Stuart Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 http://www.people.co.uk/sport/football/news/2011/03/27/blackburn-rovers-will-endure-a-financial-nightmare-if-the-club-suffer-relegation-102039-23018229/ Nicko's piece on Rovers in the People... Still don't understand taking the relegation pay-cut clauses out of players contracts. How is it in any way a good thing? Just motivates them less because they know they won't face a pay decrease if we go down - which, let's face it, is looking more and more likely. I certainly don't trust our current squad to get us out of the mire and we haven't got the management to fall back on either. A longgg couple of months ahead. Why doesn't that story tie in with what Nicko tells us in here? If Venkys are committed to the club and have money, then why would this be a problem? This could have been a positive story about how it means players could be more likely to stay if we are relegated. I.e. Because Venkys will honour PL wages in the Championship.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
imy9 Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 MGP was given a pay rise and the relegation clause removed from his contract by JW himself under the previous regime- Venkys are daft and new to this but how could JW do this?
bob fleming Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Why doesn't that story tie in with what Nicko tells us in here? I don't know it's all very strange isn't it. What could possibly be going on here? "If Rovers go down they will be left with a massive financial burden that will stretch the funds of the Rao family whose Venky’s company is bankrolling the project." You just gotta love that asumption haven't you? I expect a mortage story will hit the People sometime aorund late July. No point rushing the news is there.
chaddyrovers Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 MGP was given a pay rise and the relegation clause removed from his contract by JW himself under the previous regime- Venkys are daft and new to this but how could JW do this? cos under Big Sam we wouldn't have gone down. Plus I am sure that JW would have a gentleman agreement in place with MGP and his agent to look at his contract if we ever went down. The owners should have never got rid of SA when they did. They should have left it till the summer when his contract was up and could have bring him a new maanager in the summer if that what they wanted! The owners have took a HUGE GAMBLE with the club's PL future!!! hopefully they won't pay for this. If we did go do, would the owners have the funds to support the club with the loss of income coming in. And Kean would have to be sacked and replace with a manager who knows the championship and how to get promotion at the first time of asking. Also at the bottom of Nicko's people article it says that the owners have brought in a head-hutter to appoint a new chairman. Also says Paul Agnew is favourite for the post.
Mc Love Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 And Kean would have to be sacked and replace with a manager who knows the championship and how to get promotion at the first time of asking. Mick McCarthy Paul Agnew?? Are they fffing clueless or what?
imy9 Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 A lot of guesswork about what happened there Chaddy. My point is that if a successful chairman like JW is removing relegation clauses-which IMO is sheer lunacy then the owners have followed a precedent set by our previous chairman! Every club outside top 6 is worried about getting to 40 points so your point about not being relegated does not fit. My house has never been burnt down but I still have insurance incase it does!!
PAFELL Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Nobody said they were mates with him. I said I'd heard that the players like playing for the manager, that's all. They, unlike many on here, including myself, have not lost any hope that things might work out ok with him in charge. You may not think he's a manager, but apparently they still think he can do a good enough job. I also heard the same after the fulham game. Got into a conversation with one of the players who didn't return to lancashire via the coach, who said they are fully behind kean. They understand he has limitations due to inexperience, but also believe he has good ideas as well.
Stuart Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 I also heard the same after the fulham game. Got into a conversation with one of the players who didn't return to lancashire via the coach, who said they are fully behind kean. They understand he has limitations due to inexperience, but also believe he has good ideas as well. I don't know if that last sentence is reassuring or worrying for a top professional football team!
Miker Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 MGP was given a pay rise and the relegation clause removed from his contract by JW himself under the previous regime- Venkys are daft and new to this but how could JW do this? I think the point isn't that relegation clauses are removed, the point is that Venky's continue to risk this club's future through their decisions. The problem is they keep digging holes for themselves and then doing something to make those holes even deeper. They appoint an inexperienced manager who is unable to get results, and then they give our players beefed up contracts, remove the relegation clause and hope for the best. Same thing with Myles Anderson. There's huge question marks over the influence of Jerome Anderson on the club, so what do they do? They decide to sign on his son, as though people will just ignore that. Quite simply, they're not doing themselves any favours in the eyes of the fans.
imy9 Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Didnt Samba aknowledge JW's role in his contract renegotiation? Someone from our end was negotiating on behalf of Rovers and as JW removed clause from MGP's contract we can assume he did the same for others, that's the sort of advice we can do without IMO. Then this Givet thing appears, Venkys were not around then were they?
chaddyrovers Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Neil Ashton in the NOTW has done article about us signing Myles Anderson is stopping Jack Ramm and Matthew Pearson develop at rovers and their new contracts. PLEASE DONT CUT AND PASTE WHOLE OR PORTIONS OF ARTICLES. CAUSES COPYRIGHT ISSUES. CHEERS, HEMELROVER I think Neil Ashton is a excellent article. And the reason why we shouldn't be signing MA and using our own young players!!! Didnt Samba aknowledge JW's role in his contract renegotiation? Someone from our end was negotiating on behalf of Rovers and as JW removed clause from MGP's contract we can assume he did the same for others, that's the sort of advice we can do without IMO. Then this Givet thing appears, Venkys were not around then were they? Yeah Samba did say that. JW was involve in giving a new contract http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/8835017.Samba__Blackburn_Rovers_will_miss_Williams/
Mc Love Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 ###### like this makes me want to cry! I feel really sorry for the two lads especially Pearson! If players think Kean has good ideas, surely they are as mad as him?!
