One should be further on in their development, and it might be a bit of a rare perspective but I’d personally give our own players more time.

Complete over reaction in my opinion. Patience is a virtue.

Poor when he arrived today. No final ball, no quality at all. Looked out of position and lacking presence. I’d love to see us change formation to 2 up front now and then to better accommodate AA and Ben. One thing about the massive criticisms though; I noticed a very different expectation. KP came on, gave the ball away, failed to track, had no final ball and seemed to get progressively worse, yet the people around and behind me made no comment. BB’s first touch, second touch and further had comments - many “he’s shit”, “why have we spent 7.5m”, “he’s not even a footballer”... Now I don’t really think Ben looks a wide attacker yet, like Armstrong is developing into, he’s 19 and still raw... why is the expectation so high? Reason is price. I personally don’t think it should be like that, but I felt it today - the people around me genuinely vociferously more critical purely based on the contract scenario of both subs! The irony of it all.. one lad behind me said “he looks so short of confidence”.... no fucking wonder!

Obviously it’s much deeper than that, but Graham and Dacks form in that system plays a part in B.B. (and Armstrong, Rothwell, Palmer and others) having less chance to be involved from the start. People are critical of using two more defensive central players, but unless we start to struggle, Dack/Graham get injured/leave, I can’t see us changing the system. The time for me to judge the lad and his ability will come with a run of starts. I think it is a lot more difficult for a striker to come into a team and hit the ground running, than say a a full back. As for Nuttall, many would’ve been up in arms if we’d merely stuck with him as backup to Armstrong/Graham - it’s good to see him getting the goals in U23s though, I can’t see the extra pressure/competition for places being a bad thing!

How many championship teams have we played on the run Norwich are on?

l can’t help but think what kind of stick @chaddyrovers would get for betting against Rovers! On to the game; one of the first real tests tomorrow. A point will be well received without hindsight but I can’t help but think we might catch Norwich cold after going unbeaten for so long.

Let’s not get into a tit for tat argument. You know as well as I do, the “veil” is to hide predetermined opinions, decisions, beliefs and bias. You seemingly will go to any length to justify the long standing view that our manager ain’t good enough. From my perspective, slating ambition when then manager is looking sensibly up, or slating transfers when the mainstay of decisions are common sense - just looks and sounds like hyperbolic criticism or overreaction. If you cannot accept that without taking swipes at my intelligence, I’d suggest asking for “thicker skin” for Christmas,

I feel your “veil slips” whenever you start trying to justify the overreactive criticism and irrational response to articles like the previous one. If you can’t take the opinion on your own views, don’t post them.

I did debate your content, another (from my perspective) set of reactive over the top criticisms and paranoia. If you’ve no reply, no worries.

Hyperbolic criticisms and unnecessary and unrelated swipes from my perspective; 1. Ambition to target top half “and beyond that” is worthy of a sarcastic palpable and Heart comment? I’d assume that was a realistic ambition of most fans. 2. He said no major overhaul but right men to improve “fine lines”. Thats exactly what we need. 3. That was LT mention of Dack, no reference, no talk of sales, nothing from TM 4. The veil slips.. 5. Firstly, it’s been said that those who got us up will get their chances, Secondly; I’m not sure the opportunity to bring in potential in a position we are short of can be described as a “syndicate” signing. It’s highly paranoid imo, especially when main director at Ewood said they could flex between wages and fees. 6. You know as well as I do, anything to celebrate and people will give up their regular seat and cheap pint at the Crown ground once more. How you managed to stuff this bitterness into a response to a short interview on transfers is beyond me. You know, higher revenue, higher spend... right? Or if you prefer in future I can simply respond with the laughter emoji?

True, only league position and opponent.

It’s actually 4 quid for all u18s so I’d hope that a few pick that up. They are the demographic we need to target

As I said previously - the quote from Waggott about “flexing” budget between fee/wage explains spending more on a fee for a younger less established player. I don’t think wages are too much to worry about either, in terms of room to manoeuvre in January or next summer, but I do think the gap is widening between the top few and the rest.

You think those lads + Nuno Gomes cost less than 7m total? Think again. Comparing to those deals is basically saying it’s crooked. All because he isn’t better than Danny Graham yet... Just read the thread. 78 pages.

