[Archived] coaching staff changes

[TBTF]

44 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

Sadly, the game has changed since Jack's original plans for the Academy which were to produce players for the club and for the Academy to become self-sufficient by selling those players who weren't good enough to clubs lower down the League ladder.  When the ITV deal with the Football League collapsed that ended that plan with money becoming increasing tight in the bottom two divisions.  The introduction of the Elite Performance Plan has changed the nature of Youth development and placed a huge amount of emphasis on facilities and backroom staff.  On the pitch, at Under-18 level anyway, we have proved we can compete with the big clubs but facility wise we can't without spending more and more money with every passing year.  Many Football League clubs opposed the Elite Performance Plan but had no option but to accept it because of the financial power of the Premier League.  Last season there were 24 Category One clubs - split into two divisions at Under-23 level - but the rest of the clubs seemed to manage very well by being in the other Categories.  Other clubs seem to be able to develop young players and bring them through into their senior teams, particularly in Leagues One and Two, without spending 3.5 million every year.

With limited resources the club has to make the most of them in the best way possible.  Personally, I don't see dropping into Category Two as being the end of the world but I accept that many will.

 

yes so lets carry on with the expense of running Rovers Ladies instead then eh? Bet it costs £200k pa to start ferrying them to games up and down the country. Shambolic doesn't come close .

And lets have the costs of a squad full going to pre season in Austria for a week like all the other league One clubs (not!!) because after all money is no object for certain things and yet we cant spend on pitches at the academy.

The place is a looney bin

[J*B]

25 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

If we dropped down to Category Two it is hardly giving up the Academy.

Really? What's Jack Walker's biggest legacy to you? For me it's the opportunity for local kids to succeed as footballers for their town by having the best training facilities. That's exactly what's being stripped away. All of our best youth prospects will be poached by Cat 1 academies as we have been doing for years. 

[Garage Flower]

2 minutes ago, TBTF said:

yes so lets carry on with the expense of running Rovers Ladies instead then eh? Bet it costs £200k pa to start ferrying them to games up and down the country. Shambolic doesn't come close .

And lets have the costs of a squad full going to pre season in Austria for a week like all the other league One clubs (not!!) because after all money is no object for certain things and yet we cant spend on pitches at the academy.

The place is a looney bin

We're a family club aren't we? Personally I'm all for a women's team, I don't as of yet have a daughter or a niece but I hope that if I do one day they can follow their dream to play for Rovers as well. 

I also don't feel it's the end of the world if we keep our Academy but lose it's category 1 status. We still have great facilities and a reputation, let's not lose sight of things.

[JHRover]

11 minutes ago, TBTF said:

yes so lets carry on with the expense of running Rovers Ladies instead then eh? Bet it costs £200k pa to start ferrying them to games up and down the country. Shambolic doesn't come close .

And lets have the costs of a squad full going to pre season in Austria for a week like all the other league One clubs (not!!) because after all money is no object for certain things and yet we cant spend on pitches at the academy.

The place is a looney bin

In fairness every other League One and most League Two clubs spend money on the senior squad travelling abroad to Spain/Portugal/Austria etc. for a week. Rochdale, Bradford, Southend, Luton and Wrexham to name just a few who are currently out of the country on training camps.

[arbitro]

2 minutes ago, JHRover said:

In fairness every other League One and most League Two clubs spend money on the senior squad travelling abroad to Spain/Portugal/Austria etc. for a week. Rochdale, Bradford, Southend, Luton and Wrexham to name just a few who are currently out of the country on training camps.

It seems to be in vogue to go to these training camps but the nett result should be exactly the same in terms of fitness whether they train at Brockhall or in Austria. In such austere times I struggle to see the justification for any League One or Two side to send a whole bunch of people abroad. I think that the majority of players would rather stay here given the choice.

