Ben Brereton Diaz

[Wheelton Blue]

1 minute ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

No, I'm basing it off what I see with my eyes at this current point in time. His stats back that up. The deal has worked out.  Again, you are over estimating what 6 or 7 million gets you these days. 

The time he has been here is irrelevant to the question of whether it has worked out, eventually. So I will ask you a question, if we signed him for £6 million last summer, would you say we had signed a good player and that the deal had worked out?  

We didn't sign him for £6m last year though, that's totally irrelvant.

We did sign him for 7 million 4 years ago- which was a lot of money at the time - and for 3+ of those he's been attrocious. That's fact.

His stats over 4 years show that he's a 5 goal a season man. That's fact.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Wheelton Blue said:

We didn't sign him for £6m last year though, that's totally irrelvant.

We did sign him for 7 million 4 years ago- which was a lot of money at the time - and for 3+ of those he's been attrocious. That's fact.

His stats over 4 years show that he's a 5 goal a season man. That's fact.

Again, time here is irrelevant to the question whether the deal has worked out or not. Breaking his goals down over 4 years, likewise. If he continues his form this season, teams will be coming to us with big bids and they won't be looking at the last 3 seasons. Might be shocking for you to learn but young players improve and he is a young player. 

By your rational Thierry Henry, Suarez , Andy Cole at United, Bergkamp should all be looked at as poor signings due to their slow starts at various clubs. To the degree where anything they did afterwards is to be ignored

Look I know some just refuse to give the manager credit for anything and we would all like if Brereton got going sooner, but that doesn't change the fact we now have a player who is crucial to our team and will be the recipient of big bids from clubs going forwards. The deal has worked out. 

[Wheelton Blue]

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Again, time here is irrelevant to the question whether the deal has worked out or not. Breaking his goals down over 4 years, likewise. If he continues his form this season, teams will be coming to us with big bids and they won't be looking at the last 3 seasons. Might be shocking for you to learn but young players improve and he is a young player. 

By your rational Thierry Henry, Suarez , Andy Cole at United, Bergkamp should all be looked at as poor signings due to their slow starts at various clubs. To the degree where anything they did afterwards is to be ignored

Look I know some just refuse to give the manager credit for anything and we would all like if Brereton got going sooner, but that doesn't change the fact we now have a player who is crucial to our team and will be the recipient of big bids from clubs going forwards. The deal has worked out. 

Sorry, but that's all ifs, buts and maybes.

Anyway, it's best to agree to disagree!

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Wheelton Blue said:

Sorry, but that's all ifs, buts and maybes.

Anyway, it's best to agree to disagree!

The fact he is our top scorer, top scorer in the league and a hugely important member of the starting 11 is not if, but or a maybe, it is fact.

Fair enough though, lets leave it at that! 

[islander200]

25 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

We didn't sign him for £6m last year though, that's totally irrelvant.

We did sign him for 7 million 4 years ago- which was a lot of money at the time - and for 3+ of those he's been attrocious. That's fact.

His stats over 4 years show that he's a 5 goal a season man. That's fact.

Brererton wasn't atrocious last season he was decent and has improved again this year.

First two seasons poor but he was good last season 

[DE.]

42 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I think all the categories you mention though point to the transfer working out and being a success. The promotion stuff is really out of his hands, as is how his fee would potentially be reinvested. As an individual he is doing all he can to be a success and his performances and goals represent that. To me he has far more to his game than say Armstrong and as such could command a greater fee. 

It might have taken some time, but I don't anyone can point at the deal now and say it didn't work out. Even Forrest fans must concede we got the better deal at this stage, particularly after all the money they have squandered since. That certainly wasn't the view before the last few months, they no doubt thought they pulled our pants down. 

Again, for me it's a matter of perception. I can understand the view of people who say it has paid off, but I can also understand why somebody would say it hasn't. Totally depends on the criteria you're applying. It certainly paid off for Brereton as an individual, and it should work out for Mowbray if we sell him for a good price and he can brag about the profits made. On the other hand if Mowbray brought him in as part of the goal of getting promoted then that likely isn't going to work out regardless of how many goals BBD scores this season or what we sell him for.

Whilst I agree promotion and reinvestment of fee is out of Brereton's hands, as fans we should still consider those elements as to whether his transfer ultimately paid off for the club and has made us stronger in the long term. If it doesn't then the transfer worked out for Brereton, but not necessarily Blackburn Rovers.

