Summer Transfer Window 2019

[Neal]

2 hours ago, JacknOry said:

On monumental wages. 

I don't doubt. Prixon seems to think it could be a goer though.

[Butty]

Just now, ChrisPriceBaldSpot said:

Good singer and guitarist too. He'll give us something. 

Love that. ? 

[G Somerset Rover]

31 minutes ago, DE. said:

What a spiral that boy's career has gone into. Still only 25 but has gone from being a Welsh international and a regular at a fairly big Championship club to failing in a minor football league in the USA and now playing in League 2. 

Wasn't it Sterling that he marked out of the game in one of his first few appearances for the club? How the mighty have fallen indeed.

[RoverKyle]

It's hardly inspiring, but we could do worse than Morrison. I'd probably rather him than Downing. 

[tomphil]

He's obviously looking for a ball playing creative mid who can play other areas as well in the tombola. It seems to have to be an old guy delivered through the old boys network.

I think it's simple really these lot won't pay fees for experienced players although they might sanction short term high wages, that's why we are looking in the bargain bin again, the oap bargain bin this time.

Seems they'll only pay good or big fees for U23s with potential which leaves us a bit hamstrung yet again unless the recruitment is A1 !!!

Not sure where all that will leave Travis seeing as Evans is a shoe in and if Richie is still here well, ya know.....

[briansol]

57 minutes ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Sounds like TM is trying to put a brave face on matters...I don't think his trip to Pune Towers bared the fruit he had hoped for.

Frustrating with these people,we never seems to fully know what their expectations are..enjoy the silence!

I think it's more to do with it's harder to compete on wages. We are a medium Championship club and pay medium wages, how do you convince better than medium players to come here? Last summer was an example where Celina went to Swansea who had parachute money and McGinn went to Villa insted of us even if we could afford the transfer fee. The bigger clubs get first picks because of size/wages.  

Sounds like we have a similar budget to last year, where there is a sizable amount available for transfer fee, but the wage/attraction challenge remains. Brentford seems to have their scouting spot on. They are selling their best players all the time, but are able to replace the exciting players like Ollie Watkins and Benharama

[Ewood Ace]

1 hour ago, briansol said:

I think it's more to do with it's harder to compete on wages. We are a medium Championship club and pay medium wages, how do you convince better than medium players to come here? Last summer was an example where Celina went to Swansea who had parachute money and McGinn went to Villa insted of us even if we could afford the transfer fee. The bigger clubs get first picks because of size/wages.  

 Let's not rewrite history here if we had really wanted McGinn then we could have gone in early in the window and got him, until late July Villa had no money to spend, it was only when towards the end of the month new owners came in and made money available. The reason we did not sign Mcginn is because in Mowbray's own words he 'didn’t really see central midfield as somewhere where we needed to spend a lot of money'.

Edited June 14, 2019 by Ewood Ace

[tomphil]

If you want a good player it stands to reason you might have to pay a bit more wages to lure them. Mowbray talks about 5 grand per week extra elsewhere but how many do we carry on double that ?

Make some room on the god damn wage bill then man instead of inviting everyone to stay and  bleed the club if they feel like it but contribute nothing.

Really boils my piss this blaze" attitude I said as soon as the retained list was published and he said what he did that we'd end up getting fed the wages line as to why no first team ready players wouldn't end up coming.  They can push the boat out for one or two decent ones and they know they can but they can't be arsed because they are behind closed doors preferring to go with what they have, cautious to the last.

Nobodies on about panic buying or over paying but 5k more per week ?   COME ON !

[JacknOry]

Brentford slapped a 30 million price tag on Benrahma. Being heavily linked to Villa (the boss that found and bought him). What a bit of business he has been.  Ollie Watkins also being linked to three PL clubs including Sheffield United. 

We could do with snapping up whoever is in charge of scouting over there, would be nice to get players from further than the West Midlands.

[JHRover]

Brentford are on a different planet to us recruitment wise and to be fair compared to most clubs they are very good at what they do. We can forget emulating them any time soon. They've sold God knows how many players for all sorts of money and have repeatedly bounced back from it.

[bluebruce]

3 minutes ago, tomphil said:

If you want a good player it stands to reason you might have to pay a bit more wages to lure them. Mowbray talks about 5 grand per week extra elsewhere but how many do we carry on double that ?

Make some room on the god damn wage bill then man instead of inviting everyone to stay and  bleed the club if they feel like it but contribute nothing.

