Elephant in the room

BM’s Bargains

BM’s Bargains

Well-known member
Nope. I’ve not taken up an interest in adopting large mammals…

I guess most of us know that Josh Bowler will be leaving in the summer, and that’s kind of expected - However, are we even trying to get him on a longer contract than the 12 month one that is meaningless in a months time, or is that it? The silence is very confusing.

Surely getting him on a longer contract worth bigger wages for him, will increase his transfer value (a bit like what almost every club in the world does, hell, even Norburn cost 350k but was reportedly going to cost us double that b4 his injury) and that will more than be paid for by his transfer fee recouped?

It also gives him a little more time to shine at this level, which will undoubtedly increase interest registered from the EPL clubs.

Even now, just over 2 months after the Bournemouth and Forest bids, we are seeing Burnley, Leicester, Brentford, Norwich and Wolves looking to sign him. That’s 5 premier league clubs suddenly taking an interest in him, rather than a couple of championship ones.And that’s two months.

The interest from said Championship clubs was there when he’d only got one league goal, since then he’s scored 6 (7?) and is still developing.
He’s a player who needs confidence and the manager to believe in him. He has that here, but I don’t think he’s ready to leave the nest yet.
Obviously my opinion is tinged with tangerine, but I would love a random Big Marv style contract announcement now for Josh. That would be the icing on the cake.
Opinions?
 
Not sure it would increase his sale value that much, if it did it might price out those who want his services in which case he wouldn’t sign. Club wants to cash in and improve across the board with the money, that’s the absolute right approach IMO.
 
The silence is possibly caused by the club not negotiating with players in public. Sadler and Mansford are not daft, they'll do what they can, Bowler is a key asset. But Bowler and his agent are as aware as anybody of the interest from bigger clubs and I reckon he's unlikely to sign a new contract with us in the circumstances. The 1+1 tells you that he saw us as a shop window, I think.
 
While I agree that management isn't 'daft' and an offer has probably already probably been made (and most likely rejected) I disagree that Bowler was so confident of his future that he only signed a 12-month contract. Footballers get what they can get and he'd already been on loan at Hull for a season without pulling up any trees. There didn't appear to be any auction going on for his services pre-season so, in all likelihood, he took the best offer available. We were just very lucky and, as with Charlie Adam, it's unlikely to be repeated in the near future.
 
Thank God for the silence the club used to leak like a sieve in years gone by not now.

As to Josh signing a new contract why would he unless we completely break the bank in wages for him.
He and his agent aren't stupid they know what other players are getting at clubs do we try and compete?
 
1953 said:
While I agree that management isn't 'daft' and an offer has probably already probably been made (and most likely rejected) I disagree that Bowler was so confident of his future that he only signed a 12-month contract. Footballers get what they can get and he'd already been on loan at Hull for a season without pulling up any trees. There didn't appear to be any auction going on for his services pre-season so, in all likelihood, he took the best offer available. We were just very lucky and, as with Charlie Adam, it's unlikely to be repeated in the near future.
Click to expand...
agree with that although if he took the best offer available and it was reported that there were a good few clubs interested then in a way it was a sort of auction and he came to the highest bidder. I'd love him to stay as there are very few players in the game who can do what he does. And all the options have been discussed at great length on here over the last couple of months.
 
Last edited:
Why would he sign a new contract now if he is intent on leaving? A short contract gives the player the bargaining power as the club know he could leave on a free next year.

Equally, he could decide to run down his contract, hope that his stock rises even higher and then sign a blockbuster of a contract elsewhere in 12 months time.

In doing that there is of course always the risk of injury or loss of form.

I suspect he’ll leave in the close season, that we will get £3/4m for him, and I’m confident that the money will be properly reinvested
 
tigger said:
Why would he sign a new contract now if he is intent on leaving? A short contract gives the player the bargaining power as the club know he could leave on a free next year.

Equally, he could decide to run down his contract, hope that his stock rises even higher and then sign a blockbuster of a contract elsewhere in 12 months time.

In doing that there is of course always the risk of injury or loss of form.

I suspect he’ll leave in the close season, that we will get £3/4m for him, and I’m confident that the money will be properly reinvested
Click to expand...
The problem with letting a contract run down is he could have a serious injury which could keep him out of the game for a year without pay, he would not be as well looked after as a contracted player, and his mega signing on fee would not happen due to future concerns on fitness
 
Another problem for him is lack of game time IMO. He has already suffered this once after a big money transfer. It could easily happen again if he just takes the best financial offer.
 
Yes
Alf said:
Not sure it would increase his sale value that much, if it did it might price out those who want his services in which case he wouldn’t sign. Club wants to cash in and improve across the board with the money, that’s the absolute right approach IMO.
Click to expand...
I understand, I think I’ve not worded it quite how I should’ve. What I meant by his price tag going up was the situation when a player is tied down to a longer contract, in general they will command a bigger transfer fee because that player is committed to the club for said number of years and not months.
 
A few points I feel I didn’t expand upon enough.
Firstly, the command a bigger fee - yes he would, but the point in making here is that it’s not just the fee thag he will command, it’s the club that’s coming in for him. As said, 2 months ago it was a couple of championship teams (and selling him then - in hindsight would’ve been a huge mistake) so now with prem clubs after him, it goes to show thag in 2 months his “worth” has gone up exponentially to the point where those in the top league are sniffing around.
I also think these clubs could very easily sign him for around 5 million (which isn’t much in my opinion) and he goes there, has a couple of average games, his confidence goes and suddenly it’s Everton all over again - that’s why I feel it’s too early, for both parties.

Signing a new contract will provide guaranteed stability and support from a club that loves him, provide him with a platform to express himself and ultimately give us a bit more time to get his replacement sorted.

But it’s all hearsay.
 
We will offer him more than he's on for say 2 years with a guarantee that if a club offers £xxm in a fee and £x for his wages and probably something about a PL team etc, he can negotiate and go with our best wishes.

It gives him a bit of security if his form dips (Yates anyone?) but won't stop him bettering his career/earning more.

He may choose to run his contract down but he's experienced how fickle football can be so I'd be slightly surprised.

Whatever happens, he needs to know that the Club as much as possible in their power to support him to progress professionally and personally so we get the best out of him and there's no ill feeling like has happened in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top