Tommy Conway - Signs for 'Boro- Official

[Back of the Dolman]

3 minutes ago, 2015 said:

Really? It's hardly slave labour is it.

I’ll refer you to my response to Lew - T

[frenchred]

1 minute ago, Back of the Dolman said:

So you’d be okay if your employer treated you differently to your other colleagues simply because you were planning to leave ?

Especially if you were still happy to still work to the best of your ability ?

I would imagine it happens in most companies

[Back of the Dolman]

4 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

Just going in circles here. 

Agree with you on that, not long till the season starts and we’ll have other things to discuss

[Back of the Dolman]

1 minute ago, frenchred said:

I would imagine it happens in most companies

Think that depends on the line of work and the competence and decency of the management 

[BCFCGav]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Again you’re letting your opinion of Conway’s game form your agenda.

The club value him highly, and have put that high price out to one club who are interested.  I’m not gonna tell you the club or the amount…but even me who’s a big Conway advocate was shocked at how high a price tag they put on him.  I sort my tea out!

If they want that kind of figure, he won’t be leaving this window.  And that was before yesterday’s events worsened their bargaining power.  We are affective it saying that we are gonna let him run his contract down.

You don’t need to imagine, he said it as soon as he arrived!

Surely they have to lower the asking price don't they? Keeping him prisoner here for a year then losing him for compo seems like madness.

Could the asking price touted be a 'we aren't going to be screwed over' kinda thing? And not the actual price? Or is that not how it's done?

[frenchred]

1 minute ago, Back of the Dolman said:

Think that depends on the line of work and the competence and decency of the management 

Fair assumption

[W-S-M Seagull]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You don’t need to imagine, he said it as soon as he arrived!

We're back to that integrity thing again. 

It's OK for Manning to jump ship from Oxford after they rescued his career. Its OK for Manning to consider us as a stepping stone. But as soon as a player has similar thoughts, nah you're training with the u21s.

[mozo]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

  We are affective it saying that we are gonna let him run his contract down.

This is why I mentioned the loan scenario though Dave. Because ultimately, you, me, Tommy and Tins all know that Conway isn't going to rot in our reserves for the next year.

If his agent can't find a buyer, he'll go out on loan. Either way, we won't be paying his wages and there won't be a toxicity around the place.

The big decision really is that we decided to replace him, which we have done. 

Ideally a buyer would have come along ages ago, but they haven't, which means that value is declining by the day anyway. 

This is potentially more like the Chris Martin (different circs, same situation) situation than Bakinson or Massengo, but hey, now I'm the one creating stories! 

[Silvio Dante]

We are going in circles here but the absolute fact is that it does not matter if people think Conway is a good, poor or mediocre player so can we stop using that as any kind of justification! There are only two angles that matter here:

- Has the way we’ve done things reduced the price we are likely to recieve?

- Has the way we’ve done things likely to have impacted the morale of the rest of the squad (note EP article)

Whether you think Tommy overshoots his ability, if you think Danny Coles is a **** or think he should be playing it matters not. It is simply he’s being sold, we should all accept that as the club decision and there are only two aspects which really matter in the final reckoning.

[Supersonic Robin]

A question to those who think Conway owes us a new contract as a gesture of goodwill on the basis that he's been at the club for a number of years......

If Conway had been crap for the past 2 seasons and was looking likely to have a career in the lower leagues, do you think we'd be offering him a new contract as a gesture of goodwill for his service?

[sh1t_ref_again]

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

We are going in circles here but the absolute fact is that it does not matter if people think Conway is a good, poor or mediocre player so can we stop using that as any kind of justification! There are only two angles that matter here:

- Has the way we’ve done things reduced the price we are likely to recieve?

- Has the way we’ve done things likely to have impacted the morale of the rest of the squad (note EP article)

Whether you think Tommy overshoots his ability, if you think Danny Coles is a **** or think he should be playing it matters not. It is simply he’s being sold, we should all accept that as the club decision and there are only two aspects which really matter in the final reckoning.

Would say No & No

Only reduced the price perhaps had we sold him last summer, but with the hope of new contract offers sure they would have hoped to persuade Tommy to sign, him being put in teh U21s will make no difference, his agent  will be telling everyone who will listen that he is not staying  or signing a contract, to try an get a new deal elsewhere and no doubt a big pay day himself

These are professional footballers, not mates down the pub, whilst some will feel sorry for TC, equally they know its his decision to not sign a contract and move on as is his right to do so

 

[IAmNick]

Blimey there are some borderline vindictive people on here. I'm glad you're not my boss!

