Tommy Conway - Signs for 'Boro- Official

[Harry]

1 hour ago, MarcusX said:

If nothing the fans say on this thread has any impact or effect, then surely you agree with the original statement that it also isn't helping? 

Semantically true, I guess 

[lenred]

41 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

"**** Tommy Conway".

No one interested in the prudent running of our club is going to say ‘**** Tommy Conway’ as we need to maximise funds where ever we can NU in order to even have a chance of competing. We can’t afford to just chuck away good money.  

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

You can agree with the clubs decision but the impact has to be acknowledged or it lessens your case for saying “they’ve done the right thing”

My point since pg1. 

2 hours ago, Kibs said:

I think most people “get” the value point, but do you not think that the club will have realised this too? 

That’s the problem, no they haven’t. They are asking for a ridiculous fee for him in the circumstances. They are still thinking / pricing him like he’s just scored and West Ham and is going to sign a contract. 

[Numero Uno]

3 minutes ago, lenred said:

No one interested in the prudent running of our club is going to say ‘**** Tommy Conway’ as we need to maximise funds where ever we can NU in order to even have a chance of competing. We can’t afford to just chuck away good money.  

It has dawned on me that the club need to get the maximum value for Tommy which is why I also posted in the next post "the person(s) who made it have now got to prove their worth by selling the kid without our pants being pulled down now". If the club have ****** up, can't sell him and need to reintroduce him into the squad until January then no issue with that. If the club lose out because of the way they have treated Tommy then that is on Steve, Jon and Brian primarily. If Liam had unilaterally made that decision they could have told him to get a grip and forget it but in reality I think one of the three above lost their rag and made the decision.

What I won't be doing, though, is losing the will to live because the kid obviously wants to **** off elsewhere. In that regard I do say "**** him", he is very likely to be of no importance shortly in the same way that Adam Webster, Lloyd Kelly, Alex Scott and Antoine Semenyo are no longer of any importance, he'll soon be no more than just another ex-Bristol City player. In Conway's case, I won't be moving obstacles to see how he does elsewhere either, simply on the basis that I don't believe he is at the levels that many on here think he's at, if I'm wrong then so be it.

[lenred]

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

It has dawned on me that the club need to get the maximum value for Tommy which is why I also posted in the next post "the person(s) who made it have now got to prove their worth by selling the kid without our pants being pulled down now". If the club have ****** up, can't sell him and need to reintroduce him into the squad until January then no issue with that. If the club lose out because of the way they have treated Tommy then that is on Steve, Jon and Brian primarily. If Liam had unilaterally made that decision they could have told him to get a grip and forget it but in reality I think one of the three above lost their rag and made the decision.

What I won't be doing, though, is losing the will to live because the kid obviously wants to **** off elsewhere. In that regard I do say "**** him", he is very likely to be of no importance shortly in the same way that Adam Webster, Lloyd Kelly, Alex Scott and Antoine Semenyo are no longer of any importance, he'll soon be no more than just another ex-Bristol City player. In Conway's case, I won't be moving obstacles to see how he does elsewhere either, simply on the basis that I don't believe he is at the levels that many on here think he's at, if I'm wrong then so be it.

Who’s saying anything about losing the will to live if he goes?    There’s a hell of a lot of hyperbole on here to what is imo pretty level headed questions on how the hierarchy of our club are handling the situation. 

[Numero Uno]

Just now, lenred said:

Who’s saying anything about losing the will to live if he goes?    There’s a hell of a lot of hyperbole on here to what is imo pretty level headed questions on how the hierarchy of our club are handling the situation. 

I'll tell you what you did say - "No one interested in the prudent running of our club is going to say ‘**** Tommy Conway’". That wasn't a level headed question, just a misrepresentation of what I was saying as if I don't have the ability to realise the club need to maximise value for him. What do you want? A thank you for educating me? Once we maximise our value for Tommy and he's gone then "**** him" - hopefully that's a bit clearer for you.

[lenred]

Just now, Numero Uno said:

I'll tell you what you did say - "No one interested in the prudent running of our club is going to say ‘**** Tommy Conway’". That wasn't a level headed question, just a misrepresentation of what I was saying as if I don't have the ability to realise the club need to maximise value for him. What do you want? A thank you for educating me? Once we maximise our value for Tommy and he's gone then "**** him" - hopefully that's a bit clearer for you.

Wow….Where am I trying to ‘educate you’.  My point stands - no one is saying ‘fuc k Tommy Conway’ when his sale proceeds could be critical to contributing to the funds this club needs moving forwards. That was what you said in your post and that’s what I replied to…..

[Kibs]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

My point since pg1. 

That’s the problem, no they haven’t. They are asking for a ridiculous fee for him in the circumstances. They are still thinking / pricing him like he’s just scored and West Ham and is going to sign a contract. 

No, it’s your interpretation/assumption that they haven’t Dave.

Maybe they do, and just don’t care? It’s become emotional and personal? 

Maybe it’s gone as far up as SL and he’s said **** him, we either get a massive fee or he can rot for a year, I’ll take the hit?

Maybe they’re making a point?

Or maybe you’re right and they are THAT stupid and over-value him ridiculously?

Or maybe your info is wrong? Plenty of well respected, good ITK people with “100% never wrong trusted sources” have been wrong previously.

I don’t know that they’ve priced them as, but it’s their prerogative to do as they wish. 

Im just playing devils advocate here, because there is alot we don’t know and which people are posting as fact, on both sides of the discussion.

 

[Davefevs]

Fair comments @Kibs.

[Numero Uno]

8 minutes ago, Kibs said:

No, it’s your interpretation/assumption that they haven’t Dave.

Maybe they do, and just don’t care? It’s become emotional and personal? 

Maybe it’s gone as far up as SL and he’s said **** him, we either get a massive fee or he can rot for a year, I’ll take the hit?

