Pick's missus and Mani's 9 yr old daughter, neither with any football knowledge and barely any interest. Yes, great judges of footballing ability, thanks for that, that's that debate settled then...

Yer mum has had more dongs than a church bell.

Ya know, if you two blocked each other instead of having the same arguments (about many things), the amount of posts on this forum would probably drop by about 20%. Just saying.

Find me a player who doesn't want to play at the highest level. I'd be far more disappointed if he didn't have that ambition. He has never once said he should be playing in the Premiership now.

I'm sure he will be able to 'point' out their problems. Telling other players what to do was always his chief skill.

Then you didn't answer the question you were asked by whoever it was (Chaddy I think?). What would you consider a reasonable offer to Dolan? The clear pattern of shite offers that have made us repeatedly lose players for peanuts or less than peanuts is a separate but related issue that nonetheless doesn't speak to answering that question. You were being evasive. It's still possible Dolan wants more than most of us would be comfortable signing him onto and the club can reasonably pay, even if I personally agree we probably aren't making a good enough offer within our means and should have sorted it ages ago when it would've been cheaper.

I think you can rest assured, the club aren't offering what you would offer.

That doesn't really make sense. So if the only offer he would accept for example would be 40k per week, that would be a reasonable offer? It would be an exorbitant one.

I don't know where you get this notion. Find me a single quote of him giving it the big I am?

He isn't capable of any such thing.

Venkys might think it's a ringing endorsement though, sounds like it fits their MO. Perfect CEO for Dysfunctional Rovers FC

JDT was a Broughton pick.

61 games I make it. Including a couple of Prem appearances for Leicester. It's not a great amount at 23, but I'm not too concerned by it. The main worry is if we have spent any serious money on him we are very likely selling Travis, and therefore this lad needs to be as good right now just for us to tread water this season. I don't think the odds of that are that good, as Trav is a seasoned campaigner who knows the club and knows the league, has proven he can be one of the better CMs in the league, and of course is our captain to boot so we probably lose something in the dressing room. In the highly unlikely event we keep all the three Ts and have enough budget to spend elsewhere, it would make sense as a supplementary signing with potential to improve and phase out the others as they age. But that would only happen at a properly ran club.

Source? 21 yr old forward, his team have just been promoted to the Belgian top tier. Scored 8 in 26 last season.

He did however make 29 appearances total, and was subbed onto the pitch every single time he was on the bench. It suggests strongly that he and another player were being intentionally rotated to keep them fresh. It's not as damning as you make out. And if we really have paid 2 million Euros (dubious obviously but let's assume a second since it's the only fee reported) of course they've sold him a year after joining - that's 5 times what they paid. Knowing our lot, there is no way in hell our opening bid was anything like that. Which means they held out for a much bigger fee and weren't that keen to sell him.

You didn't read my post properly or you wouldn't have posted any of this.

The holy T-rinity.

The point was values can deteriorate rapidly, and there have been plenty others. I just used an easy to understand Rovers example. Another one might be Rodwell, had about 25 mill of fees he had moved for, probably equivalent to 50 mill now. Came here for free, and not because he had forced his club's hand but cos they didn't want him. I already agreed this guy is out of our reach, I'm just saying his move last summer is considerably more relevant.

That means nothing, Cantwell was being touted at 20 million a few years ago too. What matters more is what Forest paid for him, which was only a year ago. Which as far as I can see was 11 million Euros, plus potentially 4 mill in add ons. He hasn't played for them even once, so those add ons won't have been hit. There is also a 10% sell on clause, dunno if that's after profit or what, but could affect an asking price too if it's on any amount. They immediately loaned him out to Olympiakos, which makes it a bizarre signing given his age, but Forest do seem to like to buy people for no reason. But yes at that figure it seems highly unlikely they would sell him to us, as there's no way we could give them even half their money back. A loan, however, might not be beyond the realms of possibility.

Could turn out like the Ohashi fee, where the number we were paying was continually revised down until it was peanuts. We haven't paid that sort of money for years...I think Hyam was the last time? I doubt we are paying it when we can't even afford numerous contracts for players already here.

I must have missed that part...

Their ground will hold 16,000 when their new stand is finished (should be by the end of the season). Which is roughly what we averaged this season, and since their demand is very high I'd expect they'll fill that most weeks (dependent on away fans). Once you add in their commercial income, which they are far, far better at managing than us, they should have a significant financial advantage over us, as depressing as it is to admit. There should be a lot more wriggle room in their wage budget too, as they currently have a League One squad. On top of this, if the rules are still how they used to be, they're effectively starting from scratch on the loss limits, meaning they have three years to pretty much spend how they want before it catches up with them.

Well, yes, potentially. The club paying 700k instead of 60k are just wasting 640k. They're just being stupid as they'll be in the exact same position, but with 640k more to offer in signing on fee or wages, if they just go the compo route. The only reason I can see to offer 700k instead is if the compo package includes a sell on fee, which I don't think they do at that age (beyond the basic solidarity payments scheme that will happen regardless).

Tbf 700k for a 13 year old, makes sense to take that. If it weren't just vanishing into the black hole of Pune of course. Plenty of highly hyped kids that age have gone nowhere, there's lots of development stages still to go. Maybe he's the next Adam Wharton, maybe he's the next Connor Mahoney (or worse). If he is actually all that, they won't be going away and will get him in some summer before he breaks in anyway, at a similar cost. Might as well develop someone else instead (so they can get poached at 16...god this is depressing)

What 13 year old?