Adam Armstrong

[Bigdoggsteel]

20 hours ago, tomphil said:

Only because Dack got injured when the West Brom move was in the pipeline.

His fee was invested upfront Mowbray all but admitted as much in one interview floating about back then.

I have doubts about how true this was. If I remember correctly it was someone on here saying a player told them. For all the ITK stuff floated about Mowbray being a cert to be out the door , I think you need to take a lot of that stuff with a shovel full of salt 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

I have doubts about how true this was. If I remember correctly it was someone on here saying a player told them. For all the ITK stuff floated about Mowbray being a cert to be out the door , I think you need to take a lot of that stuff with a shovel full of salt 

'Put an offer in' - Manager reveals West Brom transfer approach - Birmingham Live (birminghammail.co.uk)

“Me and Darren (Moore) at West Brom put an offer in for Dack, so we recognised his qualities,” Jones told the Luton Today.

“There are very few with that natural ability who plays the 10 as well as he does.”

[Silas]

14 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

'Put an offer in' - Manager reveals West Brom transfer approach - Birmingham Live (birminghammail.co.uk)

“Me and Darren (Moore) at West Brom put an offer in for Dack, so we recognised his qualities,” Jones told the Luton Today.

“There are very few with that natural ability who plays the 10 as well as he does.”

That's a year or so before the injury. 

Rumour was it was lined up for the January window, and then Dack got injured just before Xmas.

Stands to reason they could have come back in for him though. We just never had it confirmed past rumours on here. 

[tomphil]

42 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I have doubts about how true this was. If I remember correctly it was someone on here saying a player told them. For all the ITK stuff floated about Mowbray being a cert to be out the door , I think you need to take a lot of that stuff with a shovel full of salt 

Whether it was lined up or not or whether it was West Brom or not it was pretty obvious certain people at the club were planning for life without him.

Also Mowbray did in an interview allude to signing Brereton possibly in prep for losing Dack.

I agree though actual bids big enough for it to happen might not have materialized. I do think though hats were being hung on it happening.

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

'Put an offer in' - Manager reveals West Brom transfer approach - Birmingham Live (birminghammail.co.uk)

“Me and Darren (Moore) at West Brom put an offer in for Dack, so we recognised his qualities,” Jones told the Luton Today.

“There are very few with that natural ability who plays the 10 as well as he does.”

Fair enough an offer in, but not exactly that a deal was a certainty or that we were spending his transfer fee already.  I would be interested to know how much. It was rejected anyway 

 

Edited June 22, 2021 by Bigdoggsteel

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, tomphil said:

Whether it was lined up or not or whether it was West Brom or not it was pretty obvious certain people at the club were planning for life without him.

Also Mowbray did in an interview allude to signing Brereton possibly in prep for losing Dack.

I agree though actual bids big enough for it to happen might not have materialized. I do think though hats were being hung on it happening.

Ah ya, I have no doubt there was interest. It's just hard to know where it was at exactly. 

Unfortunately we have taken a huge screwing here on potential fees for Dack with all this injury business. Football can be a brutal business 

[tomphil]

58 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Ah ya, I have no doubt there was interest. It's just hard to know where it was at exactly. 

Unfortunately we have taken a huge screwing here on potential fees for Dack with all this injury business. Football can be a brutal business 

It never seems to work out for us this building up the team from big transfers out business.

When you look back at the likes of Dingles they bought some bricklayer from somewhere for peanuts. He banged them in then they sold him and traded up a bit and got another who banged them in. Sold him then traded up again, all the while using the money properly.

Never seems to happen here as i'm as convinced as i can be if Dack had gone that would just have covered the money already shelled out.  We'll never know now though,

[rigger]

14 minutes ago, tomphil said:

It never seems to work out for us this building up the team from big transfers out business.

When you look back at the likes of Dingles they bought some bricklayer from somewhere for peanuts. He banged them in then they sold him and traded up a bit and got another who banged them in. Sold him then traded up again, all the while using the money properly.

