Just now, Sparks Rover said:

He's a good player from the league appearances I've seen him play.  Ask the Sunderland fans.

Listen, this guy might be the dogs tatties , and if he is 👍  but to not have 1 league appearance and such a long contract is a bit of a gamble in my opinion. 

Maja scored once in 17 games at this level.

I would be far more concerned if we’d spent millions on him, than this particular deal.

I doubt you would’ve even brought up his lack of league experience, if you hadn’t took an irrational offence to “PR going into overdrive” due to the potential of his background attracting different communities to Ewood.

2 minutes ago, Ossydave said:

 

He had a good return at leagues 2 and 1 level though. 11 goals in 18 games at MK Dons (at league 1 level) in his most recent season in England. Those are good numbers.

Similar statistics playing for a lesser team than Sunderland….

I don’t think there’s much difference between this guy and Maja.

Healey has had knee problems early in his career however.

2 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

I've never seen zerfuulk either, so same goes for him...I want Maja, he's top player...what are you talking about...?  If I ain't never seen them why should I get all excited?

Unless I’m mistaken, Maja has scored 1 goal in 18 appearances in the championship.

You’ve never seen him play for us.

Why so interested / confident in him?

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Did we?

Who?

Nzonzi

8 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Not worth arguing with you on this as you're being deliberately provocative.

1) Doesn't make sense

2) Pay him what he wants then

3) Evans, Bennett, Mulgrew, Downing, Graham plus running a squad in the past with 14 or 15 midfielders in it.

4) Your last point doesn't make any sense whatsoever either. Who's going to pay a fee for them once they're out of contract? And replacing them with similar quality would cost far more than coming to an agreement with them.

Having ones opinions dissected shouldn’t feel provocative, end of the day all opinions are subjective.

Let me explain further; 
1. The player wanted to leave Spurs. The supposed rationale was game time. Spurs surely can’t be critiqued on his contract, are they supposed to bench Son and co to give into his wishes?

He chose to move on. Hence the similarity with our players contracts being up to them and their representatives.

Some players want money, some want to move house, some want guaranteed games, some might want to play abroad. The whole point is this “the club allowed the contract to expire” is false, IMO of course

You can complain about those given extensions after league 1, and I agree with some of that “sentimentality” probably cost extra Bob, but at the end of the day the would’ve / could’ve stuff is easy in hindsight.

Not many here would’ve made Rothwell our top earner last season for example, and I’m sure now many would be all for it.

I also never suggested we’d get a few if they’re out of contract - I just remarked, if you’re so confident they’ll leave for free, tell us how you know the future?

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

No, Spurs obviously haven't demonstrated their willingness to give this lad enough of a chance at first team level.

Just as we've mishandled Nyambe over the years by shunting him in and out of the team and all indeed all three of the out of contract players by not prioritising deals for them but handing out deal after deal for players that didn't warrant it and running an extremely bloated squad.

Mismanagement of all 4 players in their different ways by the respective Clubs.

Let's hope we benefit from Markandy because we'll suffer badly if we don't go up and the other three leave for nothing.

Couple of things you can ignore for that entire argument;

1. Many players would’ve put up with having a top premier league club and on the sidelines or sent on loan.

2. Nyambe has had several issues with his hamstrings, is well documented “a top lad” to quote TM.

Deal after deal for player who didn’t want it and a bloated squad… why not give some examples? Also don’t forget to add how you specifically know these players haven’t been offered anything worthwhile?

To conclude, make sure you include how you know they’ll leave for free, and how they won’t be replaced if they do.

Cheers Rev

1 minute ago, Sparks Rover said:

But surely there are loads that played well that don't make it as professionals...picking those 4 our conveniently backs up your argument.

I've never seen him once🤷‍♂️ although looking at the Rovers PR machine on LinkedIn its going to town on the fact he's South Asian and Indian heritage and our brilliant owners etc...

Looks like a signing to attract more of the Indian heritage fans to me...

Ah that’s why you’re not waxing lyrical about this. Figures.

14 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Correct.

4 wrongs don't make a right.

End of the day, players have the ultimate say. There is no getting away from it.

The fact a Spurs fan would move 200 miles and down a division is not about his wage now, or his choice of club.

4 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Healey would be a shite signing - end of.

Right, no more discussion - Clitheroe has decided for us

15 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Tied down to 2026 as well.Good work by all involved

Silly Spurs “allowing his contract to run down”….

