The plan should be to not allow players to run their deals down, selling them prior, giving plenty of scope for reinvestment. Any talk of other plans involving projects and journeys are meaningless as it stands because Venkys are the problem. Broughton can still be judged on what he has done, and his first window was underwhelming (albeit difficult) but the bigger problems are beyond him.

Bang on. We couldn't have forced him to sign but we could have accepted bids for him.

If that is the case, then why dismiss 27 year olds as if they would block a pathway anymore than Morton?

No, hes back.

Broughton wont be "in charge" regarding big sales unless Venkys have a sudden change of heart, as was the case with Rothwell as well as Brereton.

Being so needlessly aggressive with the player would be counter productive, his decision on a new contract wouldnt change and indeed if there was even a slither of a renewal (not the case here) then that would evaporate. Its cutting your nose off to spite your face. Equally allowing him to run his contract down in the way we have is idiotic. A happy medium would have been for the owners to encourage offers and a bidding war in the summer, and take the highest. Instead they seemingly created a random and unrealistic price tag and didnt want to know unless it was met.

Skint. Or all a ploy as @chaddyroverssuggested to make out we have less than we do.

They aren't on a similarly tight budget like we are. This "people would have moaned" argument is constant yet it should play no part whatsoever.

Hyam is out for 3 or 4 weeks. Huge blow and puts emphasis on getting a deal for Porteous done.

It's small change when our main player and asset is being allowed to run his deal down and we are seemingly in the hunt for more loanees! Not consistent with focusing on next season.

I doubt that making big sales are particularly impressive to the owners when they are the ones who block potential sales to the detriment of the football club.

Point being, signing Morton as a loan signing to play every game does NOT fit in with the idea I was quoting about this being a development season with results to come next season. It reduces the game time of Wharton and Garrett when surely if it was a free pass almost, they would play as much as possible. As I said, I hate the idea of writing off seasons anyway so I disagree with this "blocking pathway" bollocks.

It would be easier to get a striker with even £5m over sole reliance on the free transfer market. Seems like that ship has sailed now anyway, hopefully we can get a fee in this window but I doubt it. Piss poor. Regarding Gelhardt, he is going to Wigan anyway. Always hard when you are just fishing for loan deals and the occasional cheap deal, lots of competition.

Very strange comment, but it wasn't Alan Nixon. Someone called Justin Allen.

I think that Undav would seem a more fitting loan signing out of the 2, if we can even do either. I watched Boro v Brighton the other week and he scored with a very good finish, his goal record in general is very good. He is a bit older and we need a number 9 rather than a "flexible" attacker.

Gelhardt has got an assist for Leeds tonight off the bench.

The Sun are reporting that Blackpool are about to appoint Mick McCarthy. Coming off the back of a bit of a dent in his reputation but far better than Appleton.

What a way to run a football club! FFP might have a say, not that it stands as an excuse to anyone defending them.

What utter rubbish. Just unfounded, agenda driven vitriol. The blame lies in India. Agreed, but just to add context as to how the £12m we have missed out on is such a sizeable sum for us purely on transfer fees, and how it can't be dismissed as a wise choice. With that £8m and with any big sale, there is no expectation for the whole sum to be reinvested, just a decent chunk, or even use the £8m and you keep the £4m you planned to invest to help with sustainability and covering unforeseen costs like you mention.

He seems a decent guy and not someone who would kick up a fuss, but we didn't entertain the offers which I suspect he would have been very interested to at least hear out. Had we accepted bids and he had turned them down, then a different situation, but we priced everyone out with an unrealistic price that has left us to cut our nose off to spite our face. The comments about people professing that the new deals are a sign of a new dawn and no more contractual mishaps was not aimed at you specifically. As you say, it is dependant on the owners staying away from the decision making. I can't see any reason to be optimistic that the owners will suddenly change.

That £8m (the bid was reported at a bit more, but say £8m) is a very sizeable amount at this level to aid the current season and also the long term. For context, we spent maybe £4.5m in the summer, £0.5m last summer and £1m the summer before, so it is more than 3 seasons worth of budgets. If there is no consideration of any reinvestment then that is an even bigger bad reflection on the owners. Buying, profiting, reinvesting should be a regular thing.

We have signed a lot of players on new contracts, it has been implied that the likes of Phillips/Buckley/Wharton proves a new dawn under Broughton and Tomasson, and that these Brereton/Rothwell issues will not be replicated. Nonsense. Until the owners stop intervening, they won't. I have never once suggested that Brereton should have been sold in January, in fact I specifically said that the summer was the time. We rejected numerous bids for him including from Nice and Everton, that was the time to sell, to help really fund the start of the Tomasson era and at the last chance where we could have got a substantial sum. We turned down bids, rejected none so Brereton had little choice. Might he have talked to both teams and decided against either? Small chance I suppose, but very doubtful if presented with 2 decent pay rises and either a big French club in a European competition with some big name players or a Premier League club. Rothwell should have been sold in January with all of the money reinvested, wouldn't have even had to cost Venkys to be able to give the manager a decent budget to improve us. Brereton should have gone in the summer. Had we accepted both bids for both players and neither had chosen to move, then the same argument wouldn't apply, but we turned down everything so the grievance IMO is more than a fair one.

https://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/2023/january/18/club-statement-michael-appleton/ Little surprise, Appleton has gone.

Quite a few assets have been signed on long term contracts even before Broughton and Tomasson. The likes of Kaminski, Travis, Dolan, Scott Wharton, Dack, Gallagher, Rankin Costello etc all signed deals in the last year or two, just as Buckley, Adam Wharton and Phillips have more recently. Also, the "fans would have been in uproar" line is a load of rubbish. A club shouldn't be operating like that, whenever a big player leaves there will be sadness but so what? He didn't even need to be sold in January, Rothwell did and should have been, especially when the manager had plans on reinvesting that but Brereton could have gone in that summer window for close to 8 figures. The timing would have been great to really help with the supposed start of the rebuild ahead of a new era.

Half a step up from the Championship? The standard of this league is shite. A no brainer for Brereton and a no brainer in a different way from our owners.