All Activity

The idea is to get the club running on its off its own back with minimal input from the owners, even if that means league one or league two. By championship standards there wasn’t a high wage ‘mess’, but the owners no longer want to fund the club at this level like all other non-parachute owners need to. So yes the plan is different in that we appear to want to cut salaries to even lower levels that we have operated at for the last 15 years.

It will work in reducing the wage bill. It wont help from a footballing perspective. Nothing has changed in terms of being able to sort out contracts. And I suspect you know that, even if you have now been trying to claim that Ismael just was happy to let them go anyway.

I've no idea if it's for the better, I'm just saying it as it is. it's you that keeps insisting nothing has changed , when you'd have to be blind not to see it's completely different. In their eyes, they're cleaning up the short term/high wage, low profit mess they inherited. Good idea if it works.

The quote from Rhodes in this article (also pasted below) seems to indicate that whilst the priority is preparing them for first team football with Rovers, they will also be looking to prepare them for first team football elsewhere if it won't happen here. "Ultimately, that's what the staff's there to do; to facilitate those players and give them the best opportunity to be able to thrive for the first team ideally, but ultimately for their development and what makes them be the player that they can become."

Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers- Learning To Fly

That reminds me of a private school I worked at briefly. The PE teacher wanted to introduce rhythmic gymnastics and asked if she could buy Infian clubs. Yes, said the Head, you can have one.' "One pair?" she said. ' No, one club,' he said in all seriousness. 'Two would cost too much.' '

There is no way that he was happy to get rid of all of those players. Certainly if he has even a shred of competence. They are more than capable of signing players yes on really cheap wages from abroad. But again, we move away from the pattern. No one is signing contracts. Its not the odd player who has outgrown us or the odd one we want or are happy to discard. Its beyond that. You speak as if the club hae changed for the better.

Gueye is worse than Gallagher although I am not sure why he gets a mention. I would be pleased if I never saw Gueye in a Rovers shirt again because he weakens the team so much when he plays. Thats all my point was. I do sort of get the logic especially if its only a loan offer to keep temporarily due again to lack of recruitment but even if he stays I hope he isnt ever needed. Sort of get the point about potentially being short but its not comparable to losing Hyam who not only was a key player but we are genuinely ridicilously short in that position without him.

It isn't unable, they're more than capable of signing players as they've proved this summer , it's being unwilling. Something else you always dismiss is just how determined the manager is to keep certain players. Britain he definitely wanted, Travis I don't think he was that bothered , and Hyam they received an offer too good to turn down(understandable but timing terrible). Just because you'd keep them doesn't mean they fit the manager's plans.

Genuine question because I dont know, but would that be part of Rhodes' remit? If we've decided we're not keeping them on, is it our job to fix them up with a new Club? Sounds callous I know. They'd have been Ok if good old Uncle Tone was still here. He'd have kept them all on until they were 35.

You are just making figures up to defend the club. A club that cant get any of its current first team players to sign over such an extended period, that pattern suggests a huge problem and has massively undermined the whole summer as many expected it to do. We dont have time to wait for the potential replacement for our captain if hes out for ages. Travis was a box to box midfielder and a bloody effective one at this level. Lets not pretend his departure was part of a tactical overhaul.

I must be in a minority of one but I didn't think Radford was all that bad. Obviously well past his best by the time he joined us but you could see his quality in flashes.

I know what we received Rev. The transfer budget was £5m as said during the Fans Forum minutes yet we spent more and another £5m so did reinvest some money from sales. I have already discussed the Hyam situation and the lack of replacement. did you my posts?

So you dont even acknowledge we sold £12.7m worth of players? Just because Gestede said in the car crash interviews that sales made no difference to the transfer budget, it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. You're treating it as the done thing because the Club via the 3 stooges said at one point it was the way things happened here. Vi also said after a certain point in the window that anyone going out would be replaced. Where's Hyam's replacement?

We had such a good window Chaddy that you changed your prediction of top 6 to ‘midtable’.

I'm not twisting anything, I used what we know and we know the transfer budget was £5m and we spend near double that around £10m

Don't be silly. Anyone's better than nothing. Even Gallagher. A rare outbreak of common sense from the Regime if true although they've probably just been looking at the cost of free agents and had a nasty shock. Pity they didn't experience a similar moment of clarity before Hyam was sold.

We couldn't agree new contracts with certain players but if we can't match their demands then we have to sell them. So we should break our wage budget to keep them then? So we should pay 30k a week if that is what they demand? yet you have no patience to wait and see what the actual situation is, cos you are already judging the player. We want a more box to box midfielder next to Tronstad now which is very different to the way we were playing last season. Yes we will miss All 6 in some ways, others more than others but Rovers must carry on.

You're twisting words there to make it sound impressive. If we'd spent £5m on players and not sold anyone then that would have been spending a £5m transfer budget on players. We're probably around £2.5m in profit from this summer's dealings having sold Hyam.

It’s so frustrating we sell Wharton for whatever he sold him for in total (18+m) sammie (8m+) and others yet our budget is only 5m for the summer more frustrating that clubs like Wrexham go out and buy proven championship players yet we use our piltry £5m on unknowns which is a complete gamble poor poor poor all round

Its not the same and you know it. You are purposely avoiding the fact that we have become totally unable to get current first team players to sign new deals. The only one in two years was Ribeiro who initially signed on a strange short term deal and then extended it. Its not normal. If you think that what we have seen suggests that contractual issues have been left in the past and we have learnt our lessons, then I suspect that you are in a very small minority.

That's poor even by your standards chaddy. We've replaced our Captain and the heartbeat of the team with someone who we dont seem to have any idea when he'll be fit. We could be down before he's fit for action or at least before he's properly match fit. If we'd signed a suitable replacement for Travis and then this guy had come in in addition as a relatively low cost gamble that would have been fine.

The original transfer budget was £5m as per the Rovers fans forum minutes. Yet we reinvested around 4-5m on top of them from players sales. I said last week Rev this very point.

That's not really a fair comparison as the two were starting from two completely different levels. VI inherited a squad that finished 7th then instead of building on that, him and the regime CHOSE to completely dismantle the squad. Eustace inherited a squad that narrowly avoided relegation but Id still expect Derby to finish comfortably above us. Along with about 21 other teams. I predicted us to finish 22nd at the start of the season and I've not seen much to change my mind yet.

Yes hes only happy with these circumstances until he gets a better offer which is if he surprisingly manages to succeed with the awful level of risk hes been given. Even if we luck out with the signings he will still want to move somewhere there is investment. With the way we treat the managers its either tails we lose (they do badly and we're stuck with them) tails you win (they do well but with an enhanced reputation they jump ship at first opportunity). Weve had two of the latter with JDT and Eustace. With Ismael it could go either way. But what it absolutely cant lead to is him and the players doing well and us keeping them. Sad face.