Eddie

I would guess that our offer 2-2 1/2 years ago wasn't lower than he was worth at the time. He was only just breaking into the first team. It's a big hypothetical on the 15,000. As is the guess that we only offered 6,000 and that he was already making 2,000. But, sure, we can come up with numbers that somewhat justify the decision to actively earn less for over 2 years. But you would have to go hard to convince me that he wouldn't be better off on a higher sum here, with one year left on a deal, established in a decent Championship club, and positioning himself for either a move this summer (seemingly there wouldn't be demand) or moving on a free in 12 months after he had really built a reputation. This isn't even factoring in the possibility that he could have had a serious injury at any point in the last 2 seasons and significantly reduced his future earning potential. Players should almost always take the contract 2/3 years before their current deal runs out as they still maintain all of the power to demand a new one or manufacture a move. It's why our inability to get players to sign new deals 2/3 years out is such a strong indicator of how poorly run the club is.

To the final part, yes, but he is still only getting his low salary that he signed up for years ago. As for the part about not accepting the contract two years ago, it is difficult to justify. Let's use your figures and say that it was a 4,000 a week raise, that's a difference of over 100,000 pounds over the 2 1/2ish years since that offer was rumoured to be on the table. There's also a solid chance that he is currently on less than 2,000 a week and that his new offer was more than 6,000. Now, in the world of football, it's easy to turn your nose up at 'just' 100,000 more. But based on what Dolan is earning at the moment, that's a huge difference in income. We also assume that his current salary is irrelevant for any future contract negotiations, but there's a chance that he's now receiving offers where the interested club says, 'we know you are only on 2,000 a week now, so 10,000 a week is a huge raise and a fair offer'. He was dumb not to take a higher offer before, and he has put himself in a weaker position as a result.

I think it is difficult to look at how this has unfolded so far and not think that Dolan and his agent have misplayed this situation. Should he have received our most recent contract offers - if there even were any? Probably not. Should he have accepted better terms that were definitely offered to him under Broughton? Yes. He's missed out on 2+ years of higher earning and is now 2+ weeks into receiving no salary. He would absolutely have benefited from another season in a stable environemnt as a guaranteed starter. He's probably now finding out just how small his current reputation is and that he didn't have the types of offers he was hoping for. I'm sure he will end up at a decent Championship club, but it will be a lateral move that will delay any bigger steps by a year or two.

Nothing wrong with the signing, it just hasn't worked out. The problem with O'Riordan is the fact that he was signed during a period when other signings were failed to be completed and that he was signed in a position where we've also failed to strengthen.

Huh?

I think there is a formula to be followed in targeting either European or lower league players with great physical attributes and hoping that they can make the step up or thrive at a higher level. It's not dissimilar to what Wenger did at Arsenal for years. There are few known quanitities in the Championship who would excite me at 5 million or above.

I think we are still waiting on Ronaldinho to decide.

I think he was referring to all of the free agents that would be leaving Rovers...

I think Ismael showed enough at the back-end of the season to believe that he has a clear sense of style and structure and the players are relatively bought in. We've lost a couple of important players, but we have still kept the core part of most of our team and can expect some improvement from some of them (I think a season of Toth will be worth a 6-9 point improvement over a season with Pears). I do think we will add some more players and basically end up with a squad that is of a similar quality to last year. I don't think the Championship is particularly strong. Birmingham and Wrexham are better-than-usual promoted sides, but the three sides that are dropping down are weaker than normal. I don't think we will be in the playoffs, but I'd be less surprised by a playoff appearance than I would be by relegation.

I'd be very surprised if we were relegated or even involved in a relegation battle at any stage this season.

So, we've just gone from 8 to 5? One of those is a youth player who we can't expect to feature too heavily. One is an older player who is probably in the squad more for his experience than anything else (and, again, hopefully won't feature too heavily). Even an optimistic view of the non-Travis or Tronstad options would see that we need another central midfielder.

Yeah, I get that and mentioned it in my post. But we need a MUCH larger squad. We need strength in depth in virtually every position, and I will not complain about any signing that is made. Yes, and we dropped out of the playoff places when they got injured. There's a solid chance that they be injured or suspended for a decent percentage of the upcoming season. We need more cover in central midifeld. Who are these 8 that we would consider real first team players? And are you throwing someone like Buckley in? Who is typically played further up the pitch? 'CM' can be a pretty broad category, but I don't think we have many viable options for players who can sit in front of the back four, break up play, turn, and get the ball moving forward.

