bluebruce

We aren't playing cute around FFP though, that's the whole problem. Everyone else is, and we are just taking it on the chin. Hell it doesn't even kick in for us until summer 2021 - proper recruitment and we could be promoted by then!! I mean, in the however many years FFP has been running now, how many clubs have been punished by it? Some teams who gambled on the promotion successfully and received paltry fines. Birmingham with their points deduction that didn't tangibly harm them (and now they're spending again). Then that time that I think three of us (us, Forest and someone else) got embargoes but were still able to sign freebies and under certain conditions. An embargo doesn't even massively matter if you just spend the money wisely beforehand. We are one of a very small clutch of clubs who haven't succeeded in playing cute around FFP. We must be the only club who harp on about it to the extent we do. On your last point, why wait til summer to need to get 6 new players PLUS the ones we already need? We can't sign one player in a whole window, I hardly fancy our chances in the summer of signing the 9 that even permanently positive people like Chaddy think we need.

And yet I expect we are one of the clubs who needed to the most. With injuries to Dack, Evans and Rothwell, shocking at left back, paper thin resistance to injury problems in defence and a poor goalie. Not to mention the huge amount of contracts running out this summer. It's unconscionable to not pick anyone up this month.

Same. We pissed away a great opportunity to do this last season when we were the first club to mathematically have nothing to play for, though, so I dunno how committed TM is to that mantra regardless what he says. But if we have no signings, push may come to shove anyway. You can be sure Benno is ahead of every up and comer for first backup option in any position though.

There isn't. We have an option to extend it by 12 months. It's in our favour not the player's according to the LT.

Zurab Khizanishvili.

Graeme Bailey says Bournemouth meant to want 'over 50 million' for King...so we can probably forget that one if true.

Or Luca Tony...eh? Eh? I'll get my coat.

I knew somebody was going to chime in on that sentence with something like that. If I decide to sell watermelons tomorrow, am I best just putting a sign on my door that says 'Buy watermelons here' and see who comes to me, or should I maybe be proactive about it and do some real marketing? Point being you can actively promote your youngsters. Some clubs have a loans manager these days. Whilst we may not have the resources to put someone full time on that, it's hard to believe more can't be done with existing staff and contacts. Other clubs operating at the same or lower youth levels than us seem to manage just fine! We also have a problem of sanctioning loans that appear to be of zero benefit. Wharton can only learn so much from consecutive League Two loans. What was the point of, at the same time, sending Matty Platt, an inferior player to Wharton, to League One to sit on a bench? Fisher couldn't get into a League Two team, but now he will get into a League One team? Why send Tom White almost immediately back to the same semi pro level we got him from when he is like 22? I don't care how anyone dresses it, we have one of the best u-23s sides in the country yet are crap at this.

What have you read? I was going to ask if anyone knew what the likelihood of him breaking into their team was. IMO we are absolutely clueless when it comes to finding good loan moves for our players. In fairness I consider this to have been true back in the Premier League days too.

Me. I should think most of the fanbase too, the ones with brains anyway. He'd be exposed like...well I came up with a few ways to finish that sentence but they were all a bit fucked up.

That's worrying, because he isn't. I mean he 'is' in the same way you or I are...badly.

I'm finding this Maddison to Hull on loan thing very odd. Peterborough were quite adamant they would only take his release clause despite 6 months left on his contract. It appeared that was met by two clubs and contract negotiations failed. Which obviously has pressured Peterborough into selling cheaper now it has gone so late, sure, as they don't want to lose all the money or have him stinking up the place not playing (as they said would be the case). But the financials seem odd, even without knowing any figures. Whatever number Peterborough will actually accept as a permanent fee, you can't see them taking a penny less as a loan fee. Because to them it's the same, as loan or permanent he will never play for them again. Meanwhile, why would Hull pay the same amount for a 6-month loan fee as they could pay to land him permanently? Or even a bit less (not that it makes sense for Peterborough to accept less as I said). They run a very real, maybe even likely, risk of losing the fight for him in the summer and having paid a lot for very little. Yes they will save a bit in wages meanwhile, but this would be counteracted by the larger signing on fee and wages that in-demand free agents normally charge due to the lack of a transfer fee. His stock could also skyrocket in that time if he has a good 6 months. All very odd. The only thing that makes any sense to me is if the loan fee is greatly reduced (say a million or something) and both clubs are having a gamble. Hull on being able to get him in the summer without too much cost, and Peterborough on getting promoted and then being able to convince him to sign a new deal.

Ourselves, Fulham and Forest in for Atsu supposedly Manure set to make second bid on King

Be that as it may, Sharpe is saying one definite outgoing today (which seems to be Fisher on loan) and one possible outgoing (since he mentioned Smallwood or Samuel, I'm guessing he means one of them). Judging by what else he has said, the team coach should have set off by now. Would give an indication to know whether TM was on it.

This time, the stealing is being done by the buying club.

Fair. Hard to tell, when it's something some on here would say in all seriousness!

Sure, we would just ignore being in second place in a league we've not been top 6 in for many a moon, and actually signing good players, and want him gone because of a run of bad form. Sounds legit.

If you stand in front of a mirror and say his name three times, he will appear and fume about the Walker Trust selling us out to Venkys, and that Burnley don't matter. Vinjay... Vinjay... Vin.... No, I can't bring myself to do it.

Undisclosed doesn't mean peanuts, some very large deals go down as undisclosed. 800k is stunningly low for him. He is 31 now, but still. Cracking player.

Fair enough on that point, but I'd still rather he go play for a League Two side with a keeper he can get ahead of, than sit on a League One bench.

1. If he is much better than League Two standard it begs the question, why couldn't he get any games for a League Two side? 2. We don't need him to go somewhere to be a sub keeper, we need him to get some senior games! I'm picturing WBA in a meeting with Hull saying, "We will offer you this bag of KP nuts for Grosicki, but you can't tell anyone..."

Fisher going on loan to a League One side seems a very odd move, just after he didn't make a single league appearance for a League 2 side.

....undisclosed peanuts?

It's been said that we did do a deal outside of tribunal. But either way I'm fairly sure a percentage of profit clause is pretty common in tribunals?

I mean, I was describing a theoretical scenario in which Nyambe was sold, and Nyambe hasn't been sold or even bid on, so...... But apology accepted. We all skim read sometimes.