[den]

Losing cat1 status on its own isn't that big of a deal. It isn't something any fan would like to see, but there you go, we're now in league one - plus, I've more than once suggested that academies and all their expense don't make great players out of poor ones. The real bonus of having a top academy is it gives you a better chance of attracting the best youngsters  possible. Jack Walker stole a march on the rest of football when he opened our top class academy facilities, but since then other clubs have done the same thing and we could no longer compete. 

However....... it's just the next, or another unnecessary/self inflicted downgrading or dismantling of the club. It's not only about losing cat1 status, it's also about the losing or releasing of coaches. To suggest this is just a one-off and is "understandable" does grate. It's nothing of the sort. We aren't here through bad luck. We're here through total incompetence. 

All this together is what really, really angers. 

[J*B]

12 minutes ago, meadows said:

Arguable that local lads will have a better chance than ever of representing their local team if we're not able to recruit the young talent from all and sundry points of the compass with a PL standard Academy whether that's a good or bad thing. 

How many "local lads" have represented Rovers down the years? In my 50 years of going I can think of Meccy, Roundy, Patterson, Dunny, Beattie, Gallagher, Lowe and Mahoney (Who We signed from Stanley) and Derbyshire (picked up from NL with Gt Harwood) 

Phil Jones of course 

 It wouldn't suggest any more emphasis on "local talent" than has ever been the case.

Its not about the numbers its about the opportunity being there. If we lose Cat 1 our 'local' players won't have the opportunity to develop into the players they could be, undoubtably they will move to bigger clubs before representing our own first team. It will come full circle and before you know whats happened we will have young Blackburn fans playing for Burnley rather than the other way around i.e Tomlinson. 

The main plus about Cat 1 is you can sign players from lower rated academies, or take them ahead of other clubs i.e. Walters, Duff, Pilkington, Edwards, Judge, Garner, Hoilett, Hanley, Wilcox, Raya, Olsson, Lenihan - all of which where poached from other academies and signed at a young age because we have a top academy. Lose Cat 1 these players will never feature at Ewood. 

[Skiptonrover]

14 minutes ago, arbitro said:

It seems to be in vogue to go to these training camps but the nett result should be exactly the same in terms of fitness whether they train at Brockhall or in Austria. In such austere times I struggle to see the justification for any League One or Two side to send a whole bunch of people abroad. I think that the majority of players would rather stay here given the choice.

Give over bet that they can't wait for some sun I'm not in England at the moment all it did yesterday was rain glad to get away. Whether you can train the same in the heat is another question depends where you go I'd still rather train in anything but rain.

[JHRover]

From a purely financial point of view the academy has actually paid for itself since Venkys arrived on the scene. The sales of Grant Hanley and Phil Jones alone brought in about £23 million, which at Category A levels of expenditure mean approximately 6-7 years of funding is covered in those 2 sales alone.

So Venkys/the club haven't actually lost anything on sustaining the academy over the last 7 years.

I understand Parsons point about the increasingly difficult obstacles that have to be overcome to continue to achieve compliance with the scheme, and clearly a decision will need to be made when the next audit is approaching as to whether we are to invest in our facilities/staff or not.

But lets not pretend the academy has been a big drain on the club/Venkys over recent years. If anything they've made money out of it whilst benefiting from first team regulars such as Hanley and Lowe playing in the team every week for 5 years.

 

[mhead]

10 hours ago, JHRover said:

 

He was manager of Middlesbrough in the Championship for 3 years. Was he wanting them to scrap their Category A academy and divert the money into the first team? If so then why didn't they?

The academy was in place long before Mowbray was on the scene and given the average tenure of managers under these owners I would expect will still be here after Mowbray has gone. 

We're getting into dangerous territory here in my opinion, and it is concerning that once again we appear to have a situation where the owners have basically told Mowbray to clear off and do things as he wants for the next 12 months. It is inherently flawed and we've seen it all before. Too much responsibility on one individual just because they've taken a liking to him and refuse to do what every other club in the land does and install a long term structure above/alongside the management staff. Nothing has changed on that front.

