Mowbray: Stay or Go - A Poll

[Mercer]

29 minutes ago, 47er said:

Since football returned we've taken 7 points from six games. That's borderline relegation form, ludicrous to think we will make the play-offs with Mowbray in charge.

He's never been a good manager, that's the thing. Left Coventry in a mess from which they have never recovered but most telling of all, made a pigs ear of the Celtic job.

How is that possible?!!

I didn't cheer when he came to us, better than Coyle is all you can say about him.

 

Think you'll find it's even worse - 7 points from 7 games.

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

1 hour ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Tony Mowbray didn't get us relegated. Owen Coyle did. People that go around throwing their toys out of their pram blaming Mowbray because he's upset them are doing themselves no favours - all they are doing is taking the blame away from chimp features.

I don't think it's a simple as that. The bulk of the blame absolutely has to lie with Coyle and ergo our clown owners, however I genuinely believe a better manager would have kept us up that year; I remember when we lost 0-2 at home to Barnsley towards the end of the season after Mowbray had had some time to bed in and I just couldn't understand it at the time. We were absolutely rank that day and our attitude and application were a million miles away from where it needed to - be given the fight we were in.

Three and a bit years later I now totally understand, and even come to expect, that type of performance. It's what we've always been under Mowbray - streaky as fuck. Given his general demeanour, comments in the press, treatment of certain players and baffling tactics I can completely understand why we have these streaky runs as well. 

After this long he clearly isn't going to change either so given the perilous situation the club is in the benefits of a change outweigh the negatives for me. 

[K-Hod]

48 minutes ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

Mixed record actually, but don't let the facts get in the way.

£12 Million down the swanny on two non scoring strikers and now we have no cash, as we are told we have to comply with FFP.

That was what I was driving at and I suspect you knew that....

[47er]

45 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Think you'll find it's even worse - 7 points from 7 games.

Agree!

[Paul Mellelieu]

2 hours ago, K-Hod said:

£12 Million down the swanny on two non scoring strikers and now we have no cash, as we are told we have to comply with FFP.

That was what I was driving at and I suspect you knew that....

Armstrong and Dack, but you know that, which is why his record is mixed.

[roversfan99]

Loyalty is an even more flimsy reason than fear of picking another Coyle.

Mowbray has done a good job but not a perfect job and has had plenty of patience, plenty of time and been im sure remunerating very well too. You cant give him an extra year out of loyalty/pity.

Mixed is very generous. In terms of signings that we have paid fees for, the ratio is one gem for one expensive failure with numerous low cost players thrown in for lower fees that have failed to ever convince, Bell, Rothwell, Chapman, Davenport, Samuel, Gladwin, Hart etc.

He has a much better record in the loan market but in terms of building a squad, loans should be used for that final push.

[Paul Mellelieu]

Rothwell has been okay and Davenport has been injured for 18 months.  Samual has also been injured.

[K-Hod]

5 hours ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

Armstrong and Dack, but you know that, which is why his record is mixed.

You’re moving the goalposts by talking about his record, that’s not what I was talking about.

I was saying, as per my original post, that one of the main reasons we have no money and so many FFP concerns is because we have spent £12 Million on Brereton and Gallagher. 
For the cost of Brereton, we could have had Patrick Bamford, who is currently playing for top of the table Leeds. It’s a funny old game....

[Blue blood]

8 hours ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

Mixed record actually, but don't let the facts get in the way.

Very mixed record. Shame that most of our bigger signings each year have been poor - Whittingham, Bereton and Gally. Also factor in how many really bad signings - as in not just not worked out or been mediocre but been detrimental to the team. I cannot remember another manager bar clueless and the odius one (neither of whom count) having so many utter flops at big expense and/or in key positions. 

[Stuart]

8 hours ago, JHRover said:

If Mowbray wasn't responsible for relegation in 2017 thats fine. Just like Lambert wasn't responsible for Stoke or Ipswich going down yet those are often chalked up against him by some to evidence his managerial flaws.

Can't have it both ways.

Suffice to say that Warnock's turnaround at Rotherham a few years ago has to be the most impressive survival act that I can recall and that showed keeping us up whilst difficult was not mission impossible. 

Ever since his WBA days I've seen Mowbray as an enigma of a manager. He clearly has something about him. Not many sustain 15 year+ careers these days and his win percentage even just in England is impressive at over 40% over nearly 700 career games. Not bad at all.

He's clearly a well liked man. A good family bloke who loves his job and football. I've never seen anything from anyone at his previous clubs that criticises the man Mowbray and on the contrary he was well liked at WBA despite relegation and loved at Boro.

But there's always been a mark against his name for me. As a manager he has always been very idealistic and romantic rather than realistic and pragmatic. There's always some grand dream or scheme going on.

 

He was well liked at West Brom because he got them promoted as Champions - the height of their success since the 60s.

He did that by playing a brand of football that he has since abandoned and (as a result) been an abject failure everywhere else. His record is buoyed by his time there and at Celtic (where incidentally, by their standards was an abject failure).

