Brockhall STC - planning permission application ?

[AllRoverAsia]

Put the pieces together.

Mowbray is unsackable. Venus and Waggott are his appointments.

Their history at Coventry is known to us all.

Mowbray was anti Academy at Rovers when he arrived and at Coventry with Venus and Waggott.

The new facility will be big enough in 5 years time when we just have a first team squad on the back of Mowbrays European scouting network, Brentford style.

Its not even if there are that many pieces in the jigsaw.

Needless to say all the above IMO, to be reviewed in 5 years if I'm still plodding around.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

As others have said, once that land is gone, it's gone forever. And once the covenants are removed it makes it easier to eventually sell the rest...especially if the new state-of-the-art TC never comes to fruition. 

I told my 80 year old dad about it yesterday. He's still an ST holder, been going since the 1950's. He's not an emotional man but i could hear the sadness in his voice when he said 'they aren't respecting Jack's wishes'. 

For some people, legacy, history, tradition etc mean an awful lot. It's about respect.  

 

Very fair point. I would definitely like to know though, in your personal opinion... 

At what stage are the owners of the club able to make decisions that perhaps Jack Walker wouldn’t have made without being deemed disrespectful?

In 100 years time, would it still be a disrespectful move to merge the training centres (or another comparable club decision)?

Or are Jack’s wishes for you, and for others, ultimate now and final?

(Genuine questions, hope nobody will take offence).

Edited February 21, 2021 by JoeH

[AllRoverAsia]

I thought this place was being moderated against provocative posts?

[Mattyblue]

It’s not about ‘Jack’s wishes’, or being ‘disrespectful’, it’s not a Worthers Originals advert.

It’s about the dismantling of the actual, tangible, quality infrastructure that he left behind, that put this club on a sound footing and has been only to the club’s benefit.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mattyblue

[J*B]

2 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

I thought this place was being moderated against provocative posts?

You’ve not reported any. 

[Guest]

Forgive me if I’m coming across as provocative, I’m asking genuine questions. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mattyblue said:

It’s not about ‘Jack’s wishes’, it’s not a Worthers Originals advert, it’s about the dismantling of the actual, tangible, quality infrastructure that he left behind and has been only to the club’s benefit.

Jack’s Wishes comment wasn’t made by me, it was made by the person who’s post I quoted? I’m asking a genuine question (or three). I’m not trying to stump anyone I just wonder what people’s thoughts are?

[Mattyblue]

I’ve just told you. You seem to be struggling with what ‘leaving a legacy’ actually means. It isn’t just looking wistfully at Jack’s statue and lovingly reminiscing with old photos and videos of the glory days, but taking advantage of the infrastructure he left behind.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mattyblue

[perthblue02]

18 minutes ago, JoeH said:

 

At what stage are the owners of the club able to make decisions that perhaps Jack Walker wouldn’t have made without being deemed disrespectful?

First of all lets establish a baseline as to treating the owners with a modicom of respect and trustworthiness : Mine is just pre-takeover

12th in the Premier League, only 24 million of debt.

Then we move on to them providing honest answers about their just like family members and the cover ups in secret court cases.

Will answer the rest of the question when we are there. Fair?

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by perthblue02

[Ewood Ace]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Very fair point. I would definitely like to know though, in your personal opinion... 

At what stage are the owners of the club able to make decisions that perhaps Jack Walker wouldn’t have made without being deemed disrespectful?

When we have owners at the club who actually care about the club and have it's best interests at heart.

[Proudtobeblue&white]

Why was Ewood used, when we have this?

[Mattyblue]

Just now, Proudtobeblue&white said:

Why was Ewood used, when we have this?

Because its probably been mothballed.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Ewood Ace said:

When we have owners at the club who actually care about the club and have it's best interests at heart.

Makes sense, I can understand that

[AllRoverAsia]

5 minutes ago, J*B said:

You’ve not reported any. 

I never have, never will.

[Herbie6590]

6 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Very fair point. I would definitely like to know though, in your personal opinion... 

