New signings, who will be first...and next?

[Srg]

7 minutes ago, leamram said:

 

Could be one for u21s and see what happens from there, like Nunn. 

[duncanjwitham]

1 hour ago, Tyler Durden said:

The DET article states that it's the business plan agreed with Clowes and the EFL when he took the club over.

So if it's an agreement then not sure why the word enforced is being used. 

What the article doesn't say is how long this agreement will go on for, whether it's open ended or to an agreed fixed timescale or open for review at any point 

There’s agreements and there’s “agreements” though. The not being able to pay fees thing doesn’t seem to jibe with other clubs that have been in administration, so either the EFL have enforced a stricter rule on us for some reason, or we’ve actively opted for it, presumably to allow some more leeway elsewhere (like wages). Or I suppose there’s some other subtlety to it that explains the difference - we can’t pay fees right now, but could reinvest some proportion of any fees we bought in, for example.

As far as I know, the agreements are normally for 2 years (assuming we’ve paid off the creditors upfront).

[May Contain Nuts]

25 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Or I suppose there’s some other subtlety to it that explains the difference

Could be purely the level of debt?

[PistoldPete]

Just now, Coconut's Beard said:

Could be purely the level of debt?

We are debt free.

[May Contain Nuts]

Just now, PistoldPete said:

We are debt free.

Now. 

If the level of debt which had been accumulated far outweighs that which others have done so the EFL may not give us quite a clean slate as others they consider to have carried out lesser demeanors. We have a different owner and Ltd company but that doesn't mean they'll treat us as being free of guilt-laden associations to the previous owner.

Regardless that we have a 'new start' the EFL still hold power over us in terms of our membership, so can still make certain demands based in previous behaviour, they still hold all the cards.

[plymouthram]

On 17/07/2022 at 11:50, StaffsRam said:

1. Announce Roofe on Tuesday when it’s at the height of the heatwave.

2. All eyes turn to Bristol for the inevitable reports of spontaneous human combustion.

Something will certainly go Pop !

[InstaRam]

Seems like Buchanan and Byrne left us in a sticky situation since Rosenior have had players lined up for evry role except fullbacks? Probably counted on these two for the upcoming season. Not impressed by their actions at all leaving their team members like that. Hopefully Rosenior kan pull another rabbit out of the hat soon? 

Edited July 18, 2022 by InstaRam

[Anag Ram]

Bit quiet on the goalkeeping front.

Was Jamal Blackman mentioned last week?

[PistoldPete]

15 hours ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Now. 

If the level of debt which had been accumulated far outweighs that which others have done so the EFL may not give us quite a clean slate as others they consider to have carried out lesser demeanors. We have a different owner and Ltd company but that doesn't mean they'll treat us as being free of guilt-laden associations to the previous owner.

Regardless that we have a 'new start' the EFL still hold power over us in terms of our membership, so can still make certain demands based in previous behaviour, they still hold all the cards.

They cannot treat us differently to other clubs who have been in admin. If we pay creditors 25% and football creditors 100% that is the same as Wigan and we should be treated exactly the same as Wigan . 

[therealhantsram]

On 16/07/2022 at 11:25, Oldben said:

Clubs in League One shall be permitted to name up to a maximum 22 Players, of which a minimum of 8 must be a Home Grown Player. Under 21 players do not need to be named on the Squad List to be eligible to participate in a League Match.

Are we close to that number now?

Great post.

By my calculations we only have Bird and Kinight that count as homegrown players (over 21).

That would mean we are only able to name a squad of 14 players over 21. We will have six gaps for those homegrown players that we just cannot fill.

We have those 13 non homegrown players on the books already. It will be 14 if we sign up Fozzy.

So it would seem anyone else we sign will have to be u21.

 

[cheron85]

3 minutes ago, therealhantsram said:

Great post.

By my calculations we only have Bird and Kinight that count as homegrown players (over 21).

That would mean we are only able to name a squad of 14 players over 21. We will have six gaps for those homegrown players that we just cannot fill.

We have those 13 non homegrown players on the books already. It will be 14 if we sign up Fozzy.

So it would seem anyone else we sign will have to be u21.

 

I think Home Grown means in the EFL not at Derby specifically 

[therealhantsram]

Just now, cheron85 said:

I think Home Grown means in the EFL not at Derby specifically 

Aaah phew.that makes a huge difference then.