Maybe they’re making a point?

Or maybe you’re right and they are THAT stupid and over-value him ridiculously?

Or maybe your info is wrong? Plenty of well respected, good ITK people with “100% never wrong trusted sources” have been wrong previously.

I don’t know that they’ve priced them as, but it’s their prerogative to do as they wish. 

Im just playing devils advocate here, because there is alot we don’t know and which people are posting as fact, on both sides of the discussion.

 

Whatever reason it is, Steve clearly doesn't disagree with it. If he was bothered about protecting his investment the decision would either not have been made or been reversed by now. People can take from that what they like........

[Mr Popodopolous]

What I would say is that if it was SL who made the call, then it would be incredibly incongruous and at odds with the nest egg stuff.

From an economic perspective it makes little sense unless a move is imminent. Even then if if was pending a move banishing to the U21s would be a heavy handed way to go about it.

[Silvio Dante]

8 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Whatever reason it is, Steve clearly doesn't disagree with it. If he was bothered about protecting his investment the decision would either not have been made or been reversed by now. People can take from that what they like........

 

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

What I would say is that if it was SL who made the call, then it would be incredibly incongruous and at odds with the nest egg stuff.

From an economic perspective it makes little sense unless a move is imminent. Even then if if was pending a move banishing to the U21s would be a heavy handed way to go about it.

As I think I’ve been consistent, SL must have as a minimum sanctioned the call if not have been responsible for it as the decision has a material impact on the value the club can expect to realise from an asset (and again, that’s based on clubs assessment and not any of ours).

What has to be acknowledged, again, is that this decision doesn’t exist in a bubble. If we’re getting less than expected for Conway, it either means that SL has to put more money in (and we know he’s rowing back) or, more likely, as what football earns football can spend, the budget is reduced.

That’s been my issue from the get go. Sell him, no problem. But don’t do it in a way that harms the bigger picture.

[Silvio Dante]

Edit/Addition - Just to say that I think if we’d used the Scott/Semenyo money and/or there hadn’t been the belt tightening in the last year - after we’d done the necessary austerity - then I think there would be far less controversy over the manner we’ve gone about this.

[Mr Popodopolous]

If we are going on comparables or not, WBA reportedly want £8m for Thomas-Asante.

Final year of his deal too, wonder how he compares overall albeit he is certainly older.

[Mr Popodopolous]

25, turning 26 in November.

[Mr Popodopolous]

For comparison the record of each- Championship only.

BTA

72 Games

18 Goals- 2 of them penalties

16 Non Penalty Goals

2 Assists

Conway

73 Games

19 Goals- 5 of them penalties

14 Non Penalty Goals

4 Assists

Conway is also 4 years younger.

[JoeAman08]

13 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Tommy Conway didn't score less goals last season because he performed badly. He scored less because we created the square root of f all for him. I'm pretty sure the data shows that. Tommy did well with what he was given. 

If we are valuing Tommy at let's say 10 million, then you have to pay a 10 million pound striker the going rate and that is certainly not 7.5k a week. 

We could have signed him to a 4 year or a 3+1 contract but didn't. 

Conway and his agent will be fully aware of what the interested clubs will be willing to offer him so he will be fully aware of the type of money on offer and what he is able to get. 

You wouldn't sign a contract on 7.5k a week if another employer was offering you 25k a week would you? 

Who’s offering him 25k a week? If someone is offering that they would pay 4-5m for him. Maybe someone said 25k a week on a free but he won’t be getting that off the back of a season of u21 football. I’m sure they are aware and it feels like they misread. If he was coveted as an amazing young forward prospect the bids would have started already, even if derisory. 
 

The goals aside, I thought he regressed. We weren’t prolific year before last either. I thought he didn’t press as hard as he did the season before, he didn’t battle with cbs as hard. He overall looked less energetic except in those bigger games where you see the flashes. 
 

14 hours ago, Davefevs said:

No, I’m talking about contract offer in the same period (not a year apart), ie offered summer 22/23, lowered when paperwork received.  I’m not talking months later. So now you know, what you saying based on my scenario.

Why the hypothetical though? Are you reporting that is what happened? Like I said, sounds like something an agent would spread around when he misread the market for his client. 

[bcfc01]

9 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Why the hypothetical though? Are you reporting that is what happened? Like I said, sounds like something an agent would spread around when he misread the market for his client. 

If anyone believes what a football agent says, point them my way as I know a Nigerian prince that would like to speak to them.

[Pugofwar]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

For comparison the record of each- Championship only.

BTA

72 Games

18 Goals- 2 of them penalties

16 Non Penalty Goals

2 Assists

Conway

73 Games

19 Goals- 5 of them penalties

14 Non Penalty Goals

4 Assists

Conway is also 4 years younger.

Very useful comparison! I'm not saying that Tommy is worth £8m, but this does show that we are not the only club to put a high value on players. Personally I think its best to wait until the end of the window to see how much we get for him (if he is sold) and then pass judgement.

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Pugofwar said:

Very useful comparison! I'm not saying that Tommy is worth £8m, but this does show that we are not the only club to put a high value on players. Personally I think its best to wait until the end of the window to see how much we get for him (if he is sold) and then pass judgement.

The market does seem a bit random this summer all told. I keep coming back  fo it but yes I know etc Ashton, £15m rising to £20m if stuff hit for Delap??

Delap aside I'd be interested to know how these 2 compared, there is an element of recency bias too that may kick in for clubs bidding as BTA season 2 better than season 1 whereas TC was the other way round.

Edited July 26 by Mr Popodopolous

[MythikRobins]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

The market does seem a bit random this summer all told. I keep coming back  fo it but yes I know etc Ashton, £15m rising to £20m if stuff hit for Delap??

Delap aside I'd be interested to know how these 2 compared, there is an element of recency bias too that may kick in for clubs bidding as BTA season 2 better than season 1 whereas TC was the other way round.

