0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Jonathan on July 05, 2022, 09:34:46 amQuote from: DonnyBazR0ver on July 05, 2022, 09:04:32 amQuote from: Jonathan on July 05, 2022, 08:40:39 amI despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan. It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture. We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free. Who knows who else may be on the radar. We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first? How many special cases are you going to present to the board??We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really. Im well aware that it’s easy to say this and that when you’re not holding the purse strings. Contrary to what you many be implying, it is possible to be both eternally grateful to (and supportive of) the owners, but frustrated at the insinuation we’d rule out bringing a top player back because he’d cost a fee. I’m allowed an opinion, and my opinion is that it appears short sighted. That doesn’t make me an ungrateful ****, because I’m not! Bit why do you assume it's the owners? I'm sure GM and Copps will have weighed everything up and perhaps, they don't intend making that special case for Martin. They have to be really pragmatic about these things. If we're talking about a left sided player who can contribute goals, we already have Tommy Rowe. Perhaps, in terms of back up, it's a position they're already earmarked for a loan and would rather prioritise other positions?
Quote from: DonnyBazR0ver on July 05, 2022, 09:04:32 amQuote from: Jonathan on July 05, 2022, 08:40:39 amI despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan. It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture. We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free. Who knows who else may be on the radar. We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first? How many special cases are you going to present to the board??We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really. Im well aware that it’s easy to say this and that when you’re not holding the purse strings. Contrary to what you many be implying, it is possible to be both eternally grateful to (and supportive of) the owners, but frustrated at the insinuation we’d rule out bringing a top player back because he’d cost a fee. I’m allowed an opinion, and my opinion is that it appears short sighted. That doesn’t make me an ungrateful ****, because I’m not!
Quote from: Jonathan on July 05, 2022, 08:40:39 amI despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan. It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture. We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free. Who knows who else may be on the radar. We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first? How many special cases are you going to present to the board??We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really.
I despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan.
Quote from: DonnyBazR0ver on July 05, 2022, 09:49:37 amQuote from: Jonathan on July 05, 2022, 09:34:46 amQuote from: DonnyBazR0ver on July 05, 2022, 09:04:32 amQuote from: Jonathan on July 05, 2022, 08:40:39 amI despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan. It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture. We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free. Who knows who else may be on the radar. We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first? How many special cases are you going to present to the board??We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really. Im well aware that it’s easy to say this and that when you’re not holding the purse strings. Contrary to what you many be implying, it is possible to be both eternally grateful to (and supportive of) the owners, but frustrated at the insinuation we’d rule out bringing a top player back because he’d cost a fee. I’m allowed an opinion, and my opinion is that it appears short sighted. That doesn’t make me an ungrateful ****, because I’m not! Bit why do you assume it's the owners? I'm sure GM and Copps will have weighed everything up and perhaps, they don't intend making that special case for Martin. They have to be really pragmatic about these things. If we're talking about a left sided player who can contribute goals, we already have Tommy Rowe. Perhaps, in terms of back up, it's a position they're already earmarked for a loan and would rather prioritise other positions?I’m not arguing as it’ll just go on and on until I agree that not bringing Josh Martin back is a fantastic idea and all at the club should be applauded for it. And any supporter that wants to see him back here is not worthy of the title.
The attention and scrutiny should be on why we still don’t have a first choice left back
Quote from: ncRover on July 05, 2022, 10:22:00 amThe attention and scrutiny should be on why we still don’t have a first choice left backYet we are trialing a player released by Sunderland that as not played an EFL league game and majority of time when played at U 23 and any cup game played left wing back. He was a winger when in youth football in Scotland. So is he our priority???
What people are perhaps forgetting in the Martin stakes is that we got relegated.He performed well in a poor side at a higher level than we are at now. There will be League One teams willing to offer a six-figure fee for him if he's available for transfer, like it or not we will not likely have a budget which stretches to spending £100-250k on a single player.If he is instead loaned out, Norwich have no reason to loan him to League Two. He has shown he can perform at a higher level and if they want to see one more season of his development before letting him go, it makes sense to send him to a club in League One for the full campaign.We signed Whiteman after a loan as a top half League One side. Mills and Sharp as an upwardly mobile Championship team. Speculating to accumulate is a sound strategy in that sense but it is much harder to do when you drop to the bottom tier.
I have a different concern .Copps is clearly proud of being Sporting Director of a club that is self sustainable ( Club Doncaster). That being so is he likely to step outside that very paradigm to ask the Board to invest further money for transfer fees.If not then I would not expect any proactive investment suggestions from DB .
I don’t know why there’s a debate about whether GM would like to sign Martin, he’s made it clear that he would and that paying a fee is the stumbling block. Now I take the point that if it’s £500k that’s too much for us to shell out, but I very much doubt it’s anywhere near that.
Unpopular opinion. Didn’t actually produce that much, albeit in a dire team. If we are talking 100k for instance we can probably put that to better use elsewhere. We’ve got in wide positions Taylor, Agard, Molyneux, Rowe and whoever we bring in on loan. Do we really need another one?