Summer Transfer Window 2019

[47er]

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

At least 10.

Depends how often he plays and where.

[47er]

Just now, Beanie01289 said:

That would leave a few on here with a sour taste as much as people say they want him to do well there a lot who have gone way over the top in their criticism of a 19-20 year old player.

What would be an acceptable goal return for him this season in peoples view?

Oh yeah! If he scores 30 goals this season I'll be sick as a parrot! 

[Bbrovers2288]

10 minutes ago, Jlee1984 said:

Saw a rumour on here a week or 2 back that we had representatives in Glasgow, looking at a keeper and a winger, Celtic letting Sinclair go for around 2.5 mill, I wonder ?

Yes, Sinclair is available and we spoke to parties in Glasgow  but I believe we wanted a loan to buy whereas Celtic wanted cash. Might change however if as expected Tierney’s deal to arsenal goes through with some hefty coin behind them 

[old darwen blue]

5 hours ago, Scotland1 said:

What I don’t understand is why we’ve not said to Bolton take butterworth till January till your takeover and players sign. He’d get every game under his belt, at a good level. If they couldn’t pay his wages then I’m sure it wouldn’t be that bad given he’s a lower earner here and unlikely to get that many minutes.

Additionally our fellow neighbours Bury could do with a player or two. Good PR exercise for our club too. 

Sod Bolton!

[Rover8T4]

Just now, Bbrovers2288 said:

Yes, Sinclair is available and we spoke to parties in Glasgow  but I believe we wanted a loan to buy whereas Celtic wanted cash. Might change however if as expected Tierney’s deal to arsenal goes through with some hefty coin behind them 

One to keep an eye on, We don’t need another forward player but he would certainly make us stronger

[FGS5635]

Sod sinclair. At this point im not convinced he would be any better than rothwell and chapman and certainly not at 2.5mil. We have enough attacking talent

[davulsukur]

If we spend £2.5m on Sinclair with the gaping holes in our back line, I'll be fuming.

[Stuart]

45 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

I believe in the loan market being a good tool for player development. I think it's the loan fees that have made clubs like Chelsea get ridiculous with it. I used to do the same thing as them on FM but only because it was just a game.

I don't see a need to cap the total players sent out, definitely not as low as 5 which would only detriment the development of many a young player. Just cap (or outlaw) the fees. Then clubs won't be so keen to amass so many as a nice little earner on the side.

Strongly disagree with this. These players should be signing for Blackburn Rovers or Norwich or Charlton, not signing for a PL club and then loaned out to a Blackburn Rovers or Norwich or Charlton.

If they are good enough then we can sell them to the PL clubs for a fair price, having invested in them.

These players will likely be better with their money, have better attitudes and be better role models. They are paid too much too soon and is ruining the players and impacting clubs.

It sounds like there’s a good chance this young but supposedly decent defender won’t be joining us because we can’t agree to use the player as required by Guardiola. If we told Bauer he wasn’t automatic first choice then there’s no way some City kid should be.

[Stuart]

21 minutes ago, Beanie01289 said:

That would leave a few on here with a sour taste as much as people say they want him to do well there a lot who have gone way over the top in their criticism of a 19-20 year old player.

What would be an acceptable goal return for him this season in peoples view?

Why would it? Everyone would be delighted if he paid back his £7m transfer fee.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 hours ago, Scotland1 said:

I’d rather have my ex partner and her inane financial lack of ability doing the negotiating than Venus.

A man who’s a failed manager, non desired assistant unless working with TM suspicious property deals, poor European scouting with suspect Bulgarian agents at Coventry and the worst defence coach we’ve seen at rovers since winter burn. 

Think we've just discovered why we always seem to put bids in for our main targets which are completely ignored and why we seem practically incapable of getting any deal over the line.

Unbelievable, should be a top executive handling that, it's the most important  job at the Club other than being the manager.

What the **** does Waggott do for his salary then?