If Thomas-Asante is going for £8 million then I think I'd place Conway in the £4-5 million range personally. £15-20m for Delap is definitely overpaying, but I think his ceiling is significantly higher than TCs.

[hertsexile]

The transfer fee for any player is what clubs are prepared to pay not necessarily what the parent club is asking!

Therefore in Tommy’s situation no takers we are led to believe. 
As it stands any suitor is going to wait until they can get him on a free next summer. 
This could all change by August 31st but time will tell. 
Hopefully Tommy won’t waste his season in our U 21 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, hertsexile said:

The transfer fee for any player is what clubs are prepared to pay not necessarily what the parent club is asking!

Therefore in Tommy’s situation no takers we are led to believe. 
As it stands any suitor is going to wait until they can get him on a free next summer. 
This could all change by August 31st but time will tell. 
Hopefully Tommy won’t waste his season in our U 21 

A Free less compensation if the worst comes to the worst.

[RedorDead BCFC]

4 hours ago, City Slicker said:

If what @NcnsBcfc is saying is true—that we offered him a contract and then lowered it after negotiations failed at another club—then I agree with @lenred, questions need to be asked. What would you get out of that apart from a bit of an 'f you'? That’s never going to work in your favour, is it?

 

And if true, then that negotiation would be on Phil Alexander and Nige. 

[bcfc01]

4 hours ago, City Slicker said:

If what @NcnsBcfc is saying is true—that we offered him a contract and then lowered it after negotiations failed at another club—then I agree with @lenred, questions need to be asked. What would you get out of that apart from a bit of an 'f you'? That’s never going to work in your favour, is it?

 

I'd be interested to hear where that rumour originated and when it first came out, it sounds like agent talk to me.

But can't see it being true personally.

 

Edited July 26 by bcfc01

[Silvio Dante]

2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Who’s offering him 25k a week? If someone is offering that they would pay 4-5m for him. Maybe someone said 25k a week on a free but he won’t be getting that off the back of a season of u21 football. I’m sure they are aware and it feels like they misread. If he was coveted as an amazing young forward prospect the bids would have started already, even if derisory. 
 

The goals aside, I thought he regressed. We weren’t prolific year before last either. I thought he didn’t press as hard as he did the season before, he didn’t battle with cbs as hard. He overall looked less energetic except in those bigger games where you see the flashes. 
 

Why the hypothetical though? Are you reporting that is what happened? Like I said, sounds like something an agent would spread around when he misread the market for his client. 

Joe. You’re again letting your personal opinion of the player colour your opinions here. And that’s fine in normal circumstances, but ultimately here it is what the club value him at.

The club, per several people on here who’d know, and even through Tinnions mouthpiece, have said that they want a sizeable fee for him. Pops comparable of Thomas-Asante and the asking price for Stansfield are both decent comparables here and they’re both north of £5m. And that, as a minimum, is what the club want - but because they’ve acted as they have, it isn’t what they’ll get.

Now, you’ve said yourself that any club paying £5m would also pay £25k a week - and I totally agree. And this is where we get to the total dichotomy here. There are people all over this thread saying Tommy isn’t worth £25k p/w - and, avoidance of doubt, I’d be unsure of that as well.

But - and here’s the rub. The club value him at a level where that is the going wage rate. You may think he’s poorly advised and a season in the stiffs will destroy his career - and I don’t think he wants that - but from the clubs perspective it also destroys that value and we get £300k for an asset that if we handled the situation better we could get a minimum of ten times that for, based on the market.

I personally couldn’t care if Conway never pulled on a city shirt again. I don’t wish him any ill will, but players are by nature transient. What I do care about is the club willingly leaving money on the table based on their own valuation - not your rating of the player, not my rating of the player.

It matters not a jot if you think he’s gone backwards or is poorly advised. It matters totally, as has been detailed several times on this thread, that the difference in offers you get for an asset you won’t use (and make that public) as opposed to an asset you could is going to be lower.

And that is people’s only real issue here.

[Glen hump]

26 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

I'd be interested to hear where that rumour originated and when it first came out, it sounds like agent talk to me.

But can't see it being true personally.

 

I can 100 pc believe it 

[petehinton]

37 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

I'd be interested to hear where that rumour originated and when it first came out, it sounds like agent talk to me.

But can't see it being true personally.

 

I heard very similar a few weeks back, not via Neil, and I’d hugely doubt we heard the same info from the same person. I’d heard this was in January not the summer however, although the difference in wage was what was being offered in Jan vs summer, when Tommy was really in the flow of things. 
 

And by a change in wages offered by “the club”, we aren’t talking some skimmed off the top or a change in bonus remuneration here, we’re talking a drop of nigh on £500k across the contract period. 
 

Only a handful of people will know the whole story, and what gets fed through via who people know is always gonna be elements of grey. But knowing our way of trying to operate, and how we think ‘professional operation’ looks like (we don’t want a ceo, remember) I think I know which way I lean to when it comes to who is in the right/wrong here, if people want to be binary about it. 

Edited July 26 by petehinton

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, bcfc01 said:

I'd be interested to hear where that rumour originated and when it first came out, it sounds like agent talk to me.

But can't see it being true personally.

 

I heard about it 3 or 4 months ago, @NcnsBcfc heard about last summer / start of 23/24 season, and obviously kept it under his hat to protect who told him.  Fair play to sit on it that long.

@JoeAman08 don’t worry about answering my question.  You’re not gonna answer however I frame it.  It wasn’t really hypothetical it was based on what I was told, which is very similar to what Neil said on FBC yesterday.

The only but of variance from what Neil said on FBC was that it wasn’t Tommy discussing with Celtic, it was Celtic discussing bids / valuations with City and City relaying info that to Tommy…whilst trying to get him to sign a new deal.  From the numbers I’ve seen (heard) Tommy was signing within the wage structure, less than our high earners, but with graduated increases to move him towards them over the contract length.