Really boils my piss this blaze" attitude I said as soon as the retained list was published and he said what he did that we'd end up getting fed the wages line as to why no first team ready players wouldn't end up coming.  They can push the boat out for one or two decent ones and they know they can but they can't be arsed because they are behind closed doors preferring to go with what they have, cautious to the last.

Nobodies on about panic buying or over paying but 5k more per week ?   COME ON !

Agree we are carrying some dross (the recent contract offers for Conway and Gladwin, and the Leutwiler extension epitomised this) that we need to be shifting to make room on the wage bill.

However I don't think it's quite as simple as not being willing to stump up 5k per week more for a player than you were originally willing. The problem is once you're paying certain players a certain amount, the rest want a bigger slice too. If we assume that paying that player 5k per week more results in the rest of the squad thinking they're worth, let's say on average another 1k per week (you'd maybe have the Dacks expecting more like another 5k, but fringe players would be more modest). Then you're looking at maybe what, 20k per week?

Obviously not everyone demands more right away (they might wait for their next extension talks, or be sensible and realise they're not on the same level as the new star player and never ask for it), and these figures are hypothetical, but it's just to illustrate the knock-on effect can be a lot more than 5k per week in the long term. In the time between any further pay rises, it also risks deharmonising the squad to a degree. It's about the overall wage structure and maintaining that so we are sustainable going forward.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just as frustrated when we miss out on the McGinns etc over a few grand a week, but I don't believe it's as simple as that.

[tomphil]

17 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

Agree we are carrying some dross (the recent contract offers for Conway and Gladwin, and the Leutwiler extension epitomised this) that we need to be shifting to make room on the wage bill.

However I don't think it's quite as simple as not being willing to stump up 5k per week more for a player than you were originally willing. The problem is once you're paying certain players a certain amount, the rest want a bigger slice too. If we assume that paying that player 5k per week more results in the rest of the squad thinking they're worth, let's say on average another 1k per week (you'd maybe have the Dacks expecting more like another 5k, but fringe players would be more modest). Then you're looking at maybe what, 20k per week?

Obviously not everyone demands more right away (they might wait for their next extension talks, or be sensible and realise they're not on the same level as the new star player and never ask for it), and these figures are hypothetical, but it's just to illustrate the knock-on effect can be a lot more than 5k per week in the long term. In the time between any further pay rises, it also risks deharmonising the squad to a degree. It's about the overall wage structure and maintaining that so we are sustainable going forward.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just as frustrated when we miss out on the McGinns etc over a few grand a week, but I don't believe it's as simple as that.

A fair assumption but if it really did come down to that we are totally buggered as what happens when you sign a Downing on 20k pwk short term or not ?

Like I said it's a fair assumption but not one I particularly think is at play here at all, personally I already think Dack is on quite big money that's how they are keeping him here at the min.  The other large earners will be the more experienced Senior gang like DG, Mulgrew and Evans who have al had the new contracts they were promised and in the first twos case they are in the twilight of their careers and are unlikey to get another gig on similar money at a club like this.  As for the rest no one is really in a position to be demanding parity or more with any new signings and if they are it's down to some very weak management agreeing to such things just to keep mostly average players here.

End of the day it isn't the Premier league and you just can't run an average Championship club in such a manner so i'd be amazed if stuff like that is written into contracts otherwise your recruitment is virtually stuffed.  Players in general will understand that better ones or more experienced ones command a bit more wedge than others in fact i'd wager most at Ewood are very aware they are on a good number here and very grateful.

[JacknOry]

I doubt the main reason we didnt sign McGinn was the wages, it was how slow things operate at Ewood. It was clear from very early on that mcGinn was a target and had we had our shop in gear, we'd have picked him up long before Villa even showed an interest. That 5k eventually tipped things but playing in Scotland he would hardly have been earning much - if we moved (were able to move quicker) and just went out and got our man instead of having to wait for trips to India and money to get authorized he'd probably be a Rovers player now.

Same thing is probably happening now.

Edited June 14, 2019 by JacknOry

[tomphil]

What i'm saying is if they really wanted a decent player they'd find that 5k pwk on a 3 year contract no problems whatsoever especially if the player in question had sell on value. Paying good wages under Venkys has never been a problem here and neither has contributing heftily to loan players from Prem clubs or making room on the wage bill until now apparently.

