2025 Summer Transfer Thread. 😂

[Theaxe15]

19 minutes ago, neophox said:

Get Mumba bumba in!!

Do Rovers have you doing the paperwork? Is that why there’s always wrong names on there?

[lraC]

2 minutes ago, paullarrygher said:

I mean the most insane element of it is that at the same time touting a player trading model like Brentford/Brighton, Suhail states that he has never asked the owners about reinvesting transfer funds when players are sold. 

Totally crazy and two in their right mind accepts that?

It is like a store selling all of their stock and not buying any to replace it, so just let the place fizzle out and go bump. 

[J*B]

3 minutes ago, KentExile said:

true

Doesn't even have to be a minute

Seems a very odd thing not to do. Albeit would probably require us doing some paperwork, which we’re incapable of doing.

[Emerald Isle Rover]

Just now, J*B said:

Seems a very odd thing not to do. Albeit would probably require us doing some paperwork, which we’re incapable of doing.

I reckon there would be some bonus he would be due if he were to make a senior appearance as it’s the only real reason why we considered/did this already 

[RevidgeBlue]

9 minutes ago, J*B said:

I saw on Twitter someone saying that if Mafoumbi plays 1 minute of league football for us, he would qualify for a permit and we could move his ESC spot. Not sure how true that is - does anyone know? 

This has already been widely discussed on here by our 2 resident experts Wilesden Rover and KentExile and that seems to be their consensus.

We're less sure if anyone at the Club is aware of this but they should be by now if they keep tabs on this Forum.

[roversfan99]

Even if it would take 1 minute of football to put Mafoumbi on, if hes nowhere near good enough. It means taking up a space on the bench that could go to someone else who actually could contribute, it means saving a sub (and one of 3 potential windows) to potentially use him, and if there is one goal either way or if the game is level you are then prioritising registration technicalities over the game. And its a bit humiliating for him to do that and then he goes back to being in and out at under 21 level.

I wouldnt be comfortable doing that. Should just have been paid up at the start of the summer as an acceptance that we should never have signed him.

[KentExile]

10 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It is insane, without wishing to defend them maybe that batshit crazy policy was imposed to cover situations where we had the windfall sale of a particularly valuable player like Wharton or Szmodics with the thinking being the budget for the following season could be upped slightly.

It's a bit different when at least half the starting X1 are just walking out for relatively modest fees. There has at least been some acknowledgement now that we need a RW and replacements for anyone else who leaves albeit we're still waiting and anyone who comes in will probably be a lot cheaper and theoretically inferior.

It "makes sense" now that Gristedes original 5 areas has been slimed down, and a striker is "no longer wanted",   Just a RW and Travis replacement

Had Brittain/Travis not left/leaving, they wouldn't have been needing replacing, so a striker might have still been on the cards

Obviously the sane & sensible thing would have been to see that we had received some transfer income & spent some of it

But sales do not impact income for some unfathomable reason

[Hannoverover]

Josh knight (English defender) is going cheap from Hannover 96. He will probably end up at a championship club. Never seen him play but the fans liked him. New manager has a different style of play and he doesn't fit in

[KentExile]

4 minutes ago, Hannoverover said:

Josh knight (English defender) is going cheap from Hannover 96. He will probably end up at a championship club. Never seen him play but the fans liked him. New manager has a different style of play and he doesn't fit in

He did ok for Peterborough a couple of years ago, think he was in their Championship squad with Szmodics etc) cant imagine Rovers would be looking for another centre back unless they lose one (Hyam due to his contract maybe?) though

Edited 12 hours ago by KentExile

[RevidgeBlue]

11 minutes ago, paullarrygher said:

I mean the most insane element of it is that at the same time touting a player trading model like Brentford/Brighton, Suhail states that he has never asked the owners about reinvesting transfer funds when players are sold. 

Agreed.

The guys at the last FF did a sterling job of getting Suhail to reveal his true feelings and put his foot in it in general.

"Wasnt aware" Lowe had left."

