Summer Transfer Window

[Guest]

1 hour ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

If I was a Preston fan I would look at that - and think possibly with a Tosin type load - could we have made the top 6. For me it is all about the quality of player you bring in - TM has had some successes mixed in with his Walton's (a bit harsh on Walton - but he doesn't look like a top 6 goal keeper).

I don't know if Tosin would've got a game for Preston to be honest. There defence is pretty neat. Maybe if they moved to a back five? Don't really think he suits PNE's play style at all to be honest and I can't imagine he would have got them into the play-offs

[Mattyblue]

Well obviously I think the mighty Blackburn Rovers should be in the PL. 

But realistically it’s a very competitive league we are now in and there’s no gimmes, especially with the hollowed out club these owners have presided over. But once we accept that we can’t compete in this league either then it’s a slippery slope.

For a sign of how tough it is to get back out, I imagine Forest and Sheffield Wednesday fans would never have believed they’d be down here for 20+ years. Thank these idiot owners for throwing our elite position away in the first place.

Edited August 11, 2020 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

11 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Glad that Iversen has gone elsewhere, one less potential loan. Hopefully Muric will go elsewhere too. 

Yet again, Nixon proves to be talking shite and all the back scratching and self appreciation done once the Iversen link surfaced at the weekend was premature.

How was he talking shite with other journalists linked us to him. 

He never said he would deffo come here. He said we HAD interest in the players.

He told a Rovers fan that we are working on 2 keepers and left back. 

 

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

This loan discussion is stupid

Hey man, agree with me, disagree with me, I don't think a discussion over the pro's and con's of the clubs transfer policies in certain markets is stupid, and it shuts down positive conversation to be so dismissive...

[bluebruce]

Smallwood signed for Hull.

[roversfan99]

https://sport-90.de/hamburger-sv-und-blackburn-rovers-an-philipp-hofmann-dran

Unsure how reputable this is, it needs translating too but a link to Hofmann.

https://www.mylondon.news/sport/football/transfer-news/brentford-boss-what-went-wrong-13219230

Also a bit on why things didnt go right at Brentford, including that he wasnt physically in good shape.

Would be a weird one, maybe agent talk. Last season he scored quite a few goals, before then, not so many, he is a target man so not really fitting in with Mowbrays supposed "vision" and he would cost a decent fee. Would also potentially mean Armstrong out wide, unless he is going.

 

Edited August 11, 2020 by roversfan99

[Guest]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Depends on the player! 

Of course it does, and if Lionel Messi was available on loan of course any club in world football would take him. But when you look up and down the names, the types of players we will be going for and seemingly can afford, none of them are good enough.

I haven't heard a single defenders name of the quality we require in the loan market, nor so the goalkeeper market. There might be a decent left-back loan out there, maybe Cunningham again, but there's not a huge plethora of cheap loans out there that are much better than what we already have.

Absolutely it does depend on the player but I think every clubs policy should be one that goes down the route of, "loan players add to what we have", not the route of "we can plug that hole with this player on loan, and that hole with this other loanee".

Your Main GK Slot, starting CB and LB shouldn't be filled year upon year with players you don't own. We didn't permanently plug these defensive gaps last year, and to continue to paste over those leaks with loan shaped thin sticky tape is a poor long term strategy.

[Richard Oakley]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

How was he talking shite with other journalists linked us to him. 

He never said he would deffo come here. He said we HAD interest in the players.

He told a Rovers fan that we are working on 2 keepers and left back. 

 

Yes @chaddyrovers Mowbray told us we needed 2 goalkeepers, LB and CB this time last year. Not even Nixon is that slow on the uptake. Where's this idea that we're in for a first team goalscoring forward come from? Gallagher played as a front man or of 2, we'd have the proven goalscorer we need.

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

How was he talking shite with other journalists linked us to him. 

He never said he would deffo come here. He said we HAD interest in the players.

He told a Rovers fan that we are working on 2 keepers and left back. 

 

I just think that if he specifically mentioned us and another Championship side as interested in Iversen and within 48 hours, he moves abroad on loan, it seems like the story was not correct. 

Also, all of the back scratching, "spot on again" type posts we saw on here on Sunday (including from yourself) because the oracle Nixon had put his name to the Iversen rumour turned out to be premature and misguided.

Now he has reverted back to being cryptic, just naming the positions we all know that we are looking for.

