ability to cope in the championship made him 1.5m rising to 3m - looking at him now, if he sustains his form... Would you accept 7m for him? No thanks OH and I forgot to answer the question about needing a backup striker, I agree we need another hold up/wily style forward like Graham as he is getting on a bit. That said, I think we have shown recently we can play 442, and even if Graham is injured for a long time - we've got a mixture of Dack, Armstrong, Nuttall, and Brereton who can play up top. Obviously, none of them can do the job that Danny can do, but that is probably why it would be a very expensive signing to get someone else who can, to sit on the bench. I have no qualms with waiting till the summer to find a better fit, and I guess it comes down to trusting the managers judgement too - he hasn't got much wrong in my book.

Amen to that at least. It won’t be though because it’s the perfect reason to up expectation with him. Its even more ridiculous when people are comparing 7m signings in the late 90s and early 2000s with now. I think a few u23s games would do him good too - but I also think he needs to keep training and learning with the first team squad, I was against loaning him out for that reason.

Travis would’ve never been seen as an undroppable centre midfielder at the end of December. 5 games later people are suggesting he is undroppable. You’ve suggested what we’ve got so far is what we will get with Ben and I can’t agree. I think he wil improve with time, patience and support.

I have the same doubts but it’s not time to say “he’s garbage” or “a waste of money”. I also don’t recall PB saying he doesn’t think he will make the grade either. I also watched the same game. You couldn’t single him out as someone not showing effort or desire from what I saw. He doesn’t look confident or exactly sure his role, but that’s a bit different to the lazy/attitude problem you just suggested. Im not sure why you’d pick that to disagree with either? Am I to assume that you think we should’ve completely blown the wage budget and the fact we aren’t spending any more is “unambitious?”

Travis has had a fantastic 6 weeks and moved his stock forward greatly. I don’t think that’s beyond any of our young players yet you and others will gladly write someone off who hasn’t! Not for me.

No, but I’m not the one suggesting it’s wasted when the 19 year lad hasn’t even started two games in a row yet. The only thing ridiculous is that!

You’re judging a 19 player by a handful of starts/sub appearances. When you’ve stopped doing that I will be waiting to have a more sensible discussion. Inferiority complex much? Social media society is as fickle as it gets, why would football fans be any different; Case in point. 47er expects and thinks a 7m signing is entitled to be a world beater. If he doesn’t do it right away, he’s a shyte/obscene waste of money.

All that would be great JHR if he hadn’t actually said we couldn’t afford the players we wanted!

You’ve seen him come off the bench for a handful of appearances and that’s it? 19 year old not worth it, sack him? Thank Christ you aren’t involved in our academy. I know that figure is the perfect excuse to expect another Rhodes - but the reality is completely different. Football has moved on even in that time. I actually thought you talked a lot of sense about football but your take on Brereton and our transfer business is so transparent that I am embarrassed for you. (@Paul Mellelieu will be ripping his own hair out)

Different gamble between a structured deal for a 19 year old and trying to take Boro’s record signing and fitting him into our wage structure. You know that, I know that. Try again. We also both know there would be no Brereton if the club or recruitment showed (as many are saying) no ambition at all. I personally think writing BB off at this point is almost as stupid as Revidges anti-Graham tirades, but that’s just me.

A sense of entitlement - if you don’t get what you want you complain. The problem is the expectancy is ridiculous too - just read through the thread. There are an embarrassing amount of short sighted comments - many in frustration to not signing a player who cost twice what our record signing was, and probably earns more than Dack and Mulgrew combined. I find someone who constantly complains about Graham/Bennett extremely odd since we are at it. As pointless as ever. Precisely - I mean such a lack of ambition to go spend a big chunk of our turnover and invest money on our squad eh? Reality is though Blueboy - if you’ve decided already that money is wasted, bloated or as you call it “obscene” ( a few rising to 7m in 2019!!), then I suggest your expectations of a 19 year old lad with 1 league start are misguided. Bit different for you though, because Brereton is the stone you grind your “I never rated Tony” axe with. Flex round that. See that makes little sense Tom. You’re talking about this being our main way into new ownership, yet the only way we could spend such figures is by borrowing our current incumbents money! That’s more reason for them to keep us from certain perspectives. To give some scope too, playing staff total wages at the minute (approx) are less than 250k a week. Villa, Stoke, and WBA are nearer to 1m a week. Youre advocating an attempt this season via gambling transfer fees and wages but then suggesting if we stay in this league we lose our better players. What do you think stacking up wages will do to that process if you aren’t one of the 3 promoted (from how many challenging)? Accelerate it. If you can only see the pro’s of that, and not the potential cons - May I suggest you look at rovers business post relegation and then the eye watering figures we ended up losing (or owe the owners). Being FORCED to sell really does change your options!

I harbour plenty of hope for promotion, the difference is I don’t think gambling is necessary at this point. As others will point out - a large group of posters seem completely oblivious to the other side of the coin. Only 3 teams go up, no need to go over the result of parachute payments running out in this league, we should all remember that. The irony is, many of these posters are advocating the club drops its prices, or takes a hit to get more fans in the ground. “Give me more, and charge me less”. Nah, not even a slight bit over entitled.

I agree. Others won’t though, your narrative doesn’t suit a vision of an unambitous club and manager who cannot recruit. How others can say that in the face of us reportedly spending 10m+ in our return to the championship and developing a competitive squad that’s not doing to badly in the league.. beyond me. Sorry @K-Hod - I’m not quoting them all, but this thread is an embarrassing example of the over entitlement of modern football support!

Out means out!

You’ve never made sense.

You mean like clubs did to us for Cairney, Hanley, Duffy etc....! Spot on.

I’ve no qualms with the idea about momentum and striking whilst we’ve got a good squad - but you’re mistaking (what I would describe as) a more realistic ambition for accepting mediocrity! Where have I heard that before? As I said to Miller, most competive league in the world potentially, 12 teams minimum all still in a position to strike top six, all ambition to get the big money of the prem. That drives cost, wages, fees up. If we broke the wage bill for someone and failed to go up - then you see the assets sold off to pay bills. Remember before? For me, develop and add potential each window and improve the ones we have. On that, I’m not getting out my pram if we don’t buy anyone. You can though, it’s quite hilarious. As for Norwich and Southampton - What point does that make? Norwich hardly spent a penny and went up second in the league under Lambert and with Grant Holt upfront... I seem to recall Henri Lansbury (a loan) was key. Southampton sold Bale, Oxlade Chamberlain and a host of others at that time - players they developed and sold for big profits funded their improvements and kept them in the prem.