Burn offer for bowler

Per football league world ‘sources’. I’d take it like a shot - last year of contract. I’m sure we could spend the cash wisely - unless they all turn out like brannagan
 
It's a decent amount, but the problem for me is that while we would have the intention of re-investing, I don't have the confidence in those deciding on targets and conducting negotiations to adequately replace him or strengthen in other areas before the window closes. It's a serious concern for me based on the evidence this summer.
 
BFC_53 said:
It's a decent amount, but the problem for me is that while we would have the intention of re-investing, I don't have the confidence in those deciding on targets and conducting negotiations to adequately replace him or strengthen in other areas before the window closes. It's a serious concern for me based on the evidence this summer.
Click to expand...
Why wouldnt we reinvest? That's our strategy to sell and reinvest.

We've just nearly spent 1.2 million out the blue that we got for Critchley, on a player we wanted.

So why wouldn't we continue to invest?

Sorry this is madness, what about Salder so far has said he won't invest?
 
The article mentions Premier League interest, I hope if they're really interested they'll come in and actually bid to drive the price up.

We certainly have to accept if it's 3 million.

That would probably take our overall transfer budget north of 4 million (assuming all the funds go back in to the transfer budget).

If he does go for that sum, we need to replace not only him, but use the money to buy 2-3 quality players in.

Next few weeks will be legacy defining for Sadler and Co.
 
JJpool said:
Why wouldnt we reinvest? That's our strategy to sell and reinvest.

We've just nearly spent 1.2 million out the blue that we got for Critchley, on a player we wanted.

So why wouldn't we continue to invest?

Sorry this is madness, what about Salder so far has said he won't invest?
Click to expand...
He's said it would be re-invested. He just doesn't have faith in those who are recruitng.
 
AmericanTangerine said:
The article mentions Premier League interest, I hope if they're really interested they'll come in and actually bid to drive the price up.

We certainly have to accept if it's 3 million.

That would probably take our overall transfer budget north of 4 million (assuming all the funds go back in to the transfer budget).

If he does go for that sum, we need to replace not only him, but use the money to buy 2-3 quality players in.

Next few weeks will be legacy defining for Sadler and Co.
Click to expand...
Remember a £4m budget isn’t a transfer fee budget, it’s probably 1.5m/2m in transfers and the remaining £2m will be to cover wages etc - still a good amount and we should be able to bring in some quality, especially if Rogers comes on loan to cover the wing
 
If he wants to go then we cash in, if not offer a new contract with a release clause.
 
TangerineTom said:
Remember a £4m budget isn’t a transfer fee budget, it’s probably 1.5m/2m in transfers and the remaining £2m will be to cover wages etc - still a good amount and we should be able to bring in some quality, especially if Rogers comes on loan to cover the wing
Click to expand...
Wages can be covered by our own revenue also.
 
Lot of assumptions in this but I would rather offer a new longer contract at 14k a week to Bowler instead of giving it out to Brannigan or whoever, how many points did he win us last season? If he carries on with the stats he has he will command a better wage fro a Prem club in a couple of seasons anyway
 
TangerineTom said:
Remember a £4m budget isn’t a transfer fee budget, it’s probably 1.5m/2m in transfers and the remaining £2m will be to cover wages etc - still a good amount and we should be able to bring in some quality, especially if Rogers comes on loan to cover the wing
Click to expand...
Why isn't it a transfer budget?

Surely we were already paying "Wages" to Bowler... So our Wage bill goes down as well as the transfer fee coming in?
 
The money didn't come out of nowhere for Brannagan, I'm convinced it was to get someone in with the proceeds of a sale. The timing is what makes me think this, if we had £1.2M regardless of outgoings, why didn't we trigger the release clause a month ago?
 
TangerineTom said:
Remember a £4m budget isn’t a transfer fee budget, it’s probably 1.5m/2m in transfers and the remaining £2m will be to cover wages etc - still a good amount and we should be able to bring in some quality, especially if Rogers comes on loan to cover the wing
Click to expand...
IF,IF, IF Rogers comes. We thought Brannagan, Bishop and Lyons were coming here but they didn't. Don't underestimate the size of the word "if".
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Why isn't it a transfer budget?

Surely we were already paying "Wages" to Bowler... So our Wage bill goes down as well as the transfer fee coming in?
Click to expand...
Big transfers come with higher wages, Bowler on his current contract is on (for arguments sake) 5k, if he’s sold for 3m and we get two 1.5m players on 10k a week, that’s 708k extra per year - not to mention we would be sticking them on 3+ year contracts.

it quickly becomes unsustainable to increase the wage bill without offsetting the cost with the transfer kitty
 
NewburyOne said:
The money didn't come out of nowhere for Brannagan, I'm convinced it was to get someone in with the proceeds of a sale. The timing is what makes me think this, if we had £1.2M regardless of outgoings, why didn't we trigger the release clause a month ago?
Click to expand...
Maybe because we've been trying to sort other deals and then we've got to a point where the season is almost upon us and done our best to secure a last minute deal.?
 