Either that or seriously struggling to separate the idea of being a fan from being an employee (player).

The club have an obligation to do as well as we can on the pitch with the resources we have, to maximise the value of our players, and yes, I believe we also have a responsibility/obligation to treat our players well and develop them. 

I'm struggling to see how relegating Conway to the kids is doing any of the above, unless he's being disruptive which we have zero evidence of. 

The idea that if he doesn't sleep in city pyjamas he's screwing us around is so childish to me. He's a young lad wanting to progress in his career and do what's best for him.

In the reverse situation if the club thought he wasn't good enough for us would we be wanting him to get a new contract because he's been loyal? Or is the idea of total loyalty only one way in this situation?

Unless he's being disruptive he's our player, we're paying him, we want to maximise his value as he's not staying, I'd treat him as a proper member of the squad and play him accordingly personally (provided he's not totally blocking our new forwards 

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

Surely they have to lower the asking price don't they? Keeping him prisoner here for a year then losing him for compo seems like madness.

Could the asking price touted be a 'we aren't going to be screwed over' kinda thing? And not the actual price? Or is that not how it's done?

I have no issue with them starting high, but they seem shocked nobody wants to pay it / get near it.…but then don’t adjust to the market for that player under those circumstances.

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

This is why I mentioned the loan scenario though Dave. Because ultimately, you, me, Tommy and Tins all know that Conway isn't going to rot in our reserves for the next year.

If his agent can't find a buyer, he'll go out on loan. Either way, we won't be paying his wages and there won't be a toxicity around the place.

The big decision really is that we decided to replace him, which we have done. 

Ideally a buyer would have come along ages ago, but they haven't, which means that value is declining by the day anyway. 

This is potentially more like the Chris Martin (different circs, same situation) situation than Bakinson or Massengo, but hey, now I'm the one creating stories! 

Agree Mozo…probably best outcome as of today.

2 minutes ago, Supersonic Robin said:

A question to those who think Conway owes us a new contract as a gesture of goodwill on the basis that he's been at the club for a number of years......

If Conway had been crap for the past 2 seasons and was looking likely to have a career in the lower leagues, do you think we'd be offering him a new contract as a gesture of goodwill for his service?

If those fans knew what we’ve done to other players re contracts in the recent past, they might think there isn’t ANY goodwill in football.

[KegCity]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

If those fans knew what we’ve done to other players re contracts in the recent past, they might think there isn’t ANY goodwill in football.

We won't know if we're not told...

[sh1t_ref_again]

1 hour ago, And Its Smith said:

I’m sure we can ALL agree on this:

 

If his attitude has been good then this is a poor decision. If his attitude has been poor then it’s the right decision.

 

Surely, for once, OTIB can unite in the above statement!   I’d love to hear from anyone who disagrees 

Sorry no don't agree

It does not have to do with attitude, what if he is currently in discussions with other clubs to move on as the club have stated they want him sold this window, should he be still training with our 1st team when perhaps about to go to a rival?

[Lew-T]

16 minutes ago, Back of the Dolman said:

So you’d be okay if your employer treated you differently to your other colleagues simply because you were planning to leave ?

Especially if you were still happy to still work to the best of your ability ?

Football is in a world of its own though. It’s a totally different business to what the majority are used to.

[Back of the Dolman]

1 minute ago, Lew-T said:

Football is in a world of its own though. It’s a totally different business to what the majority are used to.

I don’t think is as simple as that, but like I’ve always said it’s all about opinions and everyone has the right to that.

If you’re right though then the majority of us having not been involved in the world of professional football as anything apart from a fan should stop commenting as we don’t understand it.

But that’s never going to happen as we all like to get our point of view across hence why we engage in these threads

[IAmNick]

6 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Sorry no don't agree

It does not have to do with attitude, what if he is currently in discussions with other clubs to move on as the club have stated they want him sold this window, should he be still training with our 1st team when perhaps about to go to a rival?

So any time there's interest in a player and they may be sold we stick them in the U21s untill it's resolved? 

Surely that'd be happening to multiple players on and off every window, some of them for weeks or even months over the summer?

[Kibs]

So many assumptions, conspiracies and people making things up to suit their point of view, it’s hilarious.