Never seems to happen here as i'm as convinced as i can be if Dack had gone that would just have covered the money already shelled out.  We'll never know now though,

1995

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

18 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Fair enough an offer in, but not exactly that a deal was a certainty or that we were spending his transfer fee already.  I would be interested to know how much. It was rejected anyway 

 

£15m apparently. 

[tomphil]

6 minutes ago, rigger said:

1995

How so ?

[rigger]

2 minutes ago, tomphil said:

How so ?

You said that we never seem to get lucky with transfers like the Dingles. 1995was the culmination of our getting lucky with transfers.

 

Edited June 22, 2021 by rigger

[tomphil]

Just now, rigger said:

You said that we never seem to get lucky with transfers like the Dingles

No i said selling a player for big money and re-investing it in replacements who do the business themselves then get sold for big money.

Trading up as opposed to using external money.

The 1995 team did mostly get sold off for bigger money than paid for them but it was Jacks cash influx that bought them. Then Hodgson and Kidd pissed thast money away.

[rigger]

24 minutes ago, tomphil said:

No i said selling a player for big money and re-investing it in replacements who do the business themselves then get sold for big money.

Trading up as opposed to using external money.

The 1995 team did mostly get sold off for bigger money than paid for them but it was Jacks cash influx that bought them. Then Hodgson and Kidd pissed thast money away.

I have had to much to drink to have complicated discussions.

[Bigdoggsteel]

43 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

£15m apparently. 

Surely would have dealt at £18-20 mil if they went there. We won't be seeing it now anyway. 

[tomphil]

10 hours ago, rigger said:

I have had to much to drink to have complicated discussions.

Drunk or sober it ain't complicated but it rarely happens at Rovers.

[MarkBRFC]

Back to Armstrong, this is going to drag on for ages isn't it before he signs for someone in the same league, Fulham or WBA maybe?

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

1 minute ago, MarkBRFC said:

Back to Armstrong, this is going to drag on for ages isn't it before he signs for someone in the same league, Fulham or WBA maybe?

Blackburn Rovers assess European options amid recruitment chief wait | Lancashire Telegraph

Logic would dictate they'll just wait until the end of the window and pick him up for a bargain price. 

[rigger]

22 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Blackburn Rovers assess European options amid recruitment chief wait | Lancashire Telegraph

Logic would dictate they'll just wait until the end of the window and pick him up for a bargain price. 

Logic would dictate, that if the club thinks we may well be under an embargo in a weeks time. What is the point in hiring a head of recruitment ?

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, MarkBRFC said:

Back to Armstrong, this is going to drag on for ages isn't it before he signs for someone in the same league, Fulham or WBA maybe?

That's exactly what will happen

All this talk about demanding £20 million is ridiculous. We aren't in a position to demand anything.

Assuming we can't sort a new contract out then it is either sell for the best offer that comes along or keep hold and risk him going for nothing.

A situation of our own making but a familiar one.

If the powers that be want the money rather than the risk then he's going for whatever money lands on the table, regardless of whether we think it is good value or not.

Before then they'll make out that he's a bad apple pushing for a move and forcing the club to cut its losses and get rid. Of course if he was under a long term contract the club would be protected. 

[ben_the_beast]

Armstrong is worth £20million in todays market at the end of a window when clubs get twitchy. They would come back to him as West Ham did with Benrhama. Was that about £28million?? 

However we are an abysmally managed club. Waggot this, Waggot that. In terms of how he's done a poor job at Rovers. Put simply. What are a clubs most valuable assets? The players. What has Waggot allowed to lose value? The players. 

He's meant to be head honcho in the UK. Even Venkys. I'm sure if they had it explained in black and white they'd have been willing to throw extra pennies at some of these players to protect their value with meaningful contract extensions. As it is our club could be soon on its knees again because we haven't managed our assets effectively. We have made some poor but also some excellent investments over the years. And now we hold no cards when trying to extract fair value for them. And that's it. The hard work is for nothing. £15 million for Arma today... Yeah. Reluctantly yes. Because we've slid into an insecure situation of our own making. Take the money. Spend what little there is from it. Renew a couple of contracts. Midtable... Oh and learn some bloody lessons in the basic of protecting the future of the club by having foresight beyond the immediate. 

