On the other hand, our academy products don't need to be anywhere near as good as Arsenal's, although our academy itself is nearly as good and competes in the same league. Producing youngsters to win Premier League titles and compete in Europe is very, very different and far harder than producing youngsters to attain promotion from the Championship. What I'm saying is in relative terms, it's easier for our academy to meet our needs than for Arsenal's to meet theirs. You also talked about GB and his focus on bringing through academy players. Clearly the reason he believes in this approach is because it has already worked exceptionally at a club he was at. Bodo pulled off a minor miracle, going from a yo-yo club bouncing between the top two divisions to being Norweigan champions, two years running. They did it with a massive emphasis on bringing through youth players. Yes it's 'only' the Norweigan league, but their academy will have been far weaker than ours. I can understand why he believes this could bring success, and it's probably unfair to imply he isn't serious about promotion because of this belief. Whether it will work is another story. The belief seems to be that the club has produced a bit of a golden generation by our standards, which certainly helps. Personally, I'm of the opinion that we absolutely must bring in quality in key areas (especially CB) and that the untested youth players we have should be brought through in a squad player capacity until they prove good enough for more. Spending more of our limited budget on fewer but better players. Which tbf, is looking like the plan so far.

And the probable £6.5+ mill it would likely cost to buy them too.

4? It's 3 isn't it? Wharton, Ayala, Phillips. Carter is injured for a month.

The continually repeated notion that whether we sell or don't sell BBD for £15 million won't affect our budget at all is a delusion.

Not sure about putting them on Saturdays. But Sundays make a lot of sense to me. At least assuming the first team have played on Saturday rather than Sunday. Here's my thinking. Playing on first team matchdays means, as pointed out above, fans can't really attend, at least not at the same levels. But it also means if the first team are playing away, and somebody drops out of the squad, there's probably nobody who can take their place on the bench. Playing the day after first team matches negates the above, and also means that anybody who didn't come off the bench to get some game time can play for the U21s and stay sharp and fit. To me that would be the way to really ensure our bench are always raring to go when called upon. It being just a day after means maximum recovery time too for these players. (And no I don't mean literally everybody who didn't get game time, just the youngsters and the odd out-of-shape senior...I feel it's been a problem in the past when youth players are on our bench a lot and essentially pulled out of the U21/23s, they lose that edge and the confidence that comes with form)

Think that's an astonishingly poor attitude but whatever, I'll say no more about any of this, as I've nothing nice to say.

Prove Peterborough had seen him play? Or prove they were considering loaning him to League One? Their chairman literally said it. It's not really possible to prove such a thing in football beyond that. Strange argument to try on. Wait and see if he's any good? Oh you mean like I keep saying I will?

Still wrong about what I'm saying.

Yes, it matters as it affects the financial wellbeing of the club, which affects our ability to buy more players to perform on the pitch, which affects us as fans. I'm not from the 'stick a blindfold over my eyes and carry on, ignoring what happens off the pitch' clan and never will be. I'm innately interested in such things.

Peterborough had seen him play when they considered loaning him back to League One.

Neither.

Haven't seen that reported anywhere, where are you getting that? Only figure I've seen is 2.5 mill. I don't expect that to be up front, no transfer is. Posh paid 1 mill for him, be odd to say they've rejected 3 bids more than they paid and then only take a guarantee of 500k. I can't imagine they're guaranteed any less than 1.5 mill.

I know all of that. That doesn't mean we have paid an appropriate fee or not put too much weight on his late season purple patch. Scouts and managers fuck this up all the time. As I said, time will tell and obviously I wish for him to be a huge success. JDT and Broughton won't have watched him live in a competitive game at all I should imagine. Personally I don't think that matters vs a full video, but some do.

Thank you, an actual point. However, that's 18 months ago (would actually be 20 wouldn't it?), not this January gone, and BBD didn't just click, he set on fire, and has been at least reliable ever since, not just for 7-10 games. Just a rumour anyway that wasn't it, about the loan away? To be clear, I'm not saying I think Szmodics won't succeed here, I'm saying I think we've gone a fair bit above what the market rate for him should have been. As we did with BBD as it happens, and for 2 years that was a financial burden we got nothing back from. If Szmodics delivers to or above his fee, then happy days (we can't afford to wait 2 years for it this time though). I just fear we are using too short a sample of him playing well at this level to justify the expense as things stand.

Ooh matron!

Time well tell, but reading the interview with the Posh chairman is really making me think that, if we paid anything like the 2.5 mill reported, we really got our pants pulled down on Szmodics. Apparently he was close to making a loan move back down to League One in January, with Oxford, presumably whilst P'Boro were fighting relegation. The chairman's comments even suggest he was worried Szmodics would end up on Oxford's bench!! It really sounds like he was pants up to January and was McCann's 'best player for the last seven games'. Broughton has also been quoted as talking about how good he was for the last 10 games. We seem to have bought a player for a lot of money by our standards, on the basis of 7-10 good games at the end of the season. Until I see otherwise on the pitch I feel this move was bad business.

Who scored 5 (22%) less goals last season in 600 more minutes (20% more minutes), has an extra year of mileage and didn't cost them 7 million to buy. BBD is a full Chilean international, with twice the caps and twice the international goals of Gyokeres for Sweden. Gyokeres does, however, have more time left on his deal. But no. They shouldn't be getting similar for him, especially since we will probably get half our fee to spend at best. That's not to say they won't ask for it, but it almost certainly won't be available.

Cartwheel Galaxy, a recent image from JWST.

But you keep insisting he isn't any better up front. Where do you want him to play?

A game we led in but where our attack were huffing out their arses. Then the fact we have gone and spent 2.5 mill, which is a lot for us, on someone else to play his role. Someone who at 26 hasn't been bought for the future. Not seen anybody saying the club are actively planning to discard him. Seen some talk he won't fit in the new system and will see minimal game time, and could get moved on in the future. Also, he did start games for the u23s I believe. They might be less challenging games but he got 90 mins in, I think it was twice, and could have done as much running as he wanted to. Fitness can also be charged up to full levels in training, it's sharpness that only kicks in by playing matches.

I'd be fuming if we lost BBD and didn't bring in a goalscorer, no matter how well we recruited elsewhere.

It does end decades of hurt though. For the women's team, who had never won a major tournament. And also for England as a footballing nation, who haven't won anything since '66. What it doesn't do whatsoever is end decades of hurt for the England men's team. Hopefully that gets put right in Qatar (although in a way that would be bittersweet, as the fact it's being held in Qatar under the circumstances is an absolute stain on the game).

I think we can be certain he isn't here to sit behind Wharton and Garrett in the pecking order. He's in their way now, not the other way around, and it's up to them to force themselves past him and the two already ahead of them.

It does feel like some quarters (especially people I see who I'm sure aren't usually into football) are using it for gender oneupmanship (oneupwomanship) rather than just celebrating the fine achievement in it's own right.

Christ, the Ewood pitch can barely handle one team playing on it!