Planning Ahead

[Michael Shaw]

We need to use Marquis's money for another striker alongside Sadlier if we are to drive up the table. Using it for existing players right now won't get us near a playoff spot by Christmas. Fleetwood will show us how good we currently really are.

[SydneyRover]

I don't agree that the club is being short term minded, they have stated that the championship is a goal and players where available and good enough are signed for 2-3 years. Players contracts will never all run concurrently so there will be always players contracts with different expiry dates.

[Michael Shaw]

None of us know what the problems are, but one thing is for sure, the longer we leave strengthening the side, the more we’re increasing our chances of not having a successful season. Surely, everyone can see that.

Personally, I think we would have had a striker in now, but for the wages problem. Signing Championship strikers on L1 wages is simply not going to happen. Either we drop lucky and someone has a change of heart, or we have to get a loan, or we plumb the depths of L2.

Whatever we do, we should get on and do it.

What I think also (at the same time). We need to get on with it as we are already in the season and dropping points we might need at the end.

[sedwardsdrfc]

I understand how the manager change has held things up and means we'll maybe have to take a few short term decisions to be competitive where we want to be in the table. Shame it was the same last season too which just compounds it this year. Important we start looking at players contracts in good time before a transfer window so they are always secured by a few years.

Think the long term plans, contracts, transfers etc should be looked after by another person who see's the off the field plan through so changes in manager (which lets face it are now a regular event) don't cause so much upheaval.

[redarmy82]

I don't agree that the club is being short term minded, they have stated that the championship is a goal and players where available and good enough are signed for 2-3 years. Players contracts will never all run concurrently so there will be always players contracts with different expiry dates.

They can say the Championship is their goal all they want. Where is the evidence to show that?
There is a reason players are continuously turning the contracts we offer down.

[SydneyRover]

I suppose it comes down to conservative growth which is what you would expect, or I would anyway from club owners that understand how to develop and grow businesses without going broke. Some will disagree and you do which is fine but if we go down the track (or if we had a choice) of pouring money into a raft of new players and we still don't move onwards and upwards, what then? pour more money in, the owners themselves have responsibilities to maintain their own businesses and employees and ensure longevity.

[steve@dcfd]

I don't agree that the club is being short term minded, they have stated that the championship is a goal and players where available and good enough are signed for 2-3 years. Players contracts will never all run concurrently so there will be always players contracts with different expiry dates.

They can say the Championship is their goal all they want. Where is the evidence to show that?
There is a reason players are continuously turning the contracts we offer down.

Yes and that’s why GM left he realised that he couldn’t get the players he wanted to make us stronger. So soon as a Championship club offered him a job he quickly jumped ship. It’s alright having offers in but if you can’t pay the wages then loan players is the way. DM is realising that now.

GB on behalf of the club stated promotion he set expectations. We put bids in for two players which were accepted yet we couldn’t agree terms nor even for one. So if we want to be conservative then don’t keep talking about promotion the manager hasn’t because he knows his squad.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Planning ahead is certainly not spending all our money on one player.

Once DM's squad is complete by 2 Sept, then he can evaluate things up to January including extending contracts or not as each player merits. Also needs to manage players out as well as in.

This could be a consolidation season but could be one where he lays the foundations to kick on.

He's only been in post a few weeks so give him chance!

[steve@dcfd]

Planning ahead is certainly not spending all our money on one player.

Once DM's squad is complete by 2 Sept, then he can evaluate things up to January including extending contracts or not as each player merits. Also needs to manage players out as well as in.

This could be a consolidation season but could be one where he lays the foundations to kick on.

He's only been in post a few weeks so give him chance!

Baz if that’s the case on consolidation then say it not ramp up expectations that they can’t achieve because we can’t pay the wages required.

[Colin C No.3]

We either get a striker in (preferably before Saturday) or I’ll start to wonder if DM’s ‘little black book’ was in fact his bible.

We don’t & can’t afford to be paying players weekly wages in the ‘5 figure’ bracket, which means attracting an experienced forward from the Championship is a no no.