Or another example of a player who has taken the decision to leave?
 

Either way - he is an exciting signing in my book.

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

The LT reported that our other main attacking target that we have a bid in for is for a loan to buy. Even if he is unhappy in France, as their main striker and 2nd in the league you would think that they would need a permanent offer to sell a key asset.

The point he was making (I think) is some loan to buys are organised to be permanent after the initial period.

5 minutes ago, Rochdale_rover said:

Also a man in my 30s . Didn't realise there was an age cut off point.

 

I apologise.   👍 

Don’t apologise, cracked me up at least.

From another mid 30s man who makes songs up that nobody will ever sing.

Word to the wise though, last time I made one up about a potential signing as opposed to a confirmed one, it never happened 😂 

“the Mongongu is coming, and every one is running”…. 

@JHRover said before, will say it again - any figures are completely anecdotal because neither you or I know what the issue is.

2 hours ago, S8 & Blue said:

We won't be in a position to improve though.

Diaz, Rothwell, Lenihan & Nyambe won't be here and we'd have to spend to replace them adequately anyway.

The time is now.

Throwing the kitchen sink at it guarantees nothing, but losing 39m+ over three seasons will guarantee a transfer ban/points deduction.

The difference in turnover / income compared to teams with parachute payments make our “kitchen sink” negligible anyway, there’s no way we’re in a position to spend millions and 50pw on someone like Harry Wilson, despite @JHRover’s claims or anyone else’s hopes and dreams.

Surely, we all agree that any money like that in our coffers should be prioritised for enabling a wage structure that is enough for the contract “rebels” to renew?

1 minute ago, S8 & Blue said:

Fuck it.

At least we would've had a go for once.

Academy will keep us safe in the league if there's any ban.

We’re having a go with this squad tbf, and I’d rather us be in a position to improve next season if we aren’t promoted, rather than playing the shit or bust card

Someone in S8 should know that 😉 

1 minute ago, Mellor Rover said:

Yeah a transfer ban would be disastrous, we wouldn't be able to spend a grand total of 400k on a second choice left back like this summer!

Well we spent 600k or whatever on our first choice left back last January and he didn’t turn out too badly.

Just now, islander200 said:

Every other club didnt sell tickets in that period. 

If £4 or £5 million being spent after selling Arma for 15 and the training ground for 16.6 million would lead to a transfer ban then just how badly are we being run?

Or just how expensive is it to assemble a competitive squad in the championship - where teams are spending 2x what we are on wages.

1 minute ago, islander200 said:

Is 4 or 5 million a big chunk?We are in 3rd.Use some of the summer budget whilst we are an attractive proposition for players.The time to gamble(a little) is now

The example above about spending “big” when we got promoted initially, and then made a profit - forgets 12 months or whatever it was without a single ticket sold.

I too would be happy seeing  that much spent on a couple of players but if it was at the cost of a transfer ban next season, because we finished third and lost in the play off final - Id be gutted! 

@arbitro

Maybe see what it ends up like rather than get too downbeat now, two new right backs and potentially a replacement from Spurs for Poveda isn’t too bad if nobody is sold

@islander200

I can’t see why not expecting a big chunk to be chucked at 5 months of football, is “defending the owners!” Come on.

3 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Mowbray isn’t saying anything particularly revealing. Clearly the financial situation is far more challenging than many fans want to believe and it’s lazy to simply label it as a lack of ambition.

It’s frustrating but I’ve simultaneously seen the same fans want the club to slash ticket prices, give the out of contract players any salary they want and expect the owners to spend big money in the window. At some point we have to look at running the club sustainability.

If we can keep the out of contract players and BBD during January then we have a chance. Hopefully we can add one or two but realistically that’s as good as it’ll get.

I also would add to what you say, about this particular article - I’d rather the club played down / kept “cards close to their chests” than boldly announce a target or “war chest”.

6 minutes ago, islander200 said:

The club have allowed the players to run their contracts down.

These contract offers should have been made with 2 years left on their deals.And if they couldnt come to an agreement then you sell the player and replace them with the money recieved

I’m sure they’ve been in contact/ discussion for well over twelve months?

I also think many would’ve questioned selling any of those 3 in question last January or the summer before that?

12 months ago there was no Armstrong or Plot sale in the bank - how close to sanctions (those apparently I shouldn’t be concerned about) where we? Could we increase the wage bull before these sales or the release of Evans, Bennett etc?

