Tony Mowbray Discussion

[rigger]

3 hours ago, Gav said:

He was a loan signing wasn't he?

Can you tell me how many 'duff signings' he's made when a transfer fee has been involved? 

Harry Chapman, Amari Bell.

Edited November 22, 2021 by rigger

[Admiral Nelsen]

22 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Dack was a stroke of inspiration there's no doubt about that, fairly left field and by far the best signing of the lot all things considered.

My argument would be, if you're given the funding to bring in around, I don't know forty or fifty players over five years either permanently or on loan, you'd expect a few belters as an absolute minimum and under a genuinely astute manager, a lot more than that.

 

I think we have to take things like size of fee/importance of player into account when judging his transfer record. Nobody was bothered with Sparky signing the Berners, Vogels and Rigters of this world because because when we needed to spend the budget on a new striker, he always delivered in spades.

 

This actually makes it a tricky task to judge Mowbray's record. There are some players who were brought as (relatively) low cost loans, but need to be judged as pretty important failures because they filled important roles and didn't cut the mustard (e.g. Walton, Douglas). Others have eventually paid dividends, but only in time and there's an argument that the eventual Brilliant success of Ayala and Brereton has come 12 months too late for a promotion push. So even looking at Brereton as an investment which has paid off, it's not as simple as just saying that he's been a great signing because of the time that we've needed to wait for him to get to that level.

 

At the same time, trying to take everything together, I really don't think that Mowbray's transfer record is something to hold against him. Quite the opposite actually. There are the obvious examples of Dack, Armstrong, Kaminski et al, but there are plenty of others that you'd have as successes given either how much we paid, or what we needed at a certain point in time. Whilst we wouldn't take any of them now, the likes of Smallwood, P. Downing, Samuel, Nuttall, Payne & Antonsson all played significant roles in getting us up first time and were signed for buttons. More recently, there have been others who were low-risk signings who improved us whilst admittedly not doing it consistently enough to be classed as a Dack/Armstrong level success (e.g. Holtby, Rothwell, 1st. season S. Downing). A handful of these low-risk signings haven't worked out, for whatever reason, but the success of Dolan should eventually make up for a dozen Sam Harts. 

 

Ultimately, I think the case against Mowbray as manager begins and ends with his ability to get the most out of the players available to him. The squad we had last year was, according to plenty on here (myself included) was good enough to finish in the top 6 - so the issue for me isn't really recruitment, even if it's that is bit of a complex picture. The squad was also made up of plenty of young players & academy graduates, so neither is the issue that Mowbray doesn't trust youth as others have suggested elsewhere. For me it just boils down to not getting the results that we should get consistently enough, most else is just noise. 

[47er]

1 hour ago, 1864roverite said:

I haven't ignored it I don't recall seeing it.

Bonus payments for relegation? I am not too sure on that ethic but in football if you drop a league or two you take wage drops not increases. Contracts in football are also subject to overview of the FA and Premier League for compliance and I am pretty sure that if such clauses were put in place someone would have noticed it!

We have noticed it! Most people on here at the time have read it! In fact everyone's seen it but you and Arsene Wenger!

Its in the Dossier! Read it and get back to me!! Hard to believe isn't it?

You'll recall me saying a week or two back that there was plenty of evidence that things weren't right but the football authorities looked the other way?

And if you're not sure on that ethic, I am!

 

[LeftWinger]

14 hours ago, 47er said:

I notice you have completely ignored 2 posts on Kean's contract! What's your explanation?

Why would a manager be offered a bonus to take his club to the Championship and a further one to Div 1?

 

He wasn't offered a bonus payment to take the club to the Championship and League 1. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, Wheelton Blue said:

Of course, Mowbray may well have had some success in the transfer market.

Where he's been abysmal though, is putting a team together, one that can win sufficient games and make progress.

A manager can buy all the superstars in the world, but that's no use if he can't make a team out of them. 

After 5 seasons, an 11th place 'highlight' tells me enough about him.

Abysmal is hyperbole, average would be fair 

[Blue blood]

3 hours ago, Gav said:

Rev has run a mile because Mowbrays buys have been on the whole excellent, his return on investment must delight the owners, no getting away from that.

The loan market is a lottery, especially when we have no money to compete on wages. Harvey Elliot was a gem, Tosin was a gem, but its a lottery in the main with more failures than successes. 

