The Contract Situation

[Mattyblue]

40 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Maybe not, leaving on a free means a signing on fee at a new club, which would make signing for similar to what we are offering more attractive financially elsewhere 

Of course, and that’s the same everywhere.

My point is that there looks to be something more to it here when numerous senior players are happy to let their contracts run down at the same time. That isn’t something I see regularly elsewhere or indeed previously here as you become accustomed to seeing contracts signed on a fairly regular basis through the season(s).

Are we still able to offer competitive wages to experienced Championship players? If the answer is no, or indeed if we have chosen to pursue a new ‘model’ of young lads, lower division signings and loanees, all within a strict wage ceiling, then ok. In some ways it’s admirable and a business coming to its financial senses, but it is certainly a risky one and perhaps a naive one as it doesn’t change the realities of the league you are operating in and we know where it can lead in such a relentless division.

Edited November 25, 2021 by Mattyblue

[islander200]

35 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If people are going to question anyone who is criticising the owners for the fact that so many key senior players are so close to the end of their deals, implying that they are probably asking for too much and querying how people can lambast the owners without being privy to the inner details. How can those people defend the owners without being privy to those details either?

If it was one for example, then maybe you could suggest that it is the player being unreasonable. But a few at once, surely not.

You are obviously referencing my post with your use if the word "privy".

If you read my post in caps i said we dont know if it is ALL down to the owners, which we dont.

Plenty of money was found to extend ageing and past it players.

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

24 minutes ago, islander200 said:

You are obviously referencing my post with your use if the word "privy".

If you read my post in caps i said we dont know if it is ALL down to the owners, which we dont.

Plenty of money was found to extend ageing and past it players.

Those past it players were probably not demanding massive increases in wages.

I don’t blame the players for wanting to look at options, especially Brereton who would be mad to sign a new deal with a championship team given his stature right now.

I don’t think Lenihan, Nyambe or Rothwell will attract much attention from PL sides though. Rothwell might get some interest but the other two are solid second tier players and no more. Wouldn’t surprise me if a couple of them re-sign eventually.

Edited November 25, 2021 by magicalmortensleftpeg

[roversfan99]

35 minutes ago, islander200 said:

You are obviously referencing my post with your use if the word "privy".

If you read my post in caps i said we dont know if it is ALL down to the owners, which we dont.

Plenty of money was found to extend ageing and past it players.

Was from a few posters on the previous page, mainly 1864roverite leading the argument.

I suspect that it is much easier to agree a deal with an older player who is in a weaker negotiating position knowing that if they are a free agent, it will likely take them much longer to find a new team.

We don't know the 100% position though you are correct and never will. 

My stance is that for so many to be in the same position, the wage ceiling must be too strict to be able to afford reasonable Championship players at this moment in time, which is counterproductive to making money on such assets in the future.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, 1864roverite said:

1. Offers have been offered as confirmed by their agents who have said they have been unable to make agreements with the club as well as being confirmed by the club and of course through other means.

2. ALL offered deals with improved terms in accordance with the wage structure that Rovers will not break UNLESS there are extreme circumstances agreed by the owners. Sensible decision if you ask me. You have a budget you stick to it. 

3. Its not about SW or TM, it is about the players choosing not to accept and agree the deals. All of which are set against the budget for the club. Whether they have wasted money in the past is totally irrelevant its today that matters. So again if there is blame it is to the players agent declining to accept the contract offer.

4. Utter garbage, it simply suggests there may be alternative options where they may get better money or longer contracts. Its happening across the football spectrum not just at Rovers. As for your doubts about contracts being offered instead of your speculation lets have some tangible evidence to support it!

1864, I know you are going on the basis of what Waggott has told you and I don't doubt contracts have been offered but in my opinion this talk of a "wage ceiling" is absolute tosh. There's may have been an attempt to impose some sort of ceiling post the recent FFP debacle but there's no way in the world that players like Gallagher and Ayala's existing wages would fit within the notional "wage structure" mentioned and imo players salaries should reflect their value to the Club taking into account their contribution on the pitch, the likely cost of rreplacement and probable value if sold.

There has to be a large degree of flexibility, it simply doesn't work otherwise.

[islander200]

1 hour ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Those past it players were probably not demanding massive increases in wages.

I don’t blame the players for wanting to look at options, especially Brereton who would be mad to sign a new deal with a championship team given his stature right now.

I don’t think Lenihan, Nyambe or Rothwell will attract much attention from PL sides though. Rothwell might get some interest but the other two are solid second tier players and no more. Wouldn’t surprise me if a couple of them re-sign eventually.

