[Archived] Transfers Part 3

[RV Blue]

I think we should have kept him and made him play if Hibs didn't offer enough. He'd have been decent as a third choice striker who can also play out wide.

[blueboy3333]

Stokes leaving is a bit of a watershed. He would appear to be the last of the absolute wasters that have darkened our pitch during the Venky reign of terror.

I have high hopes for ToMo with the work ethic and respect for the badge he seems to be installing at the club.

 

[JHRover]

4 minutes ago, Manchester Blue said:

It's frustrating but loads of clubs do it.  Lambert just got paid off by Cardiff, there are dozens every season in each league.  The reason we think our club is a shambles for is it because that is understandably our clear focus but there is obvious logic though understandable frustration.

Trouble is that a blind man with no idea about anything would have been hesitant to offer Stokes a 3 year deal given his track record. Clearly Rovers were the only club daft enough and Coyle the only manager daft enough to dish out such a contract on substantial wages when it was obvious we were never going to get value for money from it.

Of course pay-offs happen elsewhere all the time but quite often because of a managerial change who really wants rid of a player or to offload big wages so others can be brought in. At the very least players elsewhere are brought in with the best intentions and without alarm bells going off well in advance.

 

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

4 minutes ago, meadows said:

People will continue to offer Jordan Rhodes lucrative contracts in the hope he'll fire them to promotion 

Even though the clubs involved probably accept he's probably not PL standard they know that if he hits a hot streak he can help them up. 

 

Would have the man back in a heartbeat.

[RoverCanada]

RE: Evans, I'd argue he's been our best midfielder for a couple years now. Granted, the best of an overall bad lot, but if fit (the big if obviously...) he's a tidy and effective defensive midfielder. He definitely needs to be paired with a more offensively-minded midfielder though (he may work nicely with Wittingham?). The few times we had him and Guthrie in the midfield last year were some of our best (if I remember right) just a shame they're both quite injury prone. Groin injuries can be a bitch. Having said all that, I wouldn't be too gutted if he ends up leaving given he's probably on £10k+/wk and that's a luxury we can't afford for an oft-injured, 60-75min midfielder.

Not seeing much of an issue with Caddis getting a two-year deal. He was a regular Championship player a couple years ago, so presumably he can at least be a squad player at the Championship level if we get promoted, and probably at a reasonable wage.

Joao and Emnes - could be quite fun to watch, but hardly what's needed in League 1. Both probably too pricey for League 1 anyway (and I suspect their egos would keep them looking for something at the Championship level too)

Taking a step back from speculation of whether Lenihan, Mulgrew, Evans, Graham, etc. leave, would it really be a surprise if a relegated team loses a key player or two? We'd be quite an exceptional case if we do manage to hold on to everyone (excluding Mahoney given he was out-of-contract). It's been nice to see Mowbray's posturing about holding on to everyone, but if a player's truly kicking up a fuss and a decent offer is on the table... I know there's the question of whether the money will be reinvested, but we're still very much a money-losing club. Personally, I came into this offseason expecting Lenihan and Mulgrew to be off and I'll be pretty pleased if one of them ends up sticking around.

Stokes... obviously a @#/? and a nice parting gift from Coyle... I admittedly had mild optimism that Coyle could motivate him to get his head down at the Championship (obviously foolish in retrospect, but given Coyle managed to get him such a generous contract...) There's been enough rumours around him that Mowbray's probably right to figure he's a lost cause. Cut what losses we can (hoping we didn't pay him off too much) and move on.

Now let's hope for a couple nice loans. I'm guessing a striker, and maybe a CB if one of Lenihan or Mulgrew leaves.

[JHRover]

6 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Stokes leaving is a bit of a watershed. He would appear to be the last of the absolute wasters that have darkened our pitch during the Venky reign of terror..

 

I'm sure people said the same when we finally coughed up to get rid of Leon Best and Bowyer was manager.

Then along came Coyle (appointed why whom?) and it began again.

Lets hope 2 years from now we aren't in League Two paying off League One dross.

[Dunnfc]

1 hour ago, meadows said:

What manager of any football club couldn't be gone in six months? 

Should no player at any club therefore be offered any longer on the basis that the manager might change?

I'm happy with the decisions Mowbray is making and the fact that he is quite obviously and stridently broadcasting the fact that he is empowered to make them

Folks moan if the manager doesn't have authority, then turn around the argument and complain when he patently does 

I'm quite happy to trust Mowbray's instincts and inclinations at this stage and have more confidence than if the strings were being pulled by an accountant or some unknown DOF who has never set foot on a football field.  

Caddis may have had a 2-year deal elsewhere on the table. Though it's difficult to believe, the information might not have been made available to posters on a fans' forum. 

 

Exactly. So attitudes have to change and financial and life cycle costing of certain signings considered in respect of each of the possible outcomes. The club has to adjust to its newly found position and become financially prudent as opposed to being the complete basket case it currently is.