Have to disagree. Even if you could get all three for half the 7m, that’s three sets of wages to fit into our wage budget all with necessary taxes! Would agree 1 less expensive/risky lower division addition to play a similar part from the bench would be more frugal - however I would suggest the fee gives more chance of reaching that potential. I am personally mystified by the readiness to suggest this lads a fraud by quite a few posters. We’re all welcome to our own view about him and mine will not be formed before he’s even made a start in the league.

You’re talking about a 19 year old lad who has been valued, sought after and represented his country at youth levels. There is no guarantee that he will fulfill that potential mind, but to be so critical after less than half a season - you must have ridiculous expectation levels. Comparing his signing to a load of unknown free Portuguese players through one agent is a bit of a tangent too. Now, you said there are plenty of options for this level at that rate - now you’re moving goal posts to further debt and FFP...

That’s the going wage for a top championship player, keep up. Without even mentioning Tax/Ni. Who are these strikers that fit into that profile then Blueboy?

You’re talking about their overall impact of their deals, the 8/10 comment is taken out of context, a summary of one transfer window being excellent, exceptional or any adjective meaning “good” or better than anticipated. Do I think they’ll all turn out exceptional signings? No. For instance Davenport has had poor luck with injuries and those are the kind of barriers for ANY signing, young or old. Thats not to say I’m writing him off either! Hopefully the new year will see him get involved, Armstrong to score a few more and Ben to be more involved!

You’re talking about 1 sentence of my views, based on reaction to a thread titled “Transfer window; Success or Failure”. Even still, to add such potential and highly rated/sought after players into the club is quality transfer business - even if they are yet to displace those who (as we’ve been told) earned a crack/shift at this division last year.

I anticipated young cheap premier league or higher championship u23 loans, older cheap free's and more youth progressed into the first 18. We got some exciting loans (even if one hasn't had the impact I would of thought; KP), three cash transfers; particularly highly rated potential players in Davenport, Armstrong and Ben and signed Rodwell and Rothwell - one (at the time of signing) could've been seen as a coup, a future captain if he regains any sort of ability/form of his earlier years. The other (Rothwell) more of what I expected all our signings to be - but particularly impressive early days, and another at 23 that will get better. How can I see that as anything but impressive? I know its a classic football cliche, but if you'd speculated that level of business over a pint after the Oxford game in May, I would've told you - "No chance"

I gave the judgement for that signing for that particular thread in august, like most people. The reason why that thread was dredged up in reaction to a defeat is anyone's guess - and I still think our business last summer was exceptional - even with hindsight. The price tag is only a double edge sword for those prepared to wield it as a criticism, and to up the expectation levels. It makes you look stupid, and it puts more expectation on the player when articles like HITC pick them up for click bait. I am not sure where Nuttall comes into this either. If you are asking me why I wouldn't be over critical from what I have seen so far; We've barely seen what he can do. Not because he has flattered to deceive, but because his time on the pitch has been limited. The reasons for that (in my book) are Graham, our system and his readiness/age. Not some ridiculous contract agreement, Tony not wanting to play players he didn't choose or his limited ability. It isn't a guess to look at Bamford and Celina (two others we tried to get according to reports) and see that their transfer fee + wage is likely a lot more expensive than a structured 7M + add ons, for a 19 year old with no premier league experience. It isn't a guess, it is simple maths. Even Mercer made the point about what 25k actually is including taxes. I'm not suggesting Brereton is on tiny wages either, but I expect (having read Waggotts comments) that his wage was more reasonable to allow that fee. The "I hate tony comment" is just tongue in cheek, but its no coincidence you've returned to this thread to pour more more cold water on any attempt to explain and see reasoning, sensible motives and a long term plan in signing Ben, and others new players. Armstrong is also 21 - mainly looks poor at this level? I do not understand your readiness to simply say someone isn't good enough - remember, he scored last weekend, and is currently in a similar position (behind Conway if it wasn't for injury) as a member of the 18 but not starting 11. He is also like Ben, only 3 and bit months into his championship foray with us. At least give him time to develop? Of course - but I don't think there are as many of them options in the middle that we would want - I also think that when top level championship clubs are paying bigger wages than some lower premier league clubs, the competition to get those established players in this division becomes more difficult. Does anyone remember Mowbrays comments about when Bamford went to leeds? I also think the Dack type of signing is rarer than something to be expected - How many players do you think we could sign from league one for less than a million, and within 12 months have the option to sell of nearly 20m? I reckon there will be some in there but its a difficult method. Ipswich brought a few players we would've loved, but they've ended up poor for changing some of their staff for less established second tier players and a manager. The idea is to have players in position to pick up the mantle with that process. For example, If Dack left in January - we'd potentially have Palmer or Rothwell to get involved in his role, or have the option of changing the system to two strikers (Graham/Ben/Armstrong) . Also, if he did get sold, a large amount of money to add young hungry footballers with room to improve. It's not exactly what I'd call the most "ambitious" or instant route to promotion, but it is a method that a few other premier league clubs have taken to moving from second tier to first, and staying in there. Southampton and Bournemouth are good examples.