[islander200]

6 minutes ago, DE. said:

Again, for me it's a matter of perception. I can understand the view of people who say it has paid off, but I can also understand why somebody would say it hasn't. Totally depends on the criteria you're applying. It certainly paid off for Brereton as an individual, and it should work out for Mowbray if we sell him for a good price and he can brag about the profits made. On the other hand if Mowbray brought him in as part of the goal of getting promoted then that likely isn't going to work out regardless of how many goals BBD scores this season or what we sell him for.

Whilst I agree promotion and reinvestment of fee is out of Brereton's hands, as fans we should still consider those elements as to whether his transfer ultimately paid off for the club and has made us stronger in the long term. If it doesn't then the transfer worked out for Brereton, but not necessarily Blackburn Rovers.

In that case no transfer has worked out 

Jordan Rhodes didn't work out and neither did Armstrong as we never got promoted

[roversfan99]

3 hours ago, roverblue said:

If you spend £7m on a lad who just played a full season for Notts Forest and won the EFL young player of the year then in my view he starts every game for at least the first 20 games of that season. If not why bother singing him when we had pressing concerns in other areas of the pitch?

What I wouldn't do is bring him on for 10 mins at the end of a game (probably when losing) and then see fans start classing him as appalling because he hasn't managed to score a hat trick in what little time he gets on the pitch.

You could see his confidence drain away that first season with the way Mowbray managed him. With hindsight I bet Ben wished he stayed at Forest and got another full season or two in and he may have reached the point he is at now much sooner. Thankfully in the end its worked out and its wonderful to hear the 'Diaz' chants at Ewood after he bangs another one in.

That highlighted sentence suggests that you are trying to provoke somewhat, the issue wasn't unreasonably high standards, he looked out of place when he did feature, my personal expectations that season were just for him to contribute with a few goals and assists and look a threat, which he didn't. Nobody expected hat tricks. I have no recollection of him winning that award that you mention, indeed he started the season at a mid table Forest side unable to make the 18 man squad.

Ultimately, if a player costing such a sum wasn't close to being in the first 11, then as was the case, the question was should we have spent that money when we had much more pressing matters. Graham was player of the season and Dack was scoring goals with regularity so he certainly shouldn't have started ahead of them. We played a 4-2-3-1 which didn't suit him as much to play wide as the 4-3-3 does, Armstrong had just come off a very successful half season and we tended to play a "defensive winger" on the other side.

[DE.]

12 minutes ago, islander200 said:

In that case no transfer has worked out 

Jordan Rhodes didn't work out and neither did Armstrong as we never got promoted

Armstrong helped us get out of League 1, so I don't think it's fair to say that. I think an argument could be made for Rhodes not working out as despite his goals we didn't even get into the playoffs and with his wages/bonuses taken into account did we even make a profit on him in the end?

As I have said a few times now, though, it's all about how you view it. Just because I see promotion as one of the key factors in judging whether JR worked out as a transfer doesn't mean you have to or even should feel the same way. If you don't then that's fine.

[islander200]

15 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

That highlighted sentence suggests that you are trying to provoke somewhat, the issue wasn't unreasonably high standards, he looked out of place when he did feature, my personal expectations that season were just for him to contribute with a few goals and assists and look a threat, which he didn't. Nobody expected hat tricks. I have no recollection of him winning that award that you mention, indeed he started the season at a mid table Forest side unable to make the 18 man squad.

Ultimately, if a player costing such a sum wasn't close to being in the first 11, then as was the case, the question was should we have spent that money when we had much more pressing matters. Graham was player of the season and Dack was scoring goals with regularity so he certainly shouldn't have started ahead of them. We played a 4-2-3-1 which didn't suit him as much to play wide as the 4-3-3 does, Armstrong had just come off a very successful half season and we tended to play a "defensive winger" on the other side.

He did win that award in his breakout season.He did start the season out of their 18 as they had splashed out on foreigners and Grabban,players they thought could get them promoted and Brerertons sale helped balance their books.The previous season he made 36 appearances for them,he must have been showing something

[rigger]

22 minutes ago, islander200 said:

In that case no transfer has worked out 

Jordan Rhodes didn't work out and neither did Armstrong as we never got promoted

Shearer.

[Bigdoggsteel]

25 minutes ago, DE. said:

Again, for me it's a matter of perception. I can understand the view of people who say it has paid off, but I can also understand why somebody would say it hasn't. Totally depends on the criteria you're applying. It certainly paid off for Brereton as an individual, and it should work out for Mowbray if we sell him for a good price and he can brag about the profits made. On the other hand if Mowbray brought him in as part of the goal of getting promoted then that likely isn't going to work out regardless of how many goals BBD scores this season or what we sell him for.

Whilst I agree promotion and reinvestment of fee is out of Brereton's hands, as fans we should still consider those elements as to whether his transfer ultimately paid off for the club and has made us stronger in the long term. If it doesn't then the transfer worked out for Brereton, but not necessarily Blackburn Rovers.

