This morning’s Scottish tabloids continue to link the Blues with a £250,000 move for Celtic defender Kelvin Wilson, while elsewhere Town are claimed to be looking to offload midfielder Jimmy Bullard in order to reduce their wage bill with Derby striker Steve Davies remaining a target.

Yesterday, assistant manager Chris Hutchings wouldn’t be drawn on the Blues’ interest in former Nottingham Forest centre-half Wilson, however, we understand he is a player that Paul Jewell admires and would like to bring to Portman Road as he looks to add solidity and strength in depth to his defence.

Wilson, along with former Town loanee Daryl Murphy, was a second half sub in Celtic’s 1-0 victory over Aberdeen on the opening day of the SPL season yesterday.

Bullard, who was left out of the squad which faced West Ham, is likely to be at the very top of Town’s wage bill with the 33-year-old almost certainly earning somewhere north of £15,000 a week.

The former Peterborough, Wigan, Fulham and Hull man has been a bit part player throughout pre-season, last week travelling with the reserves squad to Braintree rather than with the first team party which took on Cambridge United the following day.

Earlier in the summer, Bullard, who has a year left on his Town contract, was claimed to be interesting two clubs in China.

Davies has been a Blues target all summer but with Town and Derby unable to agree a fee with the Rams after £1 million for the 24-year-old, who Paul Jewell took to Pride Park from Tranmere during his spell as manager of the Midlanders.

Meanwhile, Blackburn are reported to be ready to make a “take it or leave it” £6 million - a £4 million initial fee plus £2 million on promotion - bid to Huddersfield for ex-Blues frontman Jordan Rhodes, who is also interesting Fulham.

Town are entitled to 10% of the profit the Terriers make on the 22-year-old with the fee the Blues received for his 2009 transfer understood to have reached around £850,000 with all the top-up clauses now having been met.

Photo: Action Images

Photo: Action Images

Town22 added 15:28 - Aug 5 Bullard was sitting in the car park yesterday before the game. He was in a Range Rover talking to a fat chap. Looked serious but he still had time to wave to my young son.
0

Sindre94 added 16:08 - Aug 5 Disappointed to see Bullard leave, but it frees up wages. Would really want davies and wilson
0

ITFC_Singapore added 16:08 - Aug 5 IF true this is madness. Bullard needs to play. EVERY game. He is the most creative and talented player in our squad. I am a big PJ fan, but it is the jobo him and the rest of his management team to get the best out of the best plyer in our squad and have him producing while he did on loan. The renaissance of Bullard is our best chance of promotion.
0

BillBlue added 17:08 - Aug 5 I am glad Phil used the word "tabloids" because I think all of this is junk. What I find more interesting is that Blackburn's game against Nijmegen has been cancelled because, apparently, the Blackburn fans were rioting! What does that say for English football in a foreign country? I hope, when they come here, we punish them as severely as we did the latest team to get promoted. COYB

0

blues1 added 17:34 - Aug 5 bigalsmate. did you not see my reply to your comment last week about the wickham money. why dont people think before they question things like that? ne1 should realise that the wickham money was spent on the 14 players we signed last season, either on deals or on loan. the money went to transfer fees, loan fees, signing on fees & wages. pretty obvious really to ne1 who gives the matter ne thought at all. oh eric gates, even if we were to sign wilson on loan, which from stories so far isnt an option, with a loan fee to pay, wouldnt save us any money towards signing davies. nemore than signing a player on a free transfer would for that matter, with a signing on fee to pay to the player. why do people think that loans/frees dont cost the club money other than the wages?

0

Langdon_Blue added 17:43 - Aug 5 I still think we will see Bullard return to form this year, but agree that if he's departure will free up funds to allow us to strengthen in other areas (central defence and target man up front) then he has to go.
0

RossHolmes added 18:02 - Aug 5 Yeah that sounds goood, offload Bullard (been looking disinterested). Get in a defender and Davies, seems sensible from Jewell.
0

ldnj added 18:29 - Aug 5 10% ... still struggle to believe they did a deal with such a low sell on fee for a young player who had scored goals at every level he'd played (inc. the Championship for Ipswich)
0

BigAlsMate added 18:32 - Aug 5 Blues1: No, I didn't see your post from last week fella, as I was away on holiday with the family - so I must thank you for pointing out the facts as you see them. However, if the whole lot was blown on what was brought in last season, then in the case of many of them, some heads should roll - because I really didn't see much come in and improve what we already had (and please before you start shouting, I didn't say all!). Also, I am not sure that with the evidence of what was brought in last season (financially speaking) compared to those we supposedly lost out on due to financial constraints, that all the Wickham money would have disappeared - or if it did, then refer back to paragraph above. And one last point, a very minor one, do you really have to type everything in your own version of text spelling? What the heck is all that ne1 about - what is wrong with plain "anyone"? I am a big boy and quite capable of reading the Queen's English! Still, whatever the reasons for the happens or lack of at Portman Road, we'll all still be down there again this season, hoping for the best. COYB