Both parties are perfectly within their rights to do what they have done/are doing.

Hopefully it works out reasonably well for all but this isn’t the first or last time this will happen. 

 

[Major Isewater]

36 minutes ago, 2015 said:

This club have had much better strikers than him down the years. Not sure why we're all in a bit of a tiz about it, maybe because he came from our academy, but he isn't all that and we've seen much better come and go over the years so unsure why we all have our nickers in a twist.

He doesn't want to sign a new deal, or even negotiate on it, so yeah see you later then, no one is bigger than the club which he certainly isn't.

Based on my own eyes - I don't think he will be a big miss for us.

He is very close to realising his potential. We have nurtured him up to the point where it looks like this best years are going to be for the benefit of another club and we will get peanuts for our investment. That sticks in the throat. 
He has shown enough to be considered a full international for the Jocks and has had two solid Championship seasons despite being marred by injuries and a change of management. 
He is a good young player who IMHO is going to have a top career. 
Of course no one is bigger than the club though try telling that to the Lansdowns and their cronies. 

[Silvio Dante]

10 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Would say No & No

Only reduced the price perhaps had we sold him last summer, but with the hope of new contract offers sure they would have hoped to persuade Tommy to sign, him being put in teh U21s will make no difference, his agent  will be telling everyone who will listen that he is not staying  or signing a contract, to try an get a new deal elsewhere and no doubt a big pay day himself

These are professional footballers, not mates down the pub, whilst some will feel sorry for TC, equally they know its his decision to not sign a contract and move on as is his right to do so

 

See I’d probably go Yes and No.

Taking the no first - you’re right in the fact these are professional footballers. They’ll know it’s a possible outcome, and will be focussed on what they can do in terms of results. The risk here is that players may tread more carefully with us in future, but broadly even if he is a popular member of the squad, I don’t think it will necessarily impact on morale to enough of a level to matter.

Moving to the yes, I’m in total agreement that Tommys agent would have been alerting other clubs to his clients intent and likely availability. But what wasn’t there before was the club indicating a desperation to sell. Tommy could have said he was looking to move but if we didn’t want to sell, we didn’t have to. The market now knows we have no intent of using the player so there is no “value on the pitch” premium clubs have to pay.

Understand the point but when you move from an unwilling/unknown seller to a desparate seller, it reduces the price in any circumstances.

[slartibartfast]

27 minutes ago, Back of the Dolman said:

So you’d be okay if your employer treated you differently to your other colleagues simply because you were planning to leave ?

Especially if you were still happy to still work to the best of your ability ?

Absolutely, it's basically called gardening leave, and if I were to leave for a similar post and I had access to sensitive info, then I would expect it. Same with TC, as someone said, he could go to another Champ club next week, armed with details of how we're planning to set up !

[Major Isewater]

Just now, Silvio Dante said:

See I’d probably go Yes and No.

Taking the no first - you’re right in the fact these are professional footballers. They’ll know it’s a possible outcome, and will be focussed on what they can do in terms of results. The risk here is that players may tread more carefully with us in future, but broadly even if he is a popular member of the squad, I don’t think it will necessarily impact on morale to enough of a level to matter.

Moving to the yes, I’m in total agreement that Tommys agent would have been alerting other clubs to his clients intent and likely availability. But what wasn’t there before was the club indicating a desperation to sell. Tommy could have said he was looking to move but if we didn’t want to sell, we didn’t have to. The market now knows we have no intent of using the player so there is no “value on the pitch” premium clubs have to pay.

Understand the point but when you move from an unwilling/unknown seller to a desparate seller, it reduces the price in any circumstances.

In every possible outcome his next club is going to be getting a bargain. 

[KegCity]

2 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

In every possible outcome his next club is going to be getting a bargain. 

That's the club's fault for giving a promising player, fresh off his first season of men's football, a 3 year deal.

[ashton_fan]

Conway's situation is now the same as Massengo the season before last, Nige had no hesitation sending him to the under 21's when he.made it clear he wanted to leave.

[Back of the Dolman]

3 minutes ago, slartibartfast said:

Absolutely, it's basically called gardening leave, and if I were to leave for a similar post and I had access to sensitive info, then I would expect it. Same with TC, as someone said, he could go to another Champ club next week, armed with details of how we're planning to set up !

