[Archived] Transfers Part 2

[blueboy3333]

Just now, DE. said:

I'm sure selling our best striker and having to bring in a ton of new players didn't help much.

If we want to hit the ground running, we won't do it if the plan is to buy 4/5 first team players at the end of August. It'll be the same stuttering start we have to practically every campaign under Venky's.

Unless there are 3 or 4 outgoings I don't see there being many changes to the team that is available now. The midfield is sorted I'd imagine, we're possibly a CB, full back (caddis) a winger and a striker away. 4 or 5 players still to come in. In fairness to Mowbray he's done some good business and got the nucleus of the squad together early in pre-season.

[blueboy3333]

5 minutes ago, Dunnfc said:

A productive employee is usually one which is happy, settled and supported, that's why most clubs have player liasion officers working for the club.  Did Rovers replace Matt Hocking btw?

Of course a few weeks makes a difference if they're supported earlier brought in in time they get used to the club quickly, they can strike up player relationships, as a manager TM can get them used to his way of working and generally tactically on the pitch. A good start to the season is usually imperative and provides a springboard confidence wise for the season.

Harder to do once the season starts and training patterns change etc

Do they not get support if they join after the season starts?

Nothing you've said alters the fact players join clubs on loan/in January and do very well from their very 1st game. No pre-season, bonding etc. By the same token players join in July, do a full pre-season, are happy as Larry and yet never play well. I suppose it depends on the player, not when he signs.

[tomphil]

18 minutes ago, Dunnfc said:

A productive employee is usually one which is happy, settled and supported, that's why most clubs have player liasion officers working for the club.  Did Rovers replace Matt Hocking btw?

Of course a few weeks makes a difference if they're supported earlier brought in in time they get used to the club quickly, they can strike up player relationships, as a manager TM can get them used to his way of working and generally tactically on the pitch. A good start to the season is usually imperative and provides a springboard confidence wise for the season.

Harder to do once the season starts and training patterns change etc

Yep some of these lads get bored, down or homesick very quickly it seems, despite the hard graft it takes to make it somewhere in the pro game ( unless your connected ) there are a lot of fragile mentalities.

[bluebruce]

33 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Unless there are 3 or 4 outgoings I don't see there being many changes to the team that is available now. The midfield is sorted I'd imagine, we're possibly a CB, full back (caddis) a winger and a striker away. 4 or 5 players still to come in.

It's clear as day that we need to bring in two strikers.

[blueboy3333]

20 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

It's clear as day that we need to bring in two strikers.

Yes, you're probably right. Although, unless he plays with 1 up front all season then he's going to have a problem keeping Graham, Samuels and A N Other happy.

[blueboy3333]

3 minutes ago, meadows said:

How the devil did we go on when you could sign players all year round apart from the last 6 weeks of the season? 

Ken Furphy, Kendall, Gordon Lee, Mackay were signing them all season, in an age when a move didn't mean you could buy a mock Tudor in Cheshire mansion for cash  

Our two previous promotions show you don't necessarily have to "hit the ground running" and win the first six games

I'd rather Mowbray gets the players he wants late in the window than signs inferior guys early on just for the sake of it

No amount of New age twaddle  will convince me that a professional footballer needs nannying 

I think Dalglish did the same. We had a new player every week.

They may need 'nannying' if they come from Gabon and can't speak a word of English but I'm sure even the most tortured soul from Rotherham can cope with a mid August move to Lancashire without breaking down in the bosom of the player liaison officer.

 

 

[onlyonejackwalker]

Been working away and just got back. Does someone mind quickly jotting down who has come in and who has gone out? The Rovers website is useless and there are 500 pages on here.

 

[bluebruce]

25 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Yes, you're probably right. Although, unless he plays with 1 up front all season then he's going to have a problem keeping Graham, Samuels and A N Other happy.

I assume you meant unless he plays with 2 up front.

Anyway Graham is going to pick up knocks at some stage, that is inevitable. There will be games where we are better off using two. We also need different types of striker, to rotate for different types of games. Mowbray has repeatedly expressed this intent. There is also the matter of being able to drop someone if their form is off. Even with a one up front approach, we need 3 strikers to be ready for injuries, changes in form, and tactical situations.

I would be fine with us only buying one and loaning the other though. Which also reduces our need to keep the loanee happy.

[bluebruce]

5 minutes ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

Been working away and just got back. Does someone mind quickly jotting down who has come in and who has gone out? The Rovers website is useless and there are 500 pages on here.

 

In what period? The whole window?

[JAL]

31 minutes ago, meadows said:

How the devil did we go on when you could sign players all year round apart from the last 6 weeks of the season? 

I'd rather Mowbray gets the players he wants late in the window than signs inferior guys early on just for the sake of it

No amount of New age twaddle  will convince me that a professional footballer needs nannying 

Any adult player signed that needs nannying shouldn't be here at all ......and the person(s) bringing a player in that can't stand alone into the Ewood fold should be sacked asap or ex communicated .

