Not sure Rothwell has dictating play in his toolbox. He can play some lovely passes sometimes, but his vision is the tunnel kind, generally. Agree a formation change is probably needed in Dack's absence though.

I think disingenuous is comparing my suggestion to what we did with the Portugeezers. That was 3 (not 10) gambits that were put to us by agents who were polluting the club. I'm talking about properly sourcing genuine talent and taking a series of calculated risks, a la Dack (who was a little over a tenth of the cost of Brereton). Not this all your eggs in one basket approach a la BB then again with Gally. If you're buying potential and you're not in the Prem, buy it cheap. It's hardly just that BB was a risk, it's that he was a stupid risk. Nearly every man and his dog was saying that with foresight, not just hindsight. Any time this club spends 7 million, it needs to be spending it on someone for right now (and hopefully a few years into the future too, not on a 31 year old or something). Yes all transfers are risk, but it's all about calculating your risks. Whoever calculated this one would fail a Maths GCSE.

Can't disagree there. It was an awful decision that I strongly criticised. But now we have Walton, temporarily, and we need as much of an improvement as we can get. And then another one in the summer, kicking the Canadian out.

Much more bothered about our goalkeeper and defence situation. Followed by our goalscoring options.

Have I missed something? We haven't signed Bialkowski as far as I know. It's a rumour, that was reported a few days ago and doesn't seem to have come up again since. I'll take an upgrade on Walton for now. Which he is if we get him.

He's playing a blinding hand of poker. Tomorrow we are going to sign Assombalonga, Maddison, Bialkowski, Rudd, Pontus Jansson, and an entire back four. Funded by selling Brereton for that 45 million Rathbone says he will be worth. FFP fixed. Superb bluff, that interview. In unrelated news, Beyonce is going to suck me off until I'm dry, and Trump is going to top himself on the grounds that he has 'realised [he] is an absolute dick'. Happy days.

Sorry Chaddy but you're one of the last people who can lecture others on needing a balanced approach. Your stance is almost always in favour of whatever the club or manager are doing. I'm not saying you don't sometimes criticise them, but it's very rare except in periods where you're on the verge of wanting them out. There absolutely are people who are unbalanced in terms of criticising everything the club or manager do. But there are also people unbalanced in terms of desperately defending everything the club or manager do. I'm sorry to inform you, and don't mean any offence by this (sometimes your blind optimism is a little lifting amidst the gloom), but you're not sat neatly in the balanced middle of those two sides.

I didn't make a point that clubs aren't willing to spend big on League One players. I said it's a general trend, that they're more reluctant. I specifically said that players do move for that kind of money, but it's the exception not the norm. I also referenced Dack being rated at higher the season before (still think it was about 1.5 without looking it up, as I seem to recall it was about double what we paid. That list, if the figures are correct (lot of undisclosed these days) shows 29 players, ever, moving from League One for 2.5 mill or more. Of those, 12 went to Prem teams. That's a very different level of financing, with Prem team interest bringing a whole new level of financial demand from the seller. It's also a very different level of requirement on the pitch - Maddison is best compared to what Championship clubs will pay for League One players, both for financial and quality reasons. Three also went to foreign top flights. So that's 14 players who went to Championship sides for 2.5 mill or more, ever. You don't have to be one of the best 14 League One players in the last few years to be good enough to excel in this league. 5 of those 14 were 21 or younger when they moved for that money, clearly bought for perceived potential because they were doing well as kids. Again it's a different kind of buy. I do agree it's a bit surprising he hasn't moved yet. But the Posh chairman last summer or Jan was talking about a deal being close with a Championship side. Deals can break down for all sorts of reasons. IIRC they wanted most of the money up front, which clubs are reluctant to do these days. I bet if his release clause was more like 1.5-2 mill he'd have already been gone. And I bet even more that next season he will be playing in this league or an equivalent. Just because someone hasn't moved yet doesn't mean they're not good enough. If you spend your transfer windows going 'well nobody has bought him before for this league', you'll find clubs gazump you for bargains all the time.