It’s not GCHQ, there is so much analysis in football nowadays that there is very little that clubs don’t know about each other.

Manning has a style just like all managers do and that’s known.

If it was a case of keeping secrets then he’d be banned from the HPC altogether as he’ll see and hear things.

i wonder if all the players have had to sign an agreement to not tell Tommy our secrets.

i certainly get what you’re saying when it’s comes to official secrets or multi million pound business deals but not Liam Mannings tactics.

[bcfc01]

43 minutes ago, Back of the Dolman said:

So you’d be okay if your employer treated you differently to your other colleagues simply because you were planning to leave ?

Especially if you were still happy to still work to the best of your ability ?

Depends on what industry it is and what the position entails, it can be quite dispassionate.

Some will  get the employee out of the door immediately, no notice period to work, just an hour to clear the office, and out the door with personal stuff in a box, all the while having all accounts disabled. I have experience of that.

With Tommy, I think it is a bit harsh and unnecessary, he's not working on a government contract he's a footballer. TCs professionalism and attitude isn't in doubt imo and LM said yesterday that there is no personal problem between the two.  LM may be thinking about a player who is leaving, potentially to another club in the same division, being in full receipt of exactly how the first team will be playing this coming season and taking that info to his new club. Or maybe its to force him to sign the contract but I think we are past that point now. 

Shame his time is ending in this manner.

Edit: Just saw your latest post which covers the above, as does @slartibartfast.

 

Edited July 19 by bcfc01

[Bob Turnip]

42 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

We're back to that integrity thing again. 

It's OK for Manning to jump ship from Oxford after they rescued his career. Its OK for Manning to consider us as a stepping stone. But as soon as a player has similar thoughts, nah you're training with the u21s.

 

You don't know that's all that has happened though despite stating it as fact. There could be more to it, and let's be honest it's more than likely that's the case - they aren't going to make someone train with the u21's just for saying they aren't signing a new contract - in what world does that make any sense?!

 

[Back of the Dolman]

2 minutes ago, Bob Turnip said:

 

You don't know that's all that has happened though despite stating it as fact. There could be more to it, and let's be honest it's more than likely that's the case - they aren't going to make someone train with the u21's just for saying they aren't signing a new contract - in what world does that make any sense?!

 

In Bristol City world, that’s why it’s so entertaining and causing such great debate

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, KegCity said:

We won't know if we're not told...

Well we publish a retained list each summer.  Every summer we feel no obligation to continue to contract players.  That’s a really simple example.

[KegCity]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Well we publish a retained list each summer.  Every summer we feel no obligation to continue to contract players.  That’s a really simple example.

Ah, you were a bit more cryptic with "if only fans what we've done to other players RE contracts" but if all you mean is releasing players then yes we do know.

[Red Army 79]

43 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Amen, brother Dave.  I can agree with this

Yes, we don’t know who made the decision.  It’s a club decision, owned by those in the hierarchy.  Ultimately Liam has to deal with the consequences day-to-day.

Yes, me too.  And you can “flog” him in training to work against defenders whilst your primary strikers get a bit of rest for example.

It’s not the formation, it’s the general style of play driven by a lack of intensity both with and without the ball, leading to our attacks being against already well-structured defences.  We saw against Leicester that when we pressed high and harder we win ball in their final-30 and created chances.  Generally we have t done that under Manning.  Preseason will be interesting to se the approach baked in.

Agree on priority.

 

Totally agree with style of play.

Millwall springs to mind on New Years Day. Build up was slow, when finally the ball got to Conway he was stood still with his back to goal and got absolutely smashed a couple of times from their big centre back. He needs front foot pressing football and also needs someone strong alongside him that is able to hold the ball up. That’s not Conways game.

I think it was decided in the last pre season we were going to adapt a more possession based style of play, Pearson said it himself in an interview at the start of last season. 

It will defiantly be interesting now Manning has had time on grass as he likes to say. Question is has he been able to turn a team that’s strength is counter attacking into a possession based one.  Also if that’s the style we are going to play I don’t get the point of buying these quick big players to play on the back foot look how Lukaku struggled at Chelsea. The style of play will be an intriguing one.

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

14 minutes ago, Bob Turnip said:

 

You don't know that's all that has happened though despite stating it as fact. There could be more to it, and let's be honest it's more than likely that's the case - they aren't going to make someone train with the u21's just for saying they aren't signing a new contract - in what world does that make any sense?!