People’s prerogative whether they want to believe or not, people’s prerogative if they want to believe it but feel it’s just agent bollox.  Each to their own.

Just like they can believe whether we are pricing Tommy unrealistically or not, or just whether that’s just my view of unrealistic.  The club in question thought it was a piss take.

I’ll leave it there.

1 hour ago, RedorDead BCFC said:

And if true, then that negotiation would be on Phil Alexander and Nige. 

Nige not involved at all, wasn’t his remit.

Edited July 26 by Davefevs

[Gazred]

Well as things are right now, his value is going down daily. Anyone seriously interested in taking him this window will leave it late IMO, forcing us to conisder that bid or the likely lesser return in the summer via compensation.

I suppose he could still be here in Jan but that would be a similarly crap position.

[bcfc01]

23 minutes ago, Gazred said:

Well as things are right now, his value is going down daily. Anyone seriously interested in taking him this window will leave it late IMO, forcing us to conisder that bid or the likely lesser return in the summer via compensation.

I suppose he could still be here in Jan but that would be a similarly crap position.

For all concerned.

Too much noise surrounding him at the moment.

Sorry to say, as a big TC supporter from years ago, the sooner he leaves the better and I hope he reaches his potential - wherever that may be. 

 

[RedorDead BCFC]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I heard about it 3 or 4 months ago, @NcnsBcfc heard about last summer / start of 23/24 season, and obviously kept it under his hat to protect who told him.  Fair play to sit on it that long.

@JoeAman08 don’t worry about answering my question.  You’re not gonna answer however I frame it.  It wasn’t really hypothetical it was based on what I was told, which is very similar to what Neil said on FBC yesterday.

The only but of variance from what Neil said on FBC was that it wasn’t Tommy discussing with Celtic, it was Celtic discussing bids / valuations with City and City relaying info that to Tommy…whilst trying to get him to sign a new deal.  From the numbers I’ve seen (heard) Tommy was signing within the wage structure, less than our high earners, but with graduated increases to move him towards them over the contract length.

People’s prerogative whether they want to believe or not, people’s prerogative if they want to believe it but feel it’s just agent bollox.  Each to their own.

Just like they can believe whether we are pricing Tommy unrealistically or not, or just whether that’s just my view of unrealistic.  The club in question thought it was a piss take.

I’ll leave it there.

Nige not involved at all, wasn’t his remit.

Maybe not in his remit, but would have been fully aware and if like we are all led to believe would have said something. 

[Davefevs]

49 minutes ago, RedorDead BCFC said:

Maybe not in his remit, but would have been fully aware and if like we are all led to believe would have said something. 

I wouldn't know.  If he did kick off, just like if PA did…it probably served to hasten their respective exits!

[bcfc01]

3 hours ago, petehinton said:

And by a change in wages offered by “the club”, we aren’t talking some skimmed off the top or a change in bonus remuneration here, we’re talking a drop of nigh on £500k across the contract period. 

 

You are stating it as fact, so as a matter of interest to everyone, where did that information come from ?

 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

 

You are stating it as fact, so as a matter of interest to everyone, where did that information come from ?

 

Like he’s gonna tell you.  You either believe it or you don’t.

Edited July 26 by Davefevs

[petehinton]

4 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

 

You are stating it as fact, so as a matter of interest to everyone, where did that information come from ?

 

Just totally made it up!

[bcfc01]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Like he’s gonna tell you.  You either believe it or you don’t.

Fair enough.

I don't.

[Davefevs]

Just now, bcfc01 said:

Fair enough.

I don't.

Cool.

[bcfc01]

1 minute ago, petehinton said:

Just totally made it up!

So you don't know where the info came from.

Fair enough, at least we know.

[Kid in the Riot]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

@JoeAman08 Nige not involved at all, wasn’t his remit.

Bit of a cop out. Nige was involved in plenty of stuff at the club that wasn't strictly in his remit I.e the women's team. He was a proper manager, not a coach, that took an interest in all aspects of the club. 

He was also instrumental in changing the entire wage structure at the club, so I think it unlikely that he would not have been aware of what offers were being made to Conway, or indeed been able to intervene if needed. 

He was at the club when we were low-balling Zak on his new contract btw, though obviously Gould was in charge then. 

Clearly Nige wasn't carrying out the negotiations but I think he would have been fully aware of what offers were being made, and would have his opinion sought by the Lansdowns. And he wasn't afraid of giving his opinion, as we know, whether it ruffled feathers or not. 

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Bit of a cop out. Nige was involved in plenty of stuff at the club that wasn't strictly in his remit I.e the women's team. He was a proper manager, not a coach, that took an interest in all aspects of the club. 

He was also instrumental in changing the entire wage structure at the club, so I think it unlikely that he would not have been aware of what offers were being made to Conway, or indeed been able to intervene if needed. 

He was at the club when we were low-balling Zak on his new contract btw, though obviously Gould was in charge then. 

Clearly Nige wasn't carrying out the negotiations but I think he would have been fully aware of what offers were being made, and would have his opinion sought by the Lansdowns. And he wasn't afraid of giving his opinion, as we know, whether it ruffled feathers or not. 

No, not really.  He didn’t do the negotiations.  Awareness, yes, negotiations no.  Awareness of impacts of wages, fees etc on budgets, yes, involved in the negotiations, no.

Which is what you say in your final para.

As for low-balling Zak…or Tommy for that matter, Nige’s view was - “you don’t become a top earner after one season, it’s an insult to those that have done it for several seasons”.  So it wouldn’t surprise me if Nige wanted to Zak’s wage to be less than a few of the others…but with a carrot dangled.

[Kid in the Riot]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

So it wouldn’t surprise me if Nige wanted to Zak’s wage to be less than a few of the others…but with a carrot dangled.

