[Archived] Transfer Talk Part 2

[joey_big_nose]

Here is Kamy's answer to whether Bowyer approved the TC transfer

Venky's approved but crucially GB has omitted from his comments that he didn't disagree with their decision.

Thanks Chadmonster.

I would say that is major change. He could have easily said he agreed with the transfer but deliberately chose not to. Basically blames circumstance and says essentially he really wanted to keep him but could not. It is hard to say this is anything other than laying the groundwork for further departures.

First time "out of my hands" comment has happened (up till recently Venkys have been very good at holding onto players, their one good quality) and I would say an augur for a seriously rough period for us. The debt is big enough that if we are shifting stance to tackling debt then the entire side could go. It's just a case of the offers coming in.

Maybe I'm being over dramatic. I hope so. But I think it really could kick off in terms of players leaving.

Sad face.

[den]

Chadmonster?

[K-Hod]

Chadmonster?

You won't like him when he's angry!

[Mani]

Can I just clear this up so that we can get back to transfers...

Managers are NEVER in charge of transfers....ever! The only control

which exists is that some clubs communicate well with the manager and leave them in no doubt. Do you think SAF actually wanted to sell Ronaldo? Or Rodgers want to sell Suarez? No, of course not...but football is a business and every player has their price.

So why we are any different I will never know!! Gaz knows what valuation the club has for all its assets. He makes his case for prioritising certain players but ultimately IF the valuation is met or exceeded then the player will be sold and GB has the task of replacing in the same way SAF and Rodgers did...the difficulty is that we are under FFP but the flip side is that we can't get out of it without sales anyway.

Please can this constant discussion over control be over? There are no more dark forces at work. They're long gone....if Gaz is not in charge then neither was SAF or Rodgers!!

[Athlete]

Seriously, nobody is Bowyer's friend on here. If you're on about Parson, I think he said he'd met him at reserve team games on a couple of occasions.

If others think differently, that's up to them, but how anyone can deny what Bowyer said in that interview is beyond me.

That's it some are in denial

FYI I'm not referring to anyone it's a reasonable assumption why anyone would deny what was said

Getting back on track there doesn't seem to be any relevant news on transfers at the moment

[ABBEY]

Can I just clear this up so that we can get back to transfers...

Managers are NEVER in charge of transfers....ever! The only control

which exists is that some clubs communicate well with the manager and leave them in no doubt. Do you think SAF actually wanted to sell Ronaldo? Or Rodgers want to sell Suarez? No, of course not...but football is a business and every player has their price.

So why we are any different I will never know!! Gaz knows what valuation the club has for all its assets. He makes his case for prioritising certain players but ultimately IF the valuation is met or exceeded then the player will be sold and GB has the task of replacing in the same way SAF and Rodgers did...the difficulty is that we are under FFP but the flip side is that we can't get out of it without sales anyway.

Please can this constant discussion over control be over? There are no more dark forces at work. They're long gone....if Gaz is not in charge then neither was SAF or Rodgers!!

YOU know this as fact because .....

[JBiz]

YOU know this as fact because .....

The onus of supplying proof is on people who suspect wrongdoing.

[G Somerset Rover]

So Mani, who is advising Venky's as to what is an acceptable offer for our players?

[K-Hod]

So Mani, who is advising Venky's as to what is an acceptable offer for our players?

I'd guess at nobody. It's simply maths, they got an offer for Cairney that represented more than we paid for him.

[Athlete]

Can I just clear this up so that we can get back to transfers...

Managers are NEVER in charge of transfers....ever! The only control

which exists is that some clubs communicate well with the manager and leave them in no doubt. Do you think SAF actually wanted to sell Ronaldo? Or Rodgers want to sell Suarez? No, of course not...but football is a business and every player has their price.

So why we are any different I will never know!! Gaz knows what valuation the club has for all its assets. He makes his case for prioritising certain players but ultimately IF the valuation is met or exceeded then the player will be sold and GB has the task of replacing in the same way SAF and Rodgers did...the difficulty is that we are under FFP but the flip side is that we can't get out of it without sales anyway.

Please can this constant discussion over control be over? There are no more dark forces at work. They're long gone....if Gaz is not in charge then neither was SAF or Rodgers!!

WTF have SAF and brendan Rodgers to do with Rovers?

[Pedro]

Lets be honest even with Jack in charge Matty Holmes was never going to compare to purchasing Zidane also most would know Shearer was destined to leave but with 15m in our back sack attempting to replace him with Per Pederson was crackers. We should at that time have been looking at the likes of Robbie Keane or Thierry Henry for 5m.

Even with hindsight, i think time playing tricks on your mind? In 96, Keane was 16 and yet to break into the Wolves team and Henry was a winger. Strange replacements for Shearer and £5m would definitely have been accepted.

Point taken though, we replaced very badly.

[Athlete]

I'd guess at nobody. It's simply maths, they got an offer for Cairney that represented more than we paid for him.

Venky's are our problem closely followed by our joke board an out of depth management team and any other hangers on and a agency who have a lot of youngsters tied up

[den]

You won't like him when he's angry!

