SWP and Hulse. SWP because he has been ****e for us. Hulse because he just wants to hang around and milk the club (and he's been ****e for us).
Agreed that we have a lot of other players we could offer rather than Mackie. Barton for a loan up until Christmas with us still paying his wages would be a good shout but maybe a bit too good a deal for us.
Let's just let it go to tribunal, history shows that they never award anything near as much as clubs ask for. Remember Simon Jordan, Crystal Palaces chairman, who would give Flav a run for his money on the permatan stakes. He announced he was leaving football when a sporting tribunal offered Palace next to nothing for one of their players. Blackburn should have been trying this hard in the transfer market last year, all a bit late now. But I'm pretty sure the Mackie connection is just total BS. He's on tour with the squad, signed a new contract and wouldn't be available for any negotiations for another week. He's not going anywhere.
Adding hoilett and taking away Mackie is strengthening the squad. Mackie will be at least 4th choice behind Park, Taarabt and Hoilett.
It's already been mentioned earlier in this thread that Blackburn are in no position to dictate anything, Hoilett is a free agent, and can therefore go wherever he chooses. If Rangers and Blackburn can't agree a fee, then it goes to a tribunal. Again as has already been said their valuations normally fall short of the selling clubs asking price, so that in my opinion would be our best option. As for an exchange for Mackie, that will solely be down to Hughes rating of his ability, if he thinks that the players that have arrived and any that may be on there way in will push Jamie too far down the pecking order, then he may be tempted to go for a swap. Lets face it Mackie would be a fantastic addition to any Championship side, so I'm sure there are going to be many suitors between now and the end of August.
He's 4th choice for winger by that score (which covers both sides) and will be 4/5th choice for the 2 striking roles. That would be weakening the squad because worse players would have to provide all that cover.
Mackie is a great squad player for us. He could come on from the bench when a match is deadlocked and his strength and commitment can really make a difference. There are players around that have greater skills than Mackie - SWP for example - but judge a player on how effective he is. And Mackie is effective. Would be dismayed to see him go.
So youd rather have better 4th/5th choice cover than 1st team starter? That doesnt make a lot of sense.
Mackie wont play much this season with us anyway......his hardwork and passion, hides his lack of ability poor touch etc......he will get goals and make goals from his sheer determenation....I dont want him to leave, but I wouldn't be suprised if Hughes thought he wont be getting much playing time.
When did this either/or scenario start up? Just because we allegedly have Hoilett does not mean that we should sacrifice the squad or does that one signing make Mackie surplus to requirements? Consider that there are 2 players needed for each position then we have Mackie as the fourth choice winger (assuming he's ahead of Ephraim, Smith and SWP). We can't include Traore in this because our cover at LB is so flimsy at the present time. Add to that the fact that he is higher up the pecking order as a striker than Hulse and DJ so in effect you'd prefer to promote two lesser players into the squad that keep a versatile fringe player. We're now speculating about the compensation due to Blackburn which is based on the costs of getting youth players through to professional contracts and not on Blakcburn's valuation. Just because JH is a great prospect does not mean that we will have to pay 4M for him. Is the tribunal likely to set the fee at more? Very doubtful. Less? More probable. That is a figure that we coulsd easily get for Mackie IF we chose to do so (which is not something I would opt for) and we could do that independently from the current transfer. You always state the importance of being frugal and then you're speculating on a million pound gamble that a committee finds the value of JH to be as much as we'd choose to sell JM for. THAT doesn't make a lot of sense.
Super-Jim-Jams is saying that he'd quite like him but never mentioned him in the post last night about players he thinks good enough for Norwich?
Pretty much this. I have a suspicion that Mr Mackie wont be seeing himself as 4th or 5th choice...it really wouldnt surprise me if he again forces his way into first team action at some stage of the season for a nice purple patch. Still feel he has a lot to offer to the club. "Blackburn want Mackie in exchange for Hoilett"...we all want things in life...
We keep talking about what we want, but spare a thought for poor Mackie. Worked his socks off to get back into the team, bangs in a few goals, finally gets in the starting side...and then we make supposedly the biggest signing in the history of the club, in his position. JSP will be the first name on the team sheet. He's also a 90 min player. So where does that leave Mackie? He'd be stupid not to consider other options.