For me, this only gives evidence to the lie. If it was really the case that new players have to get up to speed with our system etc and this takes time, he wouldn't throw some players straight into the team. It tells me it is face-saving bollocks, for when he doesn't want to play someone for one of various other reasons (like one of his besties playing there, or because he has over-stocked the position, or was only buying the player as a squad filler, etc).

I think we would probably get around that. Maybe fractionally over. Maybe a bit less. Sad state of affairs. On the other hand if one of them knocks a few in before the end of the season the maths changes. It would take a hell of a lot more than that to reap the big profits they kept talking about though! I think most of us feel certain we will never get close to our money back on these two. Those deals will never cease looking insane. I'm down with investing in potential, most of us are, but you don't spend nearly your whole budget two summers in a row on potential. Potential is scattered all over the country and the world, far far cheaper than that. You could buy ten promising players for one Brereton and expect at least 2 or 3 to come good.

I'd do a victory lap of the UK if we sold those two off at a small profit.

Yep, we were linked. Maddison can play all across the midfield, so if he performed well there's no reason for him to be dropped to the bench.

You're doing him a serious disservice. Just the League stats: 2015/16 - 11 goals, 13 assists. 2016/17 - 9 goals, 17 assists. 2017/18 - 8 goals, 16 assists. 2018/19 - 8 goals, 15 assists. 2019/20 - 9 goals, 6 assists (so far). I don't know if you think he's a striker or something, but he isn't. Those goals are at least primarily from midfield. Attacking mid (in what I assume is a broadly Dack-like role) and RW. I think he has been moved around in the past, CM, LW, occasionally striker I think. I think continuing those stats in numerous different positions over a season is even more impressive. The goals might not be Dack numbers, but he's an assists machine. 'A few assists' is like saying Dack scores 'a few goals'. That many goal contributions over the last four-and-a-half seasons is definitely lighting up League One. As for why is he still down there, his contract has a 2.5 million release clause and Peterborough have been insisting on it being met. Fairly sure he has been transfer listed since last summer? But 2.5 million is still considered a lot to gamble on a League One player. Players do move out of there for that kind of money or more, but there aren't too many. Point of reference, we paid 750k for Dack. If I remember rightly he had been available for about 1.5 million the season before after winning League One POTY and nobody bit. Since the summer, he has only had a year left on his deal. See Bauer for how clubs deal with League One players on the last year of their deal. If the fee is fairly big, they'd rather wait, as they know the player will step up in the summer for free now they know higher league clubs are looking. Sure we can all agree that Dack and Bauer are good enough for the Championship, but neither we nor others were willing to pay in the millions for either.

No, he won't.

He's not too old. He's 32. Peak age for a goalie.

I remember it being said some years ago that our academy focused a little too much on physical development rather than skill. This might explain why we churn out so many good defenders vs attackers. Then we hoover up the ones who escape through the cracks of the elite clubs' youth systems, who have been schooled heavily in technique, for our young attackers.

He's 32 and a gk, so let's say about 2 after next season is done. Three and a half seasons total works for me.

Surprised how little discussion there has been of this one. Keeper is our number one priority as far as I'm concerned, and Bialkowski has been mentioned a few times on here as a good un.

Amazing how many we have heard about over the last few years, and yet the only one who made it despite our dire defensive difficulties was a converted DM. And then there was O'Connell of course...

Lots of chances but couldn't finish...caught on the break... Lost 2-1, our goal was a penalty, the opposition team ended the game with 10 men yet we still lost... Sounds creepily like the Birmingham cup game we just played.

Exactly what I was thinking. If Mani's source is the first team staff directly, I would think they have more reason to lie about there being nothing doing, than the Wigan players have to lie about the Rovers players saying Dack was off.

No Davenport. Injured again? We don't play until Saturday so no other reason not to give him game time.

20 years old. Was only 20 in November I think it was though.

You're going to find yourself disappointed on the manager front, as we all (mostly) are. Not much point talking about it, it's not happening any time soon. That's why I'm more focusing on the areas where things could happen.

Not seen this link posted, apologies if it has been. Linked to George Tanner, 20 year old Man U fullback on loan at Morecambe Out of contract in summer. Permanent move supposedly being considered.