KegCity

I see. So nothing that actually forces our hand.

Genuine question: what can Scott do about it if we reject a bid?

After spending 8 years with the club (in his most recent spell) and being part of a transfer saga every summer where Palace put a price tag on him and stuck to their guns, so yes it is.

They are, and if Bayern meet Levy's extortionate valuation (100+ million for a player with one year of their deal left!) then he will go. Last summer we saw Man City refuse to meet Spurs' valuation. Despite Kane not turning up for training and trying to get his move Levy didn't budge, Kane decided it wasn't prudent for his career to not play for a season and got on with it. They're a bigger club than us but still have their place in the chain of selling players. Again, would wish Scott well if someone meets our valuation, would be disappointed if we fold to an offer much lower than 25 million when there's plenty of time in the window and he has two years on his deal.

I'm not silly enough to say we shouldn't sell anyone, I understand the financial climate etc, but it's all down to the contract length. Bigger players than Scott have thrown their toys out the pram for a move but when the club have the contract on their side there's not a lot a player can do. Zaha has tried and failed (with Phil Alexander as the clubs' CEO), as has Kane. Don't think Scott would do that mind and I think Bournemouth will get close enough to our price tag to get the deal done so it doesn't matter.

God forbid we play hardball with big clubs.

Exactly. If he decides the first team isn’t for him anymore, and nobody submits a suitable bid, he’d be welcome to kick rocks in the under 23s. We’ve seen bigger players such as Kane try and force moves by not training etc but when they have years on their deal it’s down to the club alone. I don’t think it would ever come to that though.

By doing what? Refusing to play?

I guess we just have different views on it. I think that that sort of fee would be much more beneficial to the squad than keeping Alex, I also think a 30% reduction in price would be poor business from the club when he has two years on his deal and there’s plenty of time in the window. Phil Alexander has been in a similar situation when at Palace with Zaha, nobody met their valuation and Zaha is still with Palace. I would be surprised and disappointed if he folded this early in the window but we’ll see how it plays out.

There's room for negotiation, say to 22, and then there's giving around a 30% discount on a player to 18. We don't need nor want to sell, it would be very disappointing and a strange business decision to fold to a considerably lower fee than the one repeatedly quoted in the press with this much time left in the window. 6 hours left? I get it. 6 weeks? Makes no sense and reeks of desperation to sell which I haven't seen any evidence of so far.

Bristol Post claim we rejected it in the same story? https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/bristol-city-alex-scott-bournemouth-8596558

Well yes it is conjecture, as is everything involved else in the thread. I don't and neither do the club as far as we can reasonably tell. A price tag has been set publicly, everything is in our favour, why would we budge? Scott is staying unless his price tag is met because the club are totally in the driving seat due to his contract length. Dropping the price by 7 million when there's 6 weeks left of the transfer window would be an odd decision.

Why would the club reject 18 million from Wolves then?

It would be silly to turn down the opportunity to play in the Premier League if Bournemouth meet out valuation. If they've bid for him then he'll have indicated he's happy to go there. All it takes is one serious injury and the opportunity can be lost forever.

Scott will clearly be willing to join Bournemouth as they've submitted a bid, they wouldn't bother if he'd indicated he wouldn't go.

TransferChecker is one of the best sources for transfer news around. I’d also be surprised if this doesn’t wake up a few clubs now.

It's such a shame as there's a lot of big fights that could and should have been made ages ago that haven't been. With Heavyweight being the biggest draw to a casual audience it's leading potential boxing fans to watch other combat sports where the big fights get made. Tank v Garcia was refreshing to see with two boxers willing to put their undefeated records on the line. Hopefully Fury gets off his arse and follows suit once he's done with Ngannou.

Totally pointless, can't imagine it will move many PPVs. Fury obviously will make Ngannou look silly with the ruleset in his favour in a boxing match, if they have a fight Ngannou kills him. Would be interesting if it's in 4oz gloves but assume Fury isn't stupid enough to take that risk.

I admire your optimism. That money would let us challenge for a longer period (aka multiple seasons) rather than just this one.

I think he's probably conflicted, happy at Spurs but well aware that if he wins nothing it will be a huge stain on an otherwise successful career. If he hadn't tried to force a move last summer (or the summer before?) as well I would completely agree. It wasn't a direct comparison to Alex as like you say they're in very different situations. Just a note that if a club has the player's contract on their side, as we do, they hold all the cards and a player isn't moving if the club don't want them to. To be honest I want Alex to go as 25 million would be more beneficial to us than keeping him for a year.

The Levy/Kane situation is, to my understanding, an interesting exception to the rule about clubs needing to sell players. Spurs have tied him down to a long term contract and that's forced him to stay at the club. He had a tantrum and tried to force a move to Man City, Spurs held firm. He's pushing for a move to Bayern with one year on his deal, it looks like Spurs will hold firm and risk him walking away next summer. Spurs could do with that money to rejuvenate their squad and Kane isn't getting any younger yet Levy appears to be sticking to his guns. Obviously we're not as big as Spurs but they're not at the top of the food chain and have been able to keep one of the best strikers of the last decade at their club for far longer than most would have been able to. Think it shows that if the club hold the cards in terms of contract length they can keep a player if they desperately want to.

Clubs will talk to agents to make sure the player is actually open to a move, and potential personal terms, before starting negotiations with a club.

Played very well in the Premier League vs playing very well in the championship, going to be a sizeable difference in fee.

Interesting, I since looked it up and there was a "focus group made up of a cross section of the fanbase" which is a poor way to involve the fans in such a big change.

Not asking you specifically but how much fan consultation was there for the new crest? As a season ticket holder I can't remember it being mentioned until it was launched but I'm probably forgetting about it.