DM must have known this, or at least should have been made aware of it & the ‘situation’ regarding Marquis, who despite those who feel rightly or wrongly Marquis served the club ‘a curve ball’ in signing for Portsmouth’, the board should have ‘factored in’ he was leaving & have contingencies in place to address his departure which given the length of time taken to conduct the interviews for the manager position, must surely have been explained to those who made the shortlist (otherwise they’d be guilty at least of offering the position whilst tying the new mans hand behind his back) so given all of that, where & how did DM & the ‘powers at be’ think it sensible to allow statements like “we’ve identified & are in talks with player/s who’s scoring records are as good as John Marquises”?

It makes supporters feel confused & frustrated & even more disappointing, in fact embarrassing, makes DM, GB & the owners look foolish.

I sincerely hope there is an announcement made this week regarding the acquisition of a ‘recognisably’ talented centre forward that makes me the one looking foolish.

[drfcsteve]

Agree with that Colin. Think the club have partly brought this on themselves by not managing expectations. Saying the aim is promotion, money is available, players are lined up, bids accepted etc etc, obviously people are going to feel disappointed when it looks like the reality is turning out to be different to what was stated.

[SydneyRover]

When you take in that DM has only been with the club a little over 4 weeks I think you have to give him a bit of slack and time to do what he's being paid to do. If buying players was as simple as shopping at Tesco then we would be right to start asking questions but it's clearly not so maybe talk to those here that have hired people and ask them how easy it is then you would get more of an understanding of the difficulties involved.

[silent majority]

I don't agree that the club is being short term minded, they have stated that the championship is a goal and players where available and good enough are signed for 2-3 years. Players contracts will never all run concurrently so there will be always players contracts with different expiry dates.

They can say the Championship is their goal all they want. Where is the evidence to show that?
There is a reason players are continuously turning the contracts we offer down.

Yes and that’s why GM left he realised that he couldn’t get the players he wanted to make us stronger. So soon as a Championship club offered him a job he quickly jumped ship. It’s alright having offers in but if you can’t pay the wages then loan players is the way. DM is realising that now.

GB on behalf of the club stated promotion he set expectations. We put bids in for two players which were accepted yet we couldn’t agree terms nor even for one. So if we want to be conservative then don’t keep talking about promotion the manager hasn’t because he knows his squad.

Wrong, wrong, wrong!

You shouldn't turn assumptions into facts. That's not why GM left, he was happy at the club, but a chance to work at a Championship club and pick up a larger salary for himself was the reason he left. It had nothing to do with not signing the players he wanted, nothing at all.

Where has it become a fact that we can't pay the wages that players want? Where is it fact that we've agreed bids for two players but can't agree terms?

[steve@dcfd]

Martin it was said by DM we’d agreed bids yet the players are not here and deals have dropped through. We are now looking at a loan player. Is that not true or a fact either.

He was that happy with the club that his final gesture was to sign Gomes on a two year deal and not come out in the media to say how good he was that was strange for Grant.

[IDM]

Where is it said, apart from on the forum etc, that those potential deals are dead.?

[steve@dcfd]

Ok they are still alive!! Yet we are only looking at one striker now who is a loan player said by DM. It that not true either.

[silent majority]

Martin it was said by DM we’d agreed bids yet the players are not here and deals have dropped through. We are now looking at a loan player. Is that not true or a fact either.

We've had no bids rejected, none at all.

DM has a striker in mind, someone he's been after for ages. He's been determined to bring this one to the club.

So, in short, your assumptions are wrong.

[IDM]

Ok they are still alive!! Yet we are only looking at one striker now who is a loan player said by DM. It that not true either.

As far as I could see the DFP says this is a priority, but not necessarily the last signing.

[steve@dcfd]

So the two players that we bid for and accepted according to DM what’s happened to those players. If the one he is after is a loan and his parent club are deciding if he can come.

