Theo Corbeanu (Confirmed)

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

yep, that's bollux. A case of slipping the word "generally" in as your get out clause. If Bowler is quality then you won't improve the quality of the squad by losing him and who else plays on the right flank who's as good as him? So yep, you won't improve the balance either. Bowler ain't a luxury he's a quality player and in a team of limited attacking threat it's something we will miss if we lose him.

All that said, a bit of pragmatism has to come into it as to if we get a decent offer for him then it has to be seriously considered.

You seem to be missing the point...

What I'm saying is that you don't need to replace a player 'like for like' in order to improve the overall quality of the squad / team.

So (for example) It's possible to improve the squad (and the balance) by having a better player on the left side, a better player in the middle and a slightly less skilful but more direct player on the right. Of course, you've got to get the right players, but that's kind of the point... I'd expect us to reinvest any fee we got for Bowler.

And as far as I'm concerned it absolutely is a luxury for a side like ours to have so much stock in a single player and that is fundamentally because we are limited if we lose him, which can result from injury, loss of form, suspensions or the fact that decent opposition just seek to nullify the threat.

 

[20togo]

You seem to be missing the point...

What I'm saying is that you don't need to replace a player 'like for like' in order to improve the overall quality of the squad / team.

So (for example) It's possible to improve the squad (and the balance) by having a better player on the left side, a better player in the middle and a slightly less skilful but more direct player on the left. Of course, you've got too get the right players, but that's kind of the point... I'd expect us to reinvest any fee we got for Bowler.

And as far as I'm concerned it absolutely is a luxury for a side like ours to have so much stock in a single player and that is fundamentally because we are limited if we lose him, which can result from injury, loss of form, suspensions or the fact that decent opposition just seek to nullify the threat.

not missing the point. If Bowler is a player who can win you points by getting you a few goals as well as creating others and also a player who will be double mared which should create space for others then it's absolute bollux to suggest that that player is a luxury which is what YOU described him as.

 

[Wizzerboy]

Seen at the ground this morning with someone who you'd suspect was his agent

 

[20togo]

Oh, and just to add it seems you want to bring three new players in to replace the ones we've got., Perhaps you fail to consider the cost of doing that against the cost of keeping Bowler! I'd suggest the former would be considerably higher.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

not missing the point. If Bowler is a player who can get you a few goals as well as creating others and also a player who will be double mared which should create space for others then it's absolute bollux to suggest that that player is a luxury which is what YOU described him as.

There's no need to swear... I'm only expressing my opinion. If you want to get married to individual players, then that's entirely up to you... I'm more interested in how we develop our Team / Squad as a whole over time. As far as I'm concerned, with a year to go on his contract and at a value of £3M then it's a luxury to place that much stock in a single player (for the reasons I've already mentioned).

I'm not saying he's a bad player... But as a club I'm not convinced we have the luxury of being able to sit on a player worth that sort of money, when in all likelihood he'll be off on a free at the end of the season.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Oh, and just to add it seems you want to bring three new players in to replace the ones we've got., Perhaps you fail to consider the cost of doing that against the cost of keeping Bowler! I'd suggest the former would be considerably higher.

Yes, I want to use the Bowler money to bring in new players who are committed to being at the club for the longer term....

What I will say is that if the option exists within our budget to sign Bowler on a three year contract, rather than simply lose him for nothing at the end of the season, then that's a different story altogether.... I'm not convinced that is very likely to happen though are you?

 

[20togo]

There's no need to swear... I'm only expressing my opinion. If you want to get married to individual players, then that's entirely up to you... I'm more interested in how we develop our Team / Squad as a whole over time. As far as I'm concerned, with a year to go on his contract and at a value of £3M then it's a luxury to place that much stock in a single player (for the reasons I've already mentioned).

I'm not saying he's a bad player... But as a club I'm not convinced we have the luxury of being able to sit on a player worth that sort of money, when in all likelihood he'll be off on a free at the end of the season.

Didn't think you were the type to get upset by the word bollux. As for your wind up comment then yep, it just confirms to me you are just as contrary as those you like to criticise. But I already knew that anyway.