My status on loaning a kid in net hasnt changed and I am just glad that there is one less possibility for that. Hopefully the Muric link is equally untrue.

[Guest]

Just now, Richard Oakley said:

Gallagher played as a front man or of 2, we'd have the proven goalscorer we need.

That's one heck of an assumption. We cannot rely on that being the case, don't think the evidence is there to suggest that's possible

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Hopefully the Muric link is equally untrue.

Yes. Muric would be a disaster signing. We need some experience between the sticks for once.

[Richard Oakley]

Just now, JoeH said:

That's one heck of an assumption. We cannot rely on that being the case, don't think the evidence is there to suggest that's possible

He scored, 11 goals, I'm told, for us under Coyle, playing centrally. Before your time.

[unsall]

5 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

What has any of that got to do with my point? 

You said that said we shouldn’t expect to be in the PL, I agree, but there should be a belief that we can compete in the second tier.

History tells us that isn’t a unrealistic belief  -  the other two full decades which we largely spent in this division we were always competitive at the top end, even though in the 80s we didn’t have a pot to piss in - we are currently (8 years and counting) also rans with billionaire owners.

 

Never said that we shouldn’t be in the top league just we haven’t a devine right to be. 
Also rans are we, no, we are still competing to reach the premier league  improving slowly, obviously too slow for you, AND more important  not in Bury, Bolton and Wigan’s position. BTW how do you know they are billionaires, is that cash, on paper, assets, no one actually knows how much they are worth.

Re the history lesson just to make you aware what it’s been like supporting Rovers apart from the glorious Jack Walker days, careful what you  wish for.

[Bigdoggsteel]

6 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Hey man, agree with me, disagree with me, I don't think a discussion over the pro's and con's of the clubs transfer policies in certain markets is stupid, and it shuts down positive conversation to be so dismissive...

Yes ,there are pros and cons. Saying we shouldn't use it is stupid. Every team that gets promoted has at least 1 stand out loan player. 

[Exiled_Rover]

11 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Depends on the player! 

It adds to the length of the 'slow build' if you don't own anyone.

Crafty, Tony, craft.

[Bigdoggsteel]

2 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Of course it does, and if Lionel Messi was available on loan of course any club in world football would take him. But when you look up and down the names, the types of players we will be going for and seemingly can afford, none of them are good enough.

I haven't heard a single defenders name of the quality we require in the loan market, nor so the goalkeeper market. There might be a decent left-back loan out there, maybe Cunningham again, but there's not a huge plethora of cheap loans out there that are much better than what we already have.

Absolutely it does depend on the player but I think every clubs policy should be one that goes down the route of, "loan players add to what we have", not the route of "we can plug that hole with this player on loan, and that hole with this other loanee".

Your Main GK Slot, starting CB and LB shouldn't be filled year upon year with players you don't own. We didn't permanently plug these defensive gaps last year, and to continue to paste over those leaks with loan shaped thin sticky tape is a poor long term strategy.

Tosin and Cunningham are 2 recent examples. Leeds signed White on loan from Brighton, super player. Started most of not all games for Leeds last season. 

Ya,ideally we own our best payers, unfortunately that doesn't seem possible for pretty much every team at this level. Even the best. 

[K-Hod]

Still legitimately have no idea why anyone listens to Nixon or even hangs on his every word. The guy is clueless and well out of the loop when it comes to Rovers nowadays and has been for a while in all honesty!

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Exiled_Rover said:

It adds to the length of the 'slow build' if you don't own anyone.

Crafty, Tony, craft.

Debatable , every team that gets promoted haso oneor two stand out loans. Every single season. 

The fact PL teams can stockpile good young players and pay them ridiculous money fuels this unfortunate but reality based situation. 

[roversfan99]

10 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Loans should be the salt seasoning to your steak before the cooking begins. Loans should not be where you source the meat itself. In my opinion. Plugging our main GK, main CB and main LB holes with loans didn't work in 2019/20 and will not work again in 2020/21.

 

Just now, JoeH said:

Yes. Muric would be a disaster signing. We need some experience between the sticks for once.

Food analogies aside, I think the problem going back to those loan deals were not the deals individually, it was the fact that we filled ALL 3 spaces with loans, having sold a permanent goalkeeper of the same age, missed out on a permanent answer at CB ( after apparently saying essentially that he wouldnt be a first team player) and spending 5 million on a striker.

