Hope the chances of that are zero. A few hundred k would be a joke, and we will get more than that for him in the summer. As I keep having to remind people, we will be eligible for compensation unless he moves abroad.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2025/january/31/jake-joins-tranmere-on-loan/ Garrett in a shitty loan to shitty Tranmere, struggling in the League Two relegation zone.

Although the bigger the leaving package, the less we free up.

Nothing like when he assisted the opener last night?

Who is Frank Vare? First time I've noticed the name was on the bench against PNE. Another 16 year old, attacking mid apparently...promising? (Incidentally I believe the manager said we had three 16 year olds on the bench, but we appear to have had two, him and Dunn...next youngest was 18 year old Atcheson)

We haven't exactly shown we are good at renewing contracts since GB left.

I expect if the rules were different, and you could play for more than 2 clubs in a season, Garrett would have been loaned out tomorrow instead, and probably would have been named on this bench and other benches prior, potentially with some sub appearances. I really do think the 2 club rule is fucking stupid. At the least, loans shouldn't be counted in it. It discourages development of young players.

From what I've seen and heard, he and Markanday are probably the best finishers the club has. Yet neither provides enough all-round game to be a regular. Arguably both should have been tried more centrally...tbh I'd say further up than a 10 as I'm not sure they're creators. Not as traditional 9s either, as they've little in the way of hold up.

I think it just meant we happened to sign him today and the club know the fans are desperate for signings.

I don't know if you were mentioning him in relation to pace, but Pedersen wasn't quick at all. He knew where to be though in ways some of our current crop simply don't.

Think this is a fucking stupid loan tbh.

Only just seen it's that short, that's a fucking joke tbh. We will have to start renegotiating terms inside a year. Paying over what we wanted is all the more reason to ensure the asset is actually secure. If we're not willing to give at least a 3.5 year deal we shouldn't pay over our valuation anyway. The rumours about this deal length came out a couple of days ago I think, and said the player's agent didn't want to give more than 2.5 years but we wanted 3.5 years. The player had been reported as keen to join, so we definitely should've told his agent to swivel.

And Szmodics' sale paid for the lot of them. With possible transfer interest in Brittain pending to make more profit. You can't just cherry pick the best signings of the new era to sit against the worst signings of the last era. I made it a fairer comparison.

I don't think there's much between it. Brittain, Hyam, Szmodics, or Gueye, Ohashi, Cantwell? Meh. But again the point is more about what we have now vs then, not in the summer vs then. Park was Chief Scout, not DoF, and Gestede has shown a concerning inability to get contracts done.

The point isn't that it's rocket science to keep players secured on contracts. The point is that the people who have replaced Broughton aren't even capable of that. As for holding back a third of available funds, the regime have shown they wanted to hold back more like 90% of available funds. So not only is a third considerably better than that plan, but it's very likely it was suggested as a compromise since he will have been aware they wanted to do dick all with it. Again, the point is not that GB was brilliant, but that what has followed him, in terms of personnel and planning, is demonstrably worse.

That entire list actually cost very little in the end tbf. Wahlstedt, Telalovic and Ennis were sold on for similar fees and a profit respectively, probably more or less covering the O'Riordan fee. Hirst and Fleck were short term deals with no transfer fee. Essentially they all together cost just wages and signing fees. They were certainly a waste of those, but if just one had worked out it'd have been worth the relatively low expenditure. Telalovic is showing we might have been hasty with him.

Using Kent Exile's link from the previous page where Barrow fans were happy with Duru, it paints a different picture now (the link is for Duru as a keyword search on their forum, so it's got fresh posts). Comments now include: 'Duru found it tougher against fast technical opponents, he’s always going to look good when we are on the front foot but struggled when out and out defending was needed. ' 'For me Duru was found wanting tonight defensively. To many times he was the wrong side of the attacking player and it was no surprise when he got subbed. He is young and raw and has undoubted talent but the defensive side of his game needs some work IMO.' Early days though. And he needs these learning experiences.

Why spend actual money when our mob have figured out how to convince the fans they've tried without spending a penny?

These two? They both got it from Africa Foot and provide a link to it. https://sportwitness.co.uk/player-arrives-in-england-to-join-blackburn-rovers-agreement-is-in-place-for-signing/ https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/blackburn-rovers-agree-deal-for-25-year-old-forward-transfer/

No need to compromise, I think we can go with 'cretinous conmen'.

Dunno but this transfer window isn't a Thriller for us. It's getting late in the day and we really Wanna Be Starting Something by now, apparently we've made enquiries but been told to Beat It. Rovers, The Way You Make Me Feel with all this really hurts, but I Just Can't Stop Loving You.

I believe that's about 6.5% of all the league goals he has scored in his career. Or about 9% of his Championship goals. We should've signed him if only to stop him doing that to us...

Wasn't surprised at all when he notched, always seems to score against us. Wanted us to sign him way back when to replace Rhodes!