I posted on here that we were after him a month or two ago. The person who told me thought it was a sign we had no money.

Exactly, it would be ludicrous to base our transfer plans on the possibility that we might receive a sell on fee from a former player leaving their current Club. That player might not move at all and we have to do what we have to do and treat any unexpected windfall as a bonus - if it did happen then that money could always be spent at a later date. That said even if we were sat there in vain hoping for King to move it wouldn't have made much difference, we still haven't got any deals over the line.

Yes, I'm talking about the close season after when we allegedly attempted to bring him back on loan on similar terms to before.

Been linked all summer. What a surprise. Boro, Mowbray allegedly mates with his dad, HSH etc.

No, but then why are we wasting our time being in for him in the first place when we could be in for a player we could realistically land as opposed to being in for one we realistically can't?

Ditto Harrison Reed. Hung about all summer hoping to get him back again on loan with the parent Club subsidising a large part of his wages only to be gazumped by Fulham who offered what the selling Club wanted I.e. loan with a view to a permanent move on full wages. Very slapdash to attempt to do business like that and it makes you think we never really wanted him in the first place.

The only time when it was really a case of the first time you heard about it was after the deal was done was when money was no object under Jack and Kenny started building a team. However things are at the other extreme now. We allegedly have offers in for players all summer every summer and nothing ever happens or alternatively we get gazumped at the last minute by another Club actually offering what the selling Club wants. Whoever would have thought it? Like you I suspect it's largely window dressing. Either because the owners will spend but Mowbray is averse to bringing new players in or the money isn't there to be competitive in the market. I actually tend slightly more towards the former view.

It'll be the same story as last summer hanging round after the season has already kicked off and we're off to a bad start sitting there forlornly with puppy dog eyes hoping that a Premier League Club will do us a massive favour and a few crumbs will fall off the Premier League loan table. Then if we do get reasonably lucky like we did last year with Tosin that will no doubt be paraded as having been the plan A all along.

Tony might consider them both by the time they're about 27 and "men".

Yeah right. Like the fabled "shadow owners" who never existed.

Off topic and irrelevant now but I don't think there's any evidence Lambert was sold a pup at all. I'd say all the events pointed to the opposite. He inserted the get out clause of his own volition and of course we knew nothing at all about it until he'd left. He didn't perform here apart from the first few games, sold our star player on the last day of the January window which from a timing point of view you don't do if you've any long term aspirations, failed to address glaring weaknesses in the squad or attend to contracts running down, then exercised his release clause and departed with glowing praise for everyone at the Club leaving us without a senior striker on the books. It all points to a man who was only ever here as a stop gap measure to his own ends to me but I know some won't agree.

Mowbray managed to persuade her to spend 12m on BB and Gallagher so she can't be that hard to convince!

Agree with this bit, Waggott should be responsible for all transfer negotiations and getting deals over the line. Never mind the first team coach wearing a different hat. What else is there to do other than set season ticket prices? (Which apparently we can't manage either)

All that assumes he ever had any intention of staying here more than a few months to get himself back into circulation and on the market which I'm not convinced was the case.

Or maybe Mowbray isn't that desperate to bring in new players which will upset the existing group in the first place. Just table a few offers which are never likely to be accepted so it looks like you're doing something. Job done for another window, then come out with a few hard luck tales about near misses after the window has shut.

Lambert was desperate to sell Rhodes, he nearly had a coronary when it looked like the deal was going to fall through and Rhodes hinted at coming back. Any signings he made on the strength of the sale were entirely his own choice as were the two Elliott's when he joined, Ward and Bennett.

So what's better, "you can have a transfer and wages budget of say £2m (which won't allow you to sign anyone decent) or you can (within reason) sign the players you want if you can make the case out they're that good and we need them badly enough." I'd say the latter every time!

It's been happening for window after window since Waggott, Mowbray and Venus were the team responsible for bringing in players. I don't recall feeling that, any other problems notwithstanding, we ever seemingly found it so impossible to sign players before those jokers got on the case.

Playing devil's advocate, maybe the owners are attempting to give Mowbray a bit more leeway by attempting to consider deals on an individual basis rather than rule them out by stipulating an overall blanket budget which might not be enough. We do manage to make a relatively simple thing sound incredibly difficult. Surely Mowbray, Venus or whoever is in charge of recruitment could ascertain the potential cost of a deal with one call to a players agent and relay it to the owners with a recommendation of how badly the manager thinks we could do with the player. It's all a lot of smoke and mirrors and an excuse for incompetence for those on the ground at Ewood imo. Window after window nothing happens, we miss out on all our main targets and end up turning in desperation to the z list at the 24 th hour. Stop making excuses and giving us hard luck stories and just get the bloody deals done!

Holtby was the same when he first came, briefly. Tony will soon knock all that nonsense and enthusiasm out of him and teach him how to 'hold his position like Evans and Smallwood.

Barely, you're back to Evans /Smallwood type fare. If we have enough money to bring in a back up RB without sacrificing any quality in the starting positions then fine. If not I'd sooner see any money spent improving the first choice starting eleven.

You can use that same argument all over the pitch though. We're an injury for Travis away from having to endure a Johnson/Evans central midfield or an injury to Armstrong away from hoping BB or Gallagher can come up with 15 - 20 goals. I'd rather any money was spent on a first choice CB and LB.

In terms of our priorities that has to be miles down the list. We need to sort the starting eleven first and if money is tight I wouldn't be putting any resources into back up players.

I thought he looked pretty decent on the rare occasions he got any minutes on the pitch. Didn't the Chelsea loan manager travel up here to query why he wasn't getting more game time?

Why do we need a right back?