It's the desire to actually stick the neck out on these type of players of pay a big fee for them I think is in question.   Lets get some bang for our bucks for once instead of being nice to squaddies and old men who contribute nowt we've plenty of our own youth to bluff out the squad now.

Edited June 14, 2019 by tomphil

[Dave S]

8 hours ago, Neal said:

https://www.burnleyexpress.net/sport/football/blackburn-eye-shock-deal-for-burnley-star-fresh-claims-emerge-over-newcastle-takeover-arsenal-set-to-sign-free-agent-plus-updates-on-liverpool-manchester-united-everton-1-9822018

 

Jack Butland? ?

Adam Davies the Goalkeeper from Barnsley  is going to Stoke.

[joey_big_nose]

8 hours ago, Neal said:

I've obviously read that half asleep. To be honest, I'd take Hart. When it was first mentioned a while back a wasn't keen but an former England International, who should be in the prime of his career, with strong leadership qualities... I think it would suit him here. I'm saying all this but hasn't TM said he's not interested previously? Pretty sure he'd be exactly the sort of player and person he would want. 

Its balls. There's no way we could afford his wages. He'll be on 50k a week.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

10 hours ago, Biz said:

Yea, the most you can get for less is obviously the better way but there’s other factors, for example; a new lad on say 20k + PW is going to cost you a lot in wage rises for the other key players.

Particularly last summer - having shed most silly wages by the time we had returned from league one, I’m quite sure the likes of Dack, Graham, Mulgrew, Evans et al would’ve been our top earners below 20k PW.

Stick a Bamford in there for 5m and 25k pw (remember the average pl wage is now +50k pw) and you can guarantee the better players would want parity.

 

Depends on whether the signing is clearly a cut above.  Players aren't daft, there has to be a hierarchy somewhere in the club.   An aging Mulgrew and Graham aren't really in a position to demand increases.  Dack in fairness would deserve one as his star is increasing.  Evans was lucky to get a new deal IMO.  Surely that is where the management team earn their corn?  Mowbray has already come out and distanced himself from the finances.  To be fair this summer there has been talk about a 'flexible budget' as less in fees more in wages or vice versa.

Edited June 14, 2019 by Wing Wizard Windy Miller

[bluebruce]

21 minutes ago, tomphil said:

A fair assumption but if it really did come down to that we are totally buggered as what happens when you sign a Downing on 20k pwk short term or not ?

Precisely why we shouldn't do that lol...hopefully if we do sign him, it's on a lot less than that (doubtful though). Madness to pay him that whilst turning our nose up at the 25k or so I assume McGinn would have wanted.

Although I suppose the short termism comes into play. It's a bit easier to say 'Look lads, this guy has a ton of pedigree and experience and will give us some class for one season to hopefully push us to promotion and improve your careers, plus he's free. That's why we're giving him pay parity with our top earners, and next season he'll be gone'. As opposed to 'We're signing this 23-year old defensive midfielder from Hibs and paying him more than any of you for the next four years. Yes Dacky, more than you too. What? No he has zero experience in the English leagues.'  (Note - not that I think Downing would get us promotion)

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

8 hours ago, JHRover said:

For what it's worth I don't think Mowbray would deliberately set out to mislead fans. Unfortunately working for this mob puts him in a difficult position and I've no doubts the goalposts continually move in India and their promises often don't materialise. It's been that way since day one. Promises galore but what actually happens is some way short of that.

To be fair if the overall outlay budget for transfers (without sales) is as per last year  (approaching £10 mil in fees for Brereton, Armstrong, Rothwell and Davenport)  Mowbray can have no complaints.  We've not had a £30million 3 year kitty for years and years. 

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

7 hours ago, tomphil said:

OR .. he's gone over there and re presented his slow build plan and told them it's better investing in young potential and getting a few old heads on big wages short term this time to help that process.....

He might have been buying himself time again and lining up some more jobs for the boys, oh don't forget all the new scouting he's allegedly setting up that will obviously take time to deliver. I'm not one to defend that lot but this seems very much TMs plan and way he prefers to work keeping pressure off himself and the team plus the perfect storm for his rotating methods whilst growing the squad value.

He seems very very relaxed about everything, too relaxed for my liking although could it e he's a little miffed at not getting another contract extension himself so has got his chief PR man Paul to start drumming up the old 'fear factor'.. ???    ?