Yes, I want to use the Bowler money to bring in new players who are committed to being at the club for the longer term....

What I will say is that if the option exists within our budget to sign Bowler on a three year contract, rather than simply lose him for nothing at the end of the season, then that's a different story altogether.... I'm not convinced that is very likely to happen though are you?

Think I already make that point by saying if a decent offer comes in the board will consider it.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Didn't think you were the type to get upset by the word bollux. As for your wind up comment then yep, it just confirms to me you are just as contrary as those you like to criticise. But I already knew that anyway.


Think I already make that point by saying if a decent offer comes in the board will consider it.

I'm not upset...

I'm not sure what you mean about my "wind up comment"... I'm not trying to be contrary, I'm just saying how I feel about the situation with Bowler. It feels to me like you're getting a bit overly defensive, because you like the player... Fair enough, I get that to a certain extent and I can't deny he's not been a fantastic and entertaining player for us, but that's not really the point....


We also have to face up to the reality of the situation.... And at the risk of repeating myself.... knocking back £3M (which can be reinvested) for a player who will be off on a free at the end of the season, is a massive luxury for a Club in our position... Do you not agree?

 

[Davepick]

I actually asked the MK dons fans for their input on Twitter and one has said that he is a quick and tricky winger and can play on either wing. He’s also got a good shot on him as well, so I reckon he could be a great signing for us.

We have friends who are MKD STHs. Must ask their opinion.

 

[20togo]

I'm not upset...

I'm not sure what you mean about my "wind up comment"... I'm not trying to be contrary, I'm just saying how I feel about the situation with Bowler. It feels to me like you're getting a bit overly defensive, because you like the player... Fair enough, I get that to a certain extent and I can't deny he's not been a fantastic and entertaining player for us, but that's not really the point....


We also have to face up to the reality of the situation.... And at the risk of repeating myself.... knocking back £3M (which can be reinvested) for a player who will be off on a free at the end of the season, is a massive luxury for a Club in our position... Do you not agree?

Wind up comment was about being married to the player. You know that and I know that so quit the crap.

And jeez, do you have difficulty reading! Think I've made the point to you twice now about pragmatism and the board needing to consider any serious offers and 3 mill is a serious offer. That doesn't make him a luxury though so quit that crap too. It just makes him a bloody good player.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Wind up comment was about being married to the player. You know that and I know that so quit the crap.

And jeez, do you have difficulty reading! Think I've made the point to you twice now about pragmatism and the board needing to consider any serious offers and 3 mill is a serious offer. That doesn't make him a luxury though so quit that crap too. It just makes him a bloody good player.

Of course it makes him a luxury...

To hold on to a player worth £3M and lose them for nothing at the end of the season is 100% a luxury. Not only is it a luxury, but it's a waste of a great opportunity to develop and improve our overall squad.

 

[OhhhBarryBarry!]

Of course it makes him a luxury...

To hold on to a player worth £3M and lose them for nothing at the end of the season is 100% a luxury. Not only is it a luxury, but it's a waste of a great opportunity to develop and improve our overall squad.

I agree he is definitely a luxury in the way he plays too. He offers something that nobody else does but like you said, the team as a whole might be stronger with somebody who is more of a disciplined team player.

 

[Philbfctrois]

How the hell can the team be stronger if we lose our most creative player

Nobody comes near him

Some right nonsense on this thread it's like people are stuck in some sort of bizarre Oyston timewharp when all that matters is counting cash

 

[Tangerine_Dream]

How the hell can the team be stronger if we lose our most creative player

Nobody comes near him

Some right nonsense on this thread it's like people are stuck in some sort of bizarre Oyston timewharp when all that matters is counting cash

You aren’t really understanding though.

If Bowler doesn’t agree a new deal then he’s effectively on loan for the season for about £2m or whatever we’ve been offered?

Any money made will be reinvested whereas under Oyston nothing was ever reinvested.

It isn’t anything to do with being stuck in a ‘timewharp’ - it’s having trust that they’ll do the right thing for the club.

I’d say your doubts over the east stand and training ground never coming to fruition because ‘they’re just plans’ is a better example of someone still being stuck in an Oyston ‘timewharp’ and not having that trust.