If you are saying that he likely had a role in what terms were offered to players, then we are in agreement. 

[JoeAman08]

9 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Joe. You’re again letting your personal opinion of the player colour your opinions here. And that’s fine in normal circumstances, but ultimately here it is what the club value him at.

The club, per several people on here who’d know, and even through Tinnions mouthpiece, have said that they want a sizeable fee for him. Pops comparable of Thomas-Asante and the asking price for Stansfield are both decent comparables here and they’re both north of £5m. And that, as a minimum, is what the club want - but because they’ve acted as they have, it isn’t what they’ll get.

Now, you’ve said yourself that any club paying £5m would also pay £25k a week - and I totally agree. And this is where we get to the total dichotomy here. There are people all over this thread saying Tommy isn’t worth £25k p/w - and, avoidance of doubt, I’d be unsure of that as well.

But - and here’s the rub. The club value him at a level where that is the going wage rate. You may think he’s poorly advised and a season in the stiffs will destroy his career - and I don’t think he wants that - but from the clubs perspective it also destroys that value and we get £300k for an asset that if we handled the situation better we could get a minimum of ten times that for, based on the market.

I personally couldn’t care if Conway never pulled on a city shirt again. I don’t wish him any ill will, but players are by nature transient. What I do care about is the club willingly leaving money on the table based on their own valuation - not your rating of the player, not my rating of the player.

It matters not a jot if you think he’s gone backwards or is poorly advised. It matters totally, as has been detailed several times on this thread, that the difference in offers you get for an asset you won’t use (and make that public) as opposed to an asset you could is going to be lower.

And that is people’s only real issue here.

I think the argument here is that I just don’t agree it really made a difference to his value. Maybe had we been rejecting deals in June before all this, I would way yes. We were not though. I think it is clear teams didn’t value him near what the club or himself thought he would be. If clubs think he is nearer the 2m mark say, I’m not convinced they still would not pay that if he is of interest. See us with Armstrong. He wasn’t banished but it was known he wasn’t extending at QPR. I feel as a fanbase it is being determined we are losing out on 5-6-7m. He just wasn’t worth that this summer. I do agree about the club though. They have fed into him a little bit if they are putting an 8m price tag on him this summer. 

 

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I heard about it 3 or 4 months ago, @NcnsBcfc heard about last summer / start of 23/24 season, and obviously kept it under his hat to protect who told him.  Fair play to sit on it that long.

@JoeAman08 don’t worry about answering my question.  You’re not gonna answer however I frame it.  It wasn’t really hypothetical it was based on what I was told, which is very similar to what Neil said on FBC yesterday.

The only but of variance from what Neil said on FBC was that it wasn’t Tommy discussing with Celtic, it was Celtic discussing bids / valuations with City and City relaying info that to Tommy…whilst trying to get him to sign a new deal.  From the numbers I’ve seen (heard) Tommy was signing within the wage structure, less than our high earners, but with graduated increases to move him towards them over the contract length.

People’s prerogative whether they want to believe or not, people’s prerogative if they want to believe it but feel it’s just agent bollox.  Each to their own.

Just like they can believe whether we are pricing Tommy unrealistically or not, or just whether that’s just my view of unrealistic.  The club in question thought it was a piss take.

I’ll leave it there.

Nige not involved at all, wasn’t his remit.

It goes back to the point Dave of that isn’t something the club would say. It sounds agent fed because he is screwing up his clients next steps and possibly threatening his career to an extent. What the club did 10 years ago with Maguire and Gray isn’t necessarily an indication of what is happening today.  The owner remains but he doesn’t seem as involved and other than him, almost everyone else involved in contracts from that time is gone, no? 
 

So of course that would be bad practice but why have we chosen this action with Conway? A major part of the squad for the past few seasons. Why would we play games with him but not Williams who got a new deal? Or Vyner when he recently got a new deal? 
 

Imo, I think it is more likely he got offered something similar to Vyner or Pring would have got(probably their first substantial contracts as pros) and he felt he was worth more. In line with Wells, maybe James or Dickie. Time will tell I guess but I can’t see why we would have just said, you know what? I think I’ll piss about with TC’s contract when he has been a key part of a young side

[Alan Dicks]

Bits going on ?

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bits-going-on-liam-manning-9440972?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

[fly in the air]

one we know is Twine the other one could be the lad from Brighton or the kiddie from Exeter. anyone have any thoughts.

[Selred]

21 minutes ago, Alan Dicks said:

Bits going on ?

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bits-going-on-liam-manning-9440972?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

We beat 7 or 8 Championship clubs for our signings? I just can’t believe it. Armstrong perhaps, but unlikely Fally or Yu surely. 

[Red Army 75]

1 minute ago, Selred said:

We beat 7 or 8 Championship clubs for our signings? I just can’t believe it. Armstrong perhaps, but unlikely Fally or Yu surely. 

Maybe referring to Bird and Stokes also

[GrahamC]

10 minutes ago, Selred said:

We beat 7 or 8 Championship clubs for our signings? I just can’t believe it. Armstrong perhaps, but unlikely Fally or Yu surely. 

He doesn’t say that.

He said if you enquire about a player there are 6 other Championship teams interested.

Seems highly likely to me.

[bpexile]

On 26/07/2024 at 16:00, 38MC said:

I’m not sure how you managed to read it that way. Perhaps the only negative about Manning in that post was ‘didn’t set the world alight’ - akin to ‘he did ok’ as you put it and hardly that damning. 

It was more a commentary on the board - which is forever flip flopping on strategy - and the average tenure of a championship manager. 

Re LM, I was only thinking today that in his post friendly interview how much more relaxed he seemed than in the previous. Let's all see how he fares, he deserves that from us at least.

