Close season transfer targets and possible departures...

[Proactive not Reactive]

They are not like for like though. Ruben has vision and the ability to split defences with a pass. It’s that we will need to replace. Scoring goals won’t be an issue as long as we can create them. This is where we will miss Ruben more.

Maybe if it was an unofficial swap McGoldrick for Rueben, McGoldrick would play up top with Langstaff(if he stays)playing as a 10,he is a far better footballer than LW allowed him to be last season(but why would he if he scored 42 goals)
I think McGoldrick is a proven goalscorer with 22 goals in Division 1 last season and the goals he has scored higher than that in his career - it would be like signing a Lee Hughes again

[OP67]

As much as I, and I guess almost all other Notts fans love Ruben, and losing him would be like losing a family member, it would be a good move for all concerned. We would gain a proven goalscorer at higher levels than Ruben has played at, and it would give Ruben a chance to see if he can cut the mustard higher up the pyramid, quicker than he would have been able to do so by staying with us. Also both players would not have to uproot.

How would it be a good move for Notts?? We'd lose a talented young player and gain an old close to retirement player. A great move for Derby but not us.

[laddo]

How would it be a good move for Notts?? We'd lose a talented young player and gain an old close to retirement player. A great move for Derby but not us.

The way I see it is it would be a good move as in its a much better move than just losing Ruben to another club.

All rumour at this stage obviously, but I'd much rather lose Ruben and gain McGoldrick than just lose Ruben.

Ideally we sign Ruben up for another 2 years , and McG would be a bonus.

The above assumes Ruben leaves.

[Proactive not Reactive]

How would it be a good move for Notts?? We'd lose a talented young player and gain an old close to retirement player. A great move for Derby but not us.

It's not the clubs agreeing the swap though it's in the players hands, if Rueben signed another 2 or 3 year deal think that would be the club's first choice but if he wanted to go to Division 1 or higher now with a lot larger wages who could blame him, McGoldrick would be a good replacement(and maybe better replacement next season)
I would only sign McGoldrick if Rueben or Macca left.

[Notts78]

It's not the clubs agreeing the swap though it's in the players hands, if Rueben signed another 2 or 3 year deal think that would be the club's first choice but if he wanted to go to Division 1 or higher now with a lot larger wages who could blame him, McGoldrick would be a good replacement(and maybe better replacement next season)
I would only sign McGoldrick if Rueben or Macca left.

Maybe Notts are being proactive rather than reactive. Pun intended. IF Notts sign DM, it shouldn’t be because RR or Macca are leaving. IF RR signs a new contract are you really willing to risk losing Macca as late as deadline day and not signing a potential replacement?
As others have said it’s rumour, if DM signs, it shouldn’t be because we fear losing a player. It should be because we think he can offer something that compliments the squad.

[DaveSmithRules]

I'd be very happy to see us sign McGoldrick nomatter what happens with Ruben. We clearly need more strikers in the squad next season. At present we only have Langstaff, Scott and Morias (assuming he plays there). I'd see McGoldrick more as a drastically better replacement for Kairo Mitchell.

[durhampie]

It's not the clubs agreeing the swap though it's in the players hands, if Rueben signed another 2 or 3 year deal think that would be the club's first choice but if he wanted to go to Division 1 or higher now with a lot larger wages who could blame him, McGoldrick would be a good replacement(and maybe better replacement next season)
I would only sign McGoldrick if Rueben or Macca left.

We dont want him, he is too old and I would see this as being a backward step in our development. Personally i would have preferred to have kept Frank Vincent.

[Chicken Balti Pie]

We dont want him, he is too old and I would see this as being a backward step in our development. Personally i would have preferred to have kept Frank Vincent.

A player who was one of the highest scorers in league 1 is too old and a backwards step and you'd prefer to have a player in a totally different position who couldn't get into the team in the national league? I often wondered if you were a troll, this now confirms it

[durhampie]

A player who was one of the highest scorers in league 1 is too old and a backwards step and you'd prefer to have a player in a totally different position who couldn't get into the team in the national league? I often wondered if you were a troll, this now confirms it

Why do we need a striker who is nearing the end of his career ? When we have Scott who can play in that position. As for Frank Vincent, he could have been a useful backup has either an attacking midfielder or in the wingback roll.. Just my opinion , and for your benefit i dont troll so less of the insults..

[IluvNotts]

We dont want him, he is too old and I would see this as being a backward step in our development. Personally i would have preferred to have kept Frank Vincent.

I thought Luke might hang on to Vincent. He looked quite sharp when he came back from his loan spell although he only got limited time off the bench.
I have a suspicion it was his attitude rather than his playing ability that Luke was unhappy with.