Filipe Morais told of Bolton Wanderers exit via a tweet

WANDERERS shocked supporters by announcing the departure of popular winger Filipe Morais.
The 32-year-old played 37 times for Phil Parkinson last season in a number of positions and had widely been expected to sign a new deal this summer.
But a surprising statement rushed out of the Macron Stadium at 5pm confirmed the club would not be offering a new contract, thanking Morais for his services.
The Bolton News understands Morais found out about his exit after reading a club tweet, linked to the official website. He had been coaching at his academy over the last few weeks and had not been in contact with any of the Wanderers staff.

Wanderers announced the signing of Erhun Oztumer yesterday and are believed to be busy in the transfer market as they build a side capable of progressing in the Championship. Nevertheless, news of Morais's departure has raised eyebrows right around the club.
Signed on a free transfer from Bradford City in February 2017, the former Chelsea youth star played a major part in Wanderers' promotion from League One, scoring two goals and supplying 14 assists. His reliable delivery from wide areas earned him the nickname 'Postman' among the Bolton supporters.
Morais signed a one-year extension last summer and his versatility proved a valuable asset for Parkinson as his side battled to stay in the Championship.
Speaking last month to The Bolton News, he said: "“Given the opportunity next season I feel I can kick on and improve. I know the gaffer will want to push on and make a better team, and I can go up another level too.”

Meanwhile, Chris Taylor - released by Wanderers at the end of the season - has signed a one-year deal with League One Blackpool.
The 31-year-old made 23 appearances for Bolton during their League One promotion campaign but started just three games. He did not play a single minute of football last season after a succession of injuries.

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/wanderers/16288661.Wanderers_winger_finds_out_about_his_exit_via_club_tweet/

Disgusting

Leeds_Trotter wrote:Disgusting

Gullible

Boggersbelief wrote:

Leeds_Trotter wrote:Disgusting

Gullible

Nope. If I was to listen to your ITK posts, then I'd be gullible. 

Very disappointing, he was my favourite of our wingers and my favourite player on Bolton's books.Girls get upset if they get ditched by a phone call never mind a text but i cant see a grown man being upset about how he found out he was getting finished.

Growler wrote:Girls get upset if they get ditched by a phone call never mind a text

You scoundrel. Man up and ditch them face to face.

This didnt happen

I don't believe this happened the way it's been reported. As to him being released well while I think he had a decent season last term I can't say I'm all that surprised really. Not only because of his age but because it seems clear to me that Ken and Phil are swinging the axe to get the wage bill down as far as possible. I still think that's the reason we let go of Henry and signed Lowe instead rather than as a partner or backup. It's all about the numbers on the balance sheet.

luckyPeterpiper wrote:I don't believe this happened the way it's been reported. As to him being released well while I think he had a decent season last term I can't say I'm all that surprised really. Not only because of his age but because it seems clear to me that Ken and Phil are swinging the axe to get the wage bill down as far as possible. I still think that's the reason we let go of Henry and signed Lowe instead rather than as a partner or backup. It's all about the numbers on the balance sheet.

It is but if you then spend the money you've saved on a bunch of has beens who may or may not work out better than what you had, it's more like rearranging the deckchairs than progress.

Anyone we sign is going to be a gamble one way or another - our budget is not even close to competitive and all signings will reflect that.

wanderlust wrote:

luckyPeterpiper wrote:I don't believe this happened the way it's been reported. As to him being released well while I think he had a decent season last term I can't say I'm all that surprised really. Not only because of his age but because it seems clear to me that Ken and Phil are swinging the axe to get the wage bill down as far as possible. I still think that's the reason we let go of Henry and signed Lowe instead rather than as a partner or backup. It's all about the numbers on the balance sheet.

It is but if you then spend the money you've saved on a bunch of has beens who may or may not work out better than what you had, it's more like rearranging the deckchairs than progress.

I understand where you're coming from and I share your concern but let's face it, the ones we've released weren't all that great to begin with were they? If they were we wouldn't have needed a final day miracle to stay up.

It's my guess (and I admit it IS a guess) that we're not spending ALL the money we save on wages, we're using some of it to offset the debts while bringing in the best players we can for the lowest possible outlay. If they're only a fraction better than the ones we've released then that would be progress in my book and from what I've seen the guys coming in are here because they're hungry to play again, to put themselves back in the public eye or shop window as it were.

