RevidgeBlue

Sounds like Tony is starting to grasp at straws a bit now and any chance of any permanent signings is receding fast. Would appear we're living in hope of relying on the good grace of Premiership Clubs to loan us a player or two they don't want after they've seen them in action pre Sea son. What a way to operate.

I wouldn't have thought that either. By way of comparison John Williams had to submit an overall annual budget to the Walker Trust each year including for transfers and had autonomy within that budget. However if the manager and/Or John thought it would be a good idea to sign a particular player which took us outside the budget he couldn't just authorise it they would have had to go cap in hand to the Trust and would certainly in the latter days no doubt have been knocked back.

Exactly. Or more commonly these days the Clubs reach a Compromise of say £2m plus various instalments bringing it up to a max of £3m with add ons if a myriad of conditions are met.

It would appear we might have been after Gallagher on loan but that interest will no longer be live if Southampton can find someone daft enough to fork out 7m on a permanent basis for him. I don't pretend to have any idea of who we might be after, I just don't see we are necessarily after Armstrong. The fans have made the connection because he was here last season and they liked him whereas the indication from the Club has been that he is out of our price range. We will probably have at the Club an absolute mountain of information from agents about hundreds of players who are available. We might not quite be on the Z list yet but I'd imagine we are desperately sifting through the X or Y list trying to find someone half decent we can afford.

I don't think We're after Armstrong anyway but I find it hard to think of a scenario whereby his price would go down substantially. Hold steady if he doesn't particularly rip up any trees maybe.

Clearly TM did have a list of targets (I was told he'd submitted those to the Board at the end of last season) and he subsequently conveyed the impression upon his return from India he was happy with the funds available. It would appear some weeks later as I've been saying all along that with the benefit of hindsight that funding has been insufficient to land any of the players he wanted and the rhetoric from TM has in fact changed substantially from confidently predicting bringing in six signings at the start of the window etc to being "excited" about the sort of players who would be coming in (funnily enough near the ST early bird deadline), to being "hopeful" of bringing in players with experience to admitting that we may not be able to bring anyone in at all in preference to Nuttall. You don't really think by TM would leave landing his targets until the last week or so of the window by choice and play Russian roulette by risking someone else nipping in first do you? We would appear to be in a right old mess. The only saving grace as far as I can see it is that it is still hopefully not too late for the Manager Board and owners to completely re-evaluate and put some decent funding in place to bring in players of the calibre we need.

I'm not convinced we do want Armstrong and Chapman. I'm sure TM made a comment at the start of the summer that Newcastle's demands would probably put him out of our reach and whenever questioned about Chapman he has been lukewarm at best and arguably even rather uncomplimentary.

Completely agree. I'm extremely disappointed with that news.

I find it very odd if as it appears we have completely misjudged the Championship market. TM has been around the block long enough to know the score and we would have been aware of the approximate state of the market from speaking to agents. I can't believe we would have fixed the budget before we made any enquiries.

Probably.

Exactly. Neither Rhodes nor Gestede were here when we were relegated so it seems extremely harsh to blame Rhodes.

People can't really have it both ways about Gallagher. As We've grown increasingly desperate in recent days I keep reading about what a good job he'd do for us on Loan. If you think he's a decent player then 7m for a young striker his age on a permanent deal probably isn't that unreasonable. Personally I think he's willing but fairly ordinary at best and not the answer either on loan or permanently. I'd also have thought that with the prices being bandied about for mediocre home grown talent there must be better players available abroad for the same sort of money. The problem of course is whether they'll be able to settle properly in this country and adapt to the pace and physicality of the English Leagues etc. Edit: whoops see several others beat me to it.

Absolutely. I would imagine there is one in and if as we are led to believe he was happy to sign a new deal all along I'd guess the delay was most likely down to haggling over the level the release clause was to be pitched at.

Have to agree to disagree. I think Dack is potentially so far above the level of the rest of the squad you have to treat him as a special case. Albeit on a much lower level I would like it to Shearer. Uncle Jack gave him numerous unsolicited pay rises even though technically under the terms of his contract he maybe wasn't entitled to it.

You're just being argumentative for the sake of it here. You know as well as I do PSG was just a figurative example. If any major Club came in unexpectedly for him before the end of the window There's every chance he'd be off regardless of the new deal. However the new deal is undoubtedly great news. If he does leave at any point we should now get a price which reflects his true worth and it shows that as at today he is quite happy to commit to the Club.

I disagree re Dack , he carried the team practically single handed my at times last season and I think it was absolutely essential to offer him new terms to try and keep him as happy as possible. What we don't know at this stage is whether or not his new deal has a release clause in and if it does, what level it is set at. From our point of view it's hopefully as high as possible to deter any outside interest and ensure us a bumper price I'd he does leave. The player would obviously want it as low as possible if there is such a clause. I would agree with you that there was no need at all to give the likes of Smallwood and Williams new deals.

As will Dack if PSG come in for him next week. All players have a price. The good news is that he obviously has no intention of moving imminently. Still doesn't alter the fact we are two quality strikers and two wide men short though.

Yep. Times are fairly hard when yiu're jumping up and down simply because your best players aren't leaving imminently but the best news of the window to date by far.

Did he say "Championship Club" who weren't in the Championship last season? Otherwise it could mean any Premier League Club apart from the 3 who were promoted last season.

I would have thought for 3m we could do better and get more of an out and out striker but then again I'm not privy to the market. As you say if we hypothetically spent 3m on Armstrong it would be unlikely we'd lose that money as at the very worst he should retain his value. At the moment though it's looking very unlikely We're prepared to spend that much on a player, the evidence to date suggests the budget is only comparably to last year's 1.3m plus loans and that having been priced out of the market We're being forced to consider loan deals.

I think with just over two weeks to go before the start of the season the choices are becoming pretty obvious. We need to spend decent money on a couple of strikers and one preferably two wide men. If We're not Prepared to do that then fine but I would say if we were to go through the season with the squad as it is now we'd be stone cold knockers to be relegated.

Absolutely. Agents have been around forever. The market is what it is as well. All this "the market is overpriced" guff is doublespeak for either "We've misjudged the market badly" or "We've no adequate funding available and we never did have".

This. We are Blackburn Rovers not Manchester City. And the logo is horrific. If There's been a worse home shirt I can't think of one off the too of my head.

For me if Kent came in on loan and Chapman came in permanently or on loan with a view that would give us decent options in the wide positions. We would then need at least one and ideally 2 quality strikers. Armstrong and Maddison permanently would probably represent decent business. Gallagher isn't good enough imo. However this is all pie in the sky at the moment. We haven't got any of them yet and if Kent comes in in isolation then that would mean we've made 3 signings, all of whom would probably come into the "providing competition for places" category as opposed to being obvious first team starters. We badly need quality acquisitions who will improve the first eleven not just pad out the squad. Particularly in the striking positions.

If the post came across as being in anyway patronising, it certainly wasn't intended to be and I've no idea why anyone would take it that way other than in your case for the purpose of launching yet another gratuitous insult. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with everyone being hopeful but whether we have any interest in the player remains to be seen.