On Sam Gallagher, he's a mangers dream, if you go to games thinking "Gallagher = striker = goals" and nothing else matters, you'll probably be disappointed. But the work that lad puts in during a game is phenomenal with or without the ball, how many chances has he setup this season for his team mates?

Brereton up until this season was poor, he not only failed to score he also didn't work hard enough, but he's put that right this season and all credit to him.

I never absolved Mowbray of any blame for not being good enough, I'd have sacked him a while ago, but clearly its not all bad, for the reasons I've already stated. 

 

Sorry Gav I strongly disagree on a number of points. Whether measured by goals or any other metric Gally isn't very good and hasn't been for us. I don't think anyone thinks that the right wing expertiment for Gally has worked, and putting in a shift isn't really enough for a forward. He doesn't score loads, doesn't create much, doesn't hold the ball up well. For a significantly large fee (for us) that's a very poor return. He's been a bit better this season, but again, nowhere near £5 millions worth. 

Nor do I think it's fair to say loans are a lottery. That's not true, it's not a lucky dip! Perhaps if the player hasn't played professional/competitive football there is an element of uncertainty - beyond that of a normal transfer - but even that in itself hints at what is going to happen; their inexperience will cost us. Most loans however don't have that degree of uncertainty Tosin had just done a full session at West Brom, Douglas had played Championship before and so on. In most cases there was evidence of how they would shape up, and for the others we didn't really get anything other than expected from a novice. So it's not pot luck, and I feel that exonerates TM of his responsibility in these transfers. 

Bereton is an exceptionally interesting case. Does one good season and a profit negate two terrible years and one ok one at a huge cost for us? I can't think of another player like it. Perhaps McCarthy was the only one, with the difference being he didn't cost the earth and his good season came at the start. It's very hard to quantify the opportunity costs of that 7 mill and two dreadful seasons, but then they came when we had others scoring. I'll be honest I don't know how to quantify him as a success or failure, but will caveat it with I am enjoying his form. 

Would agree it's not all rubbish with TM but I do think his transfer record is very sketchy. 

[Hasta]

12 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Ok so just assuming for a second  in a weird parallel conspiratorial world that the explanation for the Training ground move isn't the obvious one that it's to get round FFP and it is in fact  a machiavellian plot to cash in on it by the owners.

Why not just sell it now?

Because we are not in the scenario my full post was describing. However it's a good bit of forward planning by Venkys incase we ever are.

[Roverinbelfast]

1 hour ago, Admiral Nelsen said:

 

I think we have to take things like size of fee/importance of player into account when judging his transfer record. Nobody was bothered with Sparky signing the Berners, Vogels and Rigters of this world because because when we needed to spend the budget on a new striker, he always delivered in spades.

 

This actually makes it a tricky task to judge Mowbray's record. There are some players who were brought as (relatively) low cost loans, but need to be judged as pretty important failures because they filled important roles and didn't cut the mustard (e.g. Walton, Douglas). Others have eventually paid dividends, but only in time and there's an argument that the eventual Brilliant success of Ayala and Brereton has come 12 months too late for a promotion push. So even looking at Brereton as an investment which has paid off, it's not as simple as just saying that he's been a great signing because of the time that we've needed to wait for him to get to that level.

 

At the same time, trying to take everything together, I really don't think that Mowbray's transfer record is something to hold against him. Quite the opposite actually. There are the obvious examples of Dack, Armstrong, Kaminski et al, but there are plenty of others that you'd have as successes given either how much we paid, or what we needed at a certain point in time. Whilst we wouldn't take any of them now, the likes of Smallwood, P. Downing, Samuel, Nuttall, Payne & Antonsson all played significant roles in getting us up first time and were signed for buttons. More recently, there have been others who were low-risk signings who improved us whilst admittedly not doing it consistently enough to be classed as a Dack/Armstrong level success (e.g. Holtby, Rothwell, 1st. season S. Downing). A handful of these low-risk signings haven't worked out, for whatever reason, but the success of Dolan should eventually make up for a dozen Sam Harts. 

 

Ultimately, I think the case against Mowbray as manager begins and ends with his ability to get the most out of the players available to him. The squad we had last year was, according to plenty on here (myself included) was good enough to finish in the top 6 - so the issue for me isn't really recruitment, even if it's that is bit of a complex picture. The squad was also made up of plenty of young players & academy graduates, so neither is the issue that Mowbray doesn't trust youth as others have suggested elsewhere. For me it just boils down to not getting the results that we should get consistently enough, most else is just noise. 

Absolutely superb post. I agree with every single word. Articulated with your brain and not a blind hatred of Mowbray like most others:

[Bigdoggsteel]

16 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

Sorry Gav I strongly disagree on a number of points. Whether measured by goals or any other metric Gally isn't very good and hasn't been for us. I don't think anyone thinks that the right wing expertiment for Gally has worked, and putting in a shift isn't really enough for a forward. He doesn't score loads, doesn't create much, doesn't hold the ball up well. For a significantly large fee (for us) that's a very poor return. He's been a bit better this season, but again, nowhere near £5 millions worth. 

Nor do I think it's fair to say loans are a lottery. That's not true, it's not a lucky dip! Perhaps if the player hasn't played professional/competitive football there is an element of uncertainty - beyond that of a normal transfer - but even that in itself hints at what is going to happen; their inexperience will cost us. Most loans however don't have that degree of uncertainty Tosin had just done a full session at West Brom, Douglas had played Championship before and so on. In most cases there was evidence of how they would shape up, and for the others we didn't really get anything other than expected from a novice. So it's not pot luck, and I feel that exonerates TM of his responsibility in these transfers. 

Bereton is an exceptionally interesting case. Does one good season and a profit negate two terrible years and one ok one at a huge cost for us? I can't think of another player like it. Perhaps McCarthy was the only one, with the difference being he didn't cost the earth and his good season came at the start. It's very hard to quantify the opportunity costs of that 7 mill and two dreadful seasons, but then they came when we had others scoring. I'll be honest I don't know how to quantify him as a success or failure, but will caveat it with I am enjoying his form. 

Would agree it's not all rubbish with TM but I do think his transfer record is very sketchy. 

Your example and point on loans is very contradictory. Douglas is a poor example as ya he played before, but we got nothing like his best- so case in point, is uncertainty. Then you go on to say about nothing but expected from a novice, but then you look at Elliott who was a novice is arguably our best ever loan signing. 

Honestly, how could you class Brereton as anything but a success now? 

Edited November 22, 2021 by Bigdoggsteel

[Wheelton Blue]

53 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Abysmal is hyperbole, average would be fair 

In my opinion, it's abysmal.

[rigger]

1 hour ago, LeftWinger said:

He wasn't offered a bonus payment to take the club to the Championship and League 1. 

The way I see it,is that he would still get a bonus even if we were relegated. That is not the same as getting a bonus for getting us relegated. I still think this is a very poor clause for the Rovers to put in the managers contract, no matter who the manager is.

[LeftWinger]

8 minutes ago, rigger said:

The way I see it,is that he would still get a bonus even if we were relegated. That is not the same as getting a bonus for getting us relegated. I still think this is a very poor clause for the Rovers to put in the managers contract, no matter who the manager is.

I read it that the bonus was reduced if we were in a lower league as well. Unusual to have contingency plans in place on bonuses if we're in league one when we were a Premier League club, but it certainly wasn't a bonus for being relegated.

[roversfan99]

Gallagher is certainly not an abysmal signing nor a dream/one of the first names on the teamsheet, or he shouldn't be.

Can't hold the ball up, bring others into play, as bad at you'll find at any of that, but a reasonable goal return and plenty of powerful running means that abysmal is not fair, and I am far from his biggest fan.

As and when we sell Brereton, Mowbray will overall have generated a profit in the market to be fair to him. His transfer record certainly isn't outstanding but its at least average/ok.

[Gav]

1 hour ago, Blue blood said:

Sorry Gav I strongly disagree on a number of points. Whether measured by goals or any other metric Gally isn't very good and hasn't been for us. I don't think anyone thinks that the right wing expertiment for Gally has worked, and putting in a shift isn't really enough for a forward. He doesn't score loads, doesn't create much, doesn't hold the ball up well. For a significantly large fee (for us) that's a very poor return. He's been a bit better this season, but again, nowhere near £5 millions worth. 

Nor do I think it's fair to say loans are a lottery. That's not true, it's not a lucky dip! Perhaps if the player hasn't played professional/competitive football there is an element of uncertainty - beyond that of a normal transfer - but even that in itself hints at what is going to happen; their inexperience will cost us. Most loans however don't have that degree of uncertainty Tosin had just done a full session at West Brom, Douglas had played Championship before and so on. In most cases there was evidence of how they would shape up, and for the others we didn't really get anything other than expected from a novice. So it's not pot luck, and I feel that exonerates TM of his responsibility in these transfers. 

Bereton is an exceptionally interesting case. Does one good season and a profit negate two terrible years and one ok one at a huge cost for us? I can't think of another player like it. Perhaps McCarthy was the only one, with the difference being he didn't cost the earth and his good season came at the start. It's very hard to quantify the opportunity costs of that 7 mill and two dreadful seasons, but then they came when we had others scoring. I'll be honest I don't know how to quantify him as a success or failure, but will caveat it with I am enjoying his form. 

Would agree it's not all rubbish with TM but I do think his transfer record is very sketchy. 

Thats why we have a message board Blue Blood and I respect your views, even though I don't agree with them all.

I think both Brereton and Gallagher suffered due to Armstrong being in the side, Mowbray quite rightly played to Armstrong throughout his time here and tried to fit the other 2 in where possible. Brereton has flourished this season being the number one striker, but Gallagher has chipped in with a few goals and created goals for his team mates, Derby away and Sheff Utd? more recently if memory serves me correctly. 

In terms of loans, that market has changed significantly in the time I've been watching football. Once upon a time if you needed a player you went and got one, maybe 2, mostly to fill a gap for an injured player. Nowadays its the lower leagues version of transfer market with no transfer fees, you mostly get players other clubs don't want and you usually have up to 5 in your squad? Its a lottery, you probably wouldn't have some of them anywhere near the first team if you had the choice, but with no money for permanent transfers and depleted squads, thats the market you're playing in.

How many teams get promoted to Premiership with a side full of loan players? I can only think of Wolves and they had multi million pound players as part of a deal with the super agent. Its not a successful model for 99% of teams.

I started off earlier today by saying Mowbrays business when a transfer fee is involved is excellent, referring to Kaminski on Saturday and I have no reason to change that opinion. 

Edited November 22, 2021 by Gav

[Wheelton Blue]

34 minutes ago, Gav said:

I started off earlier today by saying Mowbrays business when a transfer fee is involved is excellent,

By definition then, we should also applaud the owners for backing Mowbray financially to fund these deals, especially as Mowbray has not been forced to sell.

All Hail Venkys, eh?

[Bigdoggsteel]

12 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

By definition then, we should also applaud the owners for backing Mowbray financially to fund these deals, especially as Mowbray has not been forced to sell.

All Hail Venkys, eh?

Well it's better than them not funding them, eh? 

[tomphil]

There should be no bonus at all for a manager who has overseen a relegation unless it's a promotion one. There should really only be a pay off.

[rigger]

3 minutes ago, tomphil said:

There should be no bonus at all for a manager who has overseen a relegation unless it's a promotion one. There should really only be a pay off.

Nobody is disputing that. But it is what the Rovers agreed to.

[Wheelton Blue]

25 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Well it's better than them not funding them, eh? 

What are you on about now?

Edited November 22, 2021 by Wheelton Blue

[Gav]

29 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

By definition then, we should also applaud the owners for backing Mowbray financially to fund these deals, especially as Mowbray has not been forced to sell.

All Hail Venkys, eh?

Yes that £400k he spent on transfer this season will definitely make us promotion candidates, coupled with the £1m he spent last season........

Going up going up going up........come on Wheelton, you're better than that.

 

[Wheelton Blue]

6 minutes ago, Gav said:

Yes that £400k he spent on transfer this season will definitely make us promotion candidates, coupled with the £1m he spent last season........

Going up going up going up........come on Wheelton, you're better than that.

 

...and the millions he's had over his whole tenure to fund wages, loans etc.

I'm not saying that Mowbray hasn't pulled off some good deals. But to describe his transfer dealings as 'excellent' is - to steal another poster's noun - 'hyperbole' 

Edited November 22, 2021 by Wheelton Blue

[Blue blood]

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Your example and point on loans is very contradictory. Douglas is a poor example as ya he played before, but we got nothing like his best- so case in point, is uncertainty. Then you go on to say about nothing but expected from a novice, but then you look at Elliott who was a novice is arguably our best ever loan signing. 

Honestly, how could you class Brereton as anything but a success now? 

Not at all. By lottery I take this to mean pure chance, you have no idea of what you are getting. That is very different from having known about players beforehand through how they have performed. The uncertainty you mention with Douglas - as in the difference between his performance with us and elsewhere - would be no different than if we had signed him permanently and he had performed like that. It isn't a lottery as in no idea what they are like, it's the uncertainty that applies to every transfer. If we are using that uncertainty as whether they will continue to perform then all transfers are a lottery which is not what was being discussed or implied. 