This messageboard sometimes confuses me. Most of the second half of last season: 'We don't have enough midfield options and injuries to Travis and Tronstad derailed our season' This offseason 'We've already signed one extra CM, I don't understand why we would sign another unless either Travis or Tronstad are leaving.' I have little faith our club to build out a complete squad, but we definitely need more central midfield options and I'd be delighted to see another one signed without anyone else leaving.

I think this is stage 2. 18 months ago we were offering contracts. They were to players we knew would leave or deals that were representative of their true market value, but we were at least holding talks and putting a contract on the table. I believe Broughton on that front. Now we are openly avoiding negotiations. In Travis and Tronstad we have two players who have publicly stated that they would like to stay and that they've yet to hear anything. That's insane. Does their willingness to stay guarantee a deal? No. But it does mean that talks should have been held.

Wharton, although injuries are a slight concern, and that could easily change within 12 months. But, they're being sold for similar prices at a similar point in their careers. We're also talking about two players who were sold/being sold at 19 years old, so there are many unknowns and many possibilities for either one to surpass their current potential or never fulfill it. We could run through lists as long as our arms of players at 19/20 who were expected to be world class and never got close. We could also come up with long lists of players at 19/20 who were never expected to be particularly special and who went on to amazing careers. I'd be very happy with either one.

Yes, and Bellingham signed for Sunderland for a reported 2 million 6 months before Wharton left us. So...what's your point? He's just been promoted to the Premier League, he's the brother of one of the world's most famous current footballers, and he's played twice as many matches for Sunderland (his second club) as Wharton played for us. I don't think his transfer proves the point that you think it does.

His ultimate issue is his lack of pace. His style of play would require him to be significantly quicker if he were to be an impactful player at a higher level. He looks like he should be quick, but he just isn't. Stronger, faster, smarter defenders will have him in their back pocket. He could definitely join a more ambitious club in the Championship and find his way in the Premier League through promotion, or get a taste of European football by going to Rangers or Celtic, but if a Premier League team signs him, they will be making a mistake.

I'm not sure if a comparison to Casemiro this season is all that flattering.

Very strong chance that it will be worse than Danny Batth last year. Decent chance that he will be on par with whatever Danny Batth produces next year.

'Time takes everybody out, time is undefeated.'

I won't be overly critical of the club for hesitating to extend the contract of a player who will be 35 in September. That will go wrong more often than it goes right. Of all of the contract resignings we have messed up, the likes of Batth, Weimann, and a few others are at least understandable.

80% of the posters on here know who we signed, how much we spent on them, who we sold, and how much we sold them for. We don't need a transfer ombudsman to provide 'facts' on a regular basis. As for your other two points, great. Then stop undermining them by defending the club (whether you intend to or not) over how much has been spent and who has been signed. They have totally failed us when it has come to transfer dealings. Not only in terms of quality of signings, but, more improtantly, in terms of amount invested. Now please, for the love of God, stop defending that in this thread. No one wants it. No one needs to know it. It doesn't need to be mentioned again. The club must IMPROVE.

Stop this. Please. You get some unnecessary flak on this messageboard, but defending the transfer spending is just idiotic. It undoes any valid points you might make on other topics as it makes you seem like a complete and utter stooge. We have spent a tiny fraction of transfer incomings on new signings. Well below what anyone would consider to be the normal fiscally responsible limit and well under what would be part of a normal club that was aiming for realistic sustainability. So, please, stop it. No one is denying that there were new signings, but they were signed using a small percentage of fees that were brought in. We have consistently had an incredibly low net spend. Defending it is particularly stupid as we are missing a wonderful opportunity to invest in the playing squad without going over FFP limits. Just stop it.

He's definitely on his way out of Montpellier and has been heavily linked with moves to Italy and the Championship (Leeds, Sunderland). Valued at around €3 million (he only signed for Montpellier 18 months ago for a fee in that region), that seems like an awfully big chunk of money to spend on a central defender if our budget is similar to years past. He's quite decent on the ball for a central defender. A big physical presence. We've been missing that type of player at the back for a while and he also offers a useful goalscoring threat from set pieces. He'd be a good signing, but not sure it's an absolute priority when our budget doesn't stretch very far.

Cherki has been threatening to play for Algeria, so he rather forced France's hand into playing him in a competitive match to lock him in (even though it was likely an empty threat).