If we’re promoted, as many rightly point out, the funds alone would it easier for us to match or top any contract those 3 “rebels” may have been offered elsewhere.

Hence why it’s a balancing act.

1 minute ago, arbitro said:

Almost unanimously every Rovers can I speak to says this is our best chance of promotion and more importantly a real opportunity to bring serious money into the club. And to achieve this dream we need to strengthen the squad of which we are an injury or two away from disaster. But this morning I read that there really won't be too much (if anything) spent on new players, rather the opposite where we will likely well and almost certainty weaken the squad. Already some of our promotion rivals have strengthened as they see the opportunity that lies ahead.

Half way through the window and we have just been given confirmation that Khadra and Van Hecke are staying for the full season. Heaven knows what would have happened if they had been recalled.

And this mess lies firmly with the owners.

It’s not a bad mess though is it, third in the league, Dack will be like a new signing.

The academy is booming, our squad is chock full with talent from it.

The main issues for me are contracts but I still don’t understand the “the club have allowed” to run down comment - the players have to sign.

Finally, I was told it was “shit or bust” repeatedly last season so perhaps it’s better not to be presumptuous.

3 hours ago, JHRover said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall a single occasion that the manager has flown around the world to meet with Balaji. 

I've no doubt he has a more 'hands on' role than the others in terms of interest in the club but when it comes to cold hard cash and funding it is clear that managers have always needed to get through to Mr and Mrs Desai.

Snake Kean worked out quickly where the power lies.

No visit to India since 2019 puts Mowbray on thin ice and no coincidence that since then buys have been low cost (if anything) and sales have started.

All my opinion and belief based on what we've seen over the last 10 years. Some might call it a conspiracy theory but I think it makes perfect sense and until Mowbray can get around a table with them cash will be very limited, as will new contracts.

You might be right, and staying away from Desai hasn’t done us any harm seemingly! 
 

I may be in the minority but I’d rather we didn’t throw everything at this season, I’d rather we build but stay away from the prospect of sanctions, if that is possible.

1 minute ago, Miller11 said:

Big sister probably gives him his pocket money.

No way to run a club is it 

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

Apart from Mowbray can't contact Mrs Desai directly and because of that no extra cash comes from the owners. 

We all know she controls the money and we all know there's a reason managers have flown across the world to meet her.

How do you come to these assertions?

I was under the impression - probably a false one, that Balaji was the main family member involved?

7 hours ago, 47er said:

Well they would say that wouldn't they? 

Why you simply believe it without knowing what the offer was I can't understand.

Why you’d simply believe whatever someone surmised on here is equally as baffling?

7 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

Well that's total bullshit.  Generous means to offer more than was expected, you are saying we were "very" generous, so I just don't believe that....that's offering way over what was expected.  The same for the rebels.

It's bullshit from Tesco again

You come up with the most boring pet names for people. Do you realise just how tedious this is? 
 

Like I said to BB- I don’t know what they’ve offered, so I’m not basing my opinion on a “generous offer” or a “low ball”. 
 

If you both read posts without trying to force an argument, you’d know that.

7 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

The campaign to discredit him is frankly baffling.

 

I find it baffling that you’d read a few differing opinions and call it a “campaign to discredit him”, frankly.

3 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

I'm not going to argue with you. You're not for persuading anyway, and quite frankly on this neither am I unless those contract offers and wages do become public which they won't. I'm very confident we could make them offers that they'd sign and which would give us more in asset value than they would cost, and that we are just being cheap whilst costing ourselves money as Waggott has shown repeatedly he is a short term financial thinker. I've no intention of having the board's 1,000th circular argument on this topic unless there's a prize on offer for the milestone.

If you don’t want a discussion, don’t post opinions. I’ve not made my mind up either, so always open to “persuasion” or having my eyes opened more.

I agree to an extent, that there is a propensity for us to be attempting to “low ball” some of these contracts, but I’m not claiming that (or the opposite) as fact. 
 

Millers input about academy graduates being on an agreed ladder seems entirely possible as I’ve heard many examples of this in football and other sports in the past.

We have no idea what these players are being offered though. Thus any assumption to base an opinion is open to question.

As I said, AA was made a “very generous offer” to quote either TM or SW. 

What makes you so convinced Rothwell, Lenihan and RN haven’t been given similar deals?

Have you considered our very top wage is potentially half of what Fulham / Bournemouth can offer?

Wouldnt you maximise possible career earnings, as a footballer? I would.