I think he would really struggle playing right wing back from left field.

Absolutely we would seem to have a better chance with him than without. So my price would likely be well above what anyone will pay, and only with a replacement lined up. In practical terms I'm saying I wouldn't sell him, but in theory there's always a price. But whilst we are on the topic of negative impact on the playing squad if we don't sell him, we have to consider the potential for him to be unhappy and that rub off on the other players. As a wild, unrealistic example, let's say someone offered 60 milli and we said no. The player would likely have been on for wages of 100k upwards in a deal like that. No matter how happy he is here at the moment, refusing him the chance to earn that kind of ludicrous money, which may be once in a lifetime, would be very likely to unsettle him. In which case we might not get his best anymore. Other players may even resent him not being given the chance and worry they won't get to make lucrative moves in future. There are a lot of variables to consider if we get a stupid, stupid offer. Fortunately I don't see it reaching the point where the player is likely to insist on a move or the club feels it can't resist the offer. His value to us right now has to be higher than his value to anyone else, especially since he doesn't have any Premiership experience and has only been outstanding for 6 months or less.

Promotion is worth a huge amount. But it also isn't guaranteed with BBD, nor is a continuation of his form guaranteed, and an enormous fee (I'm talking the likes of which we almost certainly won't get) would tempt even me. Failing to get promoted without him isn't guaranteed either. Someone 'could' step up like they have this season. Or we could spend the money on a replacement who might hit the ground running, perhaps as well as strengthening a couple of other areas. A really ridiculous amount could even keep us financially stable enough to challenge for promotion for a couple of seasons. Potentially. There isn't a player in world football who couldn't be bought for the right amount. The question is what that amount is for us, and whether anyone will pay it. You have to weigh the odds of all these factors and more. I'll say this though, I'd want a lot more than I consider the player to be worth, due to his value to us in this scenario. I also wouldn't let it happen without a suitable replacement lined up and ready to sign.

Vale back from his loan, so that's who I expect to be the main man. With young Leonard breaking through too. Possibly, but I can't see that being the sticking point. There's no reason for us to say 'no it has to be 3.5 years not 2.5' and then losing them on a free.

If we sign them on 15k a week (I said 20k in the next bit to account for a contracted promotion wage rise really, you'd expect a relegation wage drop after that) they'd still be top end Championship players, good enough to get us promoted not long ago and still a decent age, on a reasonable salary for this league, at a club still earning tens of millions in parachute payments. People could complain if they wanted but it would be chump change relative to the resources we would have. Nobody would have looked at BBD a season ago, he more than just divided opinion. One hot season and he is worth upwards of 20 million. Yes, I think it would be easy to shift them on that kind of contract if need be. But I'd be happy to keep them on in a relegated side for another tilt at promotion. Nothing is perfect, players gain and lose form, get injured etc but you can't fail to sign them on the basis that they might get worse, and lose a player worth a few million for nothing. You'd never sign anyone on that basis. Anyway as I said the club has already supposedly offered them fairly lengthy deals. I personally think those deal lengths are commensurate with their value as assets, and won't overburden us if we get promoted and they're not quite up to it, nor if we get relegated back down. The bigger question is if we stay down, and I'd say they're all good enough Championship players that the prospect doesn't worry me. They're mainstays of our side, a side in 2nd.

Rich Sharpe has said in his Q&A today that we are offering them 3.5 year deals, with a 1 year option. Also, even if they stink out the Prem as you suggest, with the £130+ million that promotion brings, nobody is really going to give a shit about their long 15k a week or so deals. Even if they were on 20k each, that's 3 million a year, and puny compared to the promotion funds. Besides which, it would likely be very easy to get a Championship team to buy or loan them after they formed a key part of a promotion-winning team.