Chaddy doesn't get angry.

[den]

So Mani, who is advising Venky's as to what is an acceptable offer for our players?

Indeed GSR. The thought of our "know nothing about football" owners, deciding which players will be sold, is scary.

[Mani]

WTF have SAF and brendan Rodgers to do with Rovers?

I was simply providing context to this ridiculous merry-go-round about 'control' . Do you think the Liverpool and United fans droned on and on about if SAF and Rodgers were in 'control' after the sales of Suarez and Ronaldo?

I appreciate we've had our fingers burnt and that under SK there were several possible people jostling for control including JA and SS but they are gone now...

The owners / financial director paint the picture. This includes the direction which they intend to go down (eg x will get us out of embargo by y) The valuations are set between the manager, owners / representatives and the directors and they move forward from that...

They just made a £3m profit (all in) on a player who had peaked in value and based on back end of last season may have begun to depreciate!! That's just good business!!

[chris_h]

I'd guess at nobody. It's simply maths, they got an offer for Cairney that represented more than we paid for him.

As well as good business.

Oops, like Mani just said.

[JHRover]

I'd guess at nobody. It's simply maths, they got an offer for Cairney that represented more than we paid for him.

Yes, but they've had numerous offers for Gestede that represent a huge profit and yet haven't agreed to a deal, on the basis they can expect more for him.

Somebody must be telling them what is a good price for a player and what they should accept and what they should reject.

If their only concern was to sell anyone of value for a profit then Gestede would have been long gone at £5 million to Watford. The fact they have rejected Watford's bid and asked for more suggests they are listening to someone who is telling them they should look for £7-8 million for him.

The same someone who told them £3 million+ was worth taking for Cairney. For all Venkys know/knew Cairney could have been worth more than Gestede, yet they did a deal at £3 million.

If the person doing that 'advising' is the manager then why has he made comments in the media this week that suggest he had no involvement in the decision to sell?

If they are being advised by others then who are these people and why are they influencing the owners decisions and not the manager/board?

I was simply providing context to this ridiculous merry-go-round about 'control' . Do you think the Liverpool and United fans droned on and on about if SAF and Rodgers were in 'control' after the sales of Suarez and Ronaldo?

I appreciate we've had our fingers burnt and that under SK there were several possible people jostling for control including JA and SS but they are gone now...

The owners / financial director paint the picture. This includes the direction which they intend to go down (eg x will get us out of embargo by y) The valuations are set between the manager, owners / representatives and the directors and they move forward from that...

They just made a £3m profit (all in) on a player who had peaked in value and based on back end of last season may have begun to depreciate!! That's just good business!!

I think we'll realise Cairney's peak in a couple of years time. Fair enough £3 million might turn out to be good business if he bombs at Fulham but if he goes there and does what he did with us in his first season then £3 million might look like a steal, especially if Fulham manage to get promoted.

[chris_h]

Yes, but they've had numerous offers for Gestede that represent a huge profit and yet haven't agreed to a deal, on the basis they can expect more for him.

Somebody must be telling them what is a good price for a player and what they should accept and what they should reject.

If their only concern was to sell anyone of value for a profit then Gestede would have been long gone at £5 million to Watford. The fact they have rejected Watford's bid and asked for more suggests they are listening to someone who is telling them they should look for £7-8 million for him.

The same someone who told them £3 million+ was worth taking for Cairney. For all Venkys know/knew Cairney could have been worth more than Gestede, yet they did a deal at £3 million.

If the person doing that 'advising' is the manager then why has he made comments in the media this week that suggest he had no involvement in the decision to sell?

If they are being advised by others then who are these people and why are they influencing the owners decisions and not the manager/board?

I think we'll realise Cairney's peak in a couple of years time. Fair enough £3 million might turn out to be good business if he bombs at Fulham but if he goes there and does what he did with us in his first season then £3 million might look like a steal, especially if Fulham manage to get promoted.

I always assumed that offers either to be made or accepted were decided upon by a combination of Manager, scouts, directors and chairman/MD.

[Tom]

Giles Coke is apparently training with us in addition to Furman. Anybody know much about Cokey?

Apologies if this has already been posted, playing catch up.

If we get Coke I imagine Paul Taylor will be here in a flash

[JHRover]

I always assumed that offers either to be made or accepted were decided upon by a combination of Manager, scouts, directors and chairman/MD.

The impression I had of the way Bowyer worked was that he had his discussions with his team in Blackburn (coaches and scouts) and then spoke to Mrs Desai directly and reached a decision with her.

Certainly on incoming players he has said that if there is a player he wants he goes to the owners (not Shaw) and asks them to support him in bringing that player in.

Now it seems that in the last few months there has been a change in policy, to the stage where Bowyer has little/no involvement in Venkys decision making process and is instead more of a powerless spectator who has to watch on as they make decisions based on their own financial judgment with no regard for the impact it has on the team, manager etc.