At what stage are the owners of the club able to make decisions that perhaps Jack Walker wouldn’t have made without being deemed disrespectful?

In 100 years time, would it still be a disrespectful move to merge the training centres (or another comparable club decision)?

Or are Jack’s wishes for you, and for others, ultimate now and final?

(Genuine questions, hope nobody will take offence).

When Venky’s build on (metaphorically...not literally) Jack’s legacy then they can be said to be taking the club forward.

There is not one single objective metric of import that is better now than the day they took over. 
 

If they were selling Brockhall entirely to build a bigger facility in another location as they recognised the importance of growing your own talent and each pitch was say, to have undersoil heating or be on rollers (like at Spurs stadium) to ensure that we always had a pitch available to use, then I think the fans would be more forgiving of that kind of proposal. 

Again...this is not progress....this is cash raising because of Covid.
 

[J*B]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Jack’s Wishes comment wasn’t made by me, it was made by the person who’s post I quoted? I’m asking a genuine question (or three). I’m not trying to stump anyone I just wonder what people’s thoughts are?

It’s not about Jack’s legacy for me. If they’re telling me this is the only way to raise funding that we need and it doesn’t effect anything - currently - I can almost accept it. 
 

It’s the way they try (Management) treat the fans. This isn’t good news for the club, as they put in the statement. 
If it was good news they would have put out a statement the second it was viable, not after fans found the information. It’s clear from the brochure in this thread that indeed this is reducing the training capacity.

If they had put out a statement admitting the club needed funding and they had found a way which would reduce capacity, but only because we currently don’t need the capacity, whilst bringing some much needing funds into the club, then invited the fans the be part of the discussion whilst they explored the possibility of selling the STC, it would be just about acceptable.
We - as fans - accept we’re 200m in debt to Venkys. It’s the way they treat the fans that’s the problem. They’re totally disconnected with us. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Herbie6590 said:

When Venky’s build on (metaphorically...not literally) Jack’s legacy then they can be said to be taking the club forward.

What kind of things could they do, besides investment in players to change our league position, that could be deemed as building on his legacy?

Would it be fair to say it would be fairly impossible for them to build on a legacy? Or are there genuine things they could do right now that would be received as a building of legacy in that way?

[Dreams of 1995]

40 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

You can use ‘could’ because we’re all speculating over the benefits and drawbacks. You don’t know that it won’t be financially profitable for example. Your final question is what we all need the club to clearly answer and until then, it’s hard to make a definitive judgement.

Sorry I should have caveated with in the long term. 
 

I said beneficial too, not profitable. A land sale will be profitable but to who? We (BRFC) will only see a portion. A lot will go to developers and given Mark Venus track record I’m far from comfortable with that at the moment. 
 

Imo it is not remotely beneficial, finance or otherwise, to sell off such good land in order to effectively downscale and also whilst these lot are in charge, because I don’t trust them to spend it wisely.  As a fan I can’t even see a benefit yet because im thinking of the day these lot leave as our future. The more they take the less we have to offer for a prospective buyer. Ambition could lead to us needing that space again. I don’t understand how anyone can have a good thought about this with the long term in mind. 

[LDRover]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

What kind of things could they do, besides investment in players to change our league position, that could be deemed as building on his legacy?

Would it be fair to say it would be fairly impossible for them to build on a legacy? Or are there genuine things they could do right now that would be received as a building of legacy in that way?

If they had turned up and done bugger all there's a damn good chance they'd be presiding over a 100 million pound business, player assets close to that, a fanbase at least double of now and a debt nowhere near the current levels.

That would have been enough if a build for me.

[J*B]

Just now, JoeH said:

What kind of things could they do, besides investment in players to change our league position, that could be deemed as building on his legacy?

Would it be fair to say it would be fairly impossible for them to build on a legacy? Or are there genuine things they could do right now that would be received as a building of legacy in that way?

Joe, I mean this will all due respect, but Jack’s legacy isn’t Rovers winning the league. I would assume you’re too young to really remember what Jack did?