I just don't think 1 signing can make or break promotion for us, which opens up the broader question of why that hasn't happened under Mowbray. If we do make money on the transfer though,  it will go to the club in some way, maybe not the way we like , or a glamorous way, but it might , for example, keep the FFP wolves from the door. I just think under pretty much all the headings that matter with regards a transfer "working out", we are in the positive, eventually, with regards the Brereton Diaz deal.   Far more than say with Gallagher, for example. 

[DE.]

1 minute ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I just don't think 1 signing can make or break promotion for us, which opens up the broader question of why that hasn't happened under Mowbray. If we do make money on the transfer though,  it will go to the club in some way, maybe not the way we like , or a glamorous way, but it might , for example, keep the FFP wolves from the door. I just think under pretty much all the headings that matter with regards a transfer "working out", we are in the positive, eventually, with regards the Brereton Diaz deal.   Far more than say with Gallagher, for example. 

If we sell BBD for a big profit, and it does look likely at the moment, I'd tend to agree. Personally I'd also look at what the end goal was from buying the player.

Using JR as an example, even though his goals likely kept us in the division, I don't think he was bought for that purpose. We spent £8m for a striker that would provide the goals to fire us to promotion. It wasn't his fault and it wasn't his sole purchase that meant we failed, but as far as the reason we bought him, it didn't work.

As far as BBD is concerned, I believe we likely purchased him with development and resale for profit in mind. On that basis alone, if we do sell him for profit, then the transfer was a success. Applying other metrics to it, which from a fan's perspective is understandable, can change that viewpoint. 

[booth]

2 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

It has paid off though. He is playing super stuff for club and country and barring injury, he will now leave for a big fee. 

It's great for him, and for us to watch the goals go in for hopefully an entire season, but what then?

Will it lead to promotion? No because the squad is paper thin. Why is the squad paper thin? Because we were gambling £7m here and £5m there a few seasons ago.

Where will that big fee go? Where did Armstrong's big fee go?

How will the club cope with losing another top scorer? The same as Armstrong I'd imagine - just praying that someone steps up followed by the club spending barely anything and Mowbray's scattershot approach to football transfers.

It won't even make a dent on the clubs debt.

It was a silly signing then and a pointless signing now if we aren't building for the future.

[islander200]

9 minutes ago, rigger said:

Shearer.

Shearer didn't get us promoted.

I was obviously referring to the Venky reign and since we got relegated

[rigger]

32 minutes ago, islander200 said:

In that case no transfer has worked out 

Jordan Rhodes didn't work out and neither did Armstrong as we never got promoted

 

2 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Shearer didn't get us promoted.

I was obviously referring to the Venky reign and since we got relegated

You never mentioned: During Venkys reign , in your initial post. Also Armstrongs transfer did work, because we made money on him. 

[islander200]

10 minutes ago, rigger said:

 

You never mentioned: During Venkys reign , in your initial post. Also Armstrongs transfer did work, because we made money on him. 

Read the post I was responding too.

It was in response to someone saying that people can look at Brererton and say he wasn't a success because he didn't get us promoted.

I mentioned Armstrong and Rhodes because they didn't get us promoted from this division either.I wasn't saying in my opinion they weren't a success 

We will make money on Brererton too.

 

Edited October 14, 2021 by islander200

[islander200]

16 minutes ago, booth said:

It's great for him, and for us to watch the goals go in for hopefully an entire season, but what then?

Will it lead to promotion? No because the squad is paper thin. Why is the squad paper thin? Because we were gambling £7m here and £5m there a few seasons ago.

Where will that big fee go? Where did Armstrong's big fee go?

How will the club cope with losing another top scorer? The same as Armstrong I'd imagine - just praying that someone steps up followed by the club spending barely anything and Mowbray's scattershot approach to football transfers.

It won't even make a dent on the clubs debt.

It was a silly signing then and a pointless signing now if we aren't building for the future.

If his goals keep us away from trouble and we sell for a decent profit then his signing will have been a successful one.

We have no idea that Venkys won't allow spending next summer they did agree to pay 7 million for Brererton and 5 for Gallagher in the first place.

[Bigdoggsteel]

10 minutes ago, booth said:

It's great for him, and for us to watch the goals go in for hopefully an entire season, but what then?

Will it lead to promotion? No because the squad is paper thin. Why is the squad paper thin? Because we were gambling £7m here and £5m there a few seasons ago.

Where will that big fee go? Where did Armstrong's big fee go?