I'm suspecting Burns and McBride will be bench options in their new loan teams. At least until they make enough impact. So I'm not really expecting them to play loads of minutes, but the experience will be valuable in their development. Reckon McBride might need to impress to a reasonable degree though in order to have his extension triggered. Then again, even if he is behind Vale and Burns in the pecking order (which I don't know of course, but Burns has been more prolific this season), it would make sense to me to keep him another year so the other two can try for more productive loans next season.

Good summation. Yeh I should think he will be the u23 striker again to get his rhythm back and provide emergency cover for the first team if we had an injury crisis. As you say, Burns and McBride going on loan, and the u23s occupying bottom spot in the league, suggests Vale won't move again yet. Reckon it's a case of Vale has had his shot, now it's time for the other two to get theirs. I think short-term loans can be tricky to make an impact. The club knows you won't be there long, so they're tempted to use you as cover unless you hit the ground running (which even top players sometimes fail to do). Not sure how many games he has been available for in his time there, but Halifax have played 21 league games and he has featured in less than half of that. I think there can be a danger for youngsters too, which Mowbray has alluded to, of thinking when they play in the non-professional leagues that they're going to be able to coast it, especially if they've had appearances three tiers higher. It's not the case, especially if you go in with that mentality, as it's competitive, often a different style of game, and the players around you might not be as gifted with their passing and vision. If you're playing stop-start too, it's easy to see how things might not pan out. He doesn't sound like he has had a shocker there though. Not going to write him off yet at all, though we've had a few goal sensation u23 players in the last few years and most haven't made much impact. The best outcomes so far have probably been Nuttall, who did make some contributions in the first team and also made us a 500k ish profit, and Butterworth.

If he is out of contract in the summer, it probably is a permanent deal rather than potential for it. Worth pointing out that yes his goal record is poor, but he has played mostly in the three top leagues in Europe. Yes he scored 1 in 25 in a poor, relegated Sheff U side in the Prem last season, but that monster Mitrovic only scored 3 in 27 in the Prem last season and he's tearing this level apart. I know Burke isn't tearing this level apart but still, could be he needs something to click. That said, I'm far from convinced. When wages are factored in I bet it's far from cheap, and what has been said about him doesn't inspire. Again I'd rather those funds went on keeping our rebels.

Cheap. The Fox and Hound could afford that.

BBD and Kaminski also expire in the summer, with a 1 year option in our favour that hasn't been triggered as far as we know. The club are convinced by them. It may be that we haven't made our minds up on Burns and McBride yet. Or it may just be there are contractual conditions for how it gets triggered, which might include when it can be triggered. Or just that we can trigger it at any time so we might as well see if they get serious injuries or look worse than expected in the lower leagues. I wish we would get on with triggering the option on BBD. Or at least, I hope the option can override a pre contract arrangement.

Bit of a different sense of afford. I say I can't afford things all the time that I do have the money to do if we get literal. I said I couldn't afford a holiday to Florida with family a few years ago. I did physically have the money to do it, but it was a larger chunk of my balance than I was comfortable with at the time. In a similar way, Rovers have offered the highest wage they're comfortable with, supposedly anyway, so I'd describe that as not being able to afford in the same sense as my Florida holiday. They could offer more but it's not in their budget. Mowbray has even talked about it 'mortgaging the club' to pay them more. Which I think is a bit hyperbolic. If you were a millionaire, I bet you'd be willing to pay the Northcote prices and barely think about it. Better response to it than the others have given though, their responses made no sense. I guess this is more like an ebay item than a regular service though. Only one person (club) will end up with it, whomever could afford the most out of their budget, relative to their desire for it I guess. If you look at the dictionary definitions for afford, some come with 'without severe consequences' being a prerequisite, rather than just physically having the resources required. We could 'afford' Messi probably, with our billionaire owners, but there's not a cat in hell's chance they'd sanction it even if he wanted to come...because they can't afford it. As in, consequences for their overall wealth and the club's FFP, etc.

That's what promotion wage rise clauses are for though.