 

[20togo]

I agree he is definitely a luxury in the way he plays too. He offers something that nobody else does but like you said, the team as a whole might be stronger with somebody who is more of a disciplined team player.

I'd say some-one that offers something that nobody else does in Bowlers case isn't a luxury, it's a bloody good player. The type of player we need. But for the want of repeating myself any serious offers have to be considered.

 

[Adams Kebab]

Corbeanu mostly plays on the right, Rogers is mostly left sided, Rogers hasn't gone anywhere else yet so I'd say the deal is still possible.

Would you not play Rogers on the right then

 

[Adams Kebab]

I disagree…

It doesn’t need to be a ‘like for like’ replacement. You can generally improve the overal balance and quality of the squad.

For a team in our position I’m inclined to think that Bowler is a luxury tbh.

You did say Demi Mitchell was a more intelligent footballer than Bowler though

We can carry Bowler and we should because he’s top quality and I just hope we get to see him a bit longer alongside forward thinking central midfielders.

 

[OhhhBarryBarry!]

I'd say some-one that offers something that nobody else does in Bowlers case isn't a luxury, it's a bloody good player. The type of player we need. But for the want of repeating myself any serious offers have to be considered.

It's all about opinions, I've always found him very frustrating. We've seen in pre season that he still gets us in trouble trying to take people on in our defensive area. We can't afford those kind of mistakes. He's also quite inconsistent.

 

[Grayth]

How the hell can the team be stronger if we lose our most creative player

Nobody comes near him

Some right nonsense on this thread it's like people are stuck in some sort of bizarre Oyston timewharp when all that matters is counting cash

You only see things in black and white then? Fair enough.

 

[20togo]

It's all about opinions, I've always found him very frustrating. We've seen in pre season that he still gets us in trouble trying to take people on in our defensive area. We can't afford those kind of mistakes. He's also quite inconsistent.

I agree with that but I prefer in his case to focus on the positives and the positives comfortably outweigh the negatives. I also believe that if he were to stay that he'd be more consistent this season. Think pre-season has given a good indication of that. And let's face it, none of our other players are being talked about as moving upwards to a better team. Even Marv who I highly rate seems to not interest the better teams.

 

[Grayth]

I agree with that but I prefer in his case to focus on the positives and the positives comfortably outweigh the negatives. I also believe that if he were to stay that he'd be more consistent this season. Think pre-season has given a good indication of that. And let's face it, none of our other players are being talked about as moving upwards to a better team. Even Marv who I highly rate seems to not interest the better teams.

Yep. The same people who complain about a talent like Bowler probably used to complain about Matt Phillips not winning his headers and Gnanduillet not being able to run faster than he was able to run.

 

[TimperleyTangerine]

It would be great to keep Josh and for him to sign a new contract. If we can achieve that and strengthen the squad it would be some achievement. However, it seems Josh has no interest in signing a new contract, so we have to be realistic. It gets us nowhere keeping a player who essentially doesn’t want a future at Pool, and giving up maybe a £2m fee.

I’d expect us to be more of an all-round stronger team this season, particularly from midfield, so our reliance on Josh’s magic might not be as crucial.

Things change, we’ve lost good players in the past and will do so in the future.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

You did say Demi Mitchell was a more intelligent footballer than Bowler though

We can carry Bowler and we should because he’s top quality and I just hope we get to see him a bit longer alongside forward thinking central midfielders.

Yes... I did say that... Probably not one of my finest moments that TBF


I'm not sure what you mean when you say "We can carry Bowler"?

I think 20's has misunderstood what I meant by 'Luxury' as well... There's a term "Luxury Player"... and maybe that's where the confusion is..

I'm not suggesting he's a luxury player in the typical sense (though of course, you can certainly make that argument)... What I'm saying is that turning down £3M for a player who is out of contract at the end of the season is a luxury....

I was also making the point that improvement of a team doesn't have to be made by a 'like for like' replacement... and that £3M can be invested to improve the team as a whole.