How will the club cope with losing another top scorer? The same as Armstrong I'd imagine - just praying that someone steps up followed by the club spending barely anything and Mowbray's scattershot approach to football transfers.

It won't even make a dent on the clubs debt.

It was a silly signing then and a pointless signing now if we aren't building for the future.

So should we not sign anyone? Buying with the aim of making profit is literally the only model we can operate under, barring we get promoted. Why we haven't been promoted is a separate issue 

Your last sentence shows you have a a wider issue that bothers you, which is understandable,  because in isolation, this deal has now worked out. 

When you say gamble 5 million here and 7 million there what would your solution have been? Who would you have signed back then? You would struggle to name anyone , even in hindsight 

[riverholmes]

Although Brereton is surprising me with his improvements, especially, since joining up with Chile, I'm still sceptical about the extent of his potential. He looks to have improved his shooting, which was weak and has more confidence. I am sure that he can be a decent Championship striker long-term but, his lack of technique, at times, and decision making is still lacking, I think, to be considered a top league forward. He gives the ball away a lot which can't go unnoticed.

I still think that we haven't seen the best of him at Rovers. If he was relieved of most defensive duties, and played as a striker, I think he would do even better.

As well as the Chile call-up, he's benefited from patience and game time from Mowbray. If only more talented young players were given such opportunities to acclimatise.

[booth]

14 minutes ago, DE. said:

As far as BBD is concerned, I believe we likely purchased him with development and resale for profit in mind. On that basis alone, if we do sell him for profit, then the transfer was a success. Applying other metrics to it, which from a fan's perspective is understandable, can change that viewpoint. 

I think we do need to define what "paid off" means.

If it means paid off for the club long term, then it's a big no considering recent history.

If it means paid off because we are seeing some goals which make us happy, along with seeing a young player flourish, followed by some money that will never be invested into the team because it'll service the bottomless pit that is the club debt, that the owners created by signing players for silly money and wages. Then I guess it's paid off.

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 minute ago, booth said:

I think we do need to define what "paid off" means.

If it means paid off for the club long term, then it's a big no considering recent history.

If it means paid off because we are seeing some goals which make us happy, along with seeing a young player flourish, followed by some money that will never be invested into the team because it'll service the bottomless pit that is the club debt, that the owners created by signing players for silly money and wages. Then I guess it's paid off.

The only metric that matters as far as I am concerned is performances and goals 

[booth]

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

So should we not sign anyone? Buying with the aim of making profit is literally the only model we can operate under, barring we get promoted. Why we haven't been promoted is a separate issue 

Your last sentence shows you have a a wider issue that bothers you, which is understandable,  because in isolation, this deal has now worked out. 

When you say gamble 5 million here and 7 million there what would your solution have been? Who would you have signed back then? You would struggle to name anyone , even in hindsight 

 

At the time of signing both players our "model" (we were told) was to gain promotion, not to develop young players to the detriment of the team, then sell them on when hopefully they get good. If you're seeking promotion, you sign players to improve the team, not to fatten them up to sell them on.

The very reason our model (if there is one) has become this is because of a scattershot transfer policy.

Signing two players, one for £7m and one a year later for £5m when we had a League 1 defence and a Championship budget was absolute lunacy.

The whole concept of buying with the aim to profit on your players is a nonsense when any returns are a relative blip compared to promotion money, and the owners are billionaires.

[booth]

11 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

The only metric that matters as far as I am concerned is performances and goals 

Well that's fine if you're happy to exclude the context.
 

[DE.]

7 minutes ago, booth said:

I think we do need to define what "paid off" means.

If it means paid off for the club long term, then it's a big no considering recent history.

If it means paid off because we are seeing some goals which make us happy, along with seeing a young player flourish, followed by some money that will never be invested into the team because it'll service the bottomless pit that is the club debt, that the owners created by signing players for silly money and wages. Then I guess it's paid off.

It's a difficult one as everyone will have their own definition. I don't think it's a situation where it's black and white. As long as we're dealing in facts then there are multiple ways to define whether the transfer worked out. At least, that's my view on this topic. If somebody says it's paid off because he's scoring goals and doing well this season then OK, if somebody else says it hasn't paid off because for £7m they expect a player to come straight into the team and contribute then I'd also say that's fair enough. 

I don't agree with using resale as criteria at the moment because that resale hasn't happened yet. If it does and he goes for much more than we paid for him then I'd accept that as a reason to say it worked out too, even if I personally had different criteria. 

I'm completely on board with arguing the merits of the transfer working out or not, based on everyone's opinions, I just don't think it needs to be proven that one person is right and everybody else is wrong. It's an interesting question to ponder, with a lot of valid answers.