 

It is a fact tho. He's been told to train with the 21s because he refuses to sign a new contract.

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, KegCity said:

Ah, you were a bit more cryptic with "if only fans what we've done to other players RE contracts" but if all you mean is releasing players then yes we do know.

No, I do mean more than that too.  Stuff goes on all the time.  Players like Joe Williams told contract discussions are gonna take place, then told no, wait a bit longer, then a bit longer.  Ok, that one worked itself through ok (from a fans point of view).

[KegCity]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

No, I do mean more than that too.  Stuff goes on all the time.  Players like Joe Williams told contract discussions are gonna take place, then told no, wait a bit longer, then a bit longer.  Ok, that one worked itself through ok (from a fans point of view).

Is that not just the club playing games to try and get the best deal for them? Whether it's right or wrong you see that sort of thing in business all the time.

[W-S-M Seagull]

Wells is going to be out of contract next summer and the likelihood is that we won't retain him. He's still part of the squad tho. 

[Davefevs]

Just now, KegCity said:

Is that not just the club playing games to try and get the best deal for them? Whether it's right or wrong you see that sort of thing in business all the time.

Exactly, but the point being is that not everything is always straightforward.

[Back of the Dolman]

1 minute ago, KegCity said:

Is that not just the club playing games to try and get the best deal for them? Whether it's right or wrong you see that sort of thing in business all the time.

So therefore if it’s acceptable for a club to do it then it’s also acceptable for a player to do it.

Hence I wonder why there is such hostility from some towards Conway 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Wells is going to be out of contract next summer and the likelihood is that we won't retain him. He's still part of the squad tho. 

Ah, but that’s diff……..

oh yeah, good point!

[KegCity]

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Wells is going to be out of contract next summer and the likelihood is that we won't retain him. He's still part of the squad tho. 

If the club offer him a deal, he rejects it without trying to negotiate and makes it clear he wants to leave then it will then be comparable.

[Selred]

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Wells is going to be out of contract next summer and the likelihood is that we won't retain him. He's still part of the squad tho. 

Difference is, he's likely to be here start of the season. City ideally sell Conway so he's not here in 3 weeks time.

[mozo]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

We are going in circles here but the absolute fact is that it does not matter if people think Conway is a good, poor or mediocre player so can we stop using that as any kind of justification! There are only two angles that matter here:

- Has the way we’ve done things reduced the price we are likely to recieve?

- Has the way we’ve done things likely to have impacted the morale of the rest of the squad (note EP article)

Whether you think Tommy overshoots his ability, if you think Danny Coles is a **** or think he should be playing it matters not. It is simply he’s being sold, we should all accept that as the club decision and there are only two aspects which really matter in the final reckoning.

And the answer to your questions is simple: 

Nobody knows!

On the morale bit, I would imagine that some players will feel bad for him, some of our lads will see it as an opportunity opening up for themselves, some just won't give a shit. Like I said earlier, results are the ultimate test.

But there's no point worrying about disharmony until you see it affect results.

[KegCity]

Just now, Back of the Dolman said:

So therefore if it’s acceptable for a club to do it then it’s also acceptable for a player to do it.

Hence I wonder why there is such hostility from some towards Conway 

Yes it is, it's also acceptable for the club to respond with more of the same.

[mozo]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Ah, but that’s diff……..

oh yeah, good point!

It's very different because we won't offer him a contract.

[Back of the Dolman]

1 minute ago, KegCity said:

Yes it is, it's also acceptable for the club to respond with more of the same.

So ultimately it should be handled in a sensible professional business way.

no need for name calling and casting doubt on people’s characters.

not saying by you by the way, but unfortunately that’s how it’s been on some posts.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, mozo said:

It's very different because we won't offer him a contract.

Well that’s not very nice for Nahki is it, having to play this season with nothing on offer.

Yes it is different, but the principle of the argument isn’t, even if it’s being a bit facetious, nobody is coming out to support Nahki are they?

We are all quite hypocritical aren’t we?

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 minutes ago, Selred said:

Difference is, he's likely to be here start of the season. City ideally sell Conway so he's not here in 3 weeks time.

If someone came in for Wells with an acceptable offer we'd sell as he is essentially surplus to requirements. 

The point I'm making is its OK for us to toss players aside but we as a club don't like it that Conway has said he doesn't want to sign a new contract. 

[Numero Uno]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

If someone came in for Wells with an acceptable offer we'd sell as he is essentially surplus to requirements. 

The point I'm making is its OK for us to toss players aside but we as a club don't like it that Conway has said he doesn't want to sign a new contract. 

If it's morals, consistency and Christian values you are looking for I think you should try a new sport...............

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Well that’s not very nice for Nahki is it, having to play this season with nothing on offer.

Yes it is different, but the principle of the argument isn’t, even if it’s being a bit facetious, nobody is coming out to support Nahki are they?

We are all quite hypocritical aren’t we?

We've seen people say Conway should sign a new contract out of loyalty for us developing him. 

So using that logic, we should be giving Nakhi a new contract because he's been loyal to us?

Just now, Numero Uno said:

If it's morals, consistency and Christian values you are looking for I think you should try a new sport...............

Oh no I'm fully aware of what football is like. 

Just pointing out the hypocrisy of our club and certain posters. 

[Numero Uno]

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

We've seen people say Conway should sign a new contract out of loyalty for us developing him. 

So using that logic, we should be giving Nakhi a new contract because he's been loyal to us?

Oh no I'm fully aware of what football is like. 

Just pointing out the hypocrisy of our club and certain posters. 

It's the "he was crap anyway" posts that make me laugh. Tommy needs to bugger off, no doubt in my mind, but he's not crap (he's also not quite as good as one or two on here think either).

[Selred]

6 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

If someone came in for Wells with an acceptable offer we'd sell as he is essentially surplus to requirements. 

The point I'm making is its OK for us to toss players aside but we as a club don't like it that Conway has said he doesn't want to sign a new contract. 

If someone came in with an acceptable offer for any of our players we'd sell... 

We are actively trying to shift Conway to maximise profit. That's the difference.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Selred said:

If someone came in with an acceptable offer for any of our players we'd sell... 

We are actively trying to shift Conway to maximise profit. That's the difference.

We're doing a very bad job at maximising the profit by making it public that we've demoted him. 

Clubs now know we are desperate to sell so that will impact what we can get for him. 

[Selred]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

We're doing a very bad job at maximising the profit by making it public that we've demoted him. 

Clubs now know we are desperate to sell so that will impact what we can get for him. 

Clubs also know they can get him for £300k in Jan.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Selred said:

Clubs also know they can get him for £300k in Jan.

This time last year Coventry sold Gyokeres for 25 million with him having only 12 months left on his contract.

Now of course he was further ahead in his development than Conway is. But if you do it right then that shows you can still get quite a hefty fee for a player who's contract is expiring. 

[KegCity]

15 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

If someone came in for Wells with an acceptable offer we'd sell as he is essentially surplus to requirements. 

The point I'm making is its OK for us to toss players aside but we as a club don't like it that Conway has said he doesn't want to sign a new contract. 

Yes it's ok for us to toss players to the side, which is what we've done with Conway after he's decided he doesn't want to stay at the club.

[Selred]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

This time last year Coventry sold Gyokeres for 25 million with him having only 12 months left on his contract.

Now of course he was further ahead in his development than Conway is. But if you do it right then that shows you can still get quite a hefty fee for a player who's contract is expiring. 

Gyokeres came off the back of a 17 and 21 goal season. Conway is coming off the back of a 9 and 10 goal season.

Different qualities, different clubs. Gyokeres was ready to step up into a top team, Conway isn't.

[MythikRobins]

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

We're doing a very bad job at maximising the profit by making it public that we've demoted him. 

Clubs now know we are desperate to sell so that will impact what we can get for him. 

They'd know we were desperate to sell anyway, if they didn't they'd be pretty bad at their jobs. Its been known in the public eye for MONTHS that he wasn't signing a contract (so likely known for longer behind closed doors).

Since his deal is up in a year clubs know they can get him for peanuts in January, so its not exactly hard to figure out we'd be pretty desperate to sell does demoting him really make a difference there?

[W-S-M Seagull]

Just now, Selred said:

Gyokeres came off the back of a 17 and 21 goal season. Conway is coming off the back of a 9 and 10 goal season.

Different qualities, different clubs. Gyokeres was ready to step up into a top team, Conway isn't.

Although at the same age Gyokeres hadn't scored a single Championship goal. 

So the fact Conway has scored goals at this level and against a European Champion suggests he has a lot of potential to also go far in the game. 