Now some will say that is fair enough, that many club owners make decisions over the manager's head in terms of letting players go at the right price. Especially in today's age where the manager has less power than ever before.

The difference is that all the other clubs have the ability to replace departing players with new signings (we don't). All the other clubs have either clued up owners or owners who are transparent and are clearly advised by a board/director of football (we don't).

We've now seemingly got a situation where the only individual at the club with a strong working relationship with the power broker Mrs Desai is now himself deemed irrelevant when deciding on player departures. The owners are being advised on valuations etc. elsewhere.

[Al]

Even with hindsight, i think time playing tricks on your mind? In 96, Keane was 16 and yet to break into the Wolves team and Henry was a winger. Strange replacements for Shearer and £5m would definitely have been accepted.

Point taken though, we replaced very badly.

Much like now then?

[chris_h]

The impression I had of the way Bowyer worked was that he had his discussions with his team in Blackburn (coaches and scouts) and then spoke to Mrs Desai directly and reached a decision with her.

Certainly on incoming players he has said that if there is a player he wants he goes to the owners (not Shaw) and asks them to support him in bringing that player in.

Now it seems that in the last few months there has been a change in policy, to the stage where Bowyer has little/no involvement in Venkys decision making process and is instead more of a powerless spectator who has to watch on as they make decisions based on their own financial judgment with no regard for the impact it has on the team, manager etc.

Now some will say that is fair enough, that many club owners make decisions over the manager's head in terms of letting players go at the right price. Especially in today's age where the manager has less power than ever before.

The difference is that all the other clubs have the ability to replace departing players with new signings (we don't). All the other clubs have either clued up owners or owners who are transparent and are clearly advised by a board/director of football (we don't).

We've now seemingly got a situation where the only individual at the club with a strong working relationship with the power broker Mrs Desai is now himself deemed irrelevant when deciding on player departures. The owners are being advised on valuations etc. elsewhere.

I'm not having a go at you (honest)!but everyday there seems to be another angle on what a terrible person/manager Bowyer is. It's hard to keep up. Where's this one come from? Is it from picking through the semantics of recent comments? Tbh, he'd be better keeping his trap shut although, of course, that would be wrong as well.

[den]

I'm fine with selling our best players under either one, of two circumstances. Firstly if finances dictate that a player needs to be sold in order to control debt, or secondly if the player is determined to leave.

That isn't what we're talking about here though. We're talking about whether the way forward is to "intentionally" buy cheap, develop then sell - then reinvest profits and move the club forwards. all I can say, is that the reason we spent so many years in the lower leagues - and the reason why our better managers always moved on was because they knew the club wouldn't/couldn't keep hold of a good player. So while some posters would have you believe that selling the better players has worked well for the club, it is in fact the very reason why we struggled to get out of the lower leagues.

The situation nowadays is totally different. Now clubs have chief execs. Now there is massive money in the game. Three clubs are promoted every season and they aren't by any means the big city clubs. Back in the day, we had no option other than to sell. Now we have multi millionairre owners and fantastic facilities. It isn't easy to get out of the Championship, but it's possible. It won't be done by selling at the first opportunity, or by employing people that don't believe it can be done.

FFP is holding us back now. Pity that no one at the club planned for it. Surely now would be the right time to reevaluate everything? Will that happen? - doubt it. Is the current approach dangerous? - absolutely.

[chaddyrovers]

So Mani, who is advising Venky's as to what is an acceptable offer for our players?

In my opinion it is Bowyer, Shaw and Cheston.

[JHRover]

I'm not having a go at you (honest)!but everyday there seems to be another angle on what a terrible person/manager Bowyer is. It's hard to keep up. Where's this one come from? Is it from picking through the semantics of recent comments? Tbh, he'd be better keeping his trap shut although, of course, that would be wrong as well.

Hand on heart I'm not trying to have a go at Bowyer here. I have an enormous amount of respect for him and will continue to have a lot of respect for him whatever happens this summer and next season.

I actually think that recent events further strengthen Bowyer's position as manager. Its quite clear the club is still being run in a chaotic manner which few proven managers would put up with. The fact Bowyer has been able to work at this shambles of a club whilst carrying out wide ranging cost cutting and still have us in the top half of this very tough division throughout I think is testament to his good work.

I imagine his job at the moment must be one of the most difficult in the Football League. I can't think of any other club where the manager would be left on a limb as the sole person in contact with the owners or the only person who communicates to the fanbase, whilst working for clueless absent owners and an embarrassment of a board of directors.

So whatever impression I have given you the last thing I am trying to do is criticise Bowyer or his management of the situation.

What I am trying to do is get some understanding of how this club is now operating. It clearly isn't Bowyer's fault as to how Venkys run the club.

My opinion, based on what has been said in the media by Bowyer and Cairney, is that the player was sold behind the manager's back with little/no warning from the owners. That clearly shows they don't value his opinion enough to have any sway in the deal (if it is true Bowyer wanted him to stay).

This merely serves to once again highlight the shambolic way this club is being operated. If Bowyer went no proven competent Championship manager would last any length of time working for this circus.