[blueboy3333]

Just now, bluebruce said:

I assume you meant unless he plays with 2 up front.

Anyway Graham is going to pick up knocks at some stage, that is inevitable. There will be games where we are better off using two. We also need different types of striker, to rotate for different types of games. Mowbray has repeatedly expressed this intent. There is also the matter of being able to drop someone if their form is off. Even with a one up front approach, we need 3 strikers to be ready for injuries, changes in form, and tactical situations.

I would be fine with us only buying one and loaning the other though. Which also reduces our need to keep the loanee happy.

I think I may have meant 2 

 

[blueboy3333]

9 minutes ago, onlyonejackwalker said:

Been working away and just got back. Does someone mind quickly jotting down who has come in and who has gone out? The Rovers website is useless and there are 500 pages on here.

 

In: Dack, Gladwin, Smallwood, Whittingham

Out: Everyone who was out of contract.

[blueboy3333]

http://the72.co.uk/87678/blackburn-rovers-will-complete-signing-championship-striker-says-journalist/

An article on Nixon's tweet to a Rovers fan.

[Bigdoggsteel]

The Peterborough chairman is having some interesting conversations with fans on Twitter currently. They have just sold a striker to Bristol rovers. The fans are asking why? He said it's because they were booing him over the past few months including  at a pre season friendly Saturday. So he asked for a transfer. 

 

[blueboy3333]

1 minute ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

The Peterborough chairman is having some interesting conversations with fans on Twitter currently. They have just sold a striker to Bristol rovers. The fans are asking why? He said it's because they were booing him over the past few months including  at a pre season firmly Saturday. So he asked for a transfer. 

We ain't in the premiership no more

From the twitter feed you mentioned.

[onlyonejackwalker]

32 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

In: Dack, Gladwin, Smallwood, Whittingham

Out: Everyone who was out of contract.

Cheers. Hopefully a few more to come.

[J*B]

2 hours ago, Biz said:

1. You said you'd bet on it being already been agreed. 

2. You suggest that we'd give sheff utd or whoever a discount to make it late august? Why, to purposely frustrate fans and/or use the "lateness" as an excuse not to invest?

That's just absolute barmy. I'd call it tomphilesque but I think that's doing him a big disservice! I'm in agreement that they've not spent a lot on transfers, but are we that far into this that we believe stuff like your initial post?

If net spend had constantly been negative to net income, why are we in 100+m of debt, JB? 

1. I stand by it, I absolutely believe the idiots at the top would do such a thing. I've nothing to back it up with, but it wouldn't surprise me.

2. Why? Exactly as you say - to say it was too late to sign a decent replacement and spin some rubbish about getting 'the right player'. Then the money is never seen again.

Yes I'm that far down the line with them - I believe these idiots are capable of absolutely anything. 

We're in 100m of debt due to expensive legal disputes, paying off contracts (Leon Best cost this football club over 10m quid. TEN MILLION POUNDS.), getting high interest loans to fund the day to day costs of the club rather than our 'rich' owners paying from their own pocket and paying people hundreds of thousands of pounds a year to sign off ridiculous contracts like the Berg one. One reason we're not in this debt is because we've spunked loads of cash signing players.

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, blueboy3333 said:

From the twitter feed you mentioned.

I wouldn't begrudge players a few pints.

"I hope our lads dont do that" I'd say that guy is great fun altogether 

[arbitro]

2 hours ago, meadows said:

Rhodes joined after the season began and had his best goslscoring season for us. 

 

But had he been the from day one of the new season he would have scored more Jim. I can never get my head around these deadline day signings when invariably the player could have been signed pre season. With twelve league points up for grabs dropped/gained points could be vital in the final shake up.

[blueboy3333]

25 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I wouldn't begrudge players a few pints.

"I hope our lads dont do that" I'd say that guy is great fun altogether 

Nor would I.

I think the chairman was taking the pish in his response when he said they would never do that and were all in bed by 1am.

He's like the Irish Shebby that fella.

[Bigdoggsteel]

7 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Nor would I.

I think the chairman was taking the pish in his response when he said they would never do that and were all in bed by 1am.

He's like the Irish Shebby that fella.

A dangerous combination that  

I think he talks a bit too much on Twitter to be honest. Difficult thing to do though as a lot of fans are morons who think they know how things should be done, but actually don't have a clue, same as every club I suppose. 

To go full circle you could say Shebby listened to and interacted with fans too much as well. Advising on team selection after being prompted by certain supporters springs to mind. 

[lraC]

40 minutes ago, J*B said:

1. I stand by it, I absolutely believe the idiots at the top would do such a thing. I've nothing to back it up with, but it wouldn't surprise me.

2. Why? Exactly as you say - to say it was too late to sign a decent replacement and spin some rubbish about getting 'the right player'. Then the money is never seen again.