Kelbo Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 If this is correct, it is not poor management, its the 'yes' factor all over again, Kean is a puppet for SEN/Kentaro/Venkys, simple as that. At 20 a player should be decent enough to play in the Scottish Leagues if he is to make it here at Prem level, I just dont get this at all, it stinks, I have seen Jackson Ramm play and can tell you that he has bags of potential, comfortable on the ball, hard in the tackle and a bit of pace too, reads the game well for a young lad all he needs now is experience, to quote Chris Kamara, Unbelievable!!
chaddyrovers Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 I agree that Kean is a 'yes man' and that is what the owners/sem/kentaro wanted!!!!!!! they can sign players and kean will agree to them, to keep his job
Guest linganzi Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Well nickos article somewhat suggests the very worst when he was telling us that it wasn't too bad. Bot a venkys stooge but not healthy. Expect aggressive multiple posts in 10 ... 9.......8 .....
imy9 Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Once again I see nothing different in what Nicko has said here and what appears in the article: "Blackburn are heading for a financial nightmare" Of course it would be even without the clauses. "If Rovers go down they will be left with a massive financial burden that will stretch the funds of the Rao family whose Venky’s company is bankrolling the project." Nothing about them not funding us, but it would stretch the funds due to lack of PL money and players on big wages.
broadsword Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 I think you're only seeing what you want to see, Imy. There is an apparent contradiction in what he has said there (Rao funds will be stretched, financial nightmare, no relegation clauses in contracts) and what he has said on this forum (Rao's have serious dosh, relegation would hurt but it wouldn't be disastrous, re-negotiating contracts was a good move). I think the truth will out in the unfortunate occurrence of us being relegated.
Beta Ray Bill Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Which story would a news paper run with, regardless of accuracy: "Relegation Will Destroy Rovers To Point of Oblivion" or "Rovers Face Some Financial Challenges If Relegated"
thenodrog Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Nobody said they were mates with him. I said I'd heard that the players like playing for the manager, that's all. They, unlike many on here, including myself, have not lost any hope that things might work out ok with him in charge. You may not think he's a manager, but apparently they still think he can do a good enough job. Good grief Gumboots. Players always support a manager in public. The only time they diss him is after he's been fired.
broadsword Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Which story would a news paper run with, regardless of accuracy: "Relegation Will Destroy Rovers To Point of Oblivion" or "Rovers Face Some Financial Challenges If Relegated" If it's just the case that we will face some "financial challenges" if relegated then I would file it under the category of "non-story". As Nicko said before, there's 9 other clubs that could go down that would life difficult financially. So why single out Rovers unless we would be in significantly more financial bother than any other relegation candidate? But then he has also said that Venky's taking out a mortgage on the club's assets is no big deal, and that Venky's are seriously wealthy. So why would their finances be seriously stretched by relegation? Something doesn't add up. These are the sort of mixed signals we are used to hearing from the Rao family.
thenodrog Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 http://www.people.co.uk/sport/football/news/2011/03/27/blackburn-rovers-will-endure-a-financial-nightmare-if-the-club-suffer-relegation-102039-23018229/ Nicko's piece on Rovers in the People... Still don't understand taking the relegation pay-cut clauses out of players contracts. How is it in any way a good thing? Just motivates them less because they know they won't face a pay decrease if we go down - which, let's face it, is looking more and more likely. I certainly don't trust our current squad to get us out of the mire and we haven't got the management to fall back on either. A longgg couple of months ahead. No lessons learned at all..... It'll quite easily break us if we go down. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/27/jimmy-bullard-hull-city btw How can Nixon be so thick skinned in criticising the manager so soon after bulling him up on here?
thenodrog Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 Paul Agnew?? Are they fffing clueless or what? It fits though with everything the Venkeys have done. That 'headhunter' must be the cheapest available! Remember ees betta ees cheepa.
nicko Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 I'm not sure there is anything to add to the People story... The new deals do NOT include pay-cuts if Rovers go down. The old deals didn't either. Neither does MGP. It is just a tale to emphasise what is at stake here. It was a very good idea to put players on longer-term deals and make some of the comfortable about the future. However nobody saw the possibility of the drop when that was done. The story about Ramm and Pearson is slightly bad news, but surely has to be addressed. The appointment of a local 'chairman' is closer. I think that was what was going on at the club on Friday. Certainly not sacking the manager. The Gael Givet tale is interesting too. But that has been running for some time.
thenodrog Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 It was a very good idea to put players on longer-term deals and make some of the comfortable about the future. However nobody saw the possibility of the drop when that was done. Rubbish. That can never be a good idea ever for a small club like ours. Look arfound the 1st and 2nd Divisions and you'll see many results of financial profligacy. Whichever way you look at it it threatens our financial situation and ultimately our very existence, and at the same time kiboshes any faint hope of bouncebackability.
John Posted March 27, 2011 Posted March 27, 2011 The Ashton article in NOTW is interesting - another day passes and another illustration that we are being run by muppets, absolute idiots of the highest order.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.