"Spending doesn't guarantee success"

"The owners aim for the Club is to be "sustainable"

"Never asked the owners if there can be an arrangement to reinvest a percentage of transfer income back into the side"

"It was the owners decision to disband the women's team"

[RevidgeBlue]

9 minutes ago, KentExile said:

It "makes sense" now that Gristedes original 5 areas has been slimed down, and a striker is "no longer wanted",   Just a RW and Travis replacement

Had Brittain/Travis not left/leaving, they wouldn't have been needing replacing, so a striker might have still been on the cards

Obviously the sane & sensible thing would have been to see that we had received some transfer income & spent some of it

But sales do not impact income for some unfathomable reason

From a purely playing perspective, if we hadn't have needed to spend fees on  replacing Brittain/Travis and could therefore have brought in a striker it makes it even more ludicrous that we won't give all these players the going rate to stay in the first place.

[MarkBRFC]

44 minutes ago, neophox said:

Get Mumba bumba in!!

Does he need a ESC slot?

[Exiled_Rover]

30 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Even if it would take 1 minute of football to put Mafoumbi on, if hes nowhere near good enough. It means taking up a space on the bench that could go to someone else who actually could contribute, it means saving a sub (and one of 3 potential windows) to potentially use him, and if there is one goal either way or if the game is level you are then prioritising registration technicalities over the game. And its a bit humiliating for him to do that and then he goes back to being in and out at under 21 level.

I wouldnt be comfortable doing that. Should just have been paid up at the start of the summer as an acceptance that we should never have signed him.

We've already had M-Matthews on the bench this season...

[TheKitGuy]

37 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Even if it would take 1 minute of football to put Mafoumbi on, if hes nowhere near good enough. It means taking up a space on the bench that could go to someone else who actually could contribute, it means saving a sub (and one of 3 potential windows) to potentially use him, and if there is one goal either way or if the game is level you are then prioritising registration technicalities over the game. And its a bit humiliating for him to do that and then he goes back to being in and out at under 21 level.

I wouldnt be comfortable doing that. Should just have been paid up at the start of the summer as an acceptance that we should never have signed him.

Surely you just stick him on for 60 seconds at the end of the game regardless as it will free up the ESC slot and allow us to keep him for the u21's and then sign a senior 'foreign' player.  I wouldn't be surprised if he was promised a WP when he signed and the club just forgot.

[Tim Southampton Rover]

1 hour ago, Emerald Isle Rover said:

Signed under Eustace then loaned now a new manager never been given even efl cup game people can debate the ability all they want but the fact he was called a hotshot etc and never even given cup minutes is very very strange and now because he has that slot he is the one getting the boot…..or alternatively we could put him on 1min this sat afternoon and get the slot and keep him and loan him again 

Depends on what's in his contract. Imagine if we played him for 1 min just to free up a slot and it costs us £1m. 

At the end of the day, if he was good enough or the manager rated him, he wouldn't be leaving. He might have been called a hotshot but if he didn't prove it, not much else can really be done.

[roversfan99]

12 minutes ago, TheKitGuy said:

Surely you just stick him on for 60 seconds at the end of the game regardless as it will free up the ESC slot and allow us to keep him for the u21's and then sign a senior 'foreign' player.  I wouldn't be surprised if he was promised a WP when he signed and the club just forgot.

But then youve got to keep a sub and a sub window available, its influencing the manager when making in game decisions, and you are dropping a more suited player off the bench to give a player a few humiliating seconds purely as an administrative procedure.

And what if the games in the balance which is probably likely?

Not for me. He doesnt seem to even impress or regularly play for the under 21s.

[lraC]

54 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Agreed.

The guys at the last FF did a sterling job of getting Suhail to reveal his true feelings and put his foot in it in general.

"Wasnt aware" Lowe had left."

"Spending doesn't guarantee success"

"The owners aim for the Club is to be "sustainable"

"Never asked the owners if there can be an arrangement to reinvest a percentage of transfer income back into the side"

"It was the owners decision to disband the women's team"

Not forgetting it is Gestede's and Waggott's faults that the players have been walking for nothing. 

[miqaayil]

18 hours ago, SuperBrfc said:

It's up to us fans to put the scrutiny and spotlight on him. He's already rattled and things haven't even got started yet. He is reaching Steve Kean territory for me with the way he is behaving. The irony and coincidence being, both of them having the same agency connections.

In my opinion, it's somebody's project, with him being the face of it. He knows f@#k all about the game. See his latest nonsense comment about "nobody knew Adam Wharton would be a good player".

No chance is he going to implement a Brighton or Brentford model and oversee such a thing here, especially when he thinks spending doesn't guarantee anything.