How the hell can the team be stronger if we lose our most creative player

Nobody comes near him

Some right nonsense on this thread it's like people are stuck in some sort of bizarre Oyston timewharp when all that matters is counting cash

It's fairly simple really..


But let's try and make it even simpler...


Player A generates 10 Goals Per season (he's awesome and called John Bowlhead)

Player B generates 3 goals per season (he's not so awesome and called B J Hamstrung)

Player C generates 3 goals per season (he's also not that awesome and called Barry Magazine)


So we sell

John Bowlhead for £3M
B J Hamstrung for £500K
Barry Magazine for £400K


and we buy

Dave Goalman for £1.5M who gets you 8 goals per season
Brian Sliderule Pass for £1.2M who gets you another 8 goals per season
Geoff the Spot Kick for £1.3M who gets you another 8 goals per season

That's 50% more goals


It's not ** rocket science TBH

 

[Grayth]

Yes... I did say that... Probably not one of my finest moments that TBF


I'm not sure what you mean when you say "We can carry Bowler"?

I think 20's has misunderstood what I meant by 'Luxury' as well... There's a term "Luxury Player"... and maybe that's where the confusion is..

I'm not suggesting he's a luxury player in the typical sense (though of course, you can certainly make that argument)... What I'm saying is that turning down £3M for a player who is out of contract at the end of the season is a luxury....

I was also making the point that improvement of a team doesn't have to be made by a 'like for like' replacement... and that £3M can be invested to improve the team as a whole.


It's fairly simple really..


But let's try and make it even simpler...


Player A generates 10 Goals Per season (he's awesome and called John Bowlhead)

Player B generates 3 goals per season (he's not so awesome and called B J Hamstrung)

Player C generates 3 goals per season (he's also not that awesome and called Barry Magazine)


So we sell

John Bowlhead for £3M
B J Hamstrung for £500K
Barry Magazine for £400K


and we buy

Dave Goalman for £1.5M who gets you 8 goals per season
Brian Sliderule Pass for £1.2M who gets you another 8 goals per season
Geoff the Spot Kick for £1.3M who gets you another 8 goals per season

That's 50% more goals


It's not ** rocket science TBH

Can't believe we got that for Magazine.

 

[Lost Seasider]

Would you not play Rogers on the right then

Why would you play him on the right when you've got fit specialists in that position?

Weird.

 

[20togo]

I think 20's has misunderstood what I meant by 'Luxury' as well... There's a term "Luxury Player"... and maybe that's where the confusion is..

I'm not suggesting he's a luxury player in the typical sense (though of course, you can certainly make that argument)... What I'm saying is that turning down £3M for a player who is out of contract at the end of the season is a luxury....

I've already stated at least twice now that serious offers for Bowler have to be considered. But the comment I first reacted to was that a TEAM in our position Bowler was a luxury player. Perhaps you should have said CLUB rather than team. The CLUB should consider offers for Bowler but he is much more than a luxury player to the team. He is pretty much the only attacking threat we possessed last season. And as such losing that threat makes our team worse.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I've already stated at least twice now that serious offers for Bowler have to be considered. But the comment I first reacted to was that a TEAM in our position Bowler was a luxury player. Perhaps you should have said CLUB rather than team. The CLUB should consider offers for Bowler but he is much more than a luxury player to the team. He is pretty much the only attacking threat we possessed last season. And as such losing that threat makes our team worse.

I’m not sure you noticed 20’s (clearly you haven’t), but that comment was part of an ongoing conversation with Phil about selling Bowler (for offers above £2M).

I’m not really interested in getting involved in a nit picky (let’s prove you’re wrong) discussion about the semantics of what I should have said.

I’ve been pretty clear in explaining where I’m coming from on this.

And losing him only makes the team worse f we fail to reinvest the fee. Plus you have to look at the reality that you will lose him anyway (for nothing) in 12 months.

 

[20togo]

I’m not sure you noticed 20’s (clearly you haven’t), but that comment was part of an ongoing conversation with Phil about selling Bowler (for offers above £2M).

I’m not really interested in getting involved in a nit picky (let’s prove you’re wrong) discussion about the semantics of what I should have said.

