roversfan99

In terms of where Tavares is at. Am I right in thinking he has only ever made 15 senior starts? Perhaps he will be more pushing as initially 3rd choice, although that I suppose that depends on either keeping or directly replacing Tronstad and Travis.

Hopefully can prove to be a good signing and we can keep Tronstad and Travis and have some proper competition in there. Good to get him in early and hopefully more follow soon. Surprised that hes only on a 3 year deal with no option. Perhaps a small indication that the fee is indeed smaller than advertised?

As I said, its clearly not possible to do that. There is a middle ground between on par with them and someone who isnt (in my opinion) capable of starting without causing a huge drop in quality. Baker proved that. If your backup is so inferior to your starting 11, then you will really suffer as the season goes on. As we have seen.

Hes not actually been capped I dont think. On Buckley, I always felt like it was a bit of interesting man management by Eustace to make him vice captain. When he was captain it was often for the second string in cup games. Maybe he was trying to get more out of him.

I dont think Buckley is even a good squad player. If a first teamer is unavailable, you dont feel comfortable with him (or Forshaw) coming in.

No but I havent made those comments in any way as a slight on either of the players coming in. To improve, we need to build on our core of good Championship players. I know enough about Travis and indeed Tronstad, Brittain, Hyam, Batth and Dolan to know that they are all good Championship players. They are capable of performing right now at a very good level (unlike Forshaw) and also bring lots of Championship minutes. If we replace a number of these like for like with players from abroad who may be talented but are unproven, that would be incredibly risky and also not address our issues with depth. I dont think what I am saying is negative at all.

I am neutral about it in that like with De Neve, I have never seen him play. I will see what comes out in terms of how he is seen at his current club to gauge a brief opinion, but even then its only an initial second hand hunch. I think if we add players like these in theory around a core of proven quality at this level, which we have but just need to keep. Then it (obviously dependant on how good they are) makes sense in theory. If they are direct replacements, then I become very concerned. Like most I imagine.

I presume you are implying that I am being negative based on previous posts. How is that negative?

I remember Tavares being on the fringes at Leicester without breaking through. These signings from Europe, players who arent really young but arent yet at their peak, can make sense if they come into a squad that already has proven players at this level. Their wages will be lower. Which puts more emphasis on getting the likes of Travis, Tronstad, Hyam Dolan, Batth and Brittain tied down. We already know 2 of them are going, if these are direct replacements then it is a huge concern.

So clear that we didnt actually offer him a deal and just came back to it over a month after.

As said above. Players aren't signing contracts.

We will never know either way but I am happy to assume that Ismael did approve. My point is, although Ismael should have final say. Even if he does, it doesn't automatically justify any decisions he chooses. Eustace wanted Bamford in January who wasn't imminently going to come back from injury. I wanted Eustace to have final say too, didn't mean I had to agree with that particular choice. I also don't get why any player as 3rd or 4th choice has to have Championship experience. Having it doesn't offset no longer being a competent Championship player in terms of being able to play from the start.

Not that it makes it automatically a wise move if Ismael wanted it. But why did we initially disclose that he had been released if he was totally happy? There is the problem. Our squad players obviously won't be as good as the first 11, but having to downgrade so much when a replacement comes in, that lack of depth has commonly hindered us post Xmas.

Pre season starts on Monday, busy weekend ahead to get Ismael what he demanded!

Would you be comfortable if he needed to start games for a prolonged period due to injury/suspension?

Question for you both. I get the fact he's experienced and can do a job as a late sub if we are leading. But a squad player can be needed for a period of time to start games should the first choices get middle. If like for a spell this season, Forshaw was needed as 3rd/4th choice to play 5/6 games or more from the start, would you be comfortable that the overall quality of the team wouldn't dip too much?

It will be "Ismael wanted the signing" and then questioning anyone by saying "dont you want Ismael to have final say." Not realising or purposefully missing the fact that you can believe that the manager should have final say AND sometimes disagree with his choices.

Also on Forshaw. Its telling that we didnt give him a new deal straight away. An act of desperation to then go back.

I dont get this idea that its fine as long as he isnt for the first team. We repeatedly have issues in the second half of the season with squad depth. Our squad players are massive downgrades and when they have prolonged periods in the team, which will likely happen at some stage, results drop off. Its all well and good thinking he will be useful to see games out etc but thats assuming everyone is fit 46 games a season.

You asked me a question neither of us could possibly answer either way. We clearly arent offering competitive Championship wages for this to be a continued running theme. But the main issue is the lack of proactivity. Why are we still to offer actual contracts for players with such little time remaining on their deals? Why has there been an 18 month lull? Occasionally some players will outgrow us, but in that case ie Brereton and Rothwell, you have to sell and reinvest. Dolan, I think he would have signed had we been proactive. Now, not gonna happen especially as his stock has grown and his deal has been allowed to expire.

Some of them might not, I am not saying they all would. But the club isnt proactive even in offering contracts. Dolan got offered one in the Broughton days, not even been offered a proper one since. Travis and Tronstad, even now, just talks with their representatives. I suspect you are only defending the club on this to go against the grain.

As we all expected, probably after realising that actual quality costs money, we give Forshaw another year. A player we released but all predicted would return. Not good enough. I did enjoy this line, playing us for fools: He becomes Rovers’ second signing of the summer, following the arrival of Belgian winger Dion De Neve earlier this month.

Roy Keane had it right. They are overrated.

Clearly we tried with a poor offer not up to scratch otherwise he would have signed. It should never have to this. But now it has. Even if he has said he wants to look around. A club with a shred of ambition wouldnt respond with the attitude of "ok we will leave you to it." They would say heres an improved concrete offer before you go, we are desperate for you to stay. Stop swallowing every bit of shite that comes out of the club.

Irrelevant to us as he wont be signing here. Only relevance is how much compensation goes into the owners pockets. They are feeding out shite about not offering him a new deal yet to respect his right to a holiday. Some people will follow that shit, but many will see through that and ask why a proper contract hasnt gone in front of him and the others long before now. Seems we put one in front of him ages ago which was clearly not satisfactory and have just not bothered to offer something proper. Now its too late.