We all KNOW just what those bastards did to the club, the point is what can we do about and how does hiring Kean become important to 2018 summer transfer discussion? Or signing Dixon Etuhu’s contract, hiring Coyle instead of Warnock, we all know they were bad decisions and have a knock on but what relevance to today’s market and our intentions going forward does that have? I’m talking about something constructive DE. If you try to point out how things have obviously moved on, you’re labelled arrogant, unable to accept criticism of the club or manager or just basically a WUM.

I don’t think that works, since my definition of what constitutes being a “dick” will be different; For example, winding people up, making stuff up, then changing your name or creating a new account seems to be perfectly fine on BRFCS but to me that would make you a bit of a “Dick”.

A tiny bit perhaps? There’s a bloody load of remaining bitterness and anger at decisions taken 2011-2017 that have little to no direct impact on what we can do this summer yet it’s brought to this and other threads on a daily basis. Just look up - what on earth does Kean and Scott Dann have to do with the interview with a new player ?

I remember Duff and Shearer leaving also so might as well start booing Dack already,

Really does calm the nerves when new lads are saying this about the manager.

No club is going to punctuate it’s summer season ticket promotion with “we can’t afford to do much bar sign our better players on bigger contracts and add a couple of loans” It’s frustrating but not complicated to understand why the word “competetive” was used in interviews with TM/SW. I do think someone at the club thought we might do a bit better in the striking department a couple of months ago. Still a bit of time yet mind.

Course it does. Why do we need reminding that our owners or their reps went for Coyle instead? We all watched it happen the same as you did. As I said the other day, let’s try living in 2018 as opposed to re-dredging past mistakes in a response to every discussion. If you read back you’ll see that I tried explain to you why 2/3 loans might be a good thing, and to point out the issue with investing even 3/4m on one player - when your entire wage bill for the playing side is only 15m. I don’t disagree it would be nice to go out and spend a few million on each of these, I just can’t see how it’s affordable in our current structure. Someone baulked at Bolton getting players in before is.. they had the luxury of 3x our turnover for last season due to the addition of higher league sponsors. It’s depressing, but our turnover is pitiful atm. There is an entire different debate about ownership financial backing that I simply cannot get involved in AGAIN, but if we are going on the premise the owners will only cover small costs and keep the facilities/academy top class, we will have to accept that x million pound signings can only come after x million pound sales. Would a big sale lead to repayment of debt? Who are we going to sell to raise 150m?

Where will Rovers finish this season? : 9th Player of the Year : Dack Young Player of the Year: Palmer Top Goalscorer: Dack Championship Promoted : Boro, Derby, Stoke Championship Relegated : Villa, Birmingham and West Brom... midland disaster. Dark Horse : Sheff United. Big fan of Chris Wilder. Hey....Stranger things have happened : Think villa will financially implode by Christmas. Traditionally one of relegated team struggles - Hence WBA Miscellaneous : Rovers to have a really good run for part of the season but ultimately fall short of any consistency to put us in play offs. Dack top scorer.

A fellow member of this board might coin you “captain obvious” for that reminder about how the club has been serially mismanaged. Back to this summer One thing about permenant signings to add, the difference between “top” players and good players in this division can be 10+ million in asking price, and a couple of million a year in wages; the reality then still potentially need replacing or a more expensive option if promotion occurs. The pyramid is getting steeper all the time. It’s one thing to want sensible investments that could potentially lead to improvement and ultimately profit - it’s another to expect or wish for transfers that would double our entire first team budget overnight. If teams are asking 5 million for Armstrong (hardly proven above third tier, short contract) and he’s after 20k a week, or 7.5m for Gallagher on something similar or more (guessed/estimated wages from a few tabloid/itk) then it’s not hard to see why we haven’t added any more permenant deals to the two already in. I think Chapman might be available for a more realistic sum with one season contract and two recent injuries that could harm his pace. It’s a risk so perhaps in his case another loan with the deal agreed might be a better solution. He and Armstrong both settled really well last season so I have no worries that TM will be choosing any loans on a similar personality basis.

And pay offs. Do people remember we spent about 10m on sacking then being sued by managers in one season alone? That doesn’t include the wages we paid them or the signing on fees etc. I genuinely can’t believe we are back to this tbh.

I like the look of Nuttall personally - I think he’s another one that could shoot up in value this season, and perhaps he sees Dack in that role this season, which effectively puts more necessity in width than central attacking. I agree on Samuel though. I don’t think he holds the ball up well enough - especially compared to Graham but he has looked effective at times getting in behind the defence on the flanks.

You’re basing this on Rich Sharpe? Don’t get me wrong I think he’s pretty good but I always prefer to see what happens with transfers and not rush to cement rumours - even Palmer isn’t confirmed yet and that’s a Sky one. Id hope the priority is a winger personally. I’d start the season with Graham/Samuel/Nuttall for that one lone striker role and be quite comfortable, but then rather concerned that our only wide players are Bennett and Conway! I know he wants to play Rothwell further up and has used Samuel out wide, but we need some more in wide area imo.

I agree but we’re talking about adding 4/5 loans like last season to the squad, which actually helped hugely. I don’t mean the “Watford” style borrow a club. I’m not dissapointed about spending money because it guarantees absolutely nothing. I know proven quality costs a lot but take Rothwell for example, if he has a big impact for 6 months - that’s a free transfer potentially worth 10m+. It’s gone mental. If one thing I am not worried or dissapointed about, it’s the squad as a whole. I’ve said all summer I think this teams better than the last one we had in the championship, and that’s without any signings. I’m also convinced the management will get the most of any budget they are given after last seasons transfer business. Just to add - I would obviously love the Rao’s to stump up more cash, but that, FFP, share capital and the continuation of our academy is a different discussion entirely.