 

 

 

In this long rambling post this is the only thing that matters. Mowbray cares about himself and his own reputation more than the club. He'd happily throw valuable money at adding an additional zero future value squad member such as Downing to his squad (last year).  As he thought he could potentially help slightly in that immediate season. Things like this are done rather than allocating funds to protect the clubs future with longer term contracts for the clubs top assets. As Mowbray has them all now. Rather than an asset secured and a squad member added. Blah, blah, blah. Pfftt

[RevidgeBlue]

On 25/06/2021 at 00:34, ben_the_beast said:

Armstrong is worth £20million in todays market at the end of a window when clubs get twitchy. They would come back to him as West Ham did with Benrhama. Was that about £28million?? 

However we are an abysmally managed club. Waggot this, Waggot that. In terms of how he's done a poor job at Rovers. Put simply. What are a clubs most valuable assets? The players. What has Waggot allowed to lose value? The players. 

He's meant to be head honcho in the UK. Even Venkys. I'm sure if they had it explained in black and white they'd have been willing to throw extra pennies at some of these players to protect their value with meaningful contract extensions. As it is our club could be soon on its knees again because we haven't managed our assets effectively. We have made some poor but also some excellent investments over the years. And now we hold no cards when trying to extract fair value for them. And that's it. The hard work is for nothing. £15 million for Arma today... Yeah. Reluctantly yes. Because we've slid into an insecure situation of our own making. Take the money. Spend what little there is from it. Renew a couple of contracts. Midtable... Oh and learn some bloody lessons in the basic of protecting the future of the club by having foresight beyond the immediate. 

 

 

 

In this long rambling post this is the only thing that matters. Mowbray cares about himself and his own reputation more than the club. He'd happily throw valuable money at adding an additional zero future value squad member such as Downing to his squad (last year).  As he thought he could potentially help slightly in that immediate season. Things like this are done rather than allocating funds to protect the clubs future with longer term contracts for the clubs top assets. As Mowbray has them all now. Rather than an asset secured and a squad member added. Blah, blah, blah. Pfftt

What a great post Ben. 

All we had to do a year or two ago was prioritise our key players and  look after the futures of the players you would at that point have regarded as our "crown jewels"

Raya, Nyambe, Lenihan, Travis, Dack and Armstrong.

Raya was ostracised and was allowed to leave for peanuts, the same will probably happen to Nyambe,  Dack had a new contract chucked at him when it wasn't clear whether or not he would return the same player from the first injury, and Armstrong has been allowed to get to the position where he will either leave for a relative pittance (of which 40% goes to Newcastle anyway) or for nothing when his contract expires.

Meanwhile there appears to be plenty of money to pay Mulgrew to play for another Club, Ayala to sit in the treatment room, to pay the lad who got injured to use our facilities, to pay Sam Hart for another few months not to play and to pay Stewie for another season to do nothing.

It's so negligent it could make you weep.

[lraC]

On 21/06/2021 at 23:45, tomphil said:

Only because Dack got injured when the West Brom move was in the pipeline.

His fee was invested upfront Mowbray all but admitted as much in one interview floating about back then.

Be careful, I once got severely slated, for saying exactly that.

[tomphil]

21 minutes ago, lraC said:

Be careful, I once got severely slated, for saying exactly that.

Iv'e come to the conclusion Tony is woke because things he's said clearly and on record in the past regularly get cancelled !

[Bigdoggsteel]

38 minutes ago, lraC said:

Be careful, I once got severely slated, for saying exactly that.

Do you have a link to where Mowbray admitted that? 

[tomphil]

No because i think it was a rhetorical question when he was waffling. 

Along the lines of 'have we got Brereton in to eventually replace Dack and maybe play a different way'

Iv'e always been surprised more didn't find it odd that after spending no big fees for years since Rhodes they suddenly went out and splurged on him. Then Gallagher followed and those 2 added to Armstrong tallied to roughly the figure being touted for Dack.

I think there was a bit of a plan in place there a few years ago following the audits.

Sadly football rarely adheres to idealistic plans.