Yes I'm that far down the line with them - I believe these idiots are capable of absolutely anything. 

We're in 100m of debt due to expensive legal disputes, paying off contracts (Leon Best cost this football club over 10m quid. TEN MILLION POUNDS.), getting high interest loans to fund the day to day costs of the club rather than our 'rich' owners paying from their own pocket and paying people hundreds of thousands of pounds a year to sign off ridiculous contracts like the Berg one. One reason we're not in this debt is because we've spunked loads of cash signing players.

I think some people are forgetting just how badly this club has been shafted, just because we have made a couple of signings recently. We have paid money for players to perform in the third tier!. As you have quite correctly posted, we have spent a fortune on Best and for what? Add to that the likes of Etuhu, Murphy and more recently Stokes, amongst others. The money wasted on Keans wages and his pay off, together with the Berg fiasco and having 5 managers in one season. A few more quid went on people like Agnew being paid off and Deadly Derek and on agents fees, especially to JA and for Portugese no marks. When adding this little lot up, it doesn't take long to realise, why we are over £100 million in debt. I haven't got the patience to work out, if we have sold more players than we have bought, but I can see that either being the case, or close to it. This club has literally been torn apart, either deliberately or by total miss management, from top to bottom. Don't let anyone think that because we may now have a good manager and the slightest possibility, that a good season is on the way, that the past seven years hasn't happened.

[RoversClitheroe]

1 hour ago, blueboy3333 said:

From the twitter feed you mentioned.

It happens all the time. At most clubs. Clubbing and very late nights, from better clubs than our

[JBiz]

2 hours ago, J*B said:

1. I stand by it, I absolutely believe the idiots at the top would do such a thing. I've nothing to back it up with, but it wouldn't surprise me.

2. Why? Exactly as you say - to say it was too late to sign a decent replacement and spin some rubbish about getting 'the right player'. Then the money is never seen again.

Yes I'm that far down the line with them - I believe these idiots are capable of absolutely anything. 

We're in 100m of debt due to expensive legal disputes, paying off contracts (Leon Best cost this football club over 10m quid. TEN MILLION POUNDS.), getting high interest loans to fund the day to day costs of the club rather than our 'rich' owners paying from their own pocket and paying people hundreds of thousands of pounds a year to sign off ridiculous contracts like the Berg one. One reason we're not in this debt is because we've spunked loads of cash signing players.

You've nothing to back it up with... thanks for making my point here, I expect most people will make assertions, predictions and cast their viewpoints from things that will "back up" those views. Otherwise, what's the difference in saying you think they'll invest a fortune in players, give season tickets away for free and get John Williams back?

You also said we'd spent/signed some players for an outlay of 1.25m, so how does this paranoid illusion stack up with the potential money to sell Lenihan as; never "being seen again"? You might feel that the current encumbnents would deliberately lose money and/or setup transfer business to spite and confuse the fans but that's another delusion as far as I'm concerned.  I suppose it hinges on your belief that either a or b is the scenario;

a. Our owners are clueless and inept, thus employ a poor structure

or

b. The previous 7 years are deliberate and part of a scheme to lose millions and/or force a club backwards 20 years.

We are in that debt because they ran the club poorly, and allowed contracts to be signed that went way above turnover levels. When you and others talk about money disappearing or the famous "trousering", its as if we are run by the Oyston family!

If offering big contracts to players and managers is not "being in debt from spunking it on players", then what is it? I agree wholeheartedly that the hangers on got their claws in and milked the club dry but that's not the discussion, could that happen again? ofcourse it could, and there are ample examples to back that up- most recent exhibit; Stokes!

There just is no ground to back up the initial post you made, its impossible. We are all frustrated and angry at what has gone on but a slice of reality would be nice you know, rather than just constant doom mongering predictions that bear little if any weight.

 

[JBiz]

2 hours ago, lraC said:

I think some people are forgetting just how badly this club has been shafted, just because we have made a couple of signings recently. We have paid money for players to perform in the third tier!. As you have quite correctly posted, we have spent a fortune on Best and for what? Add to that the likes of Etuhu, Murphy and more recently Stokes, amongst others. The money wasted on Keans wages and his pay off, together with the Berg fiasco and having 5 managers in one season. A few more quid went on people like Agnew being paid off and Deadly Derek and on agents fees, especially to JA and for Portugese no marks. When adding this little lot up, it doesn't take long to realise, why we are over £100 million in debt. I haven't got the patience to work out, if we have sold more players than we have bought, but I can see that either being the case, or close to it. This club has literally been torn apart, either deliberately or by total miss management, from top to bottom. Don't let anyone think that because we may now have a good manager and the slightest possibility, that a good season is on the way, that the past seven years hasn't happened.

I don't think anyone said that? I also don't think people need reminding about what has gone to past and that's kind of why so many arguments happen in this thread - a few seem incapable of judging any news, signing and rumour on its own isolated terms.