TangerineTom said:
Big transfers come with higher wages, Bowler on his current contract is on (for arguments sake) 5k, if he’s sold for 3m and we get two 1.5m players on 10k a week, that’s 708k extra per year - not to mention we would be sticking them on 3+ year contracts.

it quickly becomes unsustainable to increase the wage bill without offsetting the cost with the transfer kitty
Click to expand...
But we're also going to be letting other players go to make room for new signings and our general day to day revenue will have increased as a result of being in the Championship.

I'm not sure it quickly becomes unsustainable at all, so long as you're sensible about your targets...I think things do start to become 'unsustainable' if you start to prop up your wage budget with transfer revenue.
 
Last edited:
20togo said:
He's said it would be re-invested. He just doesn't have faith in those who are recruitng.
Click to expand...
Misread your post thought it said those we are recruiting.

As for those recruiting...

All this BM runs it on his own stuff... won't be right, SS will help set the structure in line with what we can afford.

So if a deal like this fails for BM it would fail for SS if he were running it. SS will be fully aware of how we run and to what limits.

I'm as disappointed as anyone at not getting some targets in, but in reality 1 went to a massive club in Sunderland instead, happens.

1 was a medical issue and given our track record you might see why we'd take no risk where others might.

The Brannagan one we weren't prepared to raise our top end and break our wage structure, Oxford offered silly money for their level and fanbase size. That won't happen with a lot of other clubs if we go for their players.

We do need to find a way to close more deals but we don't want to get sucked into paying ever more for players that aren't worth it and then that becomes our new ceiling, afterall he's good but he's not that good Brannagan.

I dont know if a sign on fee would help. Maybe over time we'll trim down the squad a little and increase quality and the ceiling can raise that way. IDK.

Ultimately if were prepared to spend that much I think we can get just as good elsewhere, probably a younger player too whose club won't be able to counter with silly money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ste
JJpool said:
Misread your post thought it said those we are recruiting.

As for those recruiting...

All this BM runs it on his own stuff... won't be right, SS will help set the structure in line with what we can afford.

So if a deal like this fails for BM it would fail for SS if he were running it. SS will be fully aware of how we run and to what limits.

I'm as disappointed as anyone at not getting some targets in, but in reality 1 went to a massive club in Sunderland instead, happens.

1 was a medical issue and given our track record you might see why we'd take no risk where others might.

The Brannagan one we weren't prepared to raise our top end and break our wage structure, Oxford offered silly money for their level and fanbase size. That won't happen with a lot of other clubs if we go for their players.

We do need to find a way to close more deals but we don't want to get sucked into paying ever more for players that aren't worth it and then that becomes our new ceiling, afterall he's good but he's not that good Brannagan.

I dont know if a sign on fee would help. Maybe over time we'll trim down the squad a little and increase quality and the ceiling can raise that way. IDK.

Ultimately if were prepared to spend that much I think we can get just as good elsewhere, probably a younger player too whose club won't be able to counter with silly money.
Click to expand...
I didn't mention Simms but broadly speaking I agree with most of your post but will add, I haven't mentioned "limits" because of course there has to be limits. But for us at least 3 high profile deals that were in the public domain have not happened and if I were Sadler, I'd want to know why. I of course accept that deals can fall through.'
 
20togo said:
I didn't mention Simms but broadly speaking I agree with most of your post but will add, I haven't mentioned "limits" because of course there has to be limits. But for us at least 3 high profile deals that were in the public domain have not happened and if I were Sadler, I'd want to know why. I of course accept that deals can fall through.'
Click to expand...
But I think the perception that sadler sits back and is almost in the dark is way off.

He'll be heavily involved in these decisions, or the limits we stick to.

So he'll know why we didn't break the structure for this guy, or why we didn't gamble on someone when the medical said slight risk.

The exact same would happen to Sadler if he were running it under his same limits.

So ultimately this comes down to people rightly frustrated and wanting to have a blame someone, it can't be SS as he is almost untouchable so next in line is Mansford.

Yet to have a pop at him is basically having a pop at Simon, as he is running it for him to his financial limits.

Obviously he doesn't get everything right or run everything past SS, things like prices I've been critical of.

But if we want to be able to pay more wages and spend more, something has to give.

There will have been some mistakes made but ultimately it'll come down to money and the reality is we are where we are right now financially.