There is no Brighton or Brentford model here anyway, never has been. It's just fluff that buys a bit of time with those still sleeping.

The thing that I always come back to is this...if I'm the sole owner of a business, what I say, goes. There are no power struggles. There are no conflicting ideas. There are no opposing camps. I decide what's happening, as the owner. You piss about, you're out. You lose me money, you're out.

So why are we not seeing such authority?

In my opinion , its tricky and catch 22 , my best explanation 

3 fools try to rob the store , the owner for insurance , the staff to sell goods for profit, the broker who'll sell the goods ...... now can they cut each other loose ? 

 

again it's all my imagination 

[B16Rover]

34 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

We've already had M-Matthews on the bench this season...

M-Matthews takes a phenomenal stutter run up  penalty 

[Tomphil2]

1 hour ago, paullarrygher said:

I mean the most insane element of it is that at the same time touting a player trading model like Brentford/Brighton, Suhail states that he has never asked the owners about reinvesting transfer funds when players are sold. 

That was never ever the intention it was just chucked out there when Mowbray started to feel the heat.  Then it became the Barnsley model when the training ground stuff leaked out because they run their academy and training complex all in one apparently.

All just whitewashing to cover that the owners weren't making money available for transfers and at some point all those at the club knew the sales conveyor belt was about to begin again sooner or later.

Perhaps those were the models TM and/or Waggot wanted but it was never going to happen as the model under Suhail and friends was never going to be more than player development/survival.

Keep everyone in wages and commissions and keep the owners happy with the cost cutting.

[Emerald Isle Rover]

44 minutes ago, Tim Southampton Rover said:

Depends on what's in his contract. Imagine if we played him for 1 min just to free up a slot and it costs us £1m. 

At the end of the day, if he was good enough or the manager rated him, he wouldn't be leaving. He might have been called a hotshot but if he didn't prove it, not much else can really be done.

Well there can be- start signing more established players and not taking punts on 90% of our signings from abroad - we’re effectively getting rid of mafoumbi and likely signing another mafoumbi type

[Neal]

3 hours ago, Emerald Isle Rover said:

Could say that about a lot of the u21s they aren’t released though it’s only him because he takes up a slot 

just highlights the gross mismanagement currently on going at rovers 

On the flip side, we took a risk and signed him believing he would valuable enough to take up one of those slots but hasn't fulfilled his potential and worth to fill the spot... Therefore released. I'd argue it's actually pretty fair, decisive and cut throat which is what I want to see tbh. 

 

No one should take this as if I'm impressed by the current management at the club, just calling it as it is. 

[Emerald Isle Rover]

1 minute ago, Neal said:

On the flip side, we took a risk and signed him believing he would valuable enough to take up one of those slots but hasn't fulfilled his potential and worth to fill the spot... Therefore released. I'd argue it's actually pretty fair, decisive and cut throat which is what I want to see tbh. 

 

No one should take this as if I'm impressed by the current management at the club, just calling it as it is. 

Your missing the bigger picture the reason we need all these spots is because we’re signing unknowns from lesser leagues meaning they have less points 

so from that standpoint a club like rovers with billionaire owners I don’t think it’s unreasonable that we would expect our ‘marquee’ signing to be more established and not requiring a slot but here we are meaning a young lad (good enough or not is turfed to the side not because of ability it’s because he holds that slot if he didn’t he wouldn’t be released at all)

Now I’m not caring either way but it’s another poor showing from rovers end I feel 

[roverblue]

Have we ever had a worse transfer window than this one?

• Lost half our first team
• Losing our team captain
• Lost our 2nd and 3rd top scorers from last season and haven't replaced them.
• Lost all our loan based attackers leaving us with nothing squad wise in attack.
• Replaced championship experience for a cheap foreign legion.
• Replaced squad players with academy players that have either had no first team experience or failed to impress on loans to lower division sides.
• Still expected to sell several more first team squad members such as Pears, Buckley (maybe even Hyam and Tronstad). To be replaced by more unknowns if they are even replaced at all.

Thanks Rudy. I am sure our wage bill has somehow magically remained the same though.

Ismael talks about it being a transition season but what we are supposed to be transitioning to?

[simongarnerisgod]

15 minutes ago, roverblue said:

Ismael talks about it being a transition season but what we are supposed to be transitioning to?

a league one team😫