Tony Mowbray Discussion

[roversfan99]

No mention that it was Maja. Just says a player, could be anyone. A shambles either way though and whatever the mystery reason was, as it sounds like the player was on board and convinced, it could even cost us a place in the division moving forward with such a weak attack.

[Bbrovers2288]

5 minutes ago, Lucimo said:

Genuine question as I know at times you have info that comes to pass, but is it the clubs fault?? He states the reasons weren't financial so the club have done there bit as far as I can tell. So was it HIS fault and that's why he won't go into it. I sense we are finally, hopefully reaching the end of the Mowbray reign. 

Believe that there was concerns on both sides re bonuses and guarantees and selling club asking for things that club were unhappy with- see armstrong deal 

He said it wasn’t financial but it kind of was. 
Look at the panic to try and get some cover in to see that he isn’t happy about transfer window. 
why the hell they leave it to the last minute annoys the hell out of me, get business done early is always the sign of a well run club, which we are not 

[Bbrovers2288]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

No mention that it was Maja. Just says a player, could be anyone. A shambles either way though and whatever the mystery reason was, as it sounds like the player was on board and convinced, it could even cost us a place in the division moving forward with such a weak attack.

It was maja. 100%. 

flew in from France with all his belongings- mowbray said that himself without naming the player 

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

It was maja. 100%. 

flew in from France with all his belongings- mowbray said that himself without naming the player 

thankyou for sharing

1 hour ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Believe that there was concerns on both sides re bonuses and guarantees and selling club asking for things that club were unhappy with- see armstrong deal 

He said it wasn’t financial but it kind of was. 
Look at the panic to try and get some cover in to see that he isn’t happy about transfer window. 
why the hell they leave it to the last minute annoys the hell out of me, get business done early is always the sign of a well run club, which we are not 

I'm annoyed why we left it so late and chase Obafemi for weeks instead on moving on. 

Do you know how much we were paying? was a Permanent transfer or loan?

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

No mention that it was Maja. Just says a player, could be anyone. A shambles either way though and whatever the mystery reason was, as it sounds like the player was on board and convinced, it could even cost us a place in the division moving forward with such a weak attack.

You have have Nixon said we had Maja in the building and was set to sign here. But for some unknown reasons. Then Bbrovers have said it is Maja. What more do you want? People are finding on their info to the MB. 

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

See he has hit out at not getting maja done when he was in the building but has made sure to say it wasn’t the clubs fault. Think it’s safe to say he is pretty peeved at not getting deals done but doesn’t want to go all out for fear of losing his position 

Can you blame him cos Maja would have very good signing. His body language says alot. Look disappointed and peeved 

Its seems someone at the club didn't want to do the deal or concern about it. 

 

 

[JHRover]

Just more excuses and backside covering from the resident excuse maker in chief. A recurring theme here of deadline day transfer disappointment followed by a succession of reasons why things didn't get done.

To be totally honest I'm not really bothered what the truth of it is. Ultimately it doesn't matter - he could have had Ronaldo and Messi sat in his office but the deals didn't get done and so Rovers are left short, again.

I think this is as close as Mowbray has been or will be to lashing out at the owners cohorts. He's quick as usual to absolve himself and his chums of any responsibility - he did his bit (so he says) and got everything done and our 'hard working' (heard that before?) head of recruitment did his job but nobody came in. Familiar story. Boring.

Maybe it is because the owners wouldn't sanction funds. Maybe it is because they won't let Mowbray spend. Maybe it is because Mr Invisible is upsetting the Coventry boys happy camp.  I'm not really interested any more.

I used to be fascinated by the inner wranglings and would hope that this is a sign the manager's days are numbered but I don't believe it and don't even care if they are.

It is a dysfunctional mess and I am perplexed that there remain people out there who seem to believe that this sort of behaviour is normal or acceptable for a professional football club.

Like selling a 25+ goal a season striker for 8 figures then spending nothing replacing him. Not normal, not acceptable, not justifiable no matter how you want to dress it up.

What is the outcome of all these shenanigans? Well the Armstrong money disappears. Who benefits from that? Well not me, not Rovers, not the squad, not even the manager but Venkys do. Which tells me all I need to know.