The fact that he's already said in the LT that he hopes people aren't shouting for his head if we aren't top 6 by Christmas supports the above.  

[bluebruce]

30 minutes ago, tomphil said:

The other large earners will be the more experienced Senior gang like DG, Mulgrew and Evans who have al had the new contracts they were promised and in the first twos case they are in the twilight of their careers and are unlikey to get another gig on similar money at a club like this.  As for the rest no one is really in a position to be demanding parity or more with any new signings and if they are it's down to some very weak management agreeing to such things just to keep mostly average players here.

End of the day it isn't the Premier league and you just can't run an average Championship club in such a manner so i'd be amazed if stuff like that is written into contracts otherwise your recruitment is virtually stuffed.  Players in general will understand that better ones or more experienced ones command a bit more wedge than others in fact i'd wager most at Ewood are very aware they are on a good number here and very grateful.

I do think weakness of management probably comes into it, in a sense, although some might argue it's just Mowbray's philosophy. He clearly likes to have a happy dressing room, and we shouldn't pretend that doesn't have its benefits. I feel like he goes a bit too far to maintain that though at times. I reckon there are players who would ask for more if we are paying a newcomer beyond what our wage structure suggests, or their agents would anyway. I think in TM's mind, when this happens, we either authorise better deals (and once you start that, others who were silent at first suddenly do expect more) or you piss those players off and upset the harmony. Not saying I agree with various aspects of his approach, I don't, but the point is it's a more complicated balancing act than just approving 5k (or 10k, etc) more. If it weren't, then yes it would always be the right call to pay one excellent player a bit more instead of using that bit more to buy a squad player.

Not sure what you mean by stuff like that being written into contracts? I didn't mean player contracts stipulate wages have to go up if a new player's are high, that'd be madness. The only one I can think could potentially have a clause like that is Dack, but I hadn't even considered that until now and he probably doesn't. As for the last sentence there, we shouldn't underestimate the greed of players and their agents. Everyone in this league is on superb money relative to the real world but it never stops them trying for more.

[bluebruce]

36 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

I doubt the main reason we didnt sign McGinn was the wages, it was how slow things operate at Ewood. It was clear from very early on that mcGinn was a target and had we had our shop in gear, we'd have picked him up long before Villa even showed an interest. That 5k eventually tipped things but playing in Scotland he would hardly have been earning much - if we moved (were able to move quicker) and just went out and got our man instead of having to wait for trips to India and money to get authorized he'd probably be a Rovers player now.

Same thing is probably happening now.

Quite possibly. We are definitely slower out of the blocks than we should be due to the system of Pune approval. It does boggle my mind why those meetings aren't done sooner, especially this year where we knew our status next season very very early. But we can only speculate what went on behind the scenes in that transfer. His agent could easily have known at the time that Villa, and maybe other clubs like them, were also monitoring McGinn. If TM's comments are to be believed, agents in that situation ask for very high wages early in the summer until they see how the interest from various clubs pans out. You could be right though.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

30 minutes ago, tomphil said:

What i'm saying is if they really wanted a decent player they'd find that 5k pwk on a 3 year contract no problems whatsoever especially if the player in question had sell on value. Paying good wages under Venkys has never been a problem here and neither has contributing heftily to loan players from Prem clubs or making room on the wage bill until now apparently.

It's the desire to actually stick the neck out on these type of players of pay a big fee for them I think is in question.   Lets get some bang for our bucks for once instead of being nice to squaddies and old men who contribute nowt we've plenty of our own youth to bluff out the squad now.

Given the strength of our under 23 group, these guys should be filling out the squad instead of your Smallwoods, Samuels, Williams, Leutweillers, Bennett et al. They'd be on half the wages of those guys straight away.  

[Athlete]

The problem is we are a club which has been ruined since the takeover and a lot of vultures have made money on the back of it.... No one can anticipate venkys next move.. Do they actually have any ambition to get us back up.. Highly doubtfull 

[Cherry Blue]

Just now, Athlete said:

The problem is we are a club which has been ruined since the takeover and a lot of vultures have made money on the back of it.... No one can anticipate venkys next move.. Do they actually have any ambition to get us back up.. Highly doubtfull 

From Venkys view they are interested in the £s. The new Blackpool owner was a supporter of the club decades ago but unfortunately our owners don't have that unique relationship. I'll credit (forgive me!) them with one thing though they are still putting money into our club despite not getting the financial return they'd expected.