[johnbytheriver]

I am in two minds about freezing  a player out.What if we get no decent offers and when the season starts he is still our player? Armstrong and Tommy up front sounds good to me.This type of scenario always ends in resentment despite Manning saying everything is amicable.

[Kid in the Riot]

@JoeAman08 I agree with you on the point regards Tommy's valuation.

The player has effectively been "available" for over a year as that is when he decided he wasn't going to sign a new deal, and told the club as such. 

So his agent has had over 12 months to punt his clients availability all around England, Scotland, Europe, the middle east, assuming he's done the job he is paid for.

So the idea that a story last month in Bristol Live confirming his availability has suddenly made clubs aware that we don't want him and he is for sale, and that that will have reduced is value, is at best speculative and at worst nonsense.

Training with the under 21s has impacted his value. Really? By how much? Has that made him a worse player in the past two weeks? He's missed a few friendlies. Has that impacted his value? Yes, it shows we want him gone, entirely reasonable as that is club policy (as it is at many clubs) when a player is in the last year of their contract. 

I'd like to know how much two weeks with the 21s has hit his value by? £15k? £150k? £1.5m? Or in reality has it made no difference at all, because every club that is a realistic option for him knows, and has known for a year, that he is available for transfer?

The biggest factor effecting his value is the clock. The longer the move takes, and the closer we get to the end of the window, his value may begin to drop, as the reality of potentially receiving compo for his hits. 

People may respond saying "shop window". Tommy has a full "highlights" reel from last season, so again would a couple of games in August significantly increase chances of selling him and for a bigger value? Maybe, but maybe not...

[Glen hump]

20 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

@JoeAman08 I agree with you on the point regards Tommy's valuation.

The player has effectively been "available" for over a year as that is when he decided he wasn't going to sign a new deal, and told the club as such. 

So his agent has had over 12 months to punt his clients availability all around England, Scotland, Europe, the middle east, assuming he's done the job he is paid for.

So the idea that a story last month in Bristol Live confirming his availability has suddenly made clubs aware that we don't want him and he is for sale, and that that will have reduced is value, is at best speculative and at worst nonsense.

Training with the under 21s has impacted his value. Really? By how much? Has that made him a worse player in the past two weeks? He's missed a few friendlies. Has that impacted his value? Yes, it shows we want him gone, entirely reasonable as that is club policy (as it is at many clubs) when a player is in the last year of their contract. 

I'd like to know how much two weeks with the 21s has hit his value by? £15k? £150k? £1.5m? Or in reality has it made no difference at all, because every club that is a realistic option for him knows, and has known for a year, that he is available for transfer?

The biggest factor effecting his value is the clock. The longer the move takes, and the closer we get to the end of the window, his value may begin to drop, as the reality of potentially receiving compo for his hits. 

People may respond saying "shop window". Tommy has a full "highlights" reel from last season, so again would a couple of games in August significantly increase chances of selling him and for a bigger value? Maybe, but maybe not...

All we’ve done is alerted clubs that we’re desperate to get rid ‘ that obviously had a impact on his value’ we should of just played the game a bit and put out the narrative that we’re happy to get value for Tommy on the pitch.

[Kid in the Riot]

10 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

All we’ve done is alerted clubs that we’re desperate to get rid ‘ that obviously had a impact on his value’ we should of just played the game a bit and put out the narrative that we’re happy to get value for Tommy on the pitch.

Have we? Which clubs have we alerted that were otherwise unaware of his contract situation? 

[Glen hump]

Just now, Kid in the Riot said:

Have we? Which clubs have we alerted that were otherwise unaware of his contract situation? 

Everyone knows of his situation’ point is we’ve weakened out position by ostracising him to the 21s’ we’re going to have to take what ever we can now ‘ we’d of been better off just playing the kid ‘ the club can’t back down now.

[petehinton]

36 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

@JoeAman08 I agree with you on the point regards Tommy's valuation.

The player has effectively been "available" for over a year as that is when he decided he wasn't going to sign a new deal, and told the club as such. 

So his agent has had over 12 months to punt his clients availability all around England, Scotland, Europe, the middle east, assuming he's done the job he is paid for.

So the idea that a story last month in Bristol Live confirming his availability has suddenly made clubs aware that we don't want him and he is for sale, and that that will have reduced is value, is at best speculative and at worst nonsense.

Training with the under 21s has impacted his value. Really? By how much? Has that made him a worse player in the past two weeks? He's missed a few friendlies. Has that impacted his value? Yes, it shows we want him gone, entirely reasonable as that is club policy (as it is at many clubs) when a player is in the last year of their contract. 

I'd like to know how much two weeks with the 21s has hit his value by? £15k? £150k? £1.5m? Or in reality has it made no difference at all, because every club that is a realistic option for him knows, and has known for a year, that he is available for transfer?

The biggest factor effecting his value is the clock. The longer the move takes, and the closer we get to the end of the window, his value may begin to drop, as the reality of potentially receiving compo for his hits. 

People may respond saying "shop window". Tommy has a full "highlights" reel from last season, so again would a couple of games in August significantly increase chances of selling him and for a bigger value? Maybe, but maybe not...

I think we’ve made a mistake not attempting to cash in in January by this logic. His stock couldn’t have been higher, and he still didn’t want to sign, 18 months left on a deal. Shift him out & the same logic they’re using now fits as a reason.
 

The timing is just totally off to me, and stinks of much more of a ‘non footy’ related falling out punishment, with relative little time to try and scramble something together. All whilst scrambling to try (wait) and get Twine out of Burnley too, who we can’t afford. 
 

They must be praying every night that someone comes in with a decent bid, or else they’ve either got their best striker with the 21s all season earning a decent wedge still, or they go tails between their legs integrating him back into the squad and have to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why. Will probably end up being something like JL had a lucid dream that he scored the winner at Wembley to take us up, so we’re happy to have him back with the senior squad…

[Glen hump]

1 minute ago, petehinton said:

I think we’ve made a mistake not attempting to cash in in January by this logic. His stock couldn’t have been higher, and he still didn’t want to sign, 18 months left on a deal. Shift him out & the same logic they’re using now fits as a reason.
 