The theory that Venkys are fed up with Mowbray and aren't backing him any more, waiting for his contract to run down. That again is more of a concern than a reassurance. That they are so desperate to avoid coughing up compo to get rid of him and bring in a new manager that they will happily sit back and let the club drift towards the rocks for the next 12 months, wasting another few million going nowhere and risking us being in even worse state next summer just doesn't make any sense.

[OldEwoodBlue]

Just read Tony's deadline day bumbling bunkum. What a load of shit. Aka lies.

Special mention for his mate Parky in case anyone thinks he is a waste of space and money. Erm....

I think I've heard it all now. Good to know he spent several hours of deadline day drinking brews and chatting about wingers to an imaginary traveller with lots of bags instead of buying a striker.

[SuperBrfc]

3 hours ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

It was maja. 100%. 

flew in from France with all his belongings- mowbray said that himself without naming the player 

Thanks for the info. To have him in the building and still fail to seal the deal makes it all the more frustrating. Hard to say who is to blame in this case. I'm just fed up of there being another "look who we nearly signed" player to add to the catalogue.

[Bbrovers2288]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

thankyou for sharing

I'm annoyed why we left it so late and chase Obafemi for weeks instead on moving on. 

Do you know how much we were paying? was a Permanent transfer or loan?

You have have Nixon said we had Maja in the building and was set to sign here. But for some unknown reasons. Then Bbrovers have said it is Maja. What more do you want? People are finding on their info to the MB. 

Loan with a view , the view being one of the sticking points 

[JacknOry]

Wasn't financial, the deal was done. It was talking to TM for several hours that made it clear what he was in for when he signed. 

[Mike E]

Could easily be that he failed the medical?Hardly unheard of.

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Could easily be that he failed the medical?Hardly unheard of.

Wouldn't shock me. Doesn't sound financial. 

[AllRoverAsia]

The 'deals' with the 'players' could not have all failed because of medicals.

Sometimes it's best to face up to the truth that our management are incompetent yet self serving plebs.

I expect Park to get a Nobel prize after that glowing tribute. Absolute fecking cobblers from a serial liar.

I see it took 9 days to put all those pieces of bullshit into a row.

Edited September 9, 2021 by AllRoverAsia

[rigger]

2 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

The 'deals' with the 'players' could not have all failed because of medicals.

Sometimes it's best to face up to the truth that our management are incompetent yet self serving plebs.

I expect Park to get a Nobel prize after that glowing tribute. Absolute fecking cobblers from a serial liar.

I would be surprised if the problem was failed medicals, when we have manged to sign three unfit loans. Our medical department are not exactly on their game.

[AllRoverAsia]

23 minutes ago, rigger said:

I would be surprised if the problem was failed medicals, when we have manged to sign three unfit loans. Our medical department are not exactly on their game.

Mowbray has a lot of form on being ok with signing injured players and those with known and likely recurring injuries.

Ayala being just one but a prime example.

[1864roverite]

2 out of our latest signings are injured, haven’t trained and are unavailable. Says it all really and with BB banned you just couldn’t make this shit up🤬

[islander200]

3 hours ago, JHRover said:

Just more excuses and backside covering from the resident excuse maker in chief. A recurring theme here of deadline day transfer disappointment followed by a succession of reasons why things didn't get done.

To be totally honest I'm not really bothered what the truth of it is. Ultimately it doesn't matter - he could have had Ronaldo and Messi sat in his office but the deals didn't get done and so Rovers are left short, again.

I think this is as close as Mowbray has been or will be to lashing out at the owners cohorts. He's quick as usual to absolve himself and his chums of any responsibility - he did his bit (so he says) and got everything done and our 'hard working' (heard that before?) head of recruitment did his job but nobody came in. Familiar story. Boring.

Maybe it is because the owners wouldn't sanction funds. Maybe it is because they won't let Mowbray spend. Maybe it is because Mr Invisible is upsetting the Coventry boys happy camp.  I'm not really interested any more.

I used to be fascinated by the inner wranglings and would hope that this is a sign the manager's days are numbered but I don't believe it and don't even care if they are.

It is a dysfunctional mess and I am perplexed that there remain people out there who seem to believe that this sort of behaviour is normal or acceptable for a professional football club.

