Tony Mowbray Discussion

[SBlue]

6 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

I genuinely have no idea what your point is? 

Operating on one of the smallest budgets - Tony Mowbray has taken us from a shitshow to the point where we have a squad that could compete at the top of the division.

He hasn’t had a budget that “other managers would dream of”

He’s overachieved.

He’s a victim of his own successes with you lot.

Feel free to interpret those facts differently.

Edited December 23, 2020 by S8 & Blue

[rigger]

26 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

The post you initially queried shows the amount of money we have spent pretty much wholly during the Mowbray era - at the VERY least it shows the job he had on his hands.

Everyone ignores this and pretends we should be doing better because he’s spent loads.

It’s just not true.

I think we should be doing better because we are Blackburn Rovers.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, S8 & Blue said:

Operating on one of the smallest budgets - Tony Mowbray has taken us from a shitshow to the point where we have a squad that could compete at the top of the division.

He hasn’t had a budget that “other managers would dream of”

He’s overachieved.

I don't agree with the overachieved bit at all, however by any standard he's done a good job. Managers like Wilder overachieved when they got promoted on similar budgets (he also didn't have to 'build a club' and go on a 'journey' -just got the job done a after ONE prior season in the Championship. 

If Mowbray gets in the play-offs you could argue an 'overachieve' - definitely if he gets promotion, But mid-table when the likes of PNE, Millwall and Barnsley achieve similar on smaller budgets? Nah, you're having  laugh. 

[Ewood Ace]

1 hour ago, S8 & Blue said:

Operating on one of the smallest budgets - Tony Mowbray has taken us from a shitshow to the point where we have a squad that could compete at the top of the division.

He hasn’t had a budget that “other managers would dream of”

He’s overachieved.

But he isn't operating on one of the smallest budgets the likes of Preston, Rotherham, Wycombe, Luton, Barnsley, Millwall, Coventry, Birmingham, QPR, Sheffield Wednesday haven't spent anywhere near spent anywhere near what we have over the last few seasons and then there are other clubs who we can match in terms of budget. The only 3 sides who I'd say financially we can't get anywhere near are Norwich, Watford and Bournemouth but that is always the case with the 3 recently relegated clubs.

What Mowbray has also had that most other managers could only dream of is free reign over signings, he has also been given funds every window and has not been forced to sell any of his key players. There aren't many manager in the Championship over the last 3 seasons who could say all that.

I expect that if you looked at our net spend since we got back into the Championship there aren't many teams who have also been in it for those 3 years that have a higher one. You take sides like Bristol City and Brentford who have both over recent seasons have spent decent money but they usually end the window in profit as they always sell their best players, Mowbray has never had to do that and has always been given money to improve the squad as well.

Edited December 23, 2020 by Ewood Ace

[tomphil]

Some strange chairmen in the championship as under performing managers keep getting gigs. Then under performing again yet sometimes when they get a complete curve ball in from elsewhere they do well.  For a spell at least.

Seems if you are a British manager and have one success somewhere - however it comes about - then you can live of it for a decade.

[SBlue]

35 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

But he isn't operating on one of the smallest budgets the likes of Preston, Rotherham, Wycombe, Luton, Barnsley, Millwall, Coventry, Birmingham, QPR, Sheffield Wednesday haven't spent anywhere near spent anywhere near what we have over the last few seasons and then there are other clubs other clubs who we can match in terms of budget. The only 3 sides who I'd say financially we can't get anywhere near are Norwich, Watford and Bournemouth but that is always the case with the 3 recently relegated clubs.

What Mowbray has also had that most other managers could only dream of is free reign over signings, he has also been given funds every window and has not been forced to sell any of his key players. There aren't many manager in the Championship over the last 3 seasons who could say that.

I expect that if you looked at our net spend since we got back into the Championship there aren't many teams who have also been in it for those 3 years that have a higher one. You take sides like Bristol City and Brentford who have both over recent seasons spent decent money but they usually end the window in profit as they always sell their best players, Mowbray has never had to do that and has always been given money to improve the squad as well.

I’ve posted the net spend. 
 

Read it.

Your “I expect that” just isn’t true at all.

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, S8 & Blue said:

 

Dunno? What do you think?

Context and truth is important in this discussion for me.

Doubt it will change anyone’s mind to see the facts but hey ho

As others have pointed out, our stats are skewed within the pre Mowbray years, whilst not including 2 of the 3 summers Mowbray has had in the Championship due to accounts not being published. Net spend of minus £30m prior to his arrival, £8m net spend in his first season after spending a couple of million in League 1. They also miss out the most recent years when Mowbray has continued to spend because the accounts have yet to be published for those years when we have a net spend of another 3 or 4 million. They dont factor in that he has had more time to build than any of those other managers, that is key, even if other teams have spent more specifically in the last couple of years, which isnt shown, it may have been by more than one manager. He also has a very competitive wage budget, he following that graphic has signed Gallagher, Holtby, Johnson, Downing, Kaminski, Ayala, Douglas, Trybull, Elliott etc, our wage bill will be massively increased you would suspect but that is not considered.

Even if Mowbray has done a good job, and I would argue he has, it doesnt mean that he is a "victim of his own success" or that he is the manager to take us forward. We seem to be unable to push past inconsistent middle of the road results regardless of tangible improvements made to the squad, Kaminski and Elliott the obvious 2. 

If we "have a squad that can compete at the top of the division" which is a very subjective comment lacking any evidence until we actually do that, surely he is underachieving? Surely that only validates the opinion of those who feel that we need a change, if we have a side that should be competing at the top and never has done.

[Ewood Ace]

1 minute ago, S8 & Blue said:

I’ve posted the net spend. 
 

Read it.

Your “I expect that” just isn’t true at all.

Your net spend is going back nearly 6 years to when Bowyer was manager. I said look at our net spend since we got back into the Championship and if you do I expect that we do have one of the highest ones of all the clubs that have been in the division for those 3 seasons as well. What makes our net spend positive during that 6 year period that you posted is because of the period where we sold the likes of Cairney, Rhodes, Gestede, Duffy, Hanley, Marshall and King. Whilst replacing them on the cheap with the likes of Guthire, Akpan, Delfouneso, Williams, Feeney, Stokes, Greer and Koita. 

Since Mowbray became manager we certainly have a negative net spend as unlike Bowyer and Coyle he hasn't seen his best players sold and he has been given funds that they could have only dreamed of to improve the squad on top of not losing his key players. 

[roversfan99]

Mowbrays net spend must be 15m+, he signed 3 strikers for 15m and plenty others for fees with Raya the main player leaving and at only 3m. That thread is rendered essentially worthless, it focuses solely on net spend and not time in the job, wages, control etc. But even specifically regarding net spend, it includes 3 years in which he wasnt here, the cause of our negative figures, doesnt include 2 of the 4 summers he has been in charge where he has spent more than he has received, and im guessing that it shows £0 in the summer prior because we was in League 1 but in which he did spend a couple of million, only selling Steele from memory.

[SBlue]

3 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

As others have pointed out, our stats are skewed within the pre Mowbray years, whilst not including 2 of the 3 summers Mowbray has had in the Championship due to accounts not being published. Net spend of minus £30m prior to his arrival, £8m net spend in his first season after spending a couple of million in League 1. They also miss out the most recent years when Mowbray has continued to spend because the accounts have yet to be published for those years when we have a net spend of another 3 or 4 million. They dont factor in that he has had more time to build than any of those other managers, that is key, even if other teams have spent more specifically in the last couple of years, which isnt shown, it may have been by more than one manager. He also has a very competitive wage budget, he following that graphic has signed Gallagher, Holtby, Johnson, Downing, Kaminski, Ayala, Douglas, Trybull, Elliott etc, our wage bill will be massively increased you would suspect but that is not considered.

Even if Mowbray has done a good job, and I would argue he has, it doesnt mean that he is a "victim of his own success" or that he is the manager to take us forward. We seem to be unable to push past inconsistent middle of the road results regardless of tangible improvements made to the squad, Kaminski and Elliott the obvious 2. 

