I've gone and got a tattoo of his face. On my ballbag.

Fully expect him to go for a lot more than that. Otherwise, exactly. I was never talking about his previous deal, just his current one, which replaces it and has had no mention of an extension.

Hah! They've done fantastically well for themselves in the last few years, and have put a skilled team together, but when all's said and done, club vs club, prestige, history, infrastructures etc all compared, they're lucky to even be in the same league as us. 'Should be beating sides like Blackburn' indeed...

I'm not arguing with you either, you've just expressed it very confusingly. I get you now. Yes it will make 4 years of owning him in total if he left at end of contract, but the point is 3 years from now he is out of contract and that's not great in my view for a fresh deal. We will need to renegotiate it next summer or end up under pressure to sell cheaper the summer after.

You don't take up an option for the fourth year as soon as you sign the contract. Otherwise you would just sign a four year contract not three. I think you're mistaken. If there is an option for a fourth year in the club's favour, I'd be pleasantly surprised, but it definitely won't have activated yet and I haven't seen it reported.

It was 3 years.

In 2 years time he will only have 1 year left on his deal and we will get our trousers taken down. This is why I was critical of the length of term of the new deal. Hope we get him on a new, longer deal next year.

Might be that his heart isn't in it anymore. Jesus, Forest seem to think they've churned out the next England team or something.

I'm sorry mate, I'm really confused by this reply? Why does 3 plus 3 equal 4? But anyway, Dack signed a 4 yr contract when we bought him. It had 3 remaining this summer. He signed a new 3 year deal this summer. It ends in 3 years. It doesn't run in addition to the other one. It wasn't an extension.

Great idea for a thread. We have all got numerous things wrong. Anyone implying they haven't, or only got one thing wrong, is an utter liar. I feel I get a lot more right than wrong, but I will confess (the others have reminded me of a few, as some were very common thoughts at the time)... I was underwhelmed by the Mowbray appointment. I didn't see the point in signing Friedel. I was then convinced he would never leave, especially for money, and bled blue and white. Thought Whittingham and Murphy would do well dropping a league after good seasons in higher ones. I was uneasy about signing Bellamy for 6 million. Wasn't sold on a Rudy Gestede who had never been a frequent scorer either. This Wednesday I was convinced that, 2-0 down against Reading, with all our best attackers gone, no way were we getting anything from the game.

We only have him contracted for 3 years. That's all the new contract gives, frustratingly. If we still have him in the summer, we are going to need to offer him another contract to stop the fear of last year negotiations.

Come on, the examples I gave were mostly ones who play for us because 1) That's what I'm most familiar with and 2) That's what other fans here are most familiar with so will understand more easily. More examples are absolutely everywhere. Millwall have an entire team of them. Of course I remember Millwall were in League 1 the season before last. What's your point? They finished 8th last season with a team lacking a single million-pound player. They've also been in the Championship more than just last season. Obviously our bar is higher than Millwall's, but again, they've never spent a million. Just spending on more deals at the Armstrong level is still well above their level. Pointing out players who cost a lot of money and failed only really reinforces the common point you know, that we shouldn't be spending all that on one player. However, IF we did, it makes far more sense to try it on a proven track record than someone who has proven nothing really yet. EVERY deal in football can go wrong or go right, we all know that. But you have to calculate your gambles, and £12 million or whatever (even 8 million, for me) for Brereton is a bad calculation. Maybe it will turn out to be deal of the century, but that won't change the degree of risk that was involved. And no, I'm not really advocating buying someone who doesn't fit the wage structure either. I'm saying I'd rather make two cheap punts who cost half that put together. Chances are at least one will come good (and there's nothing to stop their value increasing exponentially too), and if they don't, we have the budget to try again in the summer.

Possibly, but the fans would hate it after talk of spending 8 mill or so on him. I don't know it's too wise to help develop Forest's unproven player. Wouldn't be shocked though, if we ended up taking him to fill the gap short term and get a better look at him.

Well, no, we don't need to get involved at all. We could just get involved with some of the transfers being done at far more reasonable prices. Armstrongs, Dacks, Edwards, Rothwell, Davenport, the Brentford lad, there's plenty available. It has just been said that Millwall are about to spend their record ever fee of 1 million! They've had quite a lot of seasons in this league, all told, for that kind of spend. They finished 8th in it last year. Potential can be bought without a premium. If it doesn't work out, you then have enough left to try again. I'm not saying don't spend quite big, but something like 4 million or so is really the upper limit of what we should spend on potential. Anything more, we need someone who has shown they can do it NOW. There are no guarantees in football, but it's wiser to gamble big bucks when there is a track record.

Don't think it has had time yet to fully get going. It was only due to be finalised this summer, and not a lot of competitive football been played yet. I think there was some mention from someone at the club of us using it to scour foreign markets, but not sure. I assume we will see more inventive targets in future.

If, as the Notts reporter says, it would take 14 million, with a significant sell-on (why the hell should we take that kind of risk to not even see all the profit?) just to make them 'seriously consider' it, we should walk away immediately. Frankly, I wouldn't be looking to pay 8 million for the kid either. Spend it elsewhere, or loan a striker and revisit it in January or summer. Even a cheap lower league punt is preferable to spunking our load on a kid who isn't on the Forest bench and isn't close to proven enough. It would give us time to scout cheap markets like the French one - that Brentford lad who has 5 already this season cost just over a million from the French leagues and is 22. It would be disappointing, especially after this speculation and the figures being bandied around, but I'd genuinely prefer the old chestnut of 'keep our powder dry' if this is the best we can do. This deal makes me uncomfortable at anything more than 5 million, and it's clear we wouldn't get him at that price at all. Bored of it. Hope TM has another iron in the fire.

Lenihan definitely isn't a better player than Dack. Dack is the best, most complete player we have seen at the club since we lost our Prem status. Lenihan, meanwhile, we have barely seen in CM, and not for a long while I believe. I'm sure he'd be good there, but it is the most well stocked position on the pitch and he is streets ahead of Downing in defence. But you're entitled to your opinion, of course.

Surely Bennett in CM and Lenihan in defence rather than Downing.

I've said before, but need to say again - these are not 'deadlines'. That's not what deadline means. The deadlines are the transfer window and the loan window. TM has never set any of these days as a 'deadline'. Targets perhaps, or just hopes he is deigning to share with us. That said, I do think it is getting ridiculous. He would actually be better keeping it to himself. Especially since people have a tendency to mistake hopes and targets for promises and deadlines. All he is doing is creating false expectations and showing just how badly the window isn't going to plan so far.

Mickey Mouse club, but not a Mickey Mouse team. Highly unlikely to be a walkover in the Park.

Box to box? When I saw he had 1 goal in his 73 game career, I didn't think box to box at all. Implies he is better nearer one box than the other. But not seen him, will defer to others.

I'd guess a defender and this 'not expensive' deal for Rodwell. Doubt he would disclose that one if it wasn't very close.

Or he read Rich Sharpe's tweet

Anichebe...a 30 year old striker with a career goal return of less than one every six games (about one in seven in league games). His best ever goal return in a season was 8, 6 of them in the league. Maybe on pay as you play, to let Nuttall go on loan, but hopefully as an extra rather than main striker buy.

I'm so glad I was talking a load of old bollocks.