I’ve been pretty clear in explaining where I’m coming from on this.

And losing him only makes the team worse f we fail to reinvest the fee. Plus you have to look at the reality that you will lose him anyway (for nothing) in 12 months.

Of course I'd noticed but maybe you haven't noticed that nowhere ever do I put a valuation on Bowler. And unlike you I've been pretty clear where I'm coming from. Talking about the CLUB finances and the TEAMS players are separate issues.

And your last para is just guesswork, Reinvesting money doesn't guarantee anything.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Of course I'd noticed but maybe you haven't noticed that nowhere ever do I put a valuation on Bowler. And unlike you I've been pretty clear where I'm coming from. Talking about the CLUB finances and the TEAMS players are separate issues.

And your last para is just guesswork, Reinvesting money doesn't guarantee anything.

It's not so much that I had noticed... I'm just not very interested.

I was responding to Phil about my thoughts on selling Bowler.

As I've said... I really don't have the inclination to get involved in a dick waving contest with you mate... It's tiresome..

If you want to have a straightforward conversation... let me know

 

[20togo]

It's not so much that I had noticed... I'm just not very interested.

I was responding to Phil about my thoughts on selling Bowler.

As I've said... I really don't have the inclination to get involved in a dick waving contest with you mate... It's tiresome..

If you want to have a straightforward conversation... let me know

I simply pointed out your last para was bollux. You can't possibly know that only by not re-investing the money does it make the team worse.

 

[Simonized]

@ste A very unlikely double ton when this was posted me thinks

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I simply pointed out your last para was bollux. You can't possibly know that only by not re-investing the money does it make the team worse.

You're trying to engage in all this bullshit about TEAM and CLUB etc. etc...

I've clarified myself, yet you want to try and make some kind of "I'm better than you" point... Why? Do you do that when you have a conversation with someone in the pub?

is it that difficult just to engage with me normally?

My last paragraph isn't 'bollux' at all....

First and foremost Bowler's contract will end at the end of this coming season... As things stand, that is an undeniable fact.. So unless we manage to pin him down to a new contract (which based on what we've seen so far, seems pretty unlikely) he will be off for nothing. So that's no Josh Bowler and no £3M

Second... It is possible to improve our team / squad, by losing Josh Bowler and reinvesting the money across a number of players. There are obviously no guarantees, but on balance it would make sense to accept that sort of offer.

Third.. To keep hold of a player in the face of a £3M offer only to lose them on a free at the end of the season, is a 'luxury' that a Team / Club in our position cannot afford and would represent poor judgement IMHO.

 

[Briggsysgonagetya]

@ste A very unlikely double ton when this was posted me thinks

BFCx3 and 20s are arguing, this could easily get to a 1000 posts

 

[20togo]

You're trying to engage in all this bullshit about TEAM and CLUB etc. etc...

I've clarified myself, yet you want to try and make some kind of "I'm better than you" point... Why? Do you do that when you have a conversation with someone in the pub?

is it that difficult just to engage with me normally?

My last paragraph isn't 'bollux' at all....

First and foremost Bowler's contract will end at the end of this coming season... As things stand, that is an undeniable fact.. So unless we manage to pin him down to a new contract (which based on what we've seen so far, seems pretty unlikely) he will be off for nothing. So that's no Josh Bowler and no £3M

Second... It is possible to improve our team / squad, by losing Josh Bowler and reinvesting the money across a number of players. There are obviously no guarantees, but on balance it would make sense to accept that sort of offer.

Third.. To keep hold of a player in the face of a £3M offer only to lose them on a free at the end of the season, is a 'luxury' that a Team / Club in our position cannot afford and would represent poor judgement IMHO.

Of course it's bollox. You said the team would ONLY be worse if we fail to invest. You don't know that to be the case. Example. We invested 750k in Joe Nuttall. Did he improve the team or do anything. My point was that there is no guarantee that investment improves the team on the player you have lost.

And for some strange reason you keep raising this same point about Bowlers valuation and letting him go for a certain amount. I have never disagreed with that. So yeah, we may take the money for Bowler but imo the team would be worse without him. You say otherwise. based on guesswork.

