2025 Summer Transfer Thread. 😂

[Browjd]

"At the time of writing, Dion De Neve is the only player contracted until 2028."

Simply astonishing...

[roversfan99]

12 minutes ago, DutchRover said:

The wage bill staying the same is a 25% cut in real terms over the last 5 years, which means we cannot compete on wages.

Women's team cut, maintenance budgets gutted, fan engagement funds cut, coaching staff budgets cut, transfer budget cut.

Only budget that hasn't been cut is the directors wages for Waggot, Suhail etc al. That's increased exponentially to the 3rd highest in the league despite the 3rd worst revenue.

I suspect that Venkys pay more in wages than Jack Walker did if you totally discount inflation and assume that the value of money never changes.

[K-Hod]

49 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Cut what costs? 

 

Surely, you're taking the piss with this comment?

[Tomphil2]

17 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Seems like an attempt to make it look like we are being proactive.

It says we still havent even offered Travis a deal. Seemingly Tronstad too. These had to be sorted before the summer where we have already got enough work to do without the huge variable of not knowing if key players will be here beyond the summer. But even know, it doesnt seem to have to have gone beyond merely talks with representatives.

Travis made comments 6 months ago about not being offered anything but was quite relaxed about it, meaning iv'e got my agent exploring other options.

The club purposely create these situations it's one of the oldest tricks in the book and a gentle nudge towards a potential incoming transfer fee. If no serious bid comes in they say ok here's the same or less terms to stay here but by this time the agent has convinced his player there'll be a deal to be had somewhere on a free with a signing on fee and maybe a loyalty bonuses owed from Rovers.

So sit out your contract and here we are again.

 

[Torgeir]

Ok, putting my head in the chopping blocks here:

I think we can part with Travis if we get £3m or more for him. We'll then have to reinvest that money smartly on a new midfielder that can slot straight into Travs position.

He had a great season last year but I don't think he's irreplacable and his stock has never been higher at 27. 

[MarkBRFC]

2 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Ok, putting my head in the chopping blocks here:

I think we can part with Travis if we get £3m or more for him. We'll then have to reinvest that money smartly on a new midfielder that can slot straight into Travs position.

He had a great season last year but I don't think he's irreplacable and his stock has never been higher at 27. 

At a normal club this would be quote plausible.

It just doesn't happen here though, as history shows.

There is absolutely no point in this club selling a player ever again.

[chaddyrovers]

27 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

You genuinely dont think that the owners have been on a mission to cut costs for a number of years?

Also, I dont think you understand the concept of the time value of money. 

My question was a simple one. Yet again you can't answer it. Wonder why?.

Yes Rovers have cut certain things like staff in roles where IT can do it easier or closing the club shop on Monday or axing the Women's team

I understand money and finances fine thanks RF99. No need to be so condescending again!

27 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

My stance is that I dont know if they are aligned. They will say they are publically either way , I am not saying that they arent. Im saying that its early days and unless something drastically changes then Ismael will get pissed off in time too like the previous managers.

Do you have any evidence or info that they arent aligned? 

First signing in, fits the profile he wants. Etc. 

[chaddyrovers]

14 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Surely, you're taking the piss with this comment?

RF99 has mentioned several times but never go into the fine detail. I did in my reply

[47er]

1 minute ago, MarkBRFC said:

There is absolutely no point in this club selling a player ever again.

from our point of view---which doesn't count.

[47er]

17 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Surely, you're taking the piss with this comment?

Chaddy still doesn't know what "in real terms" means.

I've done my best!

[Browjd]

10 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Ok, putting my head in the chopping blocks here:

I think we can part with Travis if we get £3m or more for him. We'll then have to reinvest that money smartly on a new midfielder that can slot straight into Travs position.

He had a great season last year but I don't think he's irreplacable and his stock has never been higher at 27. 

No, no, no. Money from transfers is not reinvested into the team - there is no point accepting any transfer money. 

[chaddyrovers]

33 minutes ago, DutchRover said:

The wage bill staying the same is a 25% cut in real terms over the last 5 years, which means we cannot compete on wages.

Women's team cut, maintenance budgets gutted, fan engagement funds cut, coaching staff budgets cut, transfer budget cut.

Only budget that hasn't been cut is the directors wages for Waggot, Suhail etc al. That's increased exponentially to the 3rd highest in the league despite the 3rd worst revenue.

I agree wages aren't increasing at Rovers. The wage budget is the same roughly that's was my point. Agreed on maintenance budget..

Don't agree on coaching staff cut. 

We never been big spend on transfer budget. About £4-5m last season. Sales money should have been invested more. 

Commercial revenue increase. 

Pasha isn't a Rovers director either

 

[Old Codger]

14 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Ok, putting my head in the chopping blocks here:

I think we can part with Travis if we get £3m or more for him. We'll then have to reinvest that money smartly on a new midfielder that can slot straight into Travs position.

He had a great season last year but I don't think he's irreplacable and his stock has never been higher at 27. 

And I'm happy to weild the axe - Torgs, don't you get it, there is not an ice-cube in hell's chance that ANY money generated from player sales (Trav or anyone else) will be 're-invested' in replacement playing staff. It simply doesn't happen at this club anymore. 

The money from player sales goes into a black hole, never to be seen again. End of.

Meanwhile, on the pitch, we get closer and closer to a return to training on Pleasington with the rest of the Sunday league crowd and dog shit, with players of the capability and outlook that fit that model.