We need to find a way to be more competitive and close more deals but not sure what the answer is. I gues that'll happen over time as we sell and reinvest, plus grow the club.
 
JJpool said:
But I think the perception that sadler sits back and is almost in the dark is way off.

He'll be heavily involved in these decisions, or the limits we stick to.

So he'll know why we didn't break the structure for this guy, or why we didn't gamble on someone when the medical said slight risk.

The exact same would happen to Sadler if he were running it under his same limits.

So ultimately this comes down to people rightly frustrated and wanting to have a blame someone, it can't be SS as he is almost untouchable so next in line is Mansford.

Yet to have a pop at him is basically having a pop at Simon, as he is running it for him to his financial limits.

Obviously he doesn't get everything right or run everything past SS, things like prices I've been critical of.

But if we want to be able to pay more wages and spend more, something has to give.

There will have been some mistakes made but ultimately it'll come down to money and the reality is we are where we are right now financially.

We need to find a way to be more competitive and close more deals but not sure what the answer is.
Click to expand...
We don't have to know what the answers are, other people are paid a lot of money to come up with them.
 
Bowler keeps popping up on fmttm forum
After we sold tav to bornmuff yesterday
You never know
I hope not defensively he his a liability
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
We don't have to know what the answers are, other people are paid a lot of money to come up with them.
Click to expand...
Yes but ultimately if the answer is we need to pay more how do we do it?

Doesn't matter how smart the people are or how good they are at selling a dream people won't come if the money isn't as good as other places.

We have financial limits we can't change that much.

Maybe we could reduce quality in the squad outside the main 11 and a few, but have better quality in that 11 and a few.

Maybe we can sponsor the stadium to pay more... a lot wouldn't be happy with that.

Whoknows.
 
JJpool said:
But I think the perception that sadler sits back and is almost in the dark is way off.

He'll be heavily involved in these decisions, or the limits we stick to.

So he'll know why we didn't break the structure for this guy, or why we didn't gamble on someone when the medical said slight risk.

The exact same would happen to Sadler if he were running it under his same limits.

So ultimately this comes down to people rightly frustrated and wanting to have a blame someone, it can't be SS as he is almost untouchable so next in line is Mansford.

Yet to have a pop at him is basically having a pop at Simon, as he is running it for him to his financial limits.

Obviously he doesn't get everything right or run everything past SS, things like prices I've been critical of.

But if we want to be able to pay more wages and spend more, something has to give.

There will have been some mistakes made but ultimately it'll come down to money and the reality is we are where we are right now financially.

We need to find a way to be more competitive and close more deals but not sure what the answer is.
Click to expand...
Sadler appointed Mansford as CEO to get the day to day job and all aspects of running BFC done. He unlike Sadler, has no other job. So it comes down to Mansford to do what he was appointed for. I doubt Sadler has the active involvement in the running of the club, that's what he appointed Mansford for. And he will have given a remit to Mansford of which a big part of that is recruitment. So yep, I seriously doubt that Sadler comes up with targets for recruitment. He puts his faith in Mansford tand others to do that. And as i said earlier if I were Sadler, I'd want to know why at least 3 in the public domain targets didn't materialise.

And i repeat i haven't mentioned limits or anything to do with finance..
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Maybe because we've been trying to sort other deals and then we've got to a point where the season is almost upon us and done our best to secure a last minute deal.?
Click to expand...
That would worry me more, I get that some deals can move quickly as a player not previously available becomes an option but Brannagan has been chased for the last 12 months. If we saw him as a priority, which the fee would suggest, it's pretty poor planning in my eyes. I guess we may have thought other targets were better value or whatever, but 2 days before the season opener just feels 'panicky' to me.
 
JJpool said:
Yes but ultimately if the answer is we need to pay more how do we do it?

Doesn't matter how smart the people are or how good they are at selling a dream people won't come if the money isn't as good as other places.

We have financial limits we can't change that much.

Maybe we could reduce quality in the squad outside the main 11 and a few, but have better quality in that 11 and a few.

Maybe we can sponsor the stadium to pay more... a lot wouldn't be happy with that.

Whoknows.
Click to expand...
Maybe we have to just accept that in our situation, we're going to have to kiss more frogs than most, see plenty of deals break down and have lot's of doors slammed in our faces for the occasional win.

