Read your own, also read mine and others who are speaking to you, and you'll neither be completely inconsistent in your own arguments, nor make ridiculous comparisons to gladiators.

A real waste. A mate of mine who is an Arsenal fan used to really want him - in fact still says they should have got him back then. We are both bemused how things worked out. Just down to him making the wrong move in his impatience to get out/desire for more money. Unless you're Russian, playing in Russia seems to be a career graveyard.

Are you really obtuse enough to miss the point twice, even when I spelt it out so clearly? If that's all you've got then it really would be pointless having a discussion with you, so I will just leave it here.

Think he's just asking you to be consistent with your own arguments, instead of shifting them with the wind when it suits.

You don't know how the deal breaks down in numbers. Nobody outside the top people in the clubs involved does. Even the LT has reported inconsistent figures.

In that first season at this level (not the case for Grealish) he scored 9 more goals and got the same number of assists. They're very different types of players, and I've not seen a lot of Grealish to say who I think is better, but the stats suggest 'not a patch' is a bit harsh on Dack.

Good point, hadn't considered that. It does have to be equal to or better than his existing deal though, which you'd think means there's a chance he'll sign it. Not that I particularly care, it's not a prospective signing that hugely whets the appetite (though you never know how these ones will turn out).

Sambou, striker target (probably for the youth team) offered new deal by Everton. https://www.google.com/amp/s/the72.co.uk/134069/blackburn-rovers-striker-target-offered-new-deal-at-premier-league-club/amp/

Interesting, a big black mark against the LT's reliability then, with them having phrased our supposed enquiry as fact.

Sorry to have committed the grievous sin of showing you're most likely wrong. I made two posts about it, prior to this one. So at the point of you making that post, you'd made the same number.

Or 1.08 million. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/maceo-rigters/transfers/spieler/27701 Or 350-400k https://www.footballtransferleague.co.uk/players/maceo_rigters https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/rovers/news/2289445.blackburn-striker-heading-for-the-exit/ I'd tend to go with the LT version usually, but who knows? Or who cares at this point...

He thinks he is better, allegedly. (I'd normally preserve the term allegedly for something with pretty much criminal implications...I'd say Gladwin claiming he is better than Dack more or less is criminal)

Nah it was nothing like that. Fairly cheap deal. Don't remember the reported fee but it was a lot less than that.

Thing is, which odds are you referring to? The names on there include young European players as well as experienced players from the league above.

No point getting into who we sign first, apparently they're almost certain to fail: https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/rovers/news/17691644.who-rovers-have-signed-first-in-each-of-the-last-10-years/

I did pretty much cover that though. I accepted it can also go very right if you're lucky (more clubs fail at it than succeed though) and that there are ways around it (those are finally being challenged though). If rich owners could come in with the will and nous to pump money in without coming a cropper, and manage the club sensibly within those resources, obviously that'd be ideal. I'd just hate after all this suffering, to think we were free and then it be out of the frying pan into the fire. You can if they literally never call it in. They keep suggesting that's the case. 'No expectation of repayment' shows up in every accounts publication. Obviously I'm not fool enough to assume that's true, but it's like anything else with those mad fucks - maybe, maybe not. Agree it often feels like we have dependency on a drug that's killing us though. It's crazy that we've become reliant on cash injections from the people who ruined us. Even crazier that they've always rejected overtures to buy us out of hand.

Obviously we have plenty of cause to celebrate the day Venkys sell the club. That said...(tin hat on) Would this even benefit us all that much at this point? FFP nonsense means we can't spend any more than we seem to be planning on spending over the next couple of years without suffering points deductions etc. Unless they would be more willing to find creative ways around it, of course. What the club needs to progress is, therefore, smarter and more sensible owners. Not a big ask, but are Sheikhs whose approach to success has been to chuck inordinate amounts of money at problems going to help or hinder? It might simply shatter the stability we finally seem to be finding. Or see us overspend, fail to be promoted, and get smacked with punishments. (Yes I know the alternative outcome would be huge spending and promotion) On the other hand, this completely-not-happening story gave me a semi.

So you didn't read those few new pages then, you just decided to assume we weren't being linked to anyone. We are being linked with Glenn Whelan. Granted it might as well be no-one, but it's happened.

I'm more concerned by the implication in the LT article that we won't be using the European market this summer after all, or that it will be fairly minimal anyway. I'll be surprised if we sign more than one 34/35 year old. I expect TM just thinks the squad needs to replace the level of experience lost in Conway. It may also be with half an eye on Rodwell going (in terms of bringing in someone with top level experience). I wouldn't worry that multiple links to old players means we will sign multiple old players.

That was my thought when I saw his girlfriend's name in the very URL of the link. I do wonder in general how much of the redtop transfer speculation on Dack is due to his missus and the idea that churning out stories about him will make good clickbait.

OK well he hasn't according to the LT. I'm surprised too, but that's the case. And yep I'd definitely take 1-1.5 million for Bennett. I like him as a squad player, but the manager being unable to start him every week regardless would be the main benefit. He is probably in our higher tier of earners too (albeit at the lower end of that tier) given when he signed and being one of our 'senior pros'. It'd also be good value for him anyway. Don't see us being offered it.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/9229634/aston-villa-brighton-blackburn-bradley-dack-love-island-olivia-attwood-transfer/ Villa, Brighton looking at Dack. Also a mention of Spurs. The Sun, so avoid clicking it if you can ?

So it begins...(The Sun, so take it with a couple of bags of salt of course) https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/9229634/aston-villa-brighton-blackburn-bradley-dack-love-island-olivia-attwood-transfer/

That's what I was saying.

Matt Jansen I assume? Bit harsh! Don't think the lad took his foot off the pedal...in fact you could argue the opposite was the problem. He was never the same after that and I don't think it was anything to do with desire.