I think this is stage 2. 18 months ago we were offering contracts. They were to players we knew would leave or deals that were representative of their true market value, but we were at least holding talks and putting a contract on the table. I believe Broughton on that front. Now we are openly avoiding negotiations. In Travis and Tronstad we have two players who have publicly stated that they would like to stay and that they've yet to hear anything. That's insane. Does their willingness to stay guarantee a deal? No. But it does mean that talks should have been held.

Wharton, although injuries are a slight concern, and that could easily change within 12 months. But, they're being sold for similar prices at a similar point in their careers. We're also talking about two players who were sold/being sold at 19 years old, so there are many unknowns and many possibilities for either one to surpass their current potential or never fulfill it. We could run through lists as long as our arms of players at 19/20 who were expected to be world class and never got close. We could also come up with long lists of players at 19/20 who were never expected to be particularly special and who went on to amazing careers. I'd be very happy with either one.

Yes, and Bellingham signed for Sunderland for a reported 2 million 6 months before Wharton left us. So...what's your point? He's just been promoted to the Premier League, he's the brother of one of the world's most famous current footballers, and he's played twice as many matches for Sunderland (his second club) as Wharton played for us. I don't think his transfer proves the point that you think it does.

His ultimate issue is his lack of pace. His style of play would require him to be significantly quicker if he were to be an impactful player at a higher level. He looks like he should be quick, but he just isn't. Stronger, faster, smarter defenders will have him in their back pocket. He could definitely join a more ambitious club in the Championship and find his way in the Premier League through promotion, or get a taste of European football by going to Rangers or Celtic, but if a Premier League team signs him, they will be making a mistake.

I'm not sure if a comparison to Casemiro this season is all that flattering.

Very strong chance that it will be worse than Danny Batth last year. Decent chance that he will be on par with whatever Danny Batth produces next year.

'Time takes everybody out, time is undefeated.'

I won't be overly critical of the club for hesitating to extend the contract of a player who will be 35 in September. That will go wrong more often than it goes right. Of all of the contract resignings we have messed up, the likes of Batth, Weimann, and a few others are at least understandable.

80% of the posters on here know who we signed, how much we spent on them, who we sold, and how much we sold them for. We don't need a transfer ombudsman to provide 'facts' on a regular basis. As for your other two points, great. Then stop undermining them by defending the club (whether you intend to or not) over how much has been spent and who has been signed. They have totally failed us when it has come to transfer dealings. Not only in terms of quality of signings, but, more improtantly, in terms of amount invested. Now please, for the love of God, stop defending that in this thread. No one wants it. No one needs to know it. It doesn't need to be mentioned again. The club must IMPROVE.

Stop this. Please. You get some unnecessary flak on this messageboard, but defending the transfer spending is just idiotic. It undoes any valid points you might make on other topics as it makes you seem like a complete and utter stooge. We have spent a tiny fraction of transfer incomings on new signings. Well below what anyone would consider to be the normal fiscally responsible limit and well under what would be part of a normal club that was aiming for realistic sustainability. So, please, stop it. No one is denying that there were new signings, but they were signed using a small percentage of fees that were brought in. We have consistently had an incredibly low net spend. Defending it is particularly stupid as we are missing a wonderful opportunity to invest in the playing squad without going over FFP limits. Just stop it.

He's definitely on his way out of Montpellier and has been heavily linked with moves to Italy and the Championship (Leeds, Sunderland). Valued at around €3 million (he only signed for Montpellier 18 months ago for a fee in that region), that seems like an awfully big chunk of money to spend on a central defender if our budget is similar to years past. He's quite decent on the ball for a central defender. A big physical presence. We've been missing that type of player at the back for a while and he also offers a useful goalscoring threat from set pieces. He'd be a good signing, but not sure it's an absolute priority when our budget doesn't stretch very far.

Cherki has been threatening to play for Algeria, so he rather forced France's hand into playing him in a competitive match to lock him in (even though it was likely an empty threat).

How do you know? Plenty of players have turned down somewhat meaningless senior team inclusion in order to represent under-21s at international tournaments.

Which is fair enough. That may even have been their preference. I'd rather have a shot at winning a tournament (even at u21 level) than be part of a squad for Andorra and a friendly against Cameroon.

Am I alone in being slightly worried by this? Does this further cement Pasha's power? Waggott wasn't a good egg, but there's clearly an internal power struggle going on and he may simply be the scapegoat that allows the rest to continue business as usual.