[RevidgeBlue]

8 minutes ago, Jlee1984 said:

One to keep an eye on, We don’t need another forward player but he would certainly make us stronger

We have two exceptional young players at the Club in Rothwell and Chapman who don't get any game time already.

Signing Sinclair on the back of bringing in Downing would probably ensure they disappeared without trace.

[Beanie01289]

Just now, Stuart said:

Why would it? Everyone would be delighted if he paid back his £7m transfer fee.

I hear people say that for some i just don't believe it

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, renrag said:

 Couldn’t agree more! The original concept of the loan system was for clubs to sign players on a short term basis, usually to get over injury problems.

I believe there is a case for abolishing the loan system, except for emergency goalkeeper loans. As you say the players would naturally find their level (and their pay grade) benefitting clubs all the way down the pyramid.

Now here I completely agree. I think the loan system is abused just us much by the recipient Clubs as it is by the donor Clubs and that they use it as a cheap disposable alternative to investing in and committing to buying and developing their own players.

There also are moves afoot to reduce the number of players Clubs can have out on loan. As things currently stand though I don't think it's unreasonable to expect your player to get a minimum amount of game time if you let a lower tier Club borrow them and you're subsidising most of his wage. It's an arrangement that ought to benefit both Clubs.

[Crimpshrine]

I think Mowbray summed up our transfer problems in that article:

Premier League clubs have all got loan managers, directors of football, technical director’s, tiers and tiers of people underneath the manager

We have Mark Venus ( a coach! )

Even if we do make progress we then have to track down Venky's for the final sign-off:

You have to agree a deal, then you have to take it to the owners, to the directors of our club and they’re difficult things to put together

Our lack of infrastructure is a big barrier to our progress as a club

 

 

[RevidgeBlue]

Just now, Crimpshrine said:

I think Mowbray summed up our transfer problems in that article:

Premier League clubs have all got loan managers, directors of football, technical director’s, tiers and tiers of people underneath the manager

We have Mark Venus ( a coach! )

Even if we do make progress we then have to track down Venky's for the final sign-off:

You have to agree a deal, then you have to take it to the owners, to the directors of our club and they’re difficult things to put together

Our lack of infrastructure is a big barrier to our progress as a club

 

 

It shouldn't be a difficult thing to organise, Waggott and Mowbray should be able to agree an Annual budget and have complete autonomy within that budget. They should only need to get the green light from India if they need to go over and beyond that. 

It's what used to be the relationship between John Williams and the Walker Trust.

As regards all the negotiation, Waggott should do that, if he can't, why's he in the job?

[Crimpshrine]

Just now, RevidgeBlue said:

It shouldn't be a difficult thing to organise, Waggott and Mowbray should be able to agree an Annual budget and have complete autonomy within that budget. They should only need to get the green light from India if they need to go over and beyond that. 

It's what used to be the relationship between John Williams and the Walker Trust.

As regards all the negotiation, Waggott should do that, if he can't, why's he in the job?

Absolutely. It shouldn't be difficult but we just can't seem to manage it.

[alderson777]

1 hour ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Yes, Sinclair is available and we spoke to parties in Glasgow  but I believe we wanted a loan to buy whereas Celtic wanted cash. Might change however if as expected Tierney’s deal to arsenal goes through with some hefty coin behind them 

We are going nowhere near Scott Sinclair, he's on 70k a week. We wouldn't even pay a quarter of that. Not sure where that rumour came from. 

[Guest]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/9598742/arsenal-emiliano-no2-championship-transfer/

One from Nixon

[Vilesinner]

3 hours ago, Atko's Engine said:

Well if the aim of friendlies is to build confidence by beating teams and build fitness by giving all players good game time, then it would appear to have been successful, albeit against inferior opposition (perhaps Rangers aside). 

If it is to put into practise a change in our style of play, then again it would appear to have been successful from what I've read from those who've attended.  We seem to be quite fluid & less reliant on a long ball up to DG to hold up/knock down.