We've gone full circle in the space of 6 months from installing a new D of F structure at the club with a Head Coach, to now going back to the manager basically running the whole show singlehandedly. That's lovely if you've a nice, sensible man running it who also manages to deliver consistent results in keeping with the club's aim, but the minute results drop then the whole thing comes crashing down again. 

Whatever the future holds for the academy that should be a separate issue entirely to what Mowbray wants. He is first team manager, not chairman. His concern should be putting together a team in the short term to get promoted, not determining the future of an academy that has been in place for many years.

Mowbray's position at the club should be determined by the results he delivers next season. Nothing else. All the talk, impressive speaking and his opinions on things like the academy could and should become irrelevant if we're not achieving what we need to do next season.

Given the lifespan of managers under these wretched owners it would be insanity to suddenly start dismantling the academy because the latest incumbent has a certain view on it. There's a very high likelihood that a different bloke will be in the dugout by this time next year who could well have the opposite view as Mowbray and the opposite philosophy. I'm not saying I want it to happen, but you'd be very brave to expect him to last at this club. Nobody else bar possibly Bowyer has managed it with these imbeciles.

Its no wonder so many people liked this post. The points are clear:

-Managers are temporary...they always want to focus on the first Team

-Jack's legacy should be permanent

-we have to improve the Academy not decapitate it

-Venkys are in one of their '6 month cycles'

-no clear Direction at the local level.

The Rovers Trust lodges the Asset of Community Value for Brockhall in the next week.

Any Ribble Valley residents as concerned as us(whilst remaining optimistic for the season) need to drop an email to [email protected]  and we will make sure your name is added to the Appendix showing Residents Support. Please give name address and post code please. We are welcoming new members as well and want to get to the 2000 Members target as soon as possible.

RTID

[J*B]

8 minutes ago, meadows said:

And of that list of players we "poached" (with all the unpleasant connotations that carries) how many were "local"? You've got a Canadian, a Spaniard and any amount of Irish lads there off the top of my head. 

You're not understanding my point here. Theres two I am putting across:

1) A Cat 1 academy provides the opportunity for Blackburn fans to feature for Blackburn Rovers in their career. Without it, the good players will move to different clubs when they begin getting a name for themselves in the U23s / U21s / U18s. See Tomlinson, a Burnley fan that signed for Blackburn because at the time we gave him the best opportunities. 

2) A Cat 1 academy means that Rovers can sign young players ahead of other clubs. These players may never be a massive success here, but can be a success at other clubs and make the club money. This is how football works, Chelsea have a business model based around taking the best young players and selling them once they are established.

Walters was here aged 16. Duff was here aged 17. Pilkington was poached from PNE. Edwards was here aged 17. Judge aged 18. Garner 16. Hoilett aged 13. Hanley aged 14. Raya aged 16. Olsson aged 16. Lenihan aged 16. Pilkington and Garner where the only 'local' players - but all of them spent a large part of their youth in Blackburn and therefore had a connection to the town and its area. Ask Martin Olsson who he supports, ask Lenihan who he supports, ask Hoilett who he supports - they may not be 'local' lads i.e. born and bred in Blackburn, but they spent a key part of their lives at Brockhall and are fans because of that.

[Dreams of 1995]

If you are to allow a manager reign to decide all aspects of how a club is run you need owners/directors who will have the patience and not hire/fire on a whim. Venkys haven't shown this like for longevity in the past and I have no reason to believe they will change now.

In the past giving a manager full control of how the club is run has worked. One only needs to look at the likes of Wenger and Fergie to see that. They are, however, exceptional cases. In 8 months time should they decide Tony's time is up we will be left with a category 2 academy in League 1 and will struggle even more so to attract a manager and future players. Who is to say the next manager comes in and doesn't leave the cat 2 as it is?

This is another downgrading of the club - something we've become all to familiar with - and as usual it is the same suspects that are defending it. It is almost as if people are blind to what we are becoming.

[JHRover]

3 minutes ago, meadows said:

Some ascent into the stratosphere for Jason. 