 

[I bleed Tangerine]

Seems like it's a done deal now.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1552670314546561025

 

[I bleed Tangerine]

Reportedly had his medical today

 

[Torycorner]

BFCx3 and 20s are arguing, this could easily get to a 1000 posts

Hey…….the are merely “debating”
They are both “Passionate Pool Fans” both having valid points…that’s all.
UTMP

 

[Bamber]

You're trying to engage in all this bullshit about TEAM and CLUB etc. etc...

I've clarified myself, yet you want to try and make some kind of "I'm better than you" point... Why? Do you do that when you have a conversation with someone in the pub?

is it that difficult just to engage with me normally?

My last paragraph isn't 'bollux' at all....

First and foremost Bowler's contract will end at the end of this coming season... As things stand, that is an undeniable fact.. So unless we manage to pin him down to a new contract (which based on what we've seen so far, seems pretty unlikely) he will be off for nothing. So that's no Josh Bowler and no £3M

Second... It is possible to improve our team / squad, by losing Josh Bowler and reinvesting the money across a number of players. There are obviously no guarantees, but on balance it would make sense to accept that sort of offer.

Third.. To keep hold of a player in the face of a £3M offer only to lose them on a free at the end of the season, is a 'luxury' that a Team / Club in our position cannot afford and would represent poor judgement IMHO.

What if keeping Bowler for the season gives us an outside chance of sneaking into the play offs? How do you quantify that?

 

[hertfordseasider]

Hey…….the are merely “debating”
They are both “Passionate Pool Fans” both having valid points…that’s all.
UTMP

But we could still be on for 1000 posts

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Of course it's bollox. You said the team would ONLY be worse if we fail to invest. You don't know that to be the case. Example. We invested 750k in Joe Nuttall. Did he improve the team or do anything. My point was that there is no guarantee that investment improves the team on the player you have lost.

And for some strange reason you keep raising this same point about Bowlers valuation and letting him go for a certain amount. I have never disagreed with that. So yeah, we may take the money for Bowler but imo the team would be worse without him. You say otherwise.

OK... There's no guarantee... But then in 12 Months we lose Bowler for nothing ...

I'm raising the point about Bowler's valuation, because that was the entire basis for my original comment to Phil.

You're right... I disagree... In fact I'd go as far as to say that if we lose Bowler, but gain Brannagan and Morgan Rogers (as well as the players already brought in this transfer window) then we already start this season with a stronger squad than we finished last season with.

What if keeping Bowler for the season gives us an outside chance of sneaking into the play offs? How do you quantify that?

That feels like roulette wheel mentality, rather than sound decision making to me...you're essentially pinning your promotion hopes on a single player over a single season. We can't make decisions based on 'pie in the sky' potential outcomes, they have to be made with sound judgement.

 

[Matesrates]

I

What if keeping Bowler for the season gives us an outside chance of sneaking into the play offs? How do you quantify that?

What do you mean, outside chance! We’re going up

 

[Adams Kebab]

Why would you play him on the right when you've got fit specialists in that position?

Weird.

It was only because you've had left back at right back and a left back in centre mid in recent days I thought you might mix it up. Never mind.

Oh and I can’t believe we might be signing another player when there’s no space in the squad… madness

 

[Adams Kebab]

Yes... I did say that... Probably not one of my finest moments that TBF


I'm not sure what you mean when you say "We can carry Bowler"?

I think 20's has misunderstood what I meant by 'Luxury' as well... There's a term "Luxury Player"... and maybe that's where the confusion is..

I'm not suggesting he's a luxury player in the typical sense (though of course, you can certainly make that argument)... What I'm saying is that turning down £3M for a player who is out of contract at the end of the season is a luxury....

I was also making the point that improvement of a team doesn't have to be made by a 'like for like' replacement... and that £3M can be invested to improve the team as a whole.

Yeh I get you and agree.

I love watching Bowler but with his contract I would begrudgingly take 3mill.

 

[Markobfc]

What time do you reckon they are announcing this... 5pm... for both

 

[Lost Seasider]

It was only because you've had left back at right back and a left back in centre mid in recent days I thought you might mix it up. Never mind.