More than half the budget went on the one player who effectively made a lot of the difference. If you take half the budget out of any teams investment in a scenario where 12 players are leaving, you are going to impact the team! Loans are something we can build an advantage with compared to the likes of Bolton, Preston and a few others in this league. Premier league clubs aren't sending their prized assets to just anyone - our academy and facilities will benefit us on that, so I think its going to be a key for our push up the league. We are also very close to Man City, United, Liverpool etc - I personally would be all over that - the constant bumping up of cash in the top level is dragging all the talent to the top 5's u23 teams.

The quote you initially replied to was a post responding to a suggestion as many signings are "wrong" as "right". That is "bunkum" in my very honest opinion. We both agree that many of the players who made the difference last season are the same lot who took us down the season before, but I think we differ on the relation of the impact new players had in that scenario. Likes of Bennett, Mulgrew, Raya and Nyambe look like they've been playing with Dack, Smallwood and the loans for years - that takes research, thought and effort in the office and training pitch. We let 12 leave last summer, we had hardly any preparation or time to react. In my book, thats a pretty successful ad professional rebuild. We had a decent league one budget, which obviously helped - but he put the biggest chunk of it into Dack and he had the biggest impact by far, and that will likely (as you strangely put "make venkys money", that type of terminology is ridiculous in a scenario where our club "owes" their family an 8 figure sum, and is likely costing them another few million this year to keep it ticking over) be a huge profit, especially if he is a hit in the Championship. On that very recent and basic evidence, I'd suggest any delay in permanent transfer business this summer means that TM doesn't think he is getting value for money. I'd trust him on that.

It’s about wording “Mowbray got as many wrong as right”... it’s hard to say Leutwiler (brought in as a backup GK) or Caddis (backup RB) are “wrong” since they came to backup the main squad as cheap options. I agree they aren’t particular “right” either but it’s important to have that scope. Weve spent actual fees/money on 3 players in the past 12 months and all of them will be of use in 18/19

So he deserves no credit for bringing the best out of those still here, namely the kids like Nyambe, Raya or Travis? Or what about the improvements in Evans and Williams? All of his significant outlays have been successes, and when you have a small pot to piss in - it’s key to success. Equally, Rhodes et al and many other expensive acquisitions had 0 experience in the championship, so I don’t see the relevance to that. The argument was the amount of “flops” in the market. Antonsson and Armstrong worked well. Yes Marcus didn’t get back in after injury but you can’t say either of those are “flops” Payne made some good contributions, particularly on the run in. Similar to Chapmans early season form. You can hardly blame the management for his two injuries. Smallwood and Dack the best two for me. Bell has definitely improved the squad, he looks a good left back, it’s hard to argue - certainly is no flop. Leutwiler and Caddis did their jobs too - we needed able backups. Leutwiler even ensured we didn’t have to play any games without Mulgrew.. I think Caddis is unfit but I couldn’t call his signing a flop, he offered an option when had no Nyambe or Bennett. The two year contract on the other hand... As for Samuel, I agree. All the prerequisites to be a dangerous strike just needs to find more consistency and sharpen his touch. Definitely not a flop, and definitely useful this season. Nuttall scores a few goals for the first team and I hope he can step up again. Definitely a different style of partner for our other attackers. Signing a flop? Give me a break. I agree B.B. (great to see you back btw) but I think Samuel is a run of good form away from being in a similar boat - he has pace, power, finishing, heading - I just don’t think he’s settled on exactly what kind of striker he is. He came sort of advertised as a quick poacher style, I think he is more of a destroyer in the making - a Roberts style player.

The problem is DE - between 2011 and 2015, we spent 100m+ more than we earned, and that will be a noose around our neck until the day these owners decide to walk away!

I disagree. For a manager who had to totally rebuild the squad in a division below, who had only spent 1.2million and signed 11 permenant signings in 12 months, I think he’s done very well. Add 4 of the 5 loans of (ignoring Harper), Antonsson, Armstrong, Payne and Chapman to Dack, Smallwood, Bell, Samuel, Downing, Nuttall and Leutwiler - that’s a better hit rate since the only real flops are Gladwin, Whittingham and Hart. Two of those we would have said looked decent signings on the face of it.

People are suggesting they’d be dissapointed if we didn’t spend at least more than we did for Dack, in that respect- my view is the cost is irrelevant. Dack is worth far more now, and will be if he can sustain some form in this league - he is an example of what you can get for small transfer fees. I’m excited by the prospect of adding Davenport - for perspective, he cost 1/20th of the total amount spent on Leon Best, inc wages and pay off. Football has gone daft, historically we have some prime examples of big wages/fees turning out to be carthorses, and plenty of the others - Hughes was a fantastic manager for getting quality for cheap. Generally, proven ability costs more, im not disputing that; but it’s daft rating signings by cost before they’ve even kicked a ball.

Are you missing the fact we got a “Dack” for Dacks fee? Ofcourse the markets moved on, hence why some more average players are on daft wages. The key is finding players from under the radar of others, taking a risk. In that respect, the fee is irrelevant.

I’d suggest Nuttall was a better option than both of them! Might be more if the wide forward that we are looking for as opposed to Graham cover.

This is nonsense without actually seeing him play!

I’m quite sure the transfer world record was 50m+ when we made some absolute belting signings for peanuts. Wasnt Samba cheaper than Dack? The fee is irrelevant.

3m in legal fees paid by QPR on top of the 17m + a 20+ million fine for their owners (money they could’ve potentially recouped from new owners)... They’re screwed. You don’t need to look back, try looking forwards!