 

58 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Was from a few posters on the previous page, mainly 1864roverite leading the argument.

I suspect that it is much easier to agree a deal with an older player who is in a weaker negotiating position knowing that if they are a free agent, it will likely take them much longer to find a new team.

We don't know the 100% position though you are correct and never will. 

My stance is that for so many to be in the same position, the wage ceiling must be too strict to be able to afford reasonable Championship players at this moment in time, which is counterproductive to making money on such assets in the future.

If my posts appear that i am saying no blame is attached to the owners then i apologise for coming across wrong as of course i do think it is the overall responsibility of the owners to ensure we dont get put in a situation like this.

From various reports it would seem our highest earners are on 17/18 grand a week.If Rothwell and Lenihen are looking for that or over it, id argue they aint worth that certainly in the case of Rothwell prior to this season and although i think we are a stronger side with Lenihen  in the team , i do not think he has pushed on and as an individual i think better could be found on the market .

Other teams with similar income in this division wont be paying their players 20+ a week.

[JHRover]

2 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

1. Offers have been offered as confirmed by their agents who have said they have been unable to make agreements with the club as well as being confirmed by the club and of course through other means.

2. ALL offered deals with improved terms in accordance with the wage structure that Rovers will not break UNLESS there are extreme circumstances agreed by the owners. Sensible decision if you ask me. You have a budget you stick to it. 

3. Its not about SW or TM, it is about the players choosing not to accept and agree the deals. All of which are set against the budget for the club. Whether they have wasted money in the past is totally irrelevant its today that matters. So again if there is blame it is to the players agent declining to accept the contract offer.

4. Utter garbage, it simply suggests there may be alternative options where they may get better money or longer contracts. Its happening across the football spectrum not just at Rovers. As for your doubts about contracts being offered instead of your speculation lets have some tangible evidence to support it!

Their agents have confirmed that improved offers have been made? Where was that then?

I'm not aware of any agent that has commented on the status of his client's contract negotiations and would be very surprised if any of them did as they wouldn't get many clients 

So we are back to relying on what Waggott and Mowbray have said in their press conferences. If you want to believe what they say good luck but I won't be.

[1864roverite]

25 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

1864, I know you are going on the basis of what Waggott has told you and I don't doubt contracts have been offered but in my opinion this talk of a "wage ceiling" is absolute tosh. There's may have been an attempt to impose some sort of ceiling post the recent FFP debacle but there's no way in the world that players like Gallagher and Ayala's existing wages would fit within the notional "wage structure" mentioned and imo players salaries should reflect their value to the Club taking into account their contribution on the pitch, the likely cost of rreplacement and probable value if sold.

There has to be a large degree of flexibility, it simply doesn't work otherwise.

Simon I am not just reliant on the word of SW I also have other lines of information that corroborate what I was told/learned from within the walls of Ewood👍

[JacknOry]

6 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

Gav you cannot blame the club for a player running a contract down it happens all across the football spectrum and just doesn't affect or beloved BRFC it effects each and every club.

Contract offers have been made, improvements offered and yet the players decline to sign, no one other than the player himself can be blamed if blame is to be apportioned.

Its not mowbray or waggots fault they act within the guidelines and budget, it is as simple as that.

So no its not badly advised or incompetence, its how football contracts work

 

What? Do you even know what has been offered? He is on 4.5k per week, a quarter of the top earners. Do you know what is offered in these improved terms( that nobody wants to sign)?

[JacknOry]

4 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

Yes I do he is the one declining to sign the much improved contract he has been offered.

Much improved (how woulod you even know that?)

The fact that we have so many players running down their contracts suggest they can get better elsewhere.

[JacknOry]

4 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

Utter rubbish again. I blame the owners, mowbray and the club for various aspects I see as failures, I also compliment the good things that I also see or am aware of.

In respect of contract offers and just to be perfectly clear, it is NOT a last minute dash to secure the players on new contracts its been going on for a while, so I would stop thinking otherwise. The players and their agents have failed to agree to the terms on offer, all of which are IMPROVEMENTS on current contracts. 

 

obviously the improvements are shite. They will all go to other Championshgip clubs. 

[chaddyrovers]

7 hours ago, Gav said:

Are you honestly trying to tell me that Ryan Nyambe is pricing himself out of a deal? Do you really believe that to be the case?

One of the reasons Lambert walked was because the owners refused to talk about new contracts for players and backroom staff, its always been an issue under these inept owners.

 

6 hours ago, Gav said:

I understand the Rothwell stance, he's had a better offer clearly, but even in Rothwells case he should have been tied down to a longer deal and that deal improved 12 months in. 