I’m not saying no player should be offered a contract on that basis alone, I don’t think you’ve quite understood my initial point which was here we have a player, released from a scrappy Birmingham team and a poor Bury side last year in league one. We’ve recently had TM come out and speak over his fitness levels possibly not being quite there. I’m happy we’ve a player who I think is going to be good at this current level and someone I think will become a real asset in this division. I’m sceptical whether he’d be able to aged 30 take that into the championship where he was deemed not good enough only 12 months ago with another 12 to hopefully go. Additionally a player with perceived difficultly in keeping fitness “Fat Burning” makes me suspicious whether he is professional enough to keep this new attitude up if he is displaced for any period of time by Nyambe etc.

He’s a 30 year old (almost) freebie, who’s been released twice in the last 12 months and concerns over his fitness, I think it would be mostly prudent management if he was on a one year deal, if he has a stormer it’s in his interests as much as ours. He gets a better deal elsewhere and we will be able to upgrade if promoted, or he repays the loyalty shown in him and signs a new deal accordingly next year. It’s a balancing act and not one we do well with at all as today’s release of Anthony Stokes supports.

I agree Mowbray should be somewhat empowered on the football field but thank god not in a boardroom or running a business. You may deride the job of the directors, accountant and even Mike Cheston but these are the ones qualified in running a business not a football manager setting out the cones. You might not appreciate the delicate financial side of footballing matters but someone more qualified than football manager has to be able to and differentiate between the wants.

If Caddis did then that’s his prerogative to choose to go elsewhere for two years, we shouldn’t be held to ransom. As I’ve stated for a while this club and people involved in it’s running are seemingly incapable of making astute choices and as for the last seven years it’s mishap after mishap usually.

[blueboy3333]

Just now, JHRover said:

I'm sure people said the same when we finally coughed up to get rid of Leon Best and Bowyer was manager.

Then along came Coyle (appointed why whom?) and it began again.

Lets hope 2 years from now we aren't in League Two paying off League One dross.

As of this moment we appear to be waster-free. That, in my view, is something to be thankful for. We also appear to have a manager with the club at heart who takes pride in his job. First time since Bowyer. What happens in two years wasn't relevant to my point.

[Dunnfc]

55 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

5 goals in 28 games out on loan in League 1 last season. And he's a dirty dingle.

It's a no from ToMo

Lads a good player, I think his record was 4 in 10 at Brentford a couple of years ago. The 28 games you allude to include the following stats with 10 of those 28 appearances made from the sub bench, whilst it's not a brilliant record, it's far from poor:

Bolton	30 Jan, 17	13 May, 17	Loan	3 (7)	1	0 (0)	0	0 (0)	0	0 (0)	0
Fleetwood	12 Aug, 16	25 Jan, 17	Loan	15 (3)	4	3 (2)	0	0 (0)	0	0 (0)	0

[Manchester Blue]

5 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Trouble is that a blind man with no idea about anything would have been hesitant to offer Stokes a 3 year deal given his track record. Clearly Rovers were the only club daft enough and Coyle the only manager daft enough to dish out such a contract on substantial wages when it was obvious we were never going to get value for money from it.

Of course pay-offs happen elsewhere all the time but quite often because of a managerial change who really wants rid of a player or to offload big wages so others can be brought in. At the very least players elsewhere are brought in with the best intentions and without alarm bells going off well in advance.

 

Fully agree on the point of him being given a 3 year deal was a big risk, to be honest though anything Coyle did could be considered a big risk.  Apart from being culpable in backing him what else can the club and/or Mowbray do other than the best deal for the club.  This has been brought about by a managerial change to a large extent. 

[Dunnfc]

52 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

So could Cheston. Or any other club official. The only constants at the club in the last 7 years have been the owners. By your logic only the Rao's should choose which players get which contracts.

Gawd help us.

Only the owners have been constraints. Sorry I significantly differ from that opinion.

Agnew, Shaw, Cheston all completely incapable of running a football club.

[Gav]

22 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Stokes leaving is a bit of a watershed. He would appear to be the last of the absolute wasters that have darkened our pitch during the Venky reign of terror.

 

Not sure how you've come to that conclusion blueboy? but I hope you're right.

We've had a steady stream of 'wasters' throughout Venkys reign and Stokes just goes to show that we're open for business on that front, if you need a few quid:

"Get the Blackburn gig".....

Lessons are still not being learnt, payday loans keeping the administrators away, fans being blamed for not attending, and yet we still have millions going through the door in the pockets of mercenaries like Best, Orr and Stokes.

Sad state of affairs, who will be next? 

 

 

 

[had.e.nuff]

As another club legend departs how do i go about getting a contract at rovers i am not in the right frame of mind to play but I  am willing to pick up my wages every month until such time they pay me not to come anymore

[JHRover]

Just now, Manchester Blue said:

Fully agree on the point of him being given a 3 year deal was a big risk, to be honest though anything Coyle did could be considered a big risk.  Apart from being culpable in backing him what else can the club and/or Mowbray do other than the best deal for the club.  This has been brought about by a managerial change to a large extent. 