[Oldben]

2 hours ago, therealhantsram said:

Great post.

By my calculations we only have Bird and Kinight that count as homegrown players (over 21).

That would mean we are only able to name a squad of 14 players over 21. We will have six gaps for those homegrown players that we just cannot fill.

We have those 13 non homegrown players on the books already. It will be 14 if we sign up Fozzy.

So it would seem anyone else we sign will have to be u21.

 

These are efl rules ...

"Clubs in League One shall be permitted to name up to a maximum 22 Players, of which a minimum of 8 must be a Home Grown Player. Under 21 players do not need to be named on the Squad List to be eligible to participate in a League Match."

I thought its saying that the under 21 age players don't count towards the total, and a club can field a max of 22 players.

We are not at the number yet.

I'm not sure what the definition of home grown player references, I'm not certain it means from the club.

 

 

 

[Old Spalding Ram]

Pinched from t’internet

 

What is the homegrown player rule in the EFL?

A homegrown player in the EFL is any player, regardless of nationality, who has been registered with any club associated with the English or Welsh FA for at least 3 years before reaching 21 years old.

[Caerphilly Ram]

3 hours ago, Anag Ram said:

Bit quiet on the goalkeeping front.

Was Jamal Blackman mentioned last week?

Don’t think there was an “official” link anywhere. I think he would be a good option as he is available on a free, is in the right age bracket and has done well at times in his career. Him, Wildsmith and Loach as third choice would be solid at this level and potentially higher.

[Caerphilly Ram]

3 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

They cannot treat us differently to other clubs who have been in admin. If we pay creditors 25% and football creditors 100% that is the same as Wigan and we should be treated exactly the same as Wigan . 

No, but they can act accordingly with regards to our specific circumstances of administration and what was agreed in the business plan with the new owner upon exiting administration. The rules for clubs as they leave administration or a “liquidation event” as it’s termed in the EFL rules aren’t publicly defined, I am assuming that’s because there isn’t a one size fits all approach.
So the EFL could have sat down with Mr Clowes and the admins and said “unlike Wigan/Bolton/Bury etc the previous owners ran up an excessive tax bill along with other debts and whilst settled in part following the administration we think it would reflect poorly on the club and the league if you were to come out of admin and start throwing transfer fees around, what do you think?” 

The new owners have agreed to work within this business plan, whatever it is, Rosenior is on record saying we can’t pay fees, the conditions surrounding that is not available in the public domain so we just have to see how things pan out. In my head it would be logical as part of a business plan to say “a percentage of money generated through player sales can be reinvested in transfer fees”, but who knows if that kind of logic has been applied or not ??‍♂️ 

[Crewton]

The home-grown rule doesn't affect us simply because we don't have enough players who DON'T qualify ever to have fewer than 8 HG players in our squad. 

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

No, but they can act accordingly with regards to our specific circumstances of administration and what was agreed in the business plan with the new owner upon exiting administration. The rules for clubs as they leave administration or a “liquidation event” as it’s termed in the EFL rules aren’t publicly defined, I am assuming that’s because there isn’t a one size fits all approach.
So the EFL could have sat down with Mr Clowes and the admins and said “unlike Wigan/Bolton/Bury etc the previous owners ran up an excessive tax bill along with other debts and whilst settled in part following the administration we think it would reflect poorly on the club and the league if you were to come out of admin and start throwing transfer fees around, what do you think?” 

The new owners have agreed to work within this business plan, whatever it is, Rosenior is on record saying we can’t pay fees, the conditions surrounding that is not available in the public domain so we just have to see how things pan out. In my head it would be logical as part of a business plan to say “a percentage of money generated through player sales can be reinvested in transfer fees”, but who knows if that kind of logic has been applied or not ??‍♂️ 

New owners have agreed to work to EFL business plan because they may not  have been given any choice.

A business plan that means you don't spend excessively makes sense for sure. No need for silly rules though. 
 

[Gone]

On 17/07/2022 at 12:50, StaffsRam said:

1. Announce Roofe on Tuesday when it’s at the height of the heatwave.

2. All eyes turn to Bristol for the inevitable reports of spontaneous human combustion.

3. And we can also sing ? the Roof, the roof, the roof is on fire? …….maybe not a good one for today ?

[Rammy03]