We spent £10 million this summer on Armstrong and Brereton, who often occupy the bench and haven't really taken us to any new level so far. So there's zero guarantee of that. 20 million isn't what it used to be, Gav. With what we'd be given from the sale, we'd struggle to adequately replace Dack and have anything left over. I can only see it weakening us. Even under Williams, how often did we sell a star for big money and actually improve? The only time I can think that it was actually the right move was Santa Cruz. That was more because he had become a crock than anything else, and we were very lucky to get that much for him. He's been the only big money sale I've been happy with. I remember when we sold Duff and there was a lot of talk of how we could spend the money to improve the squad. We went from finishing a handful of points from Champions League qualification, to finishing 15th in each of the subsequent seasons. When Bentley went, similar talk - we went from finishing 7th to 15th. Selling Samba and Jones for big money saw us relegated. Rhodes left (and a few others for semi-big money), we got relegated the next season. We all know selling Shearer did us no favours. Maybe some of these are correlation rather than causation, and selling them is often out of our hands to a large extent, but as a whole, it doesn't paint a promising picture for selling our star players for big money and improving, like people like to talk about.

As I've said before, I think it's unrealistic that the deal would be weighted to heavy premiums on starts in the loan stage. I can't see why that would be deemed logically necessary by any party. However, I can conceive that there might be large chunks of the fee due at 10, 20, 30 or whatever number of starts, whether in the loan portion or after, and that we have been intentionally delaying his starts to make this number of starts coincide with a Venkys cash injection in the future. Since TM likes to take his time introducing players to the first team anyway, he might not object too strongly to being asked to hold him off from starting in the league for a while. I'm not saying this is what has happened, just that I see it as a conceivable possibility, among a few.

The lad cost so much because of his potential, not because of his current ability or impact. I don't think transfer fee inflation alone would be enough to get it all back. Plus, if he doesn't improve at all, he simply isn't going to get into the team. If he never plays, his value will drop precipitously. We're all hoping he does improve, of course.

Aye, he is. There's the rub though - Bell cost about 500k. For every Dack you unearth buying that way, you're probably looking at a few Bells and one or two inbetween. You can't just go land ten of him with the Brereton money. I do think the money could have been spent more wisely, though.

Wow, when you put it like that, we should just go buy at www.dacksfor750k.com Dunno if we need ten of him though. Not sure he's much use in defence.

Fine result for the u-23s. I know Arsenal were off-form lately but seems our lads might be finally finding their feet. They may not do so well after the January loan-outs though. Lyons continues to be a bit of a mystery of a signing to me, largely due to his age when we got him, and his position. When you sign someone aged 21, you expect them to be a squad player at least. With only experience of the Northern Irish league, that never seemed likely this season. Loaning him to St Mirren seems fairly sensible to me, but where do we find ourselves with him next season? Seems he will have to step it up a fair bit. We are very heavy squad-wise in that area. I don't know why we needed another 'body'. Maybe the U-23s needed support due to starting so badly...if that's why he was bought it'd be strange to send him on loan already. Maybe this is one of those deals which will look a lot clearer in a year.

Agree, Lincoln can fuck right off for both those reasons.

Why are we looking at new contract talks with him then?

I'm sure I read we are about mid-table for wages. Can't remember the source though.

You're right, you two do have circular discussions with each other. It's because one of you fails to see or at least reply adequately to the key points the other one makes. Hint: it's not him.

Bloody hell, you were flush with cash for a newborn!

Never liked Big Club since the Big Club debacle. Whilst this has cooled a little, still hoping to stick it to them. Aside from that, given our run of games coming up and Brum's own position, this game is very important. It's bound to be a tough game and yet, on paper, the 'easiest' we will have for a while now.

Is it though? It's something we have done as a club under Venkys before - Salgado and (possibly) Nelsen. I have started to wonder whether there might be something in this conspiracy theory. The situation is so bizarre without it that there just might be something in it. I can't see why his starts would be weighted more in terms of cost during the loan period than after it becomes permanent, but I wonder if we pay a set fee after X number of starts and TM has been instructed to limit his starts for now so that the payment required coincides with the next due Venkys cash investment. TM tending to introduce players slowly anyway might not object to waiting until January to start him in the league. Could equally easily be cobblers, but something about this whole thing doesn't seem quite right so far.