In just a few weeks he goes from being living proof through his every selection that dark forces are abound to evidence made flesh that continuing to prop up Cat 1 status is reaping On-field dividends! 

Not quite, but evidence that even though we didn't receive a massive fee for a home grown player as we did for Jones and Hanley, nonetheless the club had the 'benefit' of almost 200 games in the Championship out of him. Not wanting to get into a debate on Jason's capabilities but there's certainly reason to argue he 'paid the club back' on their initial academy investment into him as a kid, maybe not financially but in terms of getting a regular 1st team player onto the books for 5-6 years.

[J*B]

Just now, JHRover said:

Not quite, but evidence that even though we didn't receive a massive fee for a home grown player as we did for Jones and Hanley, nonetheless the club had the 'benefit' of almost 200 games in the Championship out of him. Not wanting to get into a debate on Jason's capabilities but there's certainly reason to argue he 'paid the club back' on their initial academy investment into him as a kid, maybe not financially but in terms of getting a regular 1st team player onto the books for 5-6 years.

What would 200 games of a Championship player have cost the club? You can argue that Lowe wasn't good enough and shouldn't have been playing but the reality is that he did play those games and was picked by various managers. I reckon without Lowe we would have spent around 3m on various players to get those 200 games.

[Dreams of 1995]

1 minute ago, meadows said:

Some ascent into the stratosphere for Jason. 

In just a few weeks he goes from being living proof through his every selection that dark forces are abound to evidence made flesh that continuing to prop up Cat 1 status is reaping On-field dividends! 

The club did benefit from having Jason Lowe in the team though. As J*B estimated we would have had to buy a player to replace him. Those players come at a cost and we were under an embargo for a number of transfer windows. Regardless of Lowe's abilities as a footballer the club benefited from the academy producing him by having a squad player during tough times.

If we had a category 2 academy there's every reason to believe we'd have produced a player worse than Lowe. Well, let that sink in.

[JHRover]

2 minutes ago, J*B said:

What would 200 games of a Championship player have cost the club? You can argue that Lowe wasn't good enough and shouldn't have been playing but the reality is that he did play those games and was picked by various managers. I reckon without Lowe we would have spent around 3m on various players to get those 200 games.

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make. Whilst Lowe's development might not have had the financial rewards of Hanley/Jones his progression from academy to first team still benefited the club. There can't really be much argument on that. Anyone who comes from the academy and makes 200 appearances in the Premier League/Championship and is picked regularly by 6-7 different managers has 'paid back' the initial investment the club made in him as a kid.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, JHRover said:

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make. Whilst Lowe's development might not have had the financial rewards of Hanley/Jones his progression from academy to first team still benefited the club. There can't really be much argument on that. Anyone who comes from the academy and makes 200 appearances in the Premier League/Championship and is picked regularly by 6-7 different managers has 'paid back' the initial investment the club made in him as a kid.

You could also argue that the blind loyalty shown to him due to being "one of our own" actually hurt the club in the long run 

[JHRover]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

You could also argue that the blind loyalty shown to him due to being "one of our own" actually hurt the club in the long run 

Yet next season he'll be a division above us (like almost every other player who has left here in recent seasons).

[J*B]

Just now, meadows said:

Quite apart from the odd concept of asking a professional footballer player who plays for you or used to play for you who he "supports" presently -"When You become a professional footballer, son, you forget who you support you go to work for who's paying you" ( Billy McKinlay in an interview I did with him for Rovers msg 1996) - the fact that you advocate we follow a business model perfected by Chelsea suggests you might just need to temper your expectations a little 

To summarise your previous posts

1) The main thing about Jack's legacy is the opportunity for locals to come through at Rovers

2) The best thing about the Academy is "poaching" players from everywhere else. 

 

I'm sure Billy McKinlay did say that to you in a professional sense - but its not true. If you speak to a footballer on a friend basis they all support a club.

