Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

JeffRover

Members
  • Posts

    331
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JeffRover

  1. Just now, islander200 said:

    Why though?He played 39 times for Norwich in this league last year.

    It would be better being a loan to buy but maybe he is a short term option until that Trapp or another player becomes available, or perhaps it's because Mowbray doesn't feel Davenport is ready yet but will be, or Rothwell needs to work on his discipline before he trusts him enough to play as 1 of the 2.

    It could be a loan to buy anyway  but if just a season loan surely it would be better to have him as an option instead of Smallwood rather than not 

    I just don’t really like short term loans unless they are significantly better or different than what we’ve already got in the squad.

  2. Desperate for new additions as was obvious with the team we had out second half. But we should know that this Rovers team under Mowbray do not simply lay down and die. Fantastic to rally like that without Dack, Armstrong and Oalmer who were all key on Saturday. Let’s hope we get Dack and KP back for Brentford and hopefully some new signings.

    • Like 2
  3. 2 hours ago, blueboy3333 said:

    It's not an either/or. He is saying the contract is non-binding regardless of who is intending to buy or sell. That's the point. 

    No he isn’t. He is clarifying with other clubs and the EFL what their definition of “with a view to buy” is. There is no indication given whether TM wants it to be legally binding or not. He might want to stop another club swooping in January which causes Forest to cancel the deal and get more money for him. Equally Forest want to protect themselves and stop us sending him back for nowt if he is a dud. It’s effectively a permanent transfer in all but name. We’ve gone over this many times before.

    • Like 1
  4. Mowbray states “it still feels like a pretty open transfer window” which to me means that clubs are just continuing as if the permanent window is still open. If the Brereton deal was a simple loan with a pull-out clause there is not a chance it would take this long to negotiate. And to the people who come out with claptrap about Forest having all the cards. Bollocks. They have a 19 year old on the books who knows they wanted shut of him and they’ve spent handily in the market already and need to recoup some of that back. 

  5. 1 minute ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

    Forest are just stringing us along hoping we'll pay daft money for this lad. It's time we called their bluff and walked away .

    We should make a final offer and say “take it or fuck off” and leave it. At the end it’s only the lad that loses out.

    • Like 2
  6. The reality is that we are not used to the leaks in recent seasons because we haven’t made any big money signings! Rovers buying Rothwell for 200k isn’t exactly going to command the same attention as £8m for Brereton and hence people in football circles just don’t bother reporting it.

    • Like 1
  7. 3 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

    I been thrilled with lots of our signings over the years. At the moment it looks like we're trying to build a team to win an indoor six a side competition. Like Mowbray said you need some soldiers in the team, they can't all be artists.

    I agree. That’s why TM plays Bennett and not 2 flying wingers, which some on here don’t seem to understand. Freeman would obviously be a left sided player as he’s played most of his career there. Brereton would be a long term Graham replacement, and we’d pay it in small gradual instalments. Let’s hope you are pleased by the end. We might have to sign Messi for that to be the case though.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.