To put it in Ollie type terminology... We're out there in a nightclub and we're not one of the best looking blokes in the room, but we're trying to pull a cracker. Persistence will eventually pay off 👍
 
NewburyOne said:
That would worry me more, I get that some deals can move quickly as a player not previously available becomes an option but Brannagan has been chased for the last 12 months. If we saw him as a priority, which the fee would suggest, it's pretty poor planning in my eyes. I guess we may have thought other targets were better value or whatever, but 2 days before the season opener just feels 'panicky' to me.
Click to expand...
I don't know Newbury... Maybe it was just a deal that we looked at and though "Fuck it" ... Let's pay the asking price and get the deal done. Maybe we thought it was an easy win on a player that we wanted... Who knows?

We can look at these situations in a negative light, we can think the worst whatever.... or we can focus on the players who do come in, the results on the pitch and the overall progress being made.

As I've said elsewhere, I'd rather we were in there trying and failing if we get the occasional win. I recognise and am reconciled to the reality and challenges that a Club of our size and stature are going to face in the Championship.... It is what it is.
 
20togo said:
Sadler appointed Mansford as CEO to get the day to day job and all aspects of running BFC done. He unlike Sadler, has no other job. So it comes down to Mansford to do what he was appointed for. I doubt Sadler has the active involvement in the running of the club, that's what he appointed Mansford for. And he will have given a remit to Mansford of which a big part of that is recruitment. So yep, I seriously doubt that Sadler comes up with targets for recruitment. He puts his faith in Mansford tand others to do that. And as i said earlier if I were Sadler, I'd want to know why at least 3 in the public domain targets didn't materialise.

And i repeat i haven't mentioned limits or anything to do with finance..
Click to expand...
Sadler is UK based now and will be at the end of a phone, if not in person.

He won't be involved in everything but will have set the limits and have input. The limits are important as if we can't match money we won't sign them.

Didn't say he comes up with targets for recruitment.

So to say he'd want to know why they didn't come off, he'll already know, he'll be in touch all the time.

Appleton didn't thank BM he thanked SS for his support with the 1.2 million bid.

Ultimately to spend that sort of cash it'll highly likely be put to SS.
 
Have to admit t'm a bit cynical about this failed medical of Bishop who quickly passed his medical and went to Pompey. It makes me think that we got word that Simms was available for loan so thinking we could perhaps get that deal done we pulled out of signing Bishop. Speculation of course but sounds very feasible. i think.
 
JJpool said:
Sadler is UK based now and will be at the end of a phone, if not in person.

He won't be involved in everything but will have set the limits and have input. The limits are important as if we can't match money we won't sign them.

Didn't say he comes up with targets for recruitment.

So to say he'd want to know why they didn't come off, he'll already know, he'll be in touch all the time.

Appleton didn't thank BM he thanked SS for his support with the 1.2 million bid.

Ultimately to spend that sort of cash it'll highly likely be put to SS.
Click to expand...
You keep bringing up limits, something I've not mentioned. But of course I accept there has to be limits.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Maybe we have to just accept that in our situation, we're going to have to kiss more frogs than most, see plenty of deals break down and have lot's of doors slammed in our faces for the occasional win.

To put it in Ollie type terminology... We're out there in a nightclub and we're not one of the best looking blokes in the room, but we're trying to pull a cracker. Persistence will eventually pay off 👍
Click to expand...
That's not something I can relate to.
 
20togo said:
You keep bringing up limits, something I've not mentioned. But of course I accept there has to be limits.
Click to expand...
Because ultimately those limits dictate how much we can pay and thats the reason we missed out. No amount of magic from a CEO can overcome more money elsewhere if we aren't prepared to break those limits.

As said I don’t think Brannagan was that amazing for us to break out wage structure for, although a good player.

I reckon if we go again for another league 1 midfielder or similar, for that money and our top wage and championship football we'll get them.

Seemed an unlikely move for Oxford to do.

We move on.
 
JJpool said:
Because ultimately those limits dictate how much we can pay and thats the reason we missed out. No amount of magic from a CEO can overcome more money elsewhere if we aren't prepared to break those limits.

As said I don’t think Brannagan was that amazing for us to break out wage structure for, although a good player.

I reckon if we go again for another league 1 midfielder or similar, for that money and our top wage and championship football we'll get them.

Seemed an unlikely move for Oxford to do.

We move on.
Click to expand...
You seem to have an insight into all these deal or believing everything the club say on these subjects. I've put an alternative scenario at #44 which to me seems far more plausible than a failed medical.
 
20togo said:
You seem to have an insight into all these deal or believing everything the club say on these subjects. I've put an alternative scenario at #44 which to me seems far more plausible than a failed medical.
Click to expand...
In fairness to JJ, I don't think the Club has said anything to believe or disbelieve about the Bishop deal, although I don't think the Club would tell lies about their business TBH.

I've liked your post #44, because I think that might be plausible, but then maybe that's why someone just came up with it.... Us pulling out due to something medical related is also plausible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top