Yes, we can follow the business model of Chelsea, although its unrealistic to say we can compete with them - which isn't what I said. If you do not set these sort of levels as your expectations personally thats your own business. As things stand Blackburn Rovers have the opportunity to sign the players that don't make it at City, Chelsea, United, Liverpool ahead of Premier League and Championship clubs with category 2 academies. That is a massive advantage which we will lose if the academy is downgraded.

[TBTF]

1 hour ago, Garage Flower said:

We're a family club aren't we? Personally I'm all for a women's team, I don't as of yet have a daughter or a niece but I hope that if I do one day they can follow their dream to play for Rovers as well. 

I also don't feel it's the end of the world if we keep our Academy but lose it's category 1 status. We still have great facilities and a reputation, let's not lose sight of things.

Not my point Garage Flower. What I am saying is that its a question of priorities. We cant afford or don't want to spend money on the academy pitches  yet it goes into areas where it is perhaps a little less important. The Club is £130million in debt and slipping down into the abyss. If the whole lot falls on its arse still having a ladies team wont save the day. Have a ladies team of course -it is part of the community but not at the expense of the Academy

The point I am making is that its about cutting your cloth and we shouldn't just be letting the Academy slide whilst spending money on trips to Austria, running a ladies team in a national league with all the cost that entails . Cutbacks will inevitably come in all the wrong areas with these idiots at the helm . Put it this way , I bet the Club isn't cutting back on rooms at the Dorchester for balaji and his mates every time they fancy a trip or the news that Pasha took delivery of his brand new Range Rover the day after we got relegated . But we haven't got the money to maintain the Academy pitches.

If we sold 7500 St's at say average £300 a pop.(generous I would say) then that is roughly £2m of income. Take 20% VAT out and then however much interest we pay to the sharks -I recall DunnFc saying it was 14%. We are lucky to end up with £1.5m and that's our main income source now!!!

We probably paid half of that to cover the costs of the accountants being in for a month. I don't know how this keeps going ......oh hang on there's player sales.

Its all nonsense as far as I can see. But only my own opinion before people steam in !!! 

 

 

 

[J*B]

9 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You could also argue that the blind loyalty shown to him due to being "one of our own" actually hurt the club in the long run 

In what sense? What do you think the cost was for Rovers bringing Jason Lowe through his entire career? Lets get this straight - if a player comes through the academy and is sold for more than 200k or plays a full season in the first team has been a profit / benefit to the club. 

[Roverthechimp]

Anyone know the actual difference between Cat 1 and Cat 2? (Ok with a Link if easier)

[J*B]

Just now, klc_2012 said:

Anyone know the actual difference between Cat 1 and Cat 2? (Ok with a Link if easier)

The physical difference of the difference in advantages it gives you? 

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, meadows said:

We've just signed 3 midfielders none of whom I have any idea whose junior ranks they came from. 

If they haven't come through a Cat A Academy are you by extension saying there's absolutely no chance they could be an improvement ?

And I fully acknowledge we're a division lower. 

But it would be some volte face for people who have for four years been vehemently claiming Lowe isn't good enough for the Championship to revert to holding him up as an example of a solid Championship midfielder wouldn't it? 

Not at all. However, there is a higher probability that a player has greater ability should he come through a category 1 academy. This isn't the case with all as there are never such certainties in football. As a general rule of thumb the greater the facilities the easier to attract better coaches and ultimately the better the player that is produced.

I don't think anybody is holding Lowe up as a solid Championship midfielder. To reiterate JHRover his ability was never the issue; the fact remains that during a time we couldn't sign players the club benefited greatly from having a player come through the ranks like Jason Lowe. He might not be the best football player and certainly hasn't left a lasting impression on Rovers fans but had the academy been worse than its state when he came through we could have either seen a worse player produced or none. We'd have then been forced to sign a free player or, after the embargo, spend a fee on another player.

 

[Roverthechimp]

Just now, J*B said:

The physical difference of the difference in advantages it gives you? 

Physical and tangible advantages.