0

blues1 added 18:49 - Aug 5 big al, firstly if i want to type in text speak i will do so. not for you or ne1 else to tell me how to type my messages.(rant over lol.) as to your point of heads rolling if the whole amount blown on who we brought in? how far do you think £8m goes? if you take just bullard, bowyer, andrews, stockdales wages &signing on fees/loan fees, that would account for much of it. let alone jet who cost £1.5m in transfer fees, chopra, £1m. and thats presuming we got the £8m up front which i very much doubt.you dont get much for £8m these days , let alone 14 players, whoever they may be.

0

Ipswichbusiness added 19:11 - Aug 5 I was one of those who was positive about Bullard being signed. I know that last seaspn was a poor one, but he is still the player most likely to turn a match. I hope that we can get him back to form! I agree with others that Murphy is a good player if we can sign him at the right price (both fee and wages). I don't know about Wilson.
0

Dozzells_Bobblehat added 19:21 - Aug 5 PYBlue - at least you still have your health hey !!
0

Tractastic added 20:02 - Aug 5 Appreciate that managing Bullard must be difficult but he is one of the only really class game changing players we have we have in the squad. Therefore despite the wages would love him to stay and stamp his authority on the team and guide us to the top half of the league. Isn't this why we emply managers to get the best out of players? Agree with Garv on Murphy,strong,versatile and adds a much needed ariel threat up front. Guess this depends on Celtics demands though and what we can afford?

0

alfromcol added 20:13 - Aug 5 I still think Bullard has a roll to play, but he needs game time. It'snot that he has played badly, he just hasn't played!
0

Talbs77 added 20:22 - Aug 5 I think as much I have a lot of time for jimmy as he's such a likeable lad and always seems to love his football, since he has earned his contract however he's been a massive dissapointment and at 33 we need to cut loose I think as he wont improve anytime soon. I like the look of this boy wilson, think strengthening the back line is just what we need.
0

RegencyBlue added 20:56 - Aug 5 Most Town fans wanted Jimmy signed after his impressive loan spell but we have paid him a lot of money with very little return in reality. It was worth a shot but never worked out - time to cut our losses and move on!
0

TractorBeezer added 21:16 - Aug 5 Such a shame that Jimmy has disappointed. I think we all agree that the talent and ability is certainly there. My preference would be to persevere with him. However, this is a situation where we must rely on management to make the right call since they see him in action (hopefully) most days and can judge whether or not he is pulling his weight and whether or not he can still contribute to the team.

0

Steelmonkey added 21:49 - Aug 5 I was exstatic when we finally got the business done and signed Jimmy for a two year deal, however, he has taken us for mugs. Got the contract and sat back and has done nothing. Can't believe it when some on here are saying he hasn't played badly. In the games he did make an appearance in just how many times did he get caught out, to slow and didn't seem fit enough. Think that's bad play. I don't think we have a cat's chance in hell of someone coming in and taking him off us, unless he gets a lucurative offer from China. Any improvement from him will not be seen untill second half of the season when he will be playing for a new contract either here or elsewhere, probably going on a free just like Leadboots. I apologise if that sounds very cynical, but it's just history repeating itself. Well done for the result on Saturday, COYB's.

0

ericgates added 21:57 - Aug 5 How about christophe berra from wolves?
0

Edmunds5 added 22:37 - Aug 5 ericgayes, I've thought about him also and I think he's worth a shout but not sure he's the quickest and I think we're in need of a pacey defender so Wilson is probably more suitable for what we need IMO.
0

Garv added 00:34 - Aug 6 Thank you alfromcol, just the point I've been trying to get access for ages.
0

Surco72 added 08:29 - Aug 6 I think Bullard has looked good and keen in the pre season games and think we should be building around him as he has the real quality we need to make the difference in promotion
0

thebeat added 10:51 - Aug 6 i feel a little sorry for Bullard to be honest.when he came on loan he was playing in a free role in midfield and thats why he was dominating games. last season he was never played in that position.he was always at the back of the stupid diamond which didnt suit him. i know he can be a silly boy at times but lets face it hes a class player and we've wasted him.after all the effort we went to to get him i dont understand why we havent played him in the same role as his loan spell.it doesnt make sense.for me its poor management.

0

Blogs 297 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls