Mowbray’s Future

[JBiz]

1 minute ago, Mercer said:

The key point is what the Rovers' financial commitment is over 4 years.

It is very likely to be a minimum of £11million when you factor in fee, wages, NI, agents fees etc

I agree,  it’s just that I also think Grabban, Celina, Bamford etc would’ve been much more expensive over the same time due to wages.

[Mercer]

16 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Does anyone actually enjoy watching us at home? We've had 24 halves of league football at Ewood this season.  I think that there have only been 4 or 5 halves that I have enjoyed and thought that we have played well, the rest has been forgettable boring dross. Waggott says we need 16k to break even bar the odd game with big away support there is no way we are going to get 16k through the gate to watch the sort of football that we are dishing up. Mowbray keeps talking about changing the style but there is absolutely no sign of that.

You are right.

Mowbray selects the team and tactics.  I think we see over complicated systems, too many square pegs in round holes and an overly cautious approach.

Time and time again, I've posted on here that Mowbray needs to let the players off the leash to to go for it - stop worrying about the fackin opposition but give them something to think about instead.  What United did yesterday at Cardiff would not have happened under Mourinho - Mowbray should take note.

The buck stops with Mowbray

[Mercer]

10 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Stood in the queue for a pint yesterday and the bloke behind me (obvs not a regular) said to his mate 'Is it always this boring'. His mate said 'yes'. 'Some goalmouth action might be nice' said the newbie. 

It is dull, but that's the way Mowbray plays. Two defensive DM's and nobody getting in the box apart from Dack and Graham. Tony 'two and a half attackers' Mowbray is just a very cautious manager. 

I can kind of understand it this season in a better league, but I think Mowbray is limited. There's no real improvement this season in the way we play even after splurging £10m on new players. We don't even have Chapman to come on anymore. It's still the hoof to Graham as the main tactic and then the MF/AM/WM pick up the pieces. That's fine when Dack has room to play but again yesterday he was mostly marked out of the game by Tettey (?). There's literally no other creativity. It's then left to Bell and Nyambe to work miracles down the wing which never really works because neither is great at crossing. 

We need new players out wide. Until then we won't improve. 

New players would help, however, in the meantime, it's about getting the best out of what you've already got and, IMV, Mowbray spectacularly fails to do this.

[Ewood Ace]

6 minutes ago, Biz said:

I agree,  it’s just that I also think Grabban, Celina, Bamford etc would’ve been much more expensive over the same time due to wages.

You get what you pay for don't you top players are going to want more money. But any of those 3 would have offered far better value for money than Brereton even taking potentially higher wages into account.

[Mercer]

10 minutes ago, Biz said:

I agree,  it’s just that I also think Grabban, Celina, Bamford etc would’ve been much more expensive over the same time due to wages.

There are bargains to be had.

How much do you think Pukki cost/costs Norwich!?

Bottom line is Brereton is a huge financial commitment for Rovers and at the moment, IMV, it looks like we've got a complete dud.

 

[blueboy3333]

1 minute ago, Biz said:

I agree,  it’s just that I also think Grabban, Celina, Bamford etc would’ve been much more expensive over the same time due to wages.

What's that got to do with a Rovers sub costing £7m?

Celina is on 18k pw BTW. He will cost less than BB over 4 years. Dack is on 14k pw. Graham, Mulgrew, Evans about the same. I don't know where you've got it from that player signing for Championship clubs automatically go on to 40k/50k pw as you've been keen to state? Grabban is on 25K pw. 

Bamford cost £7m and is on 30k pw. That is because he is a top quality Championship player playing at a big club with a lot of resource. BB can't even get in our team. I have no idea why you are making that comparison. YET we paid the same transfer fee. I know, lunacy. 

 

 

[blueboy3333]

11 minutes ago, Mercer said:

There are bargains to be had.

How much do you think Pukki cost/costs Norwich!?

Bottom line is Brereton is a huge financial commitment for Rovers and at the moment, IMV, it looks like we've got a complete dud.

 

Pukki signed on a free. He is on max £30k pw which would be less than £5m over 3 years. Much less than even BB's transfer fee, not even including his wage. He's scored 11 goals and is being watched by some big clubs. BB can't even get in our team let alone score.

£7m for BB = Lunacy

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 hour ago, Biz said:

I agree,  it’s just that I also think Grabban, Celina, Bamford etc would’ve been much more expensive over the same time due to wages.

Maybe, but at least we might get some goals out of those deal. Goals win you games, propel you up the table, excite the fans, put more bums on seat, more dosh in the coffers. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. ' A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush '.

[RevidgeBlue]

7 hours ago, Biz said:

But but but you said 13/15m... will you be down to 8 million if you find out we’ve only paid half upfront?

What story are you telling today Boris? 

You're making yourself look a bit silly now, it doesn't really matter whether the fee is payable up front or is spread over the life of the contract, it still has to be paid - there isn't a "you don't have to pay us if he's crap" option.

As things stand there doesn't seem to be much defence in favour of the Brereton signing. Either he was TM's choice in which case it looks like  a bad signing up to press and it's even more inexplicable why after half a season he has never handed him a league start. Or he was brought in by someone else as a long term investment and whilst not TM's choice he has gone along with it.

If the latter is the case then that might have been ok in theory if we had had say £35m to spend and £28m had been spent on players who went straight into the first team and 20% of the budget had been allocated to a development punt. There's no way the manager should have been agreeing to 70% of the summer transfer budget being spent on a speculative punt on a player who wasn't his own personal choice though.

[OldEwoodBlue]

We needed 7 Championship quality players to go into the first team replacing the 3rd division players.

We bought none.

We only got Reed on loan and its possible he will get recalled next week. 

Yet we spent a relative war chest on something.

[47er]

Biz, you keep pointing out that the 7M for Brereton won't be paid upfront but in instalments.

WE ALL KNOW THAT!

Virtually all transfers are on an instalments basis and have been for years.

When a club makes a gigantic booboo like we have, we still have to pay it, its still 7M we could and should have spent better elsewhere.

Don't keep defending the indefensible. You did the same with the match ticket surcharge till you came to your senses.

It isn't being soft to hold your hand up and admit that it, at least, looks like the Club got this one wrong.

After that its not ridiculous to start asking how this transfer came about. It doesn't bear the hallmark of a cautious Mowbray does it? Can't you at least admit that much?

C'mn you're a big, loyal Rovers supporter with many good points to make, why waste your time and energy destroying your reputation  with this one?

[RevidgeBlue]

I hope we don't regret the decision to give TM a new long term contract. It would have been more than adequate to keep him on a one year rolling deal with handsome performance related bonuses imo. 

I wasn't comfortable when  TM was instrumental in landing Waggott (with whom he's worked before) the Chief Executive's job at Ewood. Waggott gets the job, gives Mowbray a new long term deal and in the meantime suggestions are starting to emerge that the manager might be acquiescing to signings being brought in who might not be his choice.

All feels a bit too cosy to me. 

[47er]

11 hours ago, Biz said:

Good post and there is definitely a chance that the big signing from last summer will be a flop -

 

Your'e getting there!

[Sparks Rover]

It seems to me that although I like TM, he's a bit of a dinosaur in the transfer market. Sold a pup in Brereton,  Downing is the son of his mate from west brom and isn't good enough,  weve got the shittest Chelsea loanee, gladwin, Davenport, rothwell,  rodwell, etc, etc,....yawn!

The club needs to go for it if we have coin, get Paulo Fonseca in from Shaktar and promise him a chance of getting into the prem.  He gets access to Mendes stable and we have a much better chance of promotion.  Then we get the Mason mounts/Abrahans etc on loan.

[SBlue]

I honestly don’t think we’ll be poaching Shaktar’s manager.

 

Maybe Klopp?

[Sparks Rover]

13 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

I honestly don’t think we’ll be poaching Shaktar’s manager.

 

Maybe Klopp?

Hold on. Porto's manager came to wolves in mid table championship with exactly the same profile and agent.

[SBlue]

3 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Hold on. Porto's manager came to wolves in mid table championship with exactly the same profile and agent.

You’re right of course, I just can’t see it with us at all! 

From Coyle and then League One to poaching Champion’s League team’s managers in one easy step?

I would be more than astonished and find it quite fanciful.

[Sparks Rover]

Just now, S8 & Blue said:

You’re right of course, I just can’t see it with us at all! 

From Coyle and then League One to poaching Champion’s League team’s managers in one easy step?

I would be more than astonished and find it quite fanciful.

Jack used to say,  "think big"

 

[Ewood Ace]

56 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

It seems to me that although I like TM, he's a bit of a dinosaur in the transfer market. Sold a pup in Brereton,  Downing is the son of his mate from west brom and isn't good enough,  weve got the shittest Chelsea loanee, gladwin, Davenport, rothwell,  rodwell, etc, etc,....yawn!

The club needs to go for it if we have coin, get Paulo Fonseca in from Shaktar and promise him a chance of getting into the prem.  He gets access to Mendes stable and we have a much better chance of promotion.  Then we get the Mason mounts/Abrahans etc on loan.

I'd rate Paulo Fonseca as one of the top young managers in Europe the job he has done at Shakhtar under very difficult circumstances has been fantastic. He will be up for much up for bigger jobs than that of a mid table Championship team.

[JHRover]

I remain of the view that the best prospects of long term success are by installing a qualified, capable technical director or director of football who can oversee and orchestrate the football operation with a head coach operating alongside/beneath him. The D of F or whatever you want to call it would liaise with the owners and report to them and be given a budget and he would take overall responsibility working in tandem with his choice of manager.

I look at Leeds and Norwich steaming clear in this league and both are doing so with good head coaches who have come into this sort of system working under a footballing director with recruitment a joint effort. Bielsa has come along and fitted smoothly into the structure at Leeds which was set up before his arrival.

The way we operate is extremely old school with the manager having too much responsibility across too many areas. In this day and age the manager should be able to focus on training and matchdays with academy/recruitment going on elsewhere. It is ludicrous that the manager has to fly to India to get his instructions/budget.

There are odd exceptions these days like Warnock at Cardiff or Dyche at Burnley which were more traditional ways of doing things but I think in our circumstances with absentee foreign clueless owners we need a structure in place that ensures continuity and so managers can come and go without being utterly reliant upon them for the entire football operation. It seems Mowbray played a part in our CEO arriving which is also bonkers and quite alarming. 

I'm not for one minute slating Mowbray or saying he should be removed from his role but we're now in a position where we are heavily reliant on him for virtually every aspect of the operation - speaking to the owners, this 'trust' thing we have in place, recruitment, training, scouting. If we unfortunately reach a stage where Mowbray reaches the end of the line at the club then it will all have to be started again from scratch, which will probably take several years to achieve. We need to be able to change manager if required without losing all direction and having to start again from scratch. That's how Leeds have managed to get where they are - not through spending daft money or even being particularly well run - but having a structure above the manager that continues and into which the manager can fit.

 

[JBiz]

10 hours ago, 47er said:

Biz, you keep pointing out that the 7M for Brereton won't be paid upfront but in instalments.

WE ALL KNOW THAT!

Virtually all transfers are on an instalments basis and have been for years.

 

Why do you constantly only focus on parts of the content you can’t understand? 

If you had even one micro gram of gravitas- you’d have worked out that whilst transfer fees can be paid in instalments;

Wages can’t.

As I’ve said again and again, and all the slight insults in the world from you won’t change it; Brereton would’ve been far cheaper than others I’ve linked, and listed.

The simple reason why? How does a team with a <10m revenue then start spending that on one player?

Just admit that this is the perfect excuse you’ve been waiting for? 18 months without much to complain about... cold turkey! Hah

 

[JBiz]

11 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

You're making yourself look a bit silly now, it doesn't really matter whether the fee is payable up front or is spread over the life of the contract, it still has to be paid - there isn't a "you don't have to pay us if he's crap" option.

As things stand there doesn't seem to be much defence in favour of the Brereton signing. Either he was TM's choice in which case it looks like  a bad signing up to press and it's even more inexplicable why after half a season he has never handed him a league start. Or he was brought in by someone else as a long term investment and whilst not TM's choice he has gone along with it.

If the latter is the case then that might have been ok in theory if we had had say £35m to spend and £28m had been spent on players who went straight into the first team and 20% of the budget had been allocated to a development punt. There's no way the manager should have been agreeing to 70% of the summer transfer budget being spent on a speculative punt on a player who wasn't his own personal choice though.

Ofcourse it matters. Wages aren’t “instalments”. Those three ex Rovers on Norwich bench, aren’t getting paid 4 years down the line.

Thats only half the issue. 

If refraining from making the assumption “what we see is what we get” with Brereton is “making me look silly”....

So be it!

Merry Christmas

[Mattyblue]

By the same token you can’t admit 7 million (and the rest) for a club with 9,500 season ticket holders is a lot of dosh to commit for a teenager who couldn’t get in the team of another mid table second tier club.

[JBiz]

51 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

By the same token you can’t admit 7 million (and the rest) for a club with 9,500 season ticket holders is a lot of dosh to commit for a teenager who couldn’t get in the team of another mid table second tier club.

I never had you down as the type of poster to take a line out of context and continue to make the same laboured point.

To answer you; I never said it was cheap. To try and put it simply; I’m not convinced it’s as expensive as people are making out. I’m also not convinced alternatives mentioned would’ve been better investments without hindsight.

Now, unless you’ve anything to discuss on that - I’ll crack on with this wrapping.

[DE.]

7 hours ago, JHRover said:

I think in our circumstances with absentee foreign clueless owners we need a structure in place that ensures continuity and so managers can come and go without being utterly reliant upon them for the entire football operation. 

Watford are a good example of this working well. They've been constantly derided by the usual suspects for chopping and changing manager on a regular basis, but it hasn't done them any harm, has it? In fact they've been massively successful. It's all down to putting a structure in place which suits the fast-paced style of modern football, where the average manager rarely stays for longer than a couple of seasons. Clubs like us are very far behind the times with a structure so heavily reliant on the manager and his immediate staff (of which I have to include Waggott as Mowbray hired him). It was exactly the same with Kean and Bowyer, our only other longer term managers of the last eight years. Both times it ultimately led us to relegation. Not saying that will necessarily be the case with Mowbray, but once Venky's suddenly decide to turn the taps off again...