[Ivorguy]

I guess what is happening is that City realise Conway wants out and one reason for dropping him to u 21s is to attract bids sooner rather than later, in addition it is pointless having him with first team squad as tactics are worked on for new season in which he won’t play a part.

Club’s attitude seems ok to me and is one other clubs also follow, eg Cardiff

The really interesting point is there has been no firm bids - suspect sort of transfer fees talked up by City don’t match others’ assessment of the player 

It will be sorted, I am sure, before transfer period ends

[The Bard]

I think given the circumstances Manning us in , this is the only thing he could realistically do.

What was reported in the Post reflects well on Liam Manning and Tommy Conway as they seem to have maintained a professional relationship.

I have to look at others involved in this, and in particular Danny Coles and Brian Tinnion.  How do we end with 2 people from a period of underachievement so involved 20 years later? I just get the impression that if Richard Gould had dealt with this we'd have seen a different outcome. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, MythikRobins said:

They'd know we were desperate to sell anyway, if they didn't they'd be pretty bad at their jobs. Its been known in the public eye for MONTHS that he wasn't signing a contract (so likely known for longer behind closed doors).

Since his deal is up in a year clubs know they can get him for peanuts in January, so its not exactly hard to figure out we'd be pretty desperate to sell does demoting him really make a difference there?

What you do is make it clear that Tommy is part of thr squad this season and that you're prepared to let him walk away for compensation next summer.

Why would they get him for peanuts in January? 

If we signed a player on loan today for the season, we'd not throw him in the 21s because he won't be here this time next season would we? 

[Selred]

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Although at the same age Gyokeres hadn't scored a single Championship goal. 

So the fact Conway has scored goals at this level and against a European Champion suggests he has a lot of potential to also go far in the game. 

But that's my point, they aren't comparable. Gyokeres went for £25m as he was a few years older and proving he had the quality.

Tyrese Campbell had a similar record to Conway at the same age, and now he's a free agent. I don't see Conway as having a lot of potential, he's good and his ceiling in my opinion is a top Scottish club.

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

The really interesting point is there has been no firm bids

People were saying the exact same thing this time last year about Scott and that was in a non tournament summer. 

[petehinton]

1 hour ago, ashton_fan said:

Conway's situation is now the same as Massengo the season before last, Nige had no hesitation sending him to the under 21's when he.made it clear he wanted to leave.

He played with the 21s, but in no way was he properly banished from the first team altogether

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, Selred said:

he's good and his ceiling in my opinion is a top Scottish club.

So you don't think he could do a job for a Southampton, Ipswich, Forest, Palace etc? 

[Selred]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

So you don't think he could do a job for a Southampton, Ipswich, Forest, Palace etc? 

No. And I don't think they do either, or they'd be snapping him up right now for £3m.

[marcofisher]

12 hours ago, Back of the Dolman said:

But the ones at the top of the championship and in the Prem will likely create more chances.

So that would give him more opportunity to convert chances

 

11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t think it’s anything to do with the number of strikers per se, it’s about the way Manning’s style of attack.

Agree with both of you entirely, some are just obsessed with having 2 up top as some sort of silver bullet or claiming that some can only play in a 2. It’s not really used in a thing at top level anymore, all strikers need to be able to play as a lone striker. It is down to the creation of chances and getting midfielders closer to the striker that will lead to goals. 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Selred said:

No. And I don't think they do either, or they'd be snapping him up right now for £3m.

He isn’t available for £3m now, or else some would be taking that exact punt!

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Selred said:

No. And I don't think they do either, or they'd be snapping him up right now for £3m.

How do you know they wont? 

The transfer window doesn't close 2moro. 

[MythikRobins]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

What you do is make it clear that Tommy is part of thr squad this season and that you're prepared to let him walk away for compensation next summer.

Why would they get him for peanuts in January? 

If we signed a player on loan today for the season, we'd not throw him in the 21s because he won't be here this time next season would we? 

Why on earth would we make him part of the squad? He hasn't been part of our plans since the very very start of the transfer window, since we were always planning to sign two number 9s.

They can get him for peanuts in January, because his contract is up in the summer. Since he's under-23 the only thing they'd have to worry about is the compensation fee and whether we'd let him move in January or wait.

In this case, since he's not part of our plans he'd probably leave in January.

That last point is so disingenuous come on man.