We may well be the last chance saloon for some of them and that could well be a good thing from our point of view. If they succeed we might even be able to sell them on for a few quid and use that to further offset the debts. If they fail we haven't spent a lot on them so it won't be a crippling blow if they wind up being released later.

wanderlust wrote:

luckyPeterpiper wrote:I don't believe this happened the way it's been reported. As to him being released well while I think he had a decent season last term I can't say I'm all that surprised really. Not only because of his age but because it seems clear to me that Ken and Phil are swinging the axe to get the wage bill down as far as possible. I still think that's the reason we let go of Henry and signed Lowe instead rather than as a partner or backup. It's all about the numbers on the balance sheet.

It is but if you then spend the money you've saved on a bunch of has beens who may or may not work out better than what you had, it's more like rearranging the deckchairs than progress.

We've already signed a player that other clubs were interested in, so he's not come to us if we aren't at least paying the market rate in wages for him and he likes our plans for the club this season coming.

He's 27 and our other new player 25, so hardly signing 'has beens' either.

Morais probably would have found out by the clubs official twitter announcement but I would strongly imagine all other forms of contacting him (and his agent) had first been tried to contact him and failed.  It's not as though he wasn't expecting some sort of communication with his contract nearly up, was it!

It's also not necessarily the clubs decision to let him go either - maybe Morais was offered a one year contract and turned it down because he wanted a two year one and it didn't fit in with the clubs future idea's.

There will be plenty more arrivals in to the club before the transfer windows shut so let's judge who well we did with recruitment and up grading last seasons squad then.

The 'going rate' may well be less than we were paying some of these guys though sluffy. Don't forget quite a few of them were holdovers from Dougie and Neil's days. I suspect what's happening is two things. First we're looking to trim the wage bill and second, we're replacing certain players with guys Phil thinks have more to offer and are younger with a concommitant reduction in costs and a potential increase in resale value down the road. I hope the lads coming in perform the way Phil seems to think they will and as to Morais I can see why the club would let him go if his wage was high or he wanted more than a year because he's past 30 and in all likelihood wouldn't command much of a fee if any should it become necessary to offload him later.

Preston are a side who wanted oztumer, they're also a side now well established in the championship and are looking to break into the playoffs, possibly further. Clearly they thought oztumer was the type of player they needed to do just that, so why's he ended up here?

Because big things are happening on the quiet regarding investment and ambition, this is only the beginning

MORAIS was shite, played half decent for a few months when he first joined but as I expected that new club bounce didn't last, let's not forget he couldn't even break into Bradford's team before he left them. Glad we've cut him loose, we need better and will get better

luckyPeterpiper wrote:The 'going rate' may well be less than we were paying some of these guys though sluffy. Don't forget quite a few of them were holdovers from Dougie and Neil's days. I suspect what's happening is two things. First we're looking to trim the wage bill and second, we're replacing certain players with guys Phil thinks have more to offer and are younger with a concommitant reduction in costs and a potential increase in resale value down the road. I hope the lads coming in perform the way Phil seems to think they will and as to Morais I can see why the club would let him go if his wage was high or he wanted more than a year because he's past 30 and in all likelihood wouldn't command much of a fee if any should it become necessary to offload him later.

I think you are misunderstanding me Peter perhaps?

I was talking about the signing of Oztumer when I talked about 'market rate'.

If he had received interest from other clubs - and we are led to believe he did - then clearly he would know what the others were offering in wages and we must have been there or thereabouts in our offer, otherwise he would not have given us not much consideration of signing for us. Therefore we must have offered the current going rate (or better) in wages for him to be here with us.

The only player on our books with 'stupid' wages is now only Ben Amos, and he is purposely loaned out from the club to avoid club house upset.

Boggersbelief wrote:MORAIS was shite, played half decent for a few months when he first joined but as I expected that new club bounce didn't last, let's not forget he couldn't even break into Bradford's team before he left them. Glad we've cut him loose, we need better and will get better

You've just embarrassed yourself again Boggers.

Morais is the main reason we got promoted, and if he'd played more last season I think we'd have avoided the last day heroics. Again, he was pivotal in that Forest game, driving on the right hand side with Little.

Next you'll be telling us Twatface is brilliant. Oh, you already did.

Deary deary me, it's a good job the club has people like me and Ken Anderson around. We realise what's needed and who's good enough to take the club forward, another superb decision from the chairman. If it was up to you Nat we'd still be offering over the hill average players 20k a week

Boggersbelief wrote:Deary deary me, it's a good job the club has people like me and Ken Anderson around.

We're very thankful Boggers, what would we do without you?

By the way, when is Victor putting pen to paper?

When he can be arsed