Nick
Administrator
Is that the bit you were in the other week that gave you home broadband?
Row 28 block 3 pop down
That's a pretty good synopsisI think we have to take that offer really, if it's as reported - interesting to know what the exact breakdown of up front versus add-ons is mind. Personally don't think Robins will add to the squad, I doubt he'll have much of the transfer fee to work with, certainly not enough for us to be looking at a higher bracket of player that would really improve us. I'd have taken ending the window with the squad we started it with and if McCallum is loaned back then, to an extent, I'm pleased enough.
It says:The artcle says 'could be worth in excess of £3m ' which to me suggests an inital fee with add ons to take it to that 3m figure. So maybe not as much as we hope for upfront.
I am not keen on the loan backs, if he does come back then let him be on the bench as cover.
We have a huge number of games coming upIf hes loaned back we should play the best lb
Currently thats mcallum
Noone should be happy to diminish our chances of promotion to have a dig at a player who leaves?
Don’t thinks it’s a dig as much as why develop someone else’s player when we have our own in the same position who also needs games and is of a similar level, sort of.If hes loaned back we should play the best lb
Currently thats mcallum
Noone should be happy to diminish our chances of promotion to have a dig at a player who leaves?
Agreed. Mason was having a good season before his injury and subsequently McCallum taking his place. I would accept the £3m, get him loaned back to us then find a replacement in the summer.I'm also confident that Brandon Mason can fill the role with relative ease... But maybe that's just me
Don’t thinks it’s a dig as much as why develop someone else’s player when we have our own in the same position who also needs games and is of a similar level, sort of.
Also loans coming back on twice the money can’t be great for morale.
And before some blame the club, remember there’s a player and his representatives involved here who will want a move.
It was clear when all the articles saying Man City and Liverpool wanted him that they were touting him around trying to gain a bigger profile like Maddison did before ending up at a much smaller club
PSG as well?
Is McCallum so much better than Mason that we can afford to risk losing him too? I mean if he gets annoyed about being second choice to a loanee he might look at his options, and then we go from the best left sided defence we’ve had for years to scratching around for another bargain to fill the gap.You play your best players whenever possible (loans or permanents). If McCallum is loaned back, he should play unless his form drops.
We’re a ‘selling club’. Developing youngsters for other clubs is kind of what we do with all our players...and why our strategy is to get young players in the first team.Call it £4m up front and forget the loan. Don’t really want us developing other clubs players when we already have a good enough replacement in Mason.
It says:
.. "could be worth in excess of £3m, plus the usual add-ons for appearances, international caps and a sell-on clause."
Indeed, but if we have the option of developing our own player or someone else’s? After all, we’ve already sold McCallum (maybe), we should be developing the next sale...We’re a ‘selling club’. Developing youngsters for other clubs is kind of what we do with all our players...and why our strategy is to get young players in the first team.
Times like this not playing at home is a shitter more than ever as books need balancing we’ve took good Money past year,Chaplin Bayliss & McCallum going out the door,would be nice to get a good portion of that to invest even 500k would be good.
Is McCallum so much better than Mason that we can afford to risk losing him too? I mean if he gets annoyed about being second choice to a loanee he might look at his options, and then we go from the best left sided defence we’ve had for years to scratching around for another bargain to fill the gap.
Would normally agree with your statement, but feel the bigger picture is relevant here. Obviously if Mason plays and isn’t up to it, change things, otherwise develop our own player.
We’re a ‘selling club’. Developing youngsters for other clubs is kind of what we do with all our players...and why our strategy is to get young players in the first team.
I don't care who owns who, we need to play our best team.Yeah exactly.
Mason would then be our own player, McCallum wouldn't. There's not a huge amount of difference in their level at the minute so let Mason develop.
Is McCallum that far ahead of Mason though? And yes, if he strops he goes — still leaves us without a left back.I think it’s reasonable that Mason should be rotated in for certain games (cup games or to cover fatigue) but you ask any manager and they’ll tell you that they’ll pick their strongest eleven. This is a results business and the managers have a short shelf life if results are poor.
As far as the player, he could cop an attitude or work harder. His choice will determine his future.
Yes, and if he cops an attitude then he's out, decision made for Robins, its hardly going to impress his new employers if he gets a rep before he even joins them is it. I can't see him coming back and acting the big 'un.I think it’s reasonable that Mason should be rotated in for certain games (cup games or to cover fatigue) but you ask any manager and they’ll tell you that they’ll pick their strongest eleven. This is a results business and the managers have a short shelf life if results are poor.
As far as the player, he could cop an attitude or work harder. His choice will determine his future.
It doesn't matter what we think, Robins clearly rates McAllum more than Mason, and if thats the case then he should play him week in & week out, unless his attitude goes or its clear his heart isn't in itIs McCallum that far ahead of Mason though? And yes, if he strops he goes — still leaves us without a left back.
It’s not about favourites, it’s about what’s best for the team / club. Developing our own player, arguably, is better for the club. Assuming you’re not playing someone who’s rubbish, but Mason isn’t rubbish, he’s a damn good left back who has been a bit unlucky that we discovered McCallum.I don't care who owns who, we need to play our best team.
Robins doesn't seem like the sentimental type to me who'd play Mason just because he's 'one of us', and if that was the case there would be no point having him back. If Robins sees him as better then Mason, as he clearly does, then he needs to continue to play him, its whats best for the team. We aren't out to be all warm & fuzzy and hand some development opportunities out, we're here to win games. We can worry about all that stuff when we're a bit further up the leagues.
You pick your strongest 11, not your favourite 11.
Think it was Rotherham away mason got bullied McCallum came in from then onwards,that’s my only problem with mason is his size.It doesn't matter what we think, Robins clearly rates McAllum more than Mason, and if thats the case then he should play him week in & week out, unless his attitude goes or its clear his heart isn't in it
No. its not about that, we are not a Premiership club who can come 12th and be happy & be giving minutes purely so we can develop players.It’s not about favourites, it’s about what’s best for the team / club. Developing our own player, arguably, is better for the club. Assuming you’re not playing someone who’s rubbish, but Mason isn’t rubbish, he’s a damn good left back who has been a bit unlucky that we discovered McCallum.
Is that because you used to play for them in the 90's?This could be right
Norwich has close association with us
I hope “Mark” ( @better days ) is on the case to get us a loan from themIs that because you used to play for them in the 90's?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?