There isn't. If you want to buy a piece of art I made, and you offer £1,000 but I'm insisting on £10,000, you can't afford it. It doesn't matter if the piece of art is crap or overpriced, you still can't afford it. Because you're not willing to pay what it will cost. I'm not sure what people are struggling with here. As things stand, if the contract rebels are refusing to sign for financial reasons rather than football ones, we cannot afford them at this point in time. Whether they change their minds in absence of a better offer and sign down the line is immaterial, right now we CANNOT afford their wage demands. If they sign it in the summer, then in the summer we will be able to afford them. It's very simple. I don't want to discuss blindingly obvious issues of semantics anymore so I'm going to try to leave it there.

That isn't how affording things works. Whatever we are offering, if he isn't signing it and is insisting on more, we can't afford him. Regardless of how much a rise it is. Unless, as I said, there are non-financial reasons for him leaving. Your comparison to other clubs in the league is bizarre, how can it be that only a couple of teams in the league have the money to beat us when we aren't close to top 3 for wage bill? I can't find the latest figures but we tend to rank somewhere around 12-15th if I recall, for weekly wage bill. It's our disproportionate wage bill that puts us in enough FFP trouble that we had to reinvest almost nothing from what must have been at least 10 million after Newcastle got their cut, even with a training ground sale exercise to balance the books.

Out of curiosity, where are the usual suspects who call fans 'negative' and suggest they are failing to support the team, reducing the morale of a given player, etc etc whenever an honest summation of someone's talents at the time is given? Shouldn't they all be in here giving pelters for someone daring to question the ability of one of our starting 11 whilst we are 2nd in the league? Or is it alright because that player is probably leaving and it's the club's fault, so it serves as a way to defend the club (by which I mean the poor-calibre executive decision-makers we have at the club, but to some that's the same thing)?

I've pointed out the basic logical flaw here previously and I don't remember getting a halfway effective response to the contrary. Perhaps I did and missed it, so I'll try again. If we have made him an offer, and he hasn't signed it...and we aren't going to make him a better offer....then we can't afford him. Unless of course, he is just unhappy at the club, or signs it in the future.

An alternative take is that their opinions on his performances last season differed from yours. Which is fine. I distinctly remember debate on whether he was now a decent player, decent squad option, or still not good enough.

If he thought he was crap, he wouldn't talk about him in quite those glowing terms though. He would have just said he's a good player, didn't quite happen for him, thanks for your work. That's the usual fare in a situation like this. He has been far more complimentary than that. Doesn't matter, not our player, never was. Wish him well as he's a Rovers fan and a shame it didn't work out, but that's life.

Nobody has called it world beating. But he went from being pretty much useless to being a useful player, and that was a significant improvement. I'm quite sure I'm on record that I expected 10-15 goals this season from him even if he played wide. Which is a 10 to 15 fold increase on what we got from him in his first two seasons. Of course, what has happened since, nobody expected.

Not as much of a beauty as two of the other goals...

I don't know if 'stressing out' is the right phrase, but I'm sure plenty of posters are confused and curious. Surely just explaining it once in here for everyone to see makes a lot more sense than soliciting a string of individual DMs to reply to. That's more hassle for you and for any posters who would like to know.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2021/feb/11/liverpool-to-pay-fulham-record-fee-for-harvey-elliott-after-tribunal-ruling 1.2 mill initially, rising up to 4.3 mill eventually, potentially. Although as it was a tribunal fee and Fulham were hoping for about 10 million, comparing his price to Brereton's is pointless.

If available that seems a good shout. Also reminded me of Hannibal Mejbri at Manure, and wondering how doable that would be too. I'll admit I've never seen either player, but I've heard both spoken about in very glowing terms (Diallo cost Manure nearly 20 million last Jan) and neither of them seem to have played much at any level this season which raises fitness questions....well, Mejbri has played 6 games for the Tunisian senior team between 30th November and 18th December, so I guess his fitness isn't really in question.

We tried that already, it went badly.