Our team and squad are crying out for a manager like Mowbray used to be instead of the one he is today.

[unleaded]

Just hoping that the delay is because they the Venkys want to dump him .... 

His decision making all season has been all over the show ..Even if he’s given a budget he’s going to blow it on his favourites for one last payday .... This is not how to run a football club ... 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

3 hours ago, Blue blood said:

Very mixed record. Shame that most of our bigger signings each year have been poor - Whittingham, Bereton and Gally. Also factor in how many really bad signings - as in not just not worked out or been mediocre but been detrimental to the team. I cannot remember another manager bar clueless and the odius one (neither of whom count) having so many utter flops at big expense and/or in key positions. 

I was only thinking the other day if we had a time machine and we could go back how many of his signings would you still sign ? Not that many in my book. 

[Mercer]

Spoke with about half a dozen folk today about Rovers.

What struck me is how apathetic many have become.

It's as though all the energy and desire has been sucked out of our club.

I think we need to change our CEO and manager or we will just die.

Edited July 16, 2020 by Mercer

[AAK]

5 hours ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

Rothwell has been okay and Davenport has been injured for 18 months.  Samual has also been injured.

Give over;

rothwell - shite

davenport - next to useless

samuel - diabolical

caddis - atrocious 

whittingham - god bless him, but poor

walton - calamity chris

gladwin - not worth a comment

Harper - useless

nuttall - truly awful striker

bell - worst full back I’ve seen at ewood

hart - pointless

chapman - what was the point

payne - what was the point

brereton - disgraceful signing

gallagher - doubly disgraceful signing

johnson - worked out badly

armstrong, dack, downing, holtby, tosin I would class as good signings. A few other I would class as neither good nor bad. overall though poor record

 

 

 

 

[Blue blood]

11 minutes ago, AAK said:

Give over;

rothwell - shite

davenport - next to useless

samuel - diabolical

caddis - atrocious 

whittingham - god bless him, but poor

walton - calamity chris

gladwin - not worth a comment

Harper - useless

nuttall - truly awful striker

bell - worst full back I’ve seen at ewood

hart - pointless

chapman - what was the point

payne - what was the point

brereton - disgraceful signing

gallagher - doubly disgraceful signing

johnson - worked out badly

armstrong, dack, downing, holtby, tosin I would class as good signings. A few other I would class as neither good nor bad. overall though poor record

 

 

 

 

In fairness I think Bell looked a good move on paper. He was doing excellently in league 1 and seemed to have the physical attributes and scouting reports would only have come back positive. So I see why we signed him and is one of the ones I think has been unlucky. 

I also think that under a better management Rothwell would do better and we would get more out of him. 

But you missed Palmer and Leuitweiller off your list of duffers. Not that it needed the two names scratched off replacing. Even without a few debatable ones it's a hell of a list of mistakes. 

Edited July 16, 2020 by Blue blood

[Paul Mellelieu]

4 hours ago, K-Hod said:

You’re moving the goalposts by talking about his record, that’s not what I was talking about.

I was saying, as per my original post, that one of the main reasons we have no money and so many FFP concerns is because we have spent £12 Million on Brereton and Gallagher. 
For the cost of Brereton, we could have had Patrick Bamford, who is currently playing for top of the table Leeds. It’s a funny old game....

I was saying that his signings - in the context of the budget we have - has been mixed.  

[Paul Mellelieu]

35 minutes ago, AAK said:

Give over;

rothwell - shite

davenport - next to useless

samuel - diabolical

caddis - atrocious 

whittingham - god bless him, but poor

walton - calamity chris

gladwin - not worth a comment

Harper - useless

nuttall - truly awful striker

bell - worst full back I’ve seen at ewood

hart - pointless

chapman - what was the point

payne - what was the point

brereton - disgraceful signing

gallagher - doubly disgraceful signing

johnson - worked out badly

armstrong, dack, downing, holtby, tosin I would class as good signings. A few other I would class as neither good nor bad. overall though poor record

 

 

 

 

So a mixed record.

[tomphil]

Some ott critics of his signings ?

It's been a mixed bag we have to remember what we were operating in before he was lavished with an annual pot to waste.

The most puzzling and annoying thing for me is not some of the players themselves but just why HE signed them.

It's always seemed a case of get him then try and find a way to fit him in. Even Dack was shunted about at first until he just clicked with DG one game and that system was born.

[Paul Mani]

I honestly would not even go near a decision on the manager until the owners make their intentions clear.

If they pull the funding and authorise a fire sale then the last thing we need is them rolling the dice on a new manager with a disgruntled squad!

If we had to sell Dack and / or Lenihan or Travis I’d much prefer Mowbray to stay and integrate the young lads purely based on the fact that the lads do love him and he wouldn’t lose the dressing room.

[Paul Mani]

Also, IF they are reducing the budget then who in their right mind will even want to manage us. We currently have the 13th/14th highest budget in the league. Whoever takes that job would be on a hiding to nothing.

All hypothetical of course. But I wait with baited breath for this budget announcement ?

[JHRover]

We are a Championship club. Lots of people would want to manage us. 

Why does a cut budget automatically mean that we have to use young players? Why can't we just sign experienced players but on lower wages and fees? 

[Parsonblue]

Mowbray and his staff have two years left on their contracts.  Any change of manager at this point will mean a huge outlay in paying up their contracts and then employing a new manager and backroom team.  At a time when the pandemic is still going to restrict normal commercial activity within the game I suspect most clubs, Rovers included, will simply be happy to come through this period with the club intact.  

If the financial situation at the club is anywhere near as bad as it sounds then it points to players being sold and replacements being a combination of Under-23's, freebies and loans.  In the circumstances, I'm not sure how a change of manager, at this point, would do anything but plunge the club into further financial turmoil.  

Of course, with owners as unpredictable as ours, anything is possible but I suspect that their priorities at the moment are all in India with their own business and maintaining the support their Charitable Foundation gives to the people in the Pune area.  At the moment I suspect Ewood is way down on their list of priorities even though they seem to have no inclination to sell the club, indeed far from it looking at the money pumped in each year.

[Mattyblue]

I thought we were always  ‘way down their list of priorities’, if the pandemic has pushed us even further down their list, then god help us next season.

[Blue blood]

8 hours ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

So a mixed record.

Ah but let's be honest with this such a mixed record - which shows more bad than good - is pretty appalling. 

Mixed is a very clever term as it is vague and can be spun positively, whereas the context determines what rate of mixed is acceptable. For example at uni a mark of 70% is a first and therefore a good result, whereas 70% pass ratio for a safety check would be horrifically inadequate. 

So in the context of a football club a mixed ratio of successful signings is pretty poor. from this list given 50:50 would be the best ratio TM could be said to have with successful transfers (I think the list suggests it is worse but we will go with that for now.) So that means half of our signings are duds. Given probably two thirds of our squad is made up of signings and half of them are duds that means a third of them are dead weights because of TMs mixed transfer record. When we look at the context and examine the specifics we see this is far from positive but horrifically mixed. 

It gets worse when we consider the level of risk and opportunity costs of the failed signings too. After all a low-cost failure doesn't have the same negative costs as an expensive one. Hughes for example trialed a few failed strikers such as Jeffers (and Fowler). They stunk but at low cost the risk and damage was minimal. Contrast that with TM - the big signings have gone badly wrong the last 2 years and 2 of the 3 expensive ones in league 1 went badly too. Theres  a lot more damage from these signings being missed in terms of costs and not being able to respend the money or have used it elsewhere.

Also on this loans. Loans are to give you things you otherwise couldn't get. They are there to rent a better quality than you could buy, like Tosin. Problem is this better quality in than we can afford often hasn't been the case. The likes of Harper and Walton have been poor, but also use up slots that really should have been top quality. Slots that were an opportunity to get better than what we could buy. 

So yeah mixed is the word, and in the context of a football club that is a terrible result. 

 

[Mercer]

45 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

Mowbray and his staff have two years left on their contracts.  Any change of manager at this point will mean a huge outlay in paying up their contracts and then employing a new manager and backroom team.  At a time when the pandemic is still going to restrict normal commercial activity within the game I suspect most clubs, Rovers included, will simply be happy to come through this period with the club intact.  That's nonsense on both counts.  You negotiate and reach a settlement.  If Waggott can't get rid of Mowbray, Venus, Lowe & Benson for less than £1million in total then, IMO, he's not up to it.  This would be money saved many times over by NOT renewing the contracts of the deadwood  that needs shifting.  If survival becomes your objective then you die.  We have to be bold and ambitious - I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

If the financial situation at the club is anywhere near as bad as it sounds then it points to players being sold and replacements being a combination of Under-23's, freebies and loans.  In the circumstances, I'm not sure how a change of manager, at this point, would do anything but plunge the club into further financial turmoil.   You need a manager with a can do attitude who can work the market, inspire and get the best out of what he has at his disposal.  IMO, Mowbray can't - already I think he's lining up his excuses, just so feckin negative.  Furphy, Lee, Smith, Kendall, Saxton, Mackay etc all faced extreme difficulties but got on with it, each delivering relative success and there were many happy times for the fans under those managers.

Of course, with owners as unpredictable as ours, anything is possible but I suspect that their priorities at the moment are all in India with their own business and maintaining the support their Charitable Foundation gives to the people in the Pune area.  At the moment I suspect Ewood is way down on their list of priorities even though they seem to have no inclination to sell the club, indeed far from it looking at the money pumped in each year.  As Souey said you wee with the willy you have.  The best thing they can do, IMO, is bin Waggott along with the manager and his coaching team and appoint a dynamic CEO who can make things happen even within the parameters Pune lay down.  IMO, it's the very poor quality exec. and football management that is also holding our club back.  Tell me what Waggott has brought to the party?!

 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Mercer