If we "have a squad that can compete at the top of the division" which is a very subjective comment lacking any evidence until we actually do that, surely he is underachieving? Surely that only validates the opinion of those who feel that we need a change, if we have a side that should be competing at the top and never has done.

Still doesn’t move us up much on the net spend table does it?

My argument here is purely against the “he’s had loads more than other managers”

He hasn’t. You admit he inherited an average champ squad that had 30m removed from it.

Criticise Mowbray all you want, but to pretend he has had it easy or to overlook his achievements to date is frankly ignorant.

This squad will be there or there about s. It’s early yet. He has earned the chance.

[SBlue]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Mowbrays net spend must be 15m+, he signed 3 strikers for 15m and plenty others for fees with Raya the main player leaving and at only 3m. That thread is rendered essentially worthless, it focuses solely on net spend and not time in the job, wages, control etc. But even specifically regarding net spend, it includes 3 years in which he wasnt here, the cause of our negative figures, doesnt include 2 of the 4 summers he has been in charge where he has spent more than he has received, and im guessing that it shows £0 in the summer prior because we was in League 1 but in which he did spend a couple of million, only selling Steele from memory.

He inherited a squad that was decimated and asset stripped.

Does this not matter?

[roversfan99]

Just now, S8 & Blue said:

He inherited a squad that was decimated and asset stripped.

Does this not matter?

Of course, but he has had more time than any one else and plenty of resources to overcome that.

The squad he had wasnt totally worthless either, Lenihan, Williams, Nyambe and Evans all probably get into his favourite squad now, possibly Bennett too, and hes used others that he inherited along the way, Graham, Mulgrew and Raya who was his only sale. Squads naturally will be mainly different after 4 years.

Another resource he has over many is a thriving academy.

[SBlue]

6 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Of course, but he has had more time than any one else and plenty of resources to overcome that.

The squad he had wasnt totally worthless either, Lenihan, Williams, Nyambe and Evans all probably get into his favourite squad now, possibly Bennett too, and hes used others that he inherited along the way, Graham, Mulgrew and Raya who was his only sale. Squads naturally will be mainly different after 4 years.

Another resource he has over many is a thriving academy.

3 players. Evans is nowhere near,

I really just can’t get the people saying

”He has been backed more than any Championship manager could dream of”

It’s patently false - ignoring this does the argument for “Mowbray Out” no favours.

[Ewood Ace]

3 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

3 players. Evans is nowhere near,

I really just can’t get the people saying

”He has been backed more than any Championship manager could dream of”

It’s patently false - ignoring this does the argument for “Mowbray Out” no favours.

Whenever Evans has been fit this season he has been in the squad. He's started 5 games, come of the bench in 2 and been an unused sub in another. So it is patently false to say that he is nowhere near Mowbray's favourite squad.

[Miker]

25 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Your net spend is going back nearly 6 years to when Bowyer was manager. I said look at our net spend since we got back into the Championship and if you do I expect that we do have one of the highest ones of all the clubs that have been in the division for those 3 seasons as well. What makes our net spend positive during that 6 year period that you posted is because of the period where we sold the likes of Cairney, Rhodes, Gestede, Duffy, Hanley, Marshall and King. Whilst replacing them on the cheap with the likes of Guthire, Akpan, Delfouneso, Williams, Feeney, Stokes, Greer and Koita. 

Since Mowbray became manager we certainly have a negative net spend as unlike Bowyer and Coyle he hasn't seen his best players sold and he has been given funds that they could have only dreamed of to improve the squad on top of not losing his key players. 

Our net spend is in line with our current position.

[K-Hod]

22 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

3 players. Evans is nowhere near,

I really just can’t get the people saying

”He has been backed more than any Championship manager could dream of”

It’s patently false - ignoring this does the argument for “Mowbray Out” no favours.

Are you just arguing for the sake of it now lad?
He hasn’t had to sell anyone and been able to spend a fair amount. I’d hardly call that a hardship.

He’s been able to build the best squad we’ve had for ages and if we don’t at least get top six, then this year has been a failure.