If it's to finalise a first 11 to start the season with, then almost undoubtedly it's been less successful.  I'm not at all confident about the defence (as it stands) which I think we all agree seems no stronger than last season personnel wise, despite what TM said which is disappointing. That said, it's possible that with better midfield protection & ball retention we could become more game savvy & thus avoid 3 or 4 away drubbings (which in my view distorted our record massively last season) as well as avoid conceding late goals. TM though will lose (has lost?) face with many (me included) by not getting in at least one specialised & experienced CB.  I still think he will, but that's perhaps more blind hope than tangible confidence.

Going forward, I think we're well stocked with exciting options, so credit where it's due there. There's pace, power & trickery with any number of combinations in midfield & up front, and I think we'll give opponents much to think about in that sense.  BB especially should get huge confidence from his pre-season goal return, what an asset he could be.

I expect outgoings will be Smallwood, Nuttall, JRC & Grayson (probably all on loan), MacGloire too if 1 or 2 new CBs arrive. Buckley & Butterworth to stick around at least until January, see if they can have an impact as starters in league cup games and in Championship games off the bench. Johnson's promotion could have a huge impact there.

I'm giving the window 6 out of 10 so far. 2 more signings could make it 8 or 9; please Tony, Steve, Venkys, give us that chance to really push for it this season, it could be very exciting.

JRC and Grayson to stay also imo. Grayson as left back cover.

[Damien]

53 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Think we've just discovered why we always seem to put bids in for our main targets which are completely ignored and why we seem practically incapable of getting any deal over the line.

Unbelievable, should be a top executive handling that, it's the most important  job at the Club other than being the manager.

What the **** does Waggott do for his salary then?

It doesn’t say he is the ONLY person dealing with transfers. Just that he is involved. Waggot and Venus are both involved. Mowbray identifies who he likes and leaves it to better suited people to discuss the nuts and bolts. 

[47er]

1 hour ago, Stuart said:

Why would it? Everyone would be delighted if he paid back his £7m transfer fee.

Or just some of it.

[Ewood Ace]

8 minutes ago, alderson777 said:

We are going nowhere near Scott Sinclair, he's on 70k a week. We wouldn't even pay a quarter of that. Not sure where that rumour came from. 

Not a Celtic he's not, half that 70K and you will be a lot closer to what he is on.

[Oldgregg86]

I think given bretetons likely amount of game time and positions he will play in between 7-9 would be a fair return.

i still struggle to understand why people think anybody on here doesn't want brereton to be the next coming. I've slated him on many occasion on here but no one cheered louder when he scored against Bolton . Everybody without exception wants him to be a success. You can only comment on what you have seen so far and so far he has struggled , There could be numerous factors why this is but he simply did not do enough (even for a 19-20 year old) last season.

lets hope this season he proves all us doubters wrong

did I mention he cost 7 million give or take the flex

Edited July 27, 2019 by Oldgregg86

[Stuart]

49 minutes ago, Beanie01289 said:

I hear people say that for some i just don't believe it

There seems to be a misconception, due to misinformation peddled by certain mischief-makers, that there are Rovers fans on this site who want anything but the best for Blackburn Rovers Football Club.

Don’t fall for it.

[RevidgeBlue]

Just now, Damien said:

It doesn’t say he is the ONLY person dealing with transfers. Just that he is involved. Waggot and Venus are both involved. Mowbray identifies who he likes and leaves it to better suited people to discuss the nuts and bolts. 

Come on. At what other Club would the first team assistant Coach do the negotiation of transfers?

From the horses mouth: TM said he is very much involved with "ALL the negotiating, all the discussions with Clubs to get the right deals and the right numbers".

I think Mowbray has made a major faux pas here. He's probably said it to reassure everyone because he thinks Venus is such a great bloke. In reality he's let the cat out of the bag and everyone is thinking "wtf?".

Tbh it makes the fact that Mowbray got Waggott his job and the relationship between the "Coventry mafia" of Waggott Mowbray and Venus all the more concerning.