So you think playing a full back on the wrong flank if there are no other fit options there is an idiotic idea worthy of derision, fair enough, that's your opinion, and I'm sure you'd never suggest that the club do it.

Don't mind if I check, do you? No? Good.......................

Gets pushed off the ball far too easy which happened today and cost him a yellow.

Husband
Sterling
Garbutt
James

In that order.

Yes, you do look like a bit of a tit, don't you?

 

[20togo]

OK... There's no guarantee... But then in 12 Months we lose Bowler for nothing ...

I'm raising the point about Bowler's valuation, because that was the entire basis for my original comment to Phil.

You're right... I disagree... In fact I'd go as far as to say that if we lose Bowler, but gain Brannagan and Morgan Rogers (as well as the players already brought in this transfer window) then we already start this season with a stronger squad than we finished last season with.



That feels like roulette wheel mentality, rather than sound decision making to me...you're essentially pinning your promotion hopes on a single player over a single season. We can't make decisions based on 'pie in the sky' potential outcomes, they have to be made with sound judgement.

....we brought TJJ in last season.....look how he turned out. And yep, I may be being pedantic but a stronger team is the most important criteria. A stronger team should mean a stronger squad. On paper Brannagan and Rogers and even this Wolves player look good but all three of them will still have to prove themselves at this level. Bowler had done that. But if you want to call it a risk or whatever, those three for Bowler seems to make sense.

But Bowler will be missed if he goes and hope wherever he goes he proves all his doubters on here wrong.

 

[Wizaard]

Of course it's bollox. You said the team would ONLY be worse if we fail to invest. You don't know that to be the case. Example. We invested 750k in Joe Nuttall. Did he improve the team or do anything. My point was that there is no guarantee that investment improves the team on the player you have lost.

And for some strange reason you keep raising this same point about Bowlers valuation and letting him go for a certain amount. I have never disagreed with that. So yeah, we may take the money for Bowler but imo the team would be worse without him. You say otherwise. based on guesswork.

I suppose the point is, both CLUB and TEAM will be worse off if he leaves on a free next season, whereas if he is sold, one of the two benefits, and possibly both if the fee is reinvested.

 

[Adams Kebab]

So you think playing a full back on the wrong flank if there are no other fit options there is an idiotic idea worthy of derision, fair enough, that's your opinion, and I'm sure you'd never suggest that the club do it.

Don't mind if I check, do you? No? Good.......................




Yes, you do look like a bit of a tit, don't you?

Well when one can play left back and has experience of doing so and I’ve seen it with my own eyes like I had with Sterling then no I don’t.

When you pick one you’ve never seen play in a position just like you did with Thompson on the basis he’s a full back then yes I do you whopper.

Hope this helps

Stick to counting the squad size you tit

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

....we brought TJJ in last season.....look how he turned out. And yep, I may be being pedantic but a stronger team is the most important criteria. A stronger team should mean a stronger squad. On paper Brannagan and Rogers and even this Wolves player look good but all three of them will still have to prove themselves at this level. Bowler had done that. But if you want to call it a risk or whatever, those three for Bowler seems to make sense.

But Bowler will be missed if he goes and hope wherever he goes he proves all his doubters on here wrong.

I'm not sure he'll be missed quite as much as you think TBH... He was pretty ineffective for a big part of last season and finished the season feigning injury..

There's always a risk that individual players might not work out, just like there's a risk that any player can be injured, which is why it's wise not to have too much stock in any one individual.

Whichever way you look at it, it seems we need to plan for life after Bowler.... I'm pretty sure we can survive and improve without him.... I mean let's face it... We've lost plenty of much better players than Bowler and improved afterwards.

 

[Lost Seasider]

Well when one can play left back and has experience of doing so and I’ve seen it with my own eyes like I had with Sterling then no I don’t.

When you pick one you’ve never seen play in a position just like you did with Thompson on the basis he’s a full back then yes I do you whopper.

Hope this helps

Stick to counting the squad size you tit

Have you seen much of Thompson?

Had anyone seen Sterling play at LB, before he played at LB?