Like selling a 25+ goal a season striker for 8 figures then spending nothing replacing him. Not normal, not acceptable, not justifiable no matter how you want to dress it up.

What is the outcome of all these shenanigans? Well the Armstrong money disappears. Who benefits from that? Well not me, not Rovers, not the squad, not even the manager but Venkys do. Which tells me all I need to know.

The theory that Venkys are fed up with Mowbray and aren't backing him any more, waiting for his contract to run down. That again is more of a concern than a reassurance. That they are so desperate to avoid coughing up compo to get rid of him and bring in a new manager that they will happily sit back and let the club drift towards the rocks for the next 12 months, wasting another few million going nowhere and risking us being in even worse state next summer just doesn't make any sense.

How do the owners benefit from the Armstrong deal?

Pay them back for Gallagher and Brererton?Pay toward wages?

They have no clue how to run a football club but they won't be rubbing their hands together over the fact they made 9 or 10 Million on Armstrong.

This is not a post defending the owners, without a doubt they are totally clueless and agree with the majority of what you have said apart from the owners benefitting from the Armstrong sale.

Which ever way you look at it the club needs money being brought in.We had sold Raya and Nuttall previous to Armstrong.We still are not in player trading profit during Mowbrays tenure.

Also you keep saying "it's the same as every summer".Last summer 11 players were brought to the club,12 if you include Pickering.Granted 6 loans 

[AllRoverAsia]

Wherever the AA money has gone it is most certainly a benefit to the owners.

If it has gone into the Club to pay running costs then its money Vs do not need to stump up. Other scenarios give the same outcome.

The one place it most certainly has not gone is replacing AA.

[JacknOry]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

Could easily be that he failed the medical?Hardly unheard of.

Why would he not mention that though? 

[RevidgeBlue]

38 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

Why would he not mention that though? 

Probably to protect the player.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Mowbray has a lot of form on being ok with signing injured players and those with known and likely recurring injuries.

Ayala being just one but a prime example.

Yes but there are injuries and injuries.

I.e. recurring but fairly minor ones  which wouldn't necessarily be a deal breaker and more serious conditions which would result in the player being unable to get medical insurance.

If you want to question however why we are trying to do all our business in the last hour of the last day of the transfer window I think that's a valid argument.

By doing business in a timely fashion you can overcome any unexpected last minute curve balls and move onto an alternative.

[islander200]

33 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Wherever the AA money has gone it is most certainly a benefit to the owners.

If it has gone into the Club to pay running costs then its money Vs do not need to stump up. Other scenarios give the same outcome.

The one place it most certainly has not gone is replacing AA.

It pays for Gallagher and Brererton and helps to balance the books.

We have had hardly any income in the last 18 months.

If it is coming across that I am defensive over the owners being criticized then I apologize, I am completely in agreement that they are incompetent and have no business running a football club.

However, they are putting in what they can ,our wages to turnover is ridiculous.They are losing money not making it on us.They are billionaires do you honestly think they care over a few million profit made on Armstrong which doesn't even put us in a positive transfer spend since Mowbray had been at the club if you take signing on fees on ageing players Into account?

If we are ever to see the back of the Venkys then the club needs to start becoming more sustainable,they will not be putting us into administration like what happened at Wigan and Bolton.

A striker should have been brought in to make our stay in the league more secure but we can't spending money like we have been doing ,throwing money down the drain.Yes high transfer fees have been kept for forward players but some of our free transfers ended up costing the club a lot of money.

There must have been some money  as why would you choose to spend what little you have on all these similar type player loans and spend a transfer fee for a full back a position you had last paid a transfer fee for and then loaned him back (ridiculous stuff) nothing against the players in question but no way to go about things. Surely that comes down to people on the ground being wasteful with the playing budget.

Incompetent people on the ground with no sort of plan except putting prices through the roof and making it a struggle for many to afford to go.

On the ground needs a complete overhaul and we have to start cutting our cloth and being more clever with the little money we have.

Am I confident that after so many years the owners will suddenly change tact and employ both a competent CEO and a management team no I'm not and want the Venkys gone as much as anyone but they do spend (waste) money and hang onto assets that want out for too long,unless the club stop appointing yes men and start working to a strategy both on and off the field any money we spend will be wasted like the rest.

Maybe Maja didn't fancy competing for a wide Striker role with Gallagher and Brererton whilst Poveda or Dolan played through the middle?

 

 

 

[JHRover]

2 hours ago, islander200 said:

How do the owners benefit from the Armstrong deal?

Pay them back for Gallagher and Brererton?Pay toward wages?

They have no clue how to run a football club but they won't be rubbing their hands together over the fact they made 9 or 10 Million on Armstrong.

This is not a post defending the owners, without a doubt they are totally clueless and agree with the majority of what you have said apart from the owners benefitting from the Armstrong sale.

Which ever way you look at it the club needs money being brought in.We had sold Raya and Nuttall previous to Armstrong.We still are not in player trading profit during Mowbrays tenure.

Also you keep saying "it's the same as every summer".Last summer 11 players were brought to the club,12 if you include Pickering.Granted 6 loans 

I think it is obvious how the owners benefit from not spending the Armstrong cash. You've explained it yourself - it covers the cash they put in for deals previously, or alternatively can be used to fund the club for the next 12 months saving them the trouble of pumping other cash in.

Of course that's their decision and their right to decide but most billionaires desperate to see their club succeed would ensure funds were reinvested to rebuild, strengthen and go again. Conveniently we haven't done. Just like we didn't after the Rhodes dosh came in. Lightning strikes twice it seems.

I'm not saying they'll be cracking open the champagne about Armstrong going or spending the cash on themselves, but it certainly helps them in terms of getting back the cash they 'invested' previously or at the very least saves them the trouble of having to fund losses for a while.

Again it comes back to ambition and what they are in this for. If their interest is solely to balance the books, keep the club as a going concern then some would say it is sensible to spend next to nothing and use it to plug losses. But if there's any ambition to grow assets, improve, get promoted then cash needs reinvesting and excuses really won't cut it no matter which version of events is believed. 

I'm not going to credit them for signing so many players each window when one of the main reasons for that is the chaotic and short term approach they have chosen to take. Next summer is another - we will have to sign double figures just to have a squad at our disposal. I will not be hailing the owners if those are all cheapo loans and frees cobbled together with little strategy other than to grab whoever is easiest and cheapest like the policy this summer seems to have been.

The Armstrong money, coupled with the Raya cash and other bits and pieces - compensation fees - see us in profit now for the last 4 years on transfer fees. Which I think has always been their intention - they seem happy or comfortable with sustaining a wage bill and annual losses on the debt mountain but when it comes to coughing up cash for investments it seems to only be on the basis they are going to be able to get it back in the not too distant future. 

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, islander200 said:

It pays for Gallagher and Brererton and helps to balance the books.

We have had hardly any income in the last 18 months.

If it is coming across that I am defensive over the owners being criticized then I apologize, I am completely in agreement that they are incompetent and have no business running a football club.

However, they are putting in what they can ,our wages to turnover is ridiculous.They are losing money not making it on us.They are billionaires do you honestly think they care over a few million profit made on Armstrong which doesn't even put us in a positive transfer spend since Mowbray had been at the club if you take signing on fees on ageing players Into account?

If we are ever to see the back of the Venkys then the club needs to start becoming more sustainable,they will not be putting us into administration like what happened at Wigan and Bolton.

A striker should have been brought in to make our stay in the league more secure but we can't spending money like we have been doing ,throwing money down the drain.Yes high transfer fees have been kept for forward players but some of our free transfers ended up costing the club a lot of money.

There must have been some money  as why would you choose to spend what little you have on all these similar type player loans and spend a transfer fee for a full back a position you had last paid a transfer fee for and then loaned him back (ridiculous stuff) nothing against the players in question but no way to go about things. Surely that comes down to people on the ground being wasteful with the playing budget.

Incompetent people on the ground with no sort of plan except putting prices through the roof and making it a struggle for many to afford to go.

On the ground needs a complete overhaul and we have to start cutting our cloth and being more clever with the little money we have.

Am I confident that after so many years the owners will suddenly change tact and employ both a competent CEO and a management team no I'm not and want the Venkys gone as much as anyone but they do spend (waste) money and hang onto assets that want out for too long,unless the club stop appointing yes men and start working to a strategy both on and off the field any money we spend will be wasted like the rest.