Cop on, mate 😉

VENIAL VACANT VEXATIOUS VACUOUS VENKYS OUT! 

[Mercer]

6 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Do you have any evidence or info that they arent aligned? 

First signing in, fits the profile he wants. Etc. 

Think you live in a world of fantasy and make belief.

If pre season unfolds as most on here expect, there won't be cracks appearing between Gestede and Ismail but one feckin great chasm.

If Ismail is 'delighted' with the quality of De Neve then God help us.  IMO, a weak, desperate signing who in comparison makes Matty Holmes an early version of Yamal!!! 

I think the general consensus is we are fecked as a credible and progressive football club.  When this eventually dawns on you I think you will be left hugely disappointed with one almighty headache.

[Torgeir]

Yes, I'm aware we don't reinvest so based on that I agree with the majority in here. My suggestion was only in a scenario where we reinvest most, if not all of, the transfer fee received for young Trav.

[roversfan99]

28 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Ok, putting my head in the chopping blocks here:

I think we can part with Travis if we get £3m or more for him. We'll then have to reinvest that money smartly on a new midfielder that can slot straight into Travs position.

He had a great season last year but I don't think he's irreplacable and his stock has never been higher at 27. 

He is irreplacable here because not only is he a really good Championship midfielder, but hes also our captain and a leader.

And of course, if/when he goes he wont be replaced adequately. Its telling that even now, he doesnt have an actual contract offer on the table. Its because he will want (and deserves) competitive Championship wages.

[Neal]

Travis replacement?

 

https://sportwitness.co.uk/blackburn-rovers-and-oxford-united-tussle-for-brian-de-keersmaecker/

[Tugayisgod]

https://t.co/FmX5BJ32JT

[roversfan99]

27 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

My question was a simple one. Yet again you can't answer it. Wonder why?.

Yes Rovers have cut certain things like staff in roles where IT can do it easier or closing the club shop on Monday or axing the Women's team

I understand money and finances fine thanks RF99. No need to be so condescending again!

Do you have any evidence or info that they arent aligned? 

First signing in, fits the profile he wants. Etc. 

I have never one said that they arent aligned.

Im also not naive enough to assume that they are aligned or more importantly seeing as hes just stepped into his first window in the circus, that they will remain aligned once the usual things start repeating themselves. This early, Tomasson and Eustace would have felt aligned. Its when players are sold, contracts arent sorted, sub par and unwanted players are brought in and money vanishes that the alignment is well and truly a thing of fiction.

[chaddyrovers]

3 minutes ago, Neal said:

Travis replacement?

 

https://sportwitness.co.uk/blackburn-rovers-and-oxford-united-tussle-for-brian-de-keersmaecker/

Or it could be Forshaw's replacement? 

We want a midfielder signing anyway and Rovers have held talks with Tronstad and Travis now over new contract 

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

I have never one said that they arent aligned.

Im also not naive enough to assume that they are aligned or more importantly seeing as hes just stepped into his first window in the circus, that they will remain aligned once the usual things start repeating themselves. This early, Tomasson and Eustace would have felt aligned. Its when players are sold, contracts arent sorted, sub par and unwanted players are brought in and money vanishes that the alignment is well and truly a thing of fiction.

My question was a simple one, yet you don't answer it but go around in circles. 

I will take it as a no to my very simple question 

[Tugayisgod]

7 minutes ago, Neal said:

Travis replacement?

 

https://sportwitness.co.uk/blackburn-rovers-and-oxford-united-tussle-for-brian-de-keersmaecker/

Even if Travis and Tronstad stay , going to need cover and competition in that area surely?

Can't think of anyone else really in the squad that can adequately cover for those two

 

[RevidgeBlue]

31 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Ok, putting my head in the chopping blocks here:

I think we can part with Travis if we get £3m or more for him. We'll then have to reinvest that money smartly on a new midfielder that can slot straight into Travs position.

He had a great season last year but I don't think he's irreplacable and his stock has never been higher at 27. 

Couldn't disagree more with the above.

If we were getting £6m or £7m for Travis then you might be able to make out a viable case for selling him. (That's assuming the funds were being reinvested in his replacement).

At up to £3m however there's no way you're going to be able to replace him with anything like the same experience and quality. He's the heartbeat of the side as we saw this last season.  As soon as he got injured results fell off a cliff and it was effectively season over.

All selling him at this stage does, scrapes together a bit of beer money to pay one or two bills and rips the heart and soul out of the team.

 

[RevidgeBlue]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

We want a midfielder signing anyway and Rovers have held talks with Tronstad and Travis now over new contract 

Have we, where has it said that?

Even if we have, means nothing unless they sign.

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, davulsukur said:

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25234748.blackburn-rovers-hold-talks-resolve-star-players-futures/

Looks like we are finally  waking up with regards to Travis and Tronstads contracts.

The article however, certainly feels like its written to soften the blow of Travis departure. 

I suspect the club will try and cash in on him, whilst he still has some value to cover some the financial hole they have created. 

The question has to be asked again, what the actual fuck do they get out of owning this club?

[alex l]

8 minutes ago, Tugayisgod said:

Even if Travis and Tronstad stay , going to need cover and competition in that area surely?

Can't think of anyone else really in the squad that can adequately cover for those two

 

 Need a midfielder who knows the club and people? After saving a couple of months' wages, Forshaw we do...welcome back Adam.