Its an awful business model to lose good staff to competitors, no matter what industry you're in.

Gav, Rothwell and Nyambe have been offered new improve contracts terms and talks have been going on for ages. But if they wont re-sign then what can you do? 

Brereton and Kaminski have 12 months club extensions clauses in their contracts. 

[Gav]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Gav, Nyambe have been offered new improve contracts terms and talks have been going on for ages. But if they wont re-sign then what can you do? 

 

Increase the terms chaddy, like any normal club would do. Nyambe is reported to be one of the lowest paid players at the club. He’s our longest serving player I think and decent at this level. 

Rothwell won’t sign, I get that, same with Armstrong, no issues with that, but Nyambe?

The owners are just inept and like losing money and assets.

Venkys out 

[Exiled in Toronto]

6 hours ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

Those past it players were probably not demanding massive increases in wages.

I don’t blame the players for wanting to look at options, especially Brereton who would be mad to sign a new deal with a championship team given his stature right now.

I don’t think Lenihan, Nyambe or Rothwell will attract much attention from PL sides though. Rothwell might get some interest but the other two are solid second tier players and no more. Wouldn’t surprise me if a couple of them re-sign eventually.

That’s how I see it, no way any of those 3 will be at a premier league club in August. 
 

Lenihan is at an age where, if he doesn’t look elsewhere, he’ll be signing up to basically be a Rovers lifer, so it’s sensible to make this the one where he goes to the wire. If Nyambe is on peanuts then he should fire the agent that got him that contract a little over two years ago. Rothwell has previous on running down contracts, so I think that one is more him than us.

While everyone bangs on about “protecting our assets” there is the converse side of whatever contracts they sign being liabilities, as in they are essentially unbreakable from the club’s perspective - the players get paid the full whack no matter what - loss of form, serious injury, (new) manager not fancying them etc etc. I really think that Dack’s fat contract extensions have put Pune off just thinking about the asset side of the equation. Out of the three of the players involved, I can’t see Lenihan or Rothwell getting sold for big money, and probably not Nyambe either. 

[JHRover]

Some of us were concerned when ludicrous and unnecessary contracts were dished out, like to Ben Gladwin so he could use Brockhall. 

We were told that it was the right thing to do and that it wouldn't cost the club much or cause any issues.

Same thing happened in the summer of 2020 when Mowbray and Waggott decided they were going to give month long extensions to 7 players, hardly any of which were used as we drifted to a mid table finish and they were all then released.

Point is of course that straight away there is hundreds of thousands of pounds wasted, for no recognisable return, when the club could easily have let those players go and the loss to the club would have been insignificant.

If we hadn't bothered with the Gladwin one and saved £5000 a week for 6 months we would have an extra £120,000. That's £2500 a week extra for Nyambe for a year straight away. 

But no, we can't afford to meet his demands and instead will lose him for nothing along with a big cash windfall were we to sell him under contract.

[Miker]

The question is how much extra are these players actually looking for? Some may be asking for £1mil+/year extra, in which case can we afford that in our wage budget?

Our wage to turnover ratio was 189% a couple seasons ago, I don’t know what it is now but adding several million to wages wouldn’t help keep things under control.

[islander200]

8 hours ago, JHRover said:

Some of us were concerned when ludicrous and unnecessary contracts were dished out, like to Ben Gladwin so he could use Brockhall. 

We were told that it was the right thing to do and that it wouldn't cost the club much or cause any issues.

Same thing happened in the summer of 2020 when Mowbray and Waggott decided they were going to give month long extensions to 7 players, hardly any of which were used as we drifted to a mid table finish and they were all then released.

Point is of course that straight away there is hundreds of thousands of pounds wasted, for no recognisable return, when the club could easily have let those players go and the loss to the club would have been insignificant.

If we hadn't bothered with the Gladwin one and saved £5000 a week for 6 months we would have an extra £120,000. That's £2500 a week extra for Nyambe for a year straight away. 

But no, we can't afford to meet his demands and instead will lose him for nothing along with a big cash windfall were we to sell him under contract.

Plus we had mowbray saying last summer he didnt want to talk about contract extensions with the pandemic yet he still brought in 12 players that summer through loans ,free transfers and permanents.That 2k a week we spent on trybull could have been added to Nyambes package.

The overall fault lays at the owners door but Mowbray and Waggott are definitely complicit in the situation we find ourselves in 

[Mattyblue]

35 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Plus we had mowbray saying last summer he didnt want to talk about contract extensions with the pandemic yet he still brought in 12 players that summer through loans ,free transfers and permanents.That 2k a week we spent on trybull could have been added to Nyambes package.