I will admit Elliott bucks the trend a bit - perhaps I should have used most - although he's perhaps a special case since he played for Fulham at a rediculously young age and Liverpool snapped him up. That alone suggests he had a bit more about him then most at his age. 

As for Bereton as I said before- 2 years of nothing for £7 million is hard to quantify in terms of opportunity costs. And a third season not being a £7 million player either isn't great. Does this season wipe out all of that? Possibly, but I think it's hard to say with such a hypothetical situation. Losing that from the budget for 3 years without much return cannot be good for a team. Add in he only came good in the last year and we have limited time on his contract - that's not ideal either. 

That said he has come good when most needed, and we will get a profit so perhaps that does negate all the negative aspects. It's certainly a better outcome than I expected! I guess the short answer to your question is because I remember the last 3 seasons. 

1 hour ago, Gav said:

Thats why we have a message board Blue Blood and I respect your views, even though I don't agree with them all.

Indeed. I think the sentence shows more of my British awkwardness in disagreeing rather than trying to disallow you to have an opinion. 

1 hour ago, Gav said:

I think both Brereton and Gallagher suffered due to Armstrong being in the side, Mowbray quite rightly played to Armstrong throughout his time here and tried to fit the other 2 in where possible. Brereton has flourished this season being the number one striker, but Gallagher has chipped in with a few goals and created goals for his team mates, Derby away and Sheff Utd? more recently if memory serves me correctly. 

In terms of loans, that market has changed significantly in the time I've been watching football. Once upon a time if you needed a player you went and got one, maybe 2, mostly to fill a gap for an injured player. Nowadays its the lower leagues version of transfer market with no transfer fees, you mostly get players other clubs don't want and you usually have up to 5 in your squad? Its a lottery, you probably wouldn't have some of them anywhere near the first team if you had the choice, but with no money for permanent transfers and depleted squads, thats the market you're playing in.

How many teams get promoted to Premiership with a side full of loan players? I can only think of Wolves and they had multi million pound players as part of a deal with the super agent. Its not a successful model for 99% of teams.

I started off earlier today by saying Mowbrays business when a transfer fee is involved is excellent, referring to Kaminski on Saturday and I have no reason to change that opinion. 

Yes the loan market has changed over the years, and I think the transfer window system also encouraged teams to hoard players and makes less players available (the big teams could always buy them as and when needed instead back in the day.)

All of that said whilst it's harder it is harder for all clubs fishing in that market, not just us. Lots of teams I think are similarly reliant on loans so I don't think it's just a Rovers disadvantage and other clubs have used the loans more successfully than us. That said the only other candidates off the top of my head who used it really well we're West Brom when they got promoted last time. (And maybe Villa? Unsure on thst.) So I am not sure how much it's a get out of jail for TM. 

I think the big thing for me is I wouldn't class Gally as a success and I don't think you can exclusively look at his transfers fees paid only category when judging his transfer record. There's been some key loans and costly free transfers as well which for better or worse is the market we are in and he should be judged accordingly on. 

[Gav]

4 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

...and the millions he's had over his whole tenure to fund wages, loans etc.

I'm not saying that Mowbray hasn't pulled off some good deals. But to describe his transfer dealings as 'excellent' is - to steal another poster's noun - 'hyperbole' 

I described his business when paying a transfer fee as excellent, if you want to provide evidence to the contrary, the floor is yours. 

[RevidgeBlue]

31 minutes ago, Gav said:

I described his business when paying a transfer fee as excellent, if you want to provide evidence to the contrary, the floor is yours. 

The abysmal Gallagher £5m and £20k p.w.

Brereton was not really what we needed either when we lashed out £7m on him. Mowbray subsequently compounded that by ignoring him completely  for 18 months, the net result being that even though he's finally come good we're likely to lose him for nothing or a fraction of his true worth.

You're making yourself look very silly indeed now Gav.

[Wheelton Blue]

33 minutes ago, Gav said:

I described his business when paying a transfer fee as excellent, if you want to provide evidence to the contrary, the floor is yours. 

You're just caveating it to suit your narative.

You think he has an excellent record at signing players for a fee.

I think he has a mediocre/poor record when it comes to his overall transfer policy.

Needless to say, the proof of the pudding is progress on the pitch, which after 5 years is nowhere.