All transfers are gambles. Compared to cost of a prem experienced and established player - it’s certainly a lot less of a gamble in value. Whilst you’ll probably get more initially from those experienced/established players - is the 2/3x a week wage a sensible approach for a team that’s just come back from league 1 after being bled dry by “established” players on big wages? Id say putting money into potential is far more long term and sensible than putting 150k a week into 3 or 4 players in an attempt to get promoted first go.

If he doesn’t do what you think he’s a dud? Sorry Stuart, I just don’t understand your view point at all. He could be still looking for a start in March and turn out to be a cracking signing. He could also turn out for the game at Newcastle and then be a flop. Im also flabbergasted that you and others cannot see the difference in cost between signing someone on standard champ wages, and then the more qualified/expected to bag instantly type. The way you say we are skint too - do you realise why the debt is so high? Paying daft wages mate. Hence why it’s sensible to put any money we can spend into fees, younger players, projects we can likely get something back from. Rhodes came from league one (6 years ago!) to us on 40k a week mate. Stupid wages but why did we pay it? We wanted to be at the front of the queue. Assombalonga was coveted by a few clubs when at forest - why do you think he’s now paid 50k a week (and still sitting on Boro’s bench) Waggott himself has said that there was a budget and it flexed between wages/transfers. How you and others can’t see that the gulf between our top earners, and recently relegated from prem and/or city clubs going for immediate promotion, is crazy! Good lord indeed. You’re missing the point again. 7m on a fee for a 19 year old is cheaper compared to spending 3/4m on someone who is 40/50k a week. There is also a problem with this idea we should be able to find better players than our current 11 for a couple of million and standard championship wages. it’s not realistic to just expect that. Why is that so hard to grasp? Its also not difficult to see why some of the better championship players are turning down prem clubs like Burnley, when they’re being given contracts from Villa, Forest, Boro etc that are 3/4m a year wages. 7m is not exactly what I’d call daft money either. Yes, you could’ve arguably paid the transfer fees for Hugill, or the lad who went to Derby from Peterborough- but do we believe they fit into our wage setup? Both went to recently relegated or city teams going for immediate promotion. When this sinks in, you both might be able to start looking at this deal without the “I hate Tony” mindset. Final say on this, signing young/highly rated/potential players is a reason to be excited about the future for me, NOT a reason to criticise the manager, the directors, the overall direction of the club, or Ben himself.

Waggott effectively said that in his article - that the flex between wages and transfer fee was possible. Question is, was their a player we wanted in that position, and in that range? @Exiled in Toronto makes a good point about the money could be only available for a youngster who might triple that cost with improvement, but no cash available for a 27 year old on 25/30k a week for 3/4m, as there is less “capital”. Call it some gambling scam, or call it a more sensible approach to managing a club with expenditure > income. Defending the indefensible? I simply responded with my own opinions and quotes. From my view, I’m not sure what aspect of signing this lad could be argued as “indefensible” either...! Questionable perhaps, although I’d prefer “understandable”. Ive never argued that he is cheap, I don’t agree that his price is an excuse up the expectation levels beyond realistic. Especially when the transfer market at current is looked at ie Celina. I’d like to see more from Ben myself, but I didn’t expect him to come in and win games on his own, perhaps more impact so far in his cameos. I also hadn’t anticipated the Danny Graham championship return to be as prolific and injury free (touch wood) To me, if we can add more potential to the squad with the likes of Ben, or Davenport, Armstrong etc in a transfer window, and if we can continue to do that every summer, I’m quite sure we will develop a team good enough to fight for promotion. Even if it takes a few years.

Don’t tell me you’ve already judged him as poor!