[Archived] Williams & Co

[rebelmswar]

Really? There's a distinct whiff of bull steaming from that interview, re: Popov.

I wouldn’t put it in such derogatory terms, but Topman is right in regards to the information presented regarding Popov.

Too many different things resting on others. It is either a PR piece to make things better or very poor planning.

[67splitscreen]

Did Lewandowski then depend on Roberts leaving, I know there was a ? mark over the fee but!

[rebelmswar]

Did Lewandowski then depend on Roberts leaving, I know there was a ? mark over the fee but!

No. By the rationale presented that would have depended on not signing Benji.

[BigJackWalker]

1. Terrible with money

2. Under the age of 16

3. An idiot.

4. A religious user of Football Manager.

I'm all of them but i don't agree with the topic haha

[tonyoz]

Williams makes "balancing the books" a priority................that's why we haven't bought Popov and others in the past. And that's why we are an attractive target for Syed, Shah and others. It may have taken a while for the penny to drop mind you.

[LDRover]

So you didn't bother to read JWs answers then? Sounds about right. If you had you would have seen Rovers felt Popov's value was too high as he was one for the future. Benjani went through all the tests and they felt he was a better option.Disagree with it if you like but surely read it first.........

Just got round to reading this so apologies for the late reply.

I did read JW's comments and what I can't understand is that the price was 1.5 million for Popov - well within the reported transfer fund available. So why did we have to sell Roberts to afford him?

Are we also to assume that Benjani (who one must think is on higher wages) is seen as a better bet? Blimey.

Finally, do JW's comments mean that we didn't think Popov was worth 1.5 million? Because that's a paltry sum for one so young with potential resale value - and surely we must have known the constraints we had to work within prior to him coming over here.

I applaud John Williams for speaking as he did in the LT, he didn't have to, but I can't help thinking that it all doesn't really add up.

[thenodrog]

I applaud John Williams for speaking as he did in the LT, he didn't have to, but I can't help thinking that it all doesn't really add up.

I don't think the uncertainty over ownership will be having a very positive effect on spending.

[LDRover]

I don't think the uncertainty over ownership will be having a very positive effect on spending.

Agreed 'drog, no need to quote 'business as usual' ad infinitum then is there?

[DE.]

Just got round to reading this so apologies for the late reply.

I did read JW's comments and what I can't understand is that the price was 1.5 million for Popov - well within the reported transfer fund available. So why did we have to sell Roberts to afford him?

Are we also to assume that Benjani (who one must think is on higher wages) is seen as a better bet? Blimey.

Finally, do JW's comments mean that we didn't think Popov was worth 1.5 million? Because that's a paltry sum for one so young with potential resale value - and surely we must have known the constraints we had to work within prior to him coming over here.

I applaud John Williams for speaking as he did in the LT, he didn't have to, but I can't help thinking that it all doesn't really add up.

JW's main argument was that we did not want or need five strikers at the club, and then said we could therefore only purchase Popov if we sold Roberts first. He's suggesting that neither money nor work permit was the issue here.

However, we only had the surplus of strikers because we signed Benjani (which, IIRC, happened after we'd expressed interest in Popov?). It seems bizarre that, if it wasn't down to money or work-permits, the club apparently decided a 32-year-old with knackered knees who had been rejected by Championship clubs was better than a 22-year-old rising star who has shown no sign of injury proneness and is already a staple in his national side.

Not only that, but Popov can play in midfield... an area we needed new recruits in. Benjani can only play striker, when/if fit. Popov's versatility would have helped us greatly - sure, he would have needed time to adjust, but Benjani will probably be injured for the same amount of time it would have taken Popov to adjust.

So no, it doesn't add up and I don't really think JW's comments are the whole truth. Let's just hope the takeover goes through asap.

[roversfan99]

Which championship clubs rejected Benjani, just wondering?

[rebelmswar]

Which championship clubs rejected Benjani, just wondering?

Oh it's so funny... in a masochistic kinda way.

[LeChuck]

JW's main argument was that we did not want or need five strikers at the club

...

Not only that, but Popov can play in midfield

Popov's main position is as an attacking midfielder. In our system, that would have been out wide or in Dunn's role. Roberts shouldn't have had any impact on this transfer at all, they don't play the same position.

As LDRover says, it doesn't add up. If, as seems likely, the takeover situation hampered our summer dealings, I wish they'd just say so instead of trying to fudge an answer together to appease everyone.

[Athlete]

JW's main argument was that we did not want or need five strikers at the club, and then said we could therefore only purchase Popov if we sold Roberts first. He's suggesting that neither money nor work permit was the issue here.

However, we only had the surplus of strikers because we signed Benjani (which, IIRC, happened after we'd expressed interest in Popov?). It seems bizarre that, if it wasn't down to money or work-permits, the club apparently decided a 32-year-old with knackered knees who had been rejected by Championship clubs was better than a 22-year-old rising star who has shown no sign of injury proneness and is already a staple in his national side.