Maybe Maja didn't fancy competing for a wide Striker role with Gallagher and Brererton whilst Poveda or Dolan played through the middle?

 

 

Again, I'm not being argumentative for the sake of it but there are a few things I don't fully agree with here. I do think we agree on several things but:

I don't accept that the club has had 'hardly any income' for the last 18 months. In the period affected by Covid - March 2020 to August 2021 - we had a reduced income - as did everyone else in the country. But people need to recall that as a low end attended Championship side the bulk of our income comes from media, commercial and sponsorship, rather than people buying match tickets. As I understand it Sky Sports covered their full payments due under the media deal through that time, grants were also provided. Rovers also had full season ticket money for the 2019-20 season which they refused to refund people on whereas almost every other club offered the option of refunds. 

Given we sell so few matchday tickets the impact of losing that income ought to have been less than say a Derby, Forest or Norwich able to fill their grounds most weeks. 

So not ideal but I fail to see how this has affected Rovers more seriously than any other club. It is also something that Rovers have chosen to do nothing about - for example not selling season tickets for 2020-21 until September when rivals were busy selling them through the summer and then callously increasing prices.

Again - our wages to turnover ratio is high but that is the case at every club at this level. The real way to resolve this is to increase turnover, not slash wages right back and hope for the best whilst cobbling together a squad built on loans each year.

I don't think the club can be run more sustainably under these owners as I don't think they have the capability to do it.

[islander200]

45 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I think it is obvious how the owners benefit from not spending the Armstrong cash. You've explained it yourself - it covers the cash they put in for deals previously, or alternatively can be used to fund the club for the next 12 months saving them the trouble of pumping other cash in.

Of course that's their decision and their right to decide but most billionaires desperate to see their club succeed would ensure funds were reinvested to rebuild, strengthen and go again. Conveniently we haven't done. Just like we didn't after the Rhodes dosh came in. Lightning strikes twice it seems.

I'm not saying they'll be cracking open the champagne about Armstrong going or spending the cash on themselves, but it certainly helps them in terms of getting back the cash they 'invested' previously or at the very least saves them the trouble of having to fund losses for a while.

Again it comes back to ambition and what they are in this for. If their interest is solely to balance the books, keep the club as a going concern then some would say it is sensible to spend next to nothing and use it to plug losses. But if there's any ambition to grow assets, improve, get promoted then cash needs reinvesting and excuses really won't cut it no matter which version of events is believed. 

I'm not going to credit them for signing so many players each window when one of the main reasons for that is the chaotic and short term approach they have chosen to take. Next summer is another - we will have to sign double figures just to have a squad at our disposal. I will not be hailing the owners if those are all cheapo loans and frees cobbled together with little strategy other than to grab whoever is easiest and cheapest like the policy this summer seems to have been.

The Armstrong money, coupled with the Raya cash and other bits and pieces - compensation fees - see us in profit now for the last 4 years on transfer fees. Which I think has always been their intention - they seem happy or comfortable with sustaining a wage bill and annual losses on the debt mountain but when it comes to coughing up cash for investments it seems to only be on the basis they are going to be able to get it back in the not too distant future. 

The money will be spent again tho this is where we disagree that money will be put on the field again.

Why agree to 40% sell on in Armstrong's case if it is about profit or covering losses?I'm not buying the argument that we agreed to it so we could get him so cheap in my opinion it was market value for the player he was and what he had done at the time but even if that wasn't the case we had no problem over paying for Brereton and Gallagher so why not Armstrong.

The Bradley Johnson's,Holtbys ,Downings Ayala's, long term deals for Bennet,Mulgrew and Evans.That money was spent with profit in mind ffs?

The Armstrong money will reappear like the Rhodes money eventually did.Every time spending stops it is the third year when they have pushed us to the hilt.

Name me one club that carries our wage budget and spends decent enough money on transfer fees with similar non owner funded income as ourselves?There ain't any and when they do spend it is reliant on player sales.

Not being argumentative either and I am unhappy with many things at the club but believe we should be in a lot more secure position with the finance that has been available to Mowbray.

Edited September 9, 2021 by islander200