 

Now playing in the German fourth division by the looks of it with Hannover reserves …

[Ulrich]

Why does everyone automatically assume money is the issue? Whilst most football players are money grabbers, they are also people.
Nyambe and Rothwell have both been treated poorly at times, being dropped etc. Perhaps they want to go elsewhere because of the way they perceive thay have been handled by management. Emotional beasts would be an apt way to describe a large number of players these days.

[Admiral Nelsen]

4 hours ago, Miker said:

The question is how much extra are these players actually looking for? Some may be asking for £1mil+/year extra, in which case can we afford that in our wage budget?

Our wage to turnover ratio was 189% a couple seasons ago, I don’t know what it is now but adding several million to wages wouldn’t help keep things under control.

 

Yes, I think it's really difficult to say the manger/club should be doing this or that on Player X without knowing more about the player's demands. Maybe Rothwell always planned on doing at Rovers what he did at Oxford and moving on a bosman for better terms? Maybe he'll still end up signing back on?

 

The fact that this has happened to so many players over the last year or two means that it's fair to say the club are doing a poor job of protecting our assets, but it's hard to be more specific than that on individual cases, and to be fair to the club we've got evidence all around us that FFP is regrettably something that we need to be very conscious of. 

 

 

[1864roverite]

2 hours ago, Ulrich said:

Why does everyone automatically assume money is the issue? Whilst most football players are money grabbers, they are also people.
Nyambe and Rothwell have both been treated poorly at times, being dropped etc. Perhaps they want to go elsewhere because of the way they perceive thay have been handled by management. Emotional beasts would be an apt way to describe a large number of players these days.

An alternative view might be that they have been rubbish and very inconsistent in their performances at times and actually deserved dropping!

[Admiral Nelsen]

1 hour ago, Ulrich said:

Why does everyone automatically assume money is the issue? Whilst most football players are money grabbers, they are also people.
Nyambe and Rothwell have both been treated poorly at times, being dropped etc. Perhaps they want to go elsewhere because of the way they perceive thay have been handled by management. Emotional beasts would be an apt way to describe a large number of players these days.

 

Agree completely that other issues will also be a part of the equation. Having said that I would be absolutely astonished if either of those players leave because they think they've been treated poorly at Rovers. Both start the overwhelming majority of games, and have done for ages. Granted it took Rothwell a bit of time to get to that point, but it would be very strange if he didn't sign a contract for a lack of game time two years ago. Similarly with Nyambe, over the last four years or so the only games that he missed when fit were a handful when Bennett played there a couple of seasons back, and a handful where JRC started when we wanted a more attacking right back. 

 

There might be other things behind the scenes of course - but I really don't think either have been treated especially badly. 

[47er]

41 minutes ago, Admiral Nelsen said:

 

Agree completely that other issues will also be a part of the equation. Having said that I would be absolutely astonished if either of those players leave because they think they've been treated poorly at Rovers. Both start the overwhelming majority of games, and have done for ages. Granted it took Rothwell a bit of time to get to that point, but it would be very strange if he didn't sign a contract for a lack of game time two years ago. Similarly with Nyambe, over the last four years or so the only games that he missed when fit were a handful when Bennett played there a couple of seasons back, and a handful where JRC started when we wanted a more attacking right back. 

 

There might be other things behind the scenes of course - but I really don't think either have been treated especially badly. 

I do assume money is the issue and the club can't  or won't offer the going rate. I've no proof of course before anyone asks.

[Admiral Nelsen]

7 minutes ago, 47er said:

I do assume money is the issue and the club can't or won't offer the going rate. I've no proof of course before anyone asks.

 

Going off what Mowbray's said in the press about our and the their agents valuations being apart, I'd guess that's the main issue for at least one or two. I'd guess for the likes of Brereton (and by the sounds of things, Lenihan) it may more be about career progression, but then again I suppose pay and playing at a higher level are pretty closely linked. 

[Ulrich]

4 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

An alternative view might be that they have been rubbish and very inconsistent in their performances at times and actually deserved dropping!

Yes, yes, someone at rovers had a chat with you and gave you some trivial words, so now all is rosy in the garden.  I'm sorry darling, I know I keep sleeping with others but I promise you I will change. After 12 odd years of destruction etc you actually believe it will change?

I remember on more than one occasion when they have played well to be dropped the next match.  I also remember matches when others/the whole team have been dog and only certain players have been left out next match. TM is an absolutely awful man manager and as I pointed out, it doesn't have to be all about dollar, other factors can come into play.