Michael Flynn after Worcester
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
What i don't get about the waiting game, is that if you are near the bottom of the payment league, you will still be that on August. It seems you have to hope that all the other teams have signed all the players they want by that time
I also take it from that conversation, that Thomas is on his way out
Didn't get that personally. He was at the game, just not involved.Ihearye wrote: ↑06 Jul 2025, 07:23I also take it from that conversation, that Thomas is on his way out
Still think he will leave though.
He seemed to have an explanation as to why others were not there
The Garlick situation muddies things but it still feels like mixed messages - Miller on the transfer list but we don't want him to go and it would take a significant offer to be accepted. Bit odd.
Reading between the lines Flynn never transfer listed him but our Director of Football was shopping him around to free up cash for new signings. After Flynn met Garlick on Friday Miller is no longer available for transfer unless a large six figure bid is received.
-
- Posts: 4417
- Joined: 04 Aug 2011, 11:02
Where was six figures mentioned ?Robin wrote: ↑06 Jul 2025, 12:48Reading between the lines Flynn never transfer listed him but our Director of Football was shopping him around to free up cash for new signings. After Flynn met Garlick on Friday Miller is no longer available for transfer unless a large six figure bid is received.
He's guessing, but to be fair he did say "reading between the lines," and it does sound like we're now only looking to sell if a stupid bid is received. Which, let's face it, it won't.horlickfanclub wrote: ↑06 Jul 2025, 14:38Where was six figures mentioned ?
The Miller situation is nothing new as any player who has played for us is always effectively vulnerable to leaving if a significant fee is involved we are a selling club in the food chain, it just appears we are not actively looking to get rid of him anymore.
We do seem in a bit of a limbo at the moment as I'm not sure if we are waiting on the new ownership situation before really being able to tie down a couple of key targets? As Robin suggested the best scenario would be if we could manage to hold down our key assets this window (AJB,Thomas,Archer) and then perhaps look at upping the playing budget slightly in Janaury when the ownership situation is hopefully resolved and build around what we already have.
We do seem in a bit of a limbo at the moment as I'm not sure if we are waiting on the new ownership situation before really being able to tie down a couple of key targets? As Robin suggested the best scenario would be if we could manage to hold down our key assets this window (AJB,Thomas,Archer) and then perhaps look at upping the playing budget slightly in Janaury when the ownership situation is hopefully resolved and build around what we already have.
Bingo, it's obvious one of the key outcomes of the meeting on Friday is nobody is leaving unless an offer too good to turn down comes in and that sort of figure will higher than it was a month ago.Shade wrote: ↑06 Jul 2025, 20:36He's guessing, but to be fair he did say "reading between the lines," and it does sound like we're now only looking to sell if a stupid bid is received. Which, let's face it, it won't.
There is a lot of stuff floating around at the moment but it's fairly safe to say there is a serious hope, perhaps as far as an expectation, that we will start this season with a better playing budget than we originally planned for. Equally it's probably unrealistic to expect us to go out and splash around with fees (maybe a few nominal ones). If I had to guess we are holding back to sign a better quality of player but knowing that they won't be able to come in for a few more weeks it's about keeping things steady until then. That likely includes today's new signing who I presume will be more cover/competition than first choice once the squad if finalised.Benctfc wrote: ↑07 Jul 2025, 06:31 The Miller situation is nothing new as any player who has played for us is always effectively vulnerable to leaving if a significant fee is involved we are a selling club in the food chain, it just appears we are not actively looking to get rid of him anymore.
We do seem in a bit of a limbo at the moment as I'm not sure if we are waiting on the new ownership situation before really being able to tie down a couple of key targets? As Robin suggested the best scenario would be if we could manage to hold down our key assets this window (AJB,Thomas,Archer) and then perhaps look at upping the playing budget slightly in Janaury when the ownership situation is hopefully resolved and build around what we already have.
Au contraire. Further down the interview, Flynn said:
“Arkell had a little niggle, Jordan too, not worth risking.”
So, NOT a deliberate non-selection, with implication JT is leaving. Unless (flipping it round again) wanting to avoid risking a worse injury that could then PREVENT JT being sold.
I guess only MF knows what is in his own mind.
That is why I said Jim was rightLeckyfan wrote: ↑07 Jul 2025, 11:40Au contraire. Further down the interview, Flynn said:
“Arkell had a little niggle, Jordan too, not worth risking.”
So, NOT a deliberate non-selection, with implication JT is leaving. Unless (flipping it round again) wanting to avoid risking a worse injury that could then PREVENT JT being sold.
I guess only MF knows what is in his own mind.