I can picture Mercer's reign as chairman/CEO now... Season 1: 'Expects' top 8 finish. Expects us to win every week. Fires the manager before Christmas when we sit in 10th, deciding he doesn't have what it takes. Hires someone else, continuing to expect them to win every week. After an initial honeymoon period where the new man does well as all new managers do, Mercer treats everybody to a pint or a bottle of vino, whichever they prefer. Chaddy is invited to the club's Christmas shindig but refuses. Players get drunk too often - Dack gets especially drunk on a few occasions, leading to some unsavoury masturbatory incidents in dark corners (causing groin injuries) and far-too-nimble photo opportunities in back gardens. He breaks his knee during one of these. We slip to 15th by the end of the season. Manager is fired. Mercer has used the club's finances to bet on us to win every match, leaving a huge financial black hole. Season 2: Mercer finds our saviour and guarantor of Premiership football. Thank the good Lord, COYLE-Y is back in town! Promotion is the aim (and 'Coyle-y' has a proven track record of promotion - his one promotion trumps Mowbray's two, because Mercerman), and the team are expected to win every week. No youth players are to be signed if they can't go straight into the team, so no youth players are signed. Coyle-y plumps for a few ex-footballers from the local old folks home on wages of £20,000 per week. A few hundred Rovers fans die throughout the season from a combination of suicides and being irritated to death by Coyle-y's post-defeat pressers. With our free-flowing attacking football, we are relegated by far more than goal difference, far earlier than the last game of the season. Betting on us winning every week has completely crippled the club, who now sit in £300 million of debt. Mercer is given a pay-rise by Venkys. Coyle-y is given a pay-rise by Mercer.

Why? He perfectly fit the bill of the challenge that was set. He was dog shite and hopefully Brereton isn't, but nothing was said about them going on to be a success. I think the original poster's point was only about allocation of resources for a 'project'.

The same occurred to me. Switch one of our CMs out for him, put 2 up top. Admittedly would have left us open to a counter so Tony took the cautious option again.

Jordan Slew. 1.1 million, 7 years ago at that, hadn't even played at all until December when he came on as a sub in the 89th minute. Never played for us in the league again. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain cost 12 million rising to 15 million and didn't get a league start until January. I think there are actually a lot of examples in the Prem. The big clubs do it all the time. Some of the lesser lights do too sometimes, especially with the money now I bet. A million isn't that much now. It has probably happened in the Championship too but I don't know enough to go looking. However, what I'm absolutely sure hasn't happened is the same thing, in this league, for this money. I'd be amazed if it has ever happened in this league for more than say, 3 million tops, if that. What we have done is bizarrely unique and I hope Ben starts to start soon and maybe we can stop talking about it.

What? You won't agree to disagree? You are refusing to let him disagree with you? Bit forceful Chaddy.

So in our last games, we've conceded, in order: 4, 3, 2, 1... Does a clean sheet beckon against Birmingham? If it does, I hope we don't then repeat the cycle.

They had quite a few chances they could have scored from. The game could have gone either way in the end, which only makes it more disappointing really. Credit to Boro though, they did come out fired up for that second half. We should have been able to finish the game off though for sure.

No, that wouldn't have been my opinion. I rated Mahoney highly. Yes, barely worth mentioning, like Platt. Tomlinson and Hardcastle are worth mentioning, because they've seemed like they could have been on the cusp at times, but neither really featured with the first team close to as much as Mahoney did. What you're forgetting with your stats is that Mahoney featured 14 times in the season we went down, mostly under Mowbray, in a higher league than the one we dropped to, aged nearly 2 years younger than he is now. I feel TM can be too cautious with his youth, but it really seemed to me he did rate Mahoney enough that he would have become a regular last year and into this season. At the club he purports to support.

All it shows is that he has played more games than some fringe players, some of whom are barely worth mentioning and some of whom are younger. Mahoney appeared to be on the cusp of truly breaking through here. I think he'd have played a lot of games last season. We will never know because he has gone to a Premier League club to live the loanly life.

Can't get more? They seem rather popular.

No of course they're not. Not what I said either. Yes both of those forced a move. Especially Shearer, we were desperate to keep him. Not calling him a mercenary. But he forced a move, and probably the wrong one. I also don't consider him a proper Rovers fan to do so. But he's a professional footballer and can do what he likes, as they all do. Give over, Nuttall's career was completely in the shitter when we got him.

I feel uncomfortable seeing 'stroke' and Dack in the same sentence. But as long as I don't see them in the same room/dark corner.