[SBlue]

10 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Whenever Evans has been fit this season he has been in the squad. He's started 5 games, come of the bench in 2 and been an unused sub in another. So it is patently false to say that he is nowhere near Mowbray's favourite squad.

Ok fair enough. He ain’t in the best 11 though is he?

If that’s proof that he’s had a budget or squad situation better than most?

Disagree massively.

Criticise the tactics etc as much as you want, but ungrateful fake news helps no one.

It’s Venkys that have us at the bottom of that table, and we have been lucky to have TM up to now

 

[SBlue]

Just now, K-Hod said:

He hasn’t had to sell anyone and been able to spend a fair amount. I’d hardly call that a hardship.

He’s been here 4 years. Look at the five year net spend table.

We aren’t outspending anyone at the VERY LEAST

[K-Hod]

1 minute ago, S8 & Blue said:

He’s been here 4 years. Look at the five year net spend table.

We aren’t outspending anyone at the VERY LEAST

Why does any time before he was here matter when we are discussing Mowbray?

[SamTheShrew]

Probably one of the only positives of the COVID situation for me, since September, and living on Shropshire, has been the ability to watch the rovers every weekend. Really excited come the start of the season. Sadly for me that had already become malaise and I have not bothered with the last 3 games, spending those 2 hours with the kids instead. inevitable Mowbray numbness.

be great just to have some new ideas with a new man and a clearly talented squad rather than excuses and what ifs for another season 

[SBlue]

2 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Why does any time before he was here matter when we are discussing Mowbray?

That was the argument for why we are at the bottom of the net spend table.

That it happened before we are relegated so he didn’t have to deal with the fallout and the fact Venkys have asset stripped us doesn’t matter re: TM’s tenure.

Thats bollocks.

Edited December 23, 2020 by S8 & Blue

[Ewood Ace]

36 minutes ago, Miker said:

Our net spend is in line with our current position.

I'd be stunned if over the last 3 season since we have been back in the Championship there are 10 clubs with a higher net spend than us for starters Preston, Rotherham, Wycombe, Luton, Barnsley, Millwall, Coventry, Birmingham, QPR, Sheffield Wednesday will all have a lower net spend. The likes of Bristol City, Brentford, Middlesbrough and Swansea will all certainly be less as well as they have sold some of their key players for big money. Maybe Forest as well given the money that they received for Cash, Brereton, Appiah. Huddersfield probably have a lower net spend as well and they spent one of those 3 years in the Premiership.

Edited December 23, 2020 by Ewood Ace

[JHRover]

Mowbray has had funds that many managers at this level could only dream of.

Preston, Huddersfield, Cardiff, Swansea, Luton, Wycombe, Sheff Wed, Barnsley, Coventry, Rotherham, Millwall- these clubs are nowhere near us on spending on new players. Virtually all have had to make significant sales or cuts over the last 3 years. We haven't. 

When you combine with the time, freedom and control Mowbray has enjoyed here he really does have a job the envy of many. Most managers would have sales forced on them, have to cut the budget, or take over shambles like Pulis has at Wednesday or O'Neill did at Stoke. Or deal with loony owners like Birmingham, Reading and Forest.

The benefit of Venkys is they are able and willing to write off £20 million a season to plod along because they like Tony and enable us to sign and retain players that many rivals couldn't get close to signing and paying.

Remember when Preston tried it with Armstrong and Mowbray came and blew them out of the water. We are clearly much stronger than such clubs financially as we ought to be with these owners but at the moment and over the last few seasons that isn't being reflected in the table.

[SBlue]

On 22/12/2020 at 20:22, S8 & Blue said:

Posted without comment

Can anyone show me some data to counteract this then or are we just going to be happy with people making shit up?

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

5 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

Can anyone show me some data to counteract this then or are we just going to be happy with people making shit up?

What you mean shit like Mowbray's overachieved!? 

Or maybe get some proper data that relates to the years Mowbray has been here and not data from 3 years earlier. And get data that isn't skewed by teams who have received Prem money and shelled out accordingly. 

Apart from that, good points, well made. 

Edited December 23, 2020 by Hoochie Bloochie Mama