The timing is just totally off to me, and stinks of much more of a ‘non footy’ related falling out punishment, with relative little time to try and scramble something together. All whilst scrambling to try (wait) and get Twine out of Burnley too, who we can’t afford. 
 

They must be praying every night that someone comes in with a decent bid, or else they’ve either got their best striker with the 21s all season earning a decent wedge still, or they go tails between their legs integrating him back into the squad and have to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why. Will probably end up being something like JL had a lucid dream that he scored the winner at Wembley to take us up, so we’re happy to have him back with the senior squad…

Even the numptys running us can’t back down now’ they’ll look complete idiots 

[Kid in the Riot]

11 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

Everyone knows of his situation’ point is we’ve weakened out position by ostracising him to the 21s’ we’re going to have to take what ever we can now ‘ we’d of been better off just playing the kid ‘ the club can’t back down now.

Not how it works. We're not selling a second hand TV. He's an asset, our asset, which we sell at the value we deem him to be worth. Is that less than it was in January? Yes. Less than a month ago? Yes, probably. Would help if there were clubs seriously interested in signing him...

8 minutes ago, petehinton said:

I think we’ve made a mistake not attempting to cash in in January by this logic. His stock couldn’t have been higher, and he still didn’t want to sign, 18 months left on a deal. Shift him out & the same logic they’re using now fits as a reason.
 

The timing is just totally off to me, and stinks of much more of a ‘non footy’ related falling out punishment, with relative little time to try and scramble something together. All whilst scrambling to try (wait) and get Twine out of Burnley too, who we can’t afford. 
 

They must be praying every night that someone comes in with a decent bid, or else they’ve either got their best striker with the 21s all season earning a decent wedge still, or they go tails between their legs integrating him back into the squad and have to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why. Will probably end up being something like JL had a lucid dream that he scored the winner at Wembley to take us up, so we’re happy to have him back with the senior squad…

I agree, there is more to meets the eye here, particularly if his agent is no longer welcome at the HPC. I don't doubt Tommy is a good guy who puts in 100% on the pitch. That said, we also know he has a ruthless, arrogant streak to him, so it wouldn't surprise me if something had happened which ultimately led to the 21s decision. Clearly, there has been disagreement/conflict. 

Regards Jan, was there serious interest then? I don't think there was, and now it seems there is interest but he is only third/fourth choice on clubs' shopping lists. 

Edited July 27 by Kid in the Riot

[Glen hump]

3 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Not how it works. We're not selling a second hand TV. He's an asset, our asset, which we sell at the value we deem him to be worth. Is that less than it was in January? Yes. Less than a month ago? Yes, probably. Would help if there were clubs seriously interested in signing him...

I agree, there is more to meets the eye here, particularly if his agent is no longer welcome at the HPC. I don't doubt Tommy is a good guy who puts in 100% on the pitch. That said, we also know he has a ruthless, arrogant streak to him, so it wouldn't surprise me if something had happened which ultimately led to the 21s decision. Clearly, there has been disagreement/conflict. 

Regards Jan, was there serious interest then? I don't think there was, and now it seems there is interest but he is only third/fourth choice on clubs' shopping lists. 

If he sits out the whole season he’s then going to go for pennies’ in the meantime we’re having to pay him for doing nothing’ surely we’d have been better just letting him play’ we’ve royally ****** this up .

[Glen hump]

Just now, Glen hump said:

If he sits out the whole season he’s then going to go for pennies’ in the meantime we’re having to pay him for doing nothing’ surely we’d have been better just letting him play’ we’ve royally ****** this up .

And it’s not what we think he’s worth it’s what a buying club thinks he’s worth.

[Davefevs]

7 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

I think the argument here is that I just don’t agree it really made a difference to his value. Maybe had we been rejecting deals in June before all this, I would way yes. We were not though. I think it is clear teams didn’t value him near what the club or himself thought he would be. If clubs think he is nearer the 2m mark say, I’m not convinced they still would not pay that if he is of interest. See us with Armstrong. He wasn’t banished but it was known he wasn’t extending at QPR. I feel as a fanbase it is being determined we are losing out on 5-6-7m. He just wasn’t worth that this summer. I do agree about the club though. They have fed into him a little bit if they are putting an 8m price tag on him this summer. 

 

It goes back to the point Dave of that isn’t something the club would say. It sounds agent fed because he is screwing up his clients next steps and possibly threatening his career to an extent. What the club did 10 years ago with Maguire and Gray isn’t necessarily an indication of what is happening today.  The owner remains but he doesn’t seem as involved and other than him, almost everyone else involved in contracts from that time is gone, no? 
 

So of course that would be bad practice but why have we chosen this action with Conway? A major part of the squad for the past few seasons. Why would we play games with him but not Williams who got a new deal? Or Vyner when he recently got a new deal? 
 

Imo, I think it is more likely he got offered something similar to Vyner or Pring would have got(probably their first substantial contracts as pros) and he felt he was worth more. In line with Wells, maybe James or Dickie. Time will tell I guess but I can’t see why we would have just said, you know what? I think I’ll piss about with TC’s contract when he has been a key part of a young side

Vyner is our highest paid player (according to the stories).

[38MC]

18 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Regards Jan, was there serious interest then? I don't think there was, and now it seems there is interest but he is only third/fourth choice on clubs' shopping lists. 

Looking back at January we were in pretty bad form following the Boxing Day win at Watford. I don’t think the board could have even entertained selling him in the circumstances at the time.  