Not only that, but Popov can play in midfield... an area we needed new recruits in. Benjani can only play striker, when/if fit. Popov's versatility would have helped us greatly - sure, he would have needed time to adjust, but Benjani will probably be injured for the same amount of time it would have taken Popov to adjust.

So no, it doesn't add up and I don't really think JW's comments are the whole truth. Let's just hope the takeover goes through asap.

totally agree I don't think Williams spoke the truth more like he was economical with it ...why benjani who didnt score once whilst out on loan in the championsip over a rising star ?????

totally agree I don't think Williams spoke the truth more like he was economical with it ...why benjani who didnt score once whilst out on loan in the championsip over a rising star ?????

sorry was out on loan at Sunderland

[Hughesy]

Sunderland he didnt get a chance so its difficult to take that into account....

1 start (72 mins) & On as sub 6 times, total of 49 minutes, 3 of those 6 games he got less than 5 mins - and in the 2 where he got 29 mins total they were already losing the game.

[Mr. E]

Wait a second. Hold the phone. There is no way that Rothschild are the same company that helped sell Liverpool to their current owners, right?

[RoyRover]

I did read JW's comments and what I can't understand is that the price was 1.5 million for Popov - well within the reported transfer fund available. So why did we have to sell Roberts to afford him?

I applaud John Williams for speaking as he did in the LT, he didn't have to, but I can't help thinking that it all doesn't really add up.

That's what first crossed my mind when I read his comments. Surely adding an attacking midfielder to our powder puff midfield would have been a good bit of business. Even if he was just an out and out striker, surely it's obvious that Jason Roberts isn't in the long term plans of the club, so whether we sold him or not, it shouldn't really have affected a deal. But fair play to him for speaking to LET.

[thenodrog]

That's what first crossed my mind when I read his comments. Surely adding an attacking midfielder to our powder puff midfield would have been a good bit of business. Even if he was just an out and out striker, surely it's obvious that Jason Roberts isn't in the long term plans of the club, so whether we sold him or not, it shouldn't really have affected a deal. But fair play to him for speaking to LET.

Imo the relationship between BRFC and the LT must have increased in importance now that Radio Lancs has fallen out of bed with the club.

[Steve Moss]

[*]Resisted Real interest for a number of players for some key senior players

[*]Wage bill is down from 90% to 82% (at End June) and expected to lower further now to 79%.

Both of these points are critical. JW is moving the wage bill to a sustainable level AND he kept the first team squad intact. JW deserves praise for his management, not condemnation.

Surely we havnt budgeted for tenth? We only got there last season with a large slice of luck at the end. Plus we have stayed still whilst others around have moved on.

We are a top half club. Yes, there was some good luck. And there was some considerable bad luck the first half of the season. It balances out, long term.

But wait, apparently, Benjani is our replacement for Benni:

"So going back to our overall plan to replace Benni and Franco, we’ve done it. It’s Mame for Franco and Benji for Benni."

Oh dear, oh dear...

Benjani is far superior to Benni. Benjani is motivated. Benni was and is not.

[rebelmswar]

Benjani is far superior to Benni. Benjani is motivated. Benni was and is not.

A motivated cripple is still a cripple. Benni turned into a waste of subs bench, we may count ourselves lucky if Benjani can crawl to it.

Hope I am wrong and he is the bomb as opposed to a bomb.

Everything else you said is right on though Smoss - the wage savings are good, keeping the majority of squad intact etc.

[Steve Moss]

A motivated cripple is still a cripple. Benni turned into a waste of subs bench, we may count ourselves lucky if Benjani can crawl to it.

Hope I am wrong and he is the bomb as opposed to a bomb...

This is just my opinion so free to disregard it (as if you needed permission ) but I suspect that Benjani will do good service for the Rovers. He is experienced and talented. While having suffered a serious injury:

1. He's had plenty of time to recuperate (never did get a fair run out at Sunderland);

2. Sam has had more than sufficient time to take a look at him and he and JW decided to take the gamble.

If JW and Sam had thought he'd 'bomb' they wouldn't have wasted their time. There are plenty of talented youngsters they could have gambled on. Instead they moved for Benjani which indicates that they think he can contribute.

And unlike Benni, Benjani has been remarkably candid and self-aware. I am hopeful. And if Sam and JW got it wrong, then they've covered the bases as Benjani only has a year contract.

[philipl]

I am pretty confident Benji will do some damage whilst at Rovers.

Just hope it is to the opposition and not to himself.

[Seggie]

Is Benjani on a pay as you play deal? If so it renders the whole argument that he's a cripple therefore a poor piece of business irrelevant.

[Amo]

Is Benjani on a pay as you play deal? If so it renders the whole argument that he's a cripple therefore a poor piece of business irrelevant.

The argument is now that because we signed Benjani we missed out on Popov. If you believe Mr. Williams, anyway.

[rebelmswar]

Is Benjani on a pay as you play deal? If so it renders the whole argument that he's a cripple therefore a poor piece of business irrelevant.

It is possible, not probable, that he can still pull off playing so he can get paid.

[Seggie]

It is possible, not probable, that he can still pull off playing so he can get paid.

Which ones grella?