If we filled say one of those spaces again with a loan, it wouldnt be that bad as long as it wasnt the goalkeeping position, for the reasons I have stated (little alternative once you get him in as number 1 if it doesnt work out, and also the position whereby you are most prone to costly mistakes, not ideal developing someone elses player there) and if it was only one of the defensive births. For example, sign a permanent experienced keeper, a left back and then loan back Adarabioyo (wont happen but for example) and that would be totally fine.

The only thing I didnt agree with in what you put is if you say you may aswell avoid loans if you are going to finish mid table, you are then accepting finishing in mid table before youve begun! But I agreed with your scepticism on loans, especially in goal.

Definitely agree on Muric. If Mowbray chose to plug the goalkeeping gap with a player with 5 senior League appearances on a temporary basis, following a loan spell at Forest in which his inadequacies were costing them only 5 games in and they had to sign another keeper, he would need his head testing.

 If Nixon has suggested it then hopefully its as accurate as his Iversen link, the McLaughlin link earlier in the summer that Mowbray totally rubbished, and the Joe Hart link which again Mowbray said there was absolutely no truth in it.

[roversfan99]

Just now, K-Hod said:

Still legitimately have no idea why anyone listens to Nixon or even hangs on his every word. The guy is clueless and well out of the loop when it comes to Rovers nowadays and has been for a while in all honesty!

Agreed.

He put his neck on the line with mentioning Iversen, for him to go elsewhere isnt particularly bad in terms of the link, but less than 48 hours afterwards to a totally different league, on the back of the last 2 keepers he linked to us (Hart and McLaughlin) being specifically rubbished by Mowbray in interviews, he is clearly not in the loop.

Now he has reverted back to cryptic tweets clearly, listing the positions we all know we need!

[Mattyblue]

7 minutes ago, unsall said:

Never said that we shouldn’t be in the top league just we haven’t a devine right to be. 
Also rans are we, no, we are still competing to reach the premier league  improving slowly, obviously too slow for you, AND more important  not in Bury, Bolton and Wigan’s position. BTW how do you know they are billionaires, is that cash, on paper, assets, no one actually knows how much they are worth.

Re the history lesson just to make you aware what it’s been like supporting Rovers apart from the glorious Jack Walker days, careful what you  wish for.

Post Kean we’ve spent about a week in the top 6 in 8 years, we are therefore the very definition of also rans! 

It’s not particularly ‘too slow for me’ as I have no faith in how this club is run so edging up the table each year is as good as we can ask for.

Ok... ‘paper wealth’ or otherwise, I’m sure you’d agree that they are substantially richer than Messers Fox and Bancroft - yet that version of Blackburn Rovers put together sides fighting for promotion year after year.

 

Edited August 11, 2020 by Mattyblue

[Exiled_Rover]

1 minute ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Debatable , every team that gets promoted haso oneor two stand out loans. Every single season. 

The fact PL teams can stockpile good young players and pay them ridiculous money fuels this unfortunate but reality based situation. 

I've zero problem with loaning players - it's how the football pyramid operates (money talks, bullshit walks).

I have a massive problem with those loan players not being ones that put you over the top.

We, essentially, loaned Cunningham, Walton and Tosin to finish a comfortable midtable last year. That's an expensive, short term option that doesn't really benefit the club.

[roversfan99]

If you are thankful solely that your club is still in existence/has not been put into administration then it suggests that you have very low expectations surely and you do not view your club as a competitive one. We can hope for more than that.

[Mike E]

25 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

How was he talking shite with other journalists linked us to him. 

He never said he would deffo come here. He said we HAD interest in the players.

He told a Rovers fan that we are working on 2 keepers and left back. 

 

He's 'heard' that from here! In 3 years, the man has never broken Rovers news that wasn't already a name mentioned heavily on this mb.

Believe me, we've checked.

This mb and its posters are far more ITK than Nixon re: Rovers and I don't believe half of them either.

Edited August 11, 2020 by Mike E

[Mattyblue]

Just now, Mike E said:

He's 'heard' that from here! In 3 years, the man has never broken Rovers news that wasn't already a name mentioned heavily on this mb.

Believe me, we've checked.

This mb and its posters are far more ITK than Nixon and I don't believe half of them either.

Aye.