[BasSavage88]

20 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

If he sits out the whole season he’s then going to go for pennies’ in the meantime we’re having to pay him for doing nothing’ surely we’d have been better just letting him play’ we’ve royally ****** this up .

Does he want to play as he didnt look bothered for most of last season?

[RedRoss]

I draw parallels with Peterborough. They always seem to have players each season that have played well and created a substantial market value. Although that player has reached the last year of their contract. The policy to said player is to sign now or your transfer listed. Works sometimes for a fee re Jack Taylor to Ipswich. However, if it doesn't work they still play them i.e Jonson Clarke-Harris who contributed 13 goals as a bit part player but eventually went for free. We've deviated away from that similar policy and parked Conway in the under 21's. I feel there must be more to this. I'm not blaming any side because I have no idea.

My hunch is that Conway has serious interest from Scotland but they won't bid the money we want and we're worried about losing him for a couple hundred grand so playing hard ball. Tommy, his agent and family think he has a better chance to establish himself in the national team by smashing goals in for for example Rangers against teams like Ross County week in week out. IMO he's not the finished article and he's not outgrown us like Scott and Semenyo but he's definitely determined to succeed. However if I was unbiased I'd probably be advising him to move too. It will be a risk but regardless of anyone's perspective on the standard of SPL or even his chance for a Championship move to a top 6 team. He will make more noise with those sides and has more potential surrounded by better players or playing weaker sides. 

Let's hope our policy doesn't burn us twice i.e losing him for peanuts and having no value on the field for this season. It could work and we could see a reasonable fee arrive. Hopefully we find out sooner rather than later. 

[headhunter]

50 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

And it’s not what we think he’s worth it’s what a buying club thinks he’s worth.

[Cov 77]

18 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

I draw parallels with Peterborough. They always seem to have players each season that have played well and created a substantial market value. Although that player has reached the last year of their contract. The policy to said player is to sign now or your transfer listed. Works sometimes for a fee re Jack Taylor to Ipswich. However, if it doesn't work they still play them i.e Jonson Clarke-Harris who contributed 13 goals as a bit part player but eventually went for free. We've deviated away from that similar policy and parked Conway in the under 21's. I feel there must be more to this. I'm not blaming any side because I have no idea.

My hunch is that Conway has serious interest from Scotland but they won't bid the money we want and we're worried about losing him for a couple hundred grand so playing hard ball. Tommy, his agent and family think he has a better chance to establish himself in the national team by smashing goals in for for example Rangers against teams like Ross County week in week out. IMO he's not the finished article and he's not outgrown us like Scott and Semenyo but he's definitely determined to succeed. However if I was unbiased I'd probably be advising him to move too. It will be a risk but regardless of anyone's perspective on the standard of SPL or even his chance for a Championship move to a top 6 team. He will make more noise with those sides and has more potential surrounded by better players or playing weaker sides. 

Let's hope our policy doesn't burn us twice i.e losing him for peanuts and having no value on the field for this season. It could work and we could see a reasonable fee arrive. Hopefully we find out sooner rather than later. 

Interesting comments from Manning that situation ongoing but ‘ bits are going on in the background’ , draw from that what you will, but could mean his exit or more unlikely that we are talking resolutions

[Glen hump]

38 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

I draw parallels with Peterborough. They always seem to have players each season that have played well and created a substantial market value. Although that player has reached the last year of their contract. The policy to said player is to sign now or your transfer listed. Works sometimes for a fee re Jack Taylor to Ipswich. However, if it doesn't work they still play them i.e Jonson Clarke-Harris who contributed 13 goals as a bit part player but eventually went for free. We've deviated away from that similar policy and parked Conway in the under 21's. I feel there must be more to this. I'm not blaming any side because I have no idea.

My hunch is that Conway has serious interest from Scotland but they won't bid the money we want and we're worried about losing him for a couple hundred grand so playing hard ball. Tommy, his agent and family think he has a better chance to establish himself in the national team by smashing goals in for for example Rangers against teams like Ross County week in week out. IMO he's not the finished article and he's not outgrown us like Scott and Semenyo but he's definitely determined to succeed. However if I was unbiased I'd probably be advising him to move too. It will be a risk but regardless of anyone's perspective on the standard of SPL or even his chance for a Championship move to a top 6 team. He will make more noise with those sides and has more potential surrounded by better players or playing weaker sides. 

Let's hope our policy doesn't burn us twice i.e losing him for peanuts and having no value on the field for this season. It could work and we could see a reasonable fee arrive. Hopefully we find out sooner rather than later. 

If he’s goes to Glasgow there’s no guarantee he’ll score a bucket load’ better strickers than tc have struggled up there’ it’s a whole different ballgame’ the pressure you’re put under playing for either Glasgow clubs is massive.

[Davefevs]

45 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

Let's hope our policy doesn't burn us twice i.e losing him for peanuts and having no value on the field for this season. It could work and we could see a reasonable fee arrive. Hopefully we find out sooner rather than later. 

That is the double whammy isn’t it and contrary to what Tinnion said in his FBC interview. Which partly makes me think this wasn’t a Tinnion decision. 

[Loosey Boy]

Let’s be honest, we all know what’s going to happen - in the last couple of days on the Transfer Window, we will start seeing some real interest in TC, with clubs knowing at that stage, we will be REALLY desperate to sell……

Expect to see a couple of clubs bidding and we will end up selling him for between £1m and £2m, rather than running the risk of a similar situation in Jan or even worse, at the end of the season.

I am in agreement with the stance we’ve taken - he’s made it clear he’s not “all in” as Manning says and so shouldn’t be involved.

[Glen hump]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That is the double whammy isn’t it and contrary to what Tinnion said in his FBC interview. Which partly makes me think this wasn’t a Tinnion decision. 

We all know who runs the show’ my club I’ll do what I want.

[Cov 77]

4 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

We all know who runs the show’ my club I’ll do what I want.

God you really hate those people don’t you