This is the trouble. Notwithstanding the initial appointment of Coyle, which should have never happened and wouldn't have done at any other club, once he started lining players up there should have been someone at executive level keeping an eye on it.

Venkys appear to sit in India and sanction things as and when they feel like it. Then we've an accountant running the club and shadow man Pasha sending messages. Neither of those are qualified and I doubt empowered to take the manager to task.

I'm not suggesting that we should necessarily have a D of F who signs players above the managers head, but what we need is someone to say to the manager: 'ok so you want Anthony Stokes, at £10k a week he's a big risk, we aren't going to give him a 3 year deal on that money'. I doubt very much such a person exists at Rovers as seen by our haphazard transfer policy and financial carnage. Every other club has such a person. Its called keeping things in check and ensuring outrageous and risky deals aren't done which put the club at risk down the line.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Gav said:

Not sure how you've come to that conclusion blueboy?

We've had a steady stream of 'wasters' throughout Venkys reign and Stokes just goes to show that we're open for business on that front, if you need a few quid:

"Get the Blackburn gig".....

Lessons are still not being learnt, payday loans keeping the administrators away, fans being blamed for not attending, and yet we still have millions going through the door in the pockets of mercenaries like Best, Orr and Stokes.

Sad state of affairs. 

 

 

 

It's pretty clear what he means. Stokes is the last of his type of waster player being brought to the club. Mowbrays signings this summer are a mix of good pros and young players with potential. 

What you write isn't even responding to the clear point he made about Stokes. Tangent much? 

[funny-old-game]

2 hours ago, Parsonblue said:

The fact that the manager thinks he is worth a two year deal is really all that matters.  The opinions of you or I are really irrelevant.  Mike Cheston is an employee of the club and does what he is instructed to do by the owners - just as anyone who is not self employed does exactly as instructed by their employers or is soon down the road.  Personally, have no problem with the summer transfer activity.  We seem to have assembled a more than decent squad, particularly with such excellent youngsters as Raya, Nyambe, Tomlinson, Wharton, Rankin-Costello, Travis, Doyle and Hardcastle all part of the senior squad.

It does show how the academy  is more beneficial the lower down the leagues you go. Very few over the years have progressed and made an impact, yet now we have a good number showing through.

Good to see.

[blueboy3333]

3 minutes ago, Dunnfc said:

Only the owners have been constraints. Sorry I significantly differ from that opinion.

Agnew, Shaw, Cheston all completely incapable of running a football club.

I said constants.

[Torgeir]

3 hours ago, RV Blue said:

I didn't realise he's played that much! Shows what kind of impact he's had doesn't it?

Mowbray also stated that Evans' injury was a long standing groin problem. This is from his wikipedia page:

"Despite a groin injury delaying his debut for the club, Evans passed a medical and signed a three-year contract.^"

108 league games from a possible 184 isn't too shabby, but maybe we haven't seen the best version of him yet - and maybe we never will.

 

[Dunnfc]

Just now, blueboy3333 said:

I said constants.

Apologies but I'm sure you understand the point made

[blueboy3333]

2 minutes ago, Gav said:

Not sure how you've come to that conclusion blueboy? but I hope you're right.

We've had a steady stream of 'wasters' throughout Venkys reign and Stokes just goes to show that we're open for business on that front, if you need a few quid:

"Get the Blackburn gig".....

Lessons are still not being learnt, payday loans keeping the administrators away, fans being blamed for not attending, and yet we still have millions going through the door in the pockets of mercenaries like Best, Orr and Stokes.

Sad state of affairs, who will be next? 

 

 

 

He appeared to be the last of the wasters left on the playing staff. And now he's gone. That was my only point.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

''As another club legend departs how do i go about getting a contract at rovers i am not in the right frame of mind to play but I  am willing to pick up my wages every month until such time they pay me not to come anymore''

 

.....get in that 3 mile long queue snaking down Bolton Rd had.e.nuff!!!!

[blueboy3333]

Just now, Dunnfc said:

Apologies but I'm sure you understand the point made

I do and it backs up my point that I'd rather have Mowbray making decisions on contracts than Cheston or anyone else.

[blueboy3333]

16 minutes ago, Dunnfc said:

You may deride the job of the directors, accountant and even Mike Cheston but these are the ones qualified in running a business not a football manager setting out the cones.

You've changed your tune on Cheston. You've been calling him for months.

[had.e.nuff]

5 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Mowbray also stated that Evans' injury was a long standing groin problem. This is from his wikipedia page:

"Despite a groin injury delaying his debut for the club, Evans passed a medical and signed a three-year contract.^"

108 league games from a possible 184 isn't too shabby, but maybe we haven't seen the best version of him yet - and maybe we never will.

 

so he has only missed a season and a half in 4 seasons

[Dunnfc]

1 minute ago, blueboy3333 said:

You've changed your tune on Cheston. You've been calling him for months.

Talk about taking things out of context. The management structure of a more sane club would usually and exactly have decisions made in the same way as the rest of my post alluded to.

Christ