[Jonathan]

Back on topic, and addressing a point made earlier that ”planning ahead is certainly not spending all our money on one player”, surely nobody is suggesting that it is?! To do so would be reckless and foolish. But loans and short term contracts do little to address future planning requirements either, other than to kick the can down the road to a stage where the issues pile up further.

I do understand that the best case scenario is that we loan a player of such quality that we’d have no chance of buying him. And if he helps us to get promoted then he’s done his job and we go into the summer needing to build a new team capable of delivering at a higher level than this one. There’d be some merit in that, but there are a lot of ifs in that scenario.

My view is that the club would benefit from having a larger core group of players that will grow with us beyond this season. There’ll always be comings and goings within and outside that core group, but at least the club’s interests are protected where potential sales are concerned.

Having only seven players (currently) to be able to look at from one season to the next is not enough. And loan signings and short term contracts add to the risk rather than taking away from it, as funds that could otherwise be spent on developing the squad are used to plug gaps.

We had a similar discussion last season about the number of contracted players, and we’ve seen almost an entire team change as a result. We finished last season on such a high at Charlton. Nobody could have foreseen the managerial situation, and I feel we’ve emerged well from that by appointing Darren Moore. But the risks around continuity in the playing staff were foreseen, and rather than building on last season’s success we’re almost starting again. 

[IDM]

It’s a balancing act though.? Longer term contracts can be a problem if the players don’t deliver and are hard to move on.?

[silent majority]

So the two players that we bid for and accepted according to DM what’s happened to those players. If the one he is after is a loan and his parent club are deciding if he can come.

I'm not sure what you're quoting there.

But he's probably referring to the two deals we had in place that were set up by GM, one was Sheaf and the other was Middleton. DM sanctioned the Sheaf deal but was cautious over the Middleton one, and in the end signed Taylor as a permanent signing rather another loan.

But I repeat, we've had no bids rejected, no deals have fallen through due to wages, which means your starting premise is all wrong.

[IDM]

I think the “2 bids” thing is for the two players DM was referring to around the time of the Gillingham game.?

[redarmy82]

So the two players that we bid for and accepted according to DM what’s happened to those players. If the one he is after is a loan and his parent club are deciding if he can come.

I'm not sure what you're quoting there.

But he's probably referring to the two deals we had in place that were set up by GM, one was Sheaf and the other was Middleton. DM sanctioned the Sheaf deal but was cautious over the Middleton one, and in the end signed Taylor as a permanent signing rather another loan.

But I repeat, we've had no bids rejected, no deals have fallen through due to wages, which means your starting premise is all wrong.

What??

On the day Marquis left, Liam Hoden published a story that we had made bids for two strikers, both of which had been accepted.Both who had just as good or if not better records than Marquis. Are you saying this isn't true?

[RoversAlias]

There's an awful lot of people stating their opinion, or some speculation, as a fact and then just referring to it as solid truth thereafter. A very strange world we live in now where this is the norm.

[steve@dcfd]

Phttps://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/doncaster-rovers/doncaster-rovers-darren-moore-details-striker-hunt-as-he-targets-replacements-for-john-marquis-487781

Is this true or not

[IDM]

SM not yet picking up on the specific point doesn’t mean the DFP report was wrong - give him time to reply.?

[silent majority]

Jonathan,

Things are never that simple. You can't put everybody on long term contracts, you have to have some on short term so that they can be let go if they don't meet certain standards or injuries take their toll. But at the same time you need your better players signed up for longer which is what the club have done.

If GM had stayed then most of those deals would have been sorted out, but the break in appointing a new manager has delayed things slightly. However be assured, putting the deals in place for the players you mention has been done, or is being done as we speak.

[silent majority]

I need to do my day job now, so I'll respond later.

[wing commander]

https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/doncaster-rovers/doncaster-rovers-darren-moore-details-striker-hunt-as-he-targets-replacements-for-john-marquis-487781

   I think this is what people are referring too SM not the deals in place prior to GM leaving.Here DM talks about bids in place for 2 strikers and trying to get them over the line..