Jacks legacy is putting Blackburn on the map. It’s giving the fans pride in the club. It’s the commentators on TV saying “the most successful town football club in the world”. It’s giving local kids the opportunity to train at a superb academy and maybe one day, represent their town. They don’t necessarily need to be stars at Blackburn Rovers. Its about the soccer schools for local kids. The disability groups for local people. The women’s team, who are treated just like the men’s. 
It’s creating jobs and opportunities for local people - whether that be at the academy on reception, or the chippy on Bolton Road which makes a fortune on match day. Jack’s legacy on the pitch is about challenging the big boys, creating a mentality of managers, coaches and players proud to represent Blackburn and it’s people. Blackburn Rovers will never be Manchester United - but Jack’s motto was “think big” and there’s absolutely nothing to say, for 90 minutes, 11 men representing the town of Blackburn cannot defeat 11 men playing for Manchester United. 

Jack’s legacy is for the town, its bigger than the football club. 

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, EgyptianPete said:

You should know, be like Bolton and Wigan, and god forbid Bury.

Thing is when those floating around social media and forums constantly chuck out the line 'we'd be the next Bolton/Wigan/Bury without Venkys', they are kind of missing the point.

 It is Venkys who have put us in that position anyway and continue to push us ever closer to it.  Mainly by not getting enough progress for their lending by keeping faith in people who aren't capable and don't have the nous to push us forwards.

And the moment they step away we reap what they sowed they didn't rescue the club they totally screwed it in the first place. Selling off fixed assets could some way down the line end the club, when it otherwise it might have something to fall back on.

I've seen a few comments that if this was Jacks trust doing this or Williams everyone would be behind it. Maybe so but that's because we'd all know it was being done for the right reasons, the club not the middlemen or some suit who wanted to prove himself.

If i thought it was 100% being done now for the clubs benefit i'd back them but i'm not sure that's the real driving force.  In fact when Williams was here and we had nothing to spend on players and the club was up for sale he still persuaded the Trust to stump up for the land outside Ewood on Bolton Road. Arguing that it was an opportunity not to be missed and it would be a future asset on the clubs books.

 

[Proudtobeblue&white]

These are images from 2011, back in the day when I sponsored Junior Hoilett, the facilities looked fairly state of the art.Gym/pool. Cafe I remember, Pitches were top notch

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Proudtobeblue&white

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, Herbie6590 said:

I demand INSTANT results 😁

Without a journey? How is that possible?

Edited February 21, 2021 by bluebruce

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, J*B said:

Joe, I mean this will all due respect, but Jack’s legacy isn’t Rovers winning the league. I would assume you’re too young to really remember what Jack did?

Jacks legacy is putting Blackburn on the map. It’s giving the fans pride in the club. It’s the commentators on TV saying “the most successful town football club in the world”. It’s giving local kids the opportunity to train at a superb academy and maybe one day, represent their town. They don’t necessarily need to be stars at Blackburn Rovers. Its about the soccer schools for local kids. The disability groups for local people. The women’s team, who are treated just like the men’s. 
It’s creating jobs and opportunities for local people - whether that be at the academy on reception, or the chippy on Bolton Road which makes a fortune on match day. Jack’s legacy on the pitch is about challenging the big boys, creating a mentality of managers, coaches and players proud to represent Blackburn and it’s people. Blackburn Rovers will never be Manchester United - but Jack’s motto was “think big” and there’s absolutely nothing to say, for 90 minutes, 11 men representing the town of Blackburn cannot defeat 11 men playing for Manchester United. 

Jack’s legacy is for the town, its bigger than the football club. 

I think I do know those things, all of it. Hence why I’m asking how it would even be plausible for them to “build” on Jack Walkers legacy. Because to me, I don’t see how they could ever achieve that with what’s gone on in the past now.

Perhaps a new owner could.

[J*B]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

I think I do know those things, all of it. Hence why I’m asking how it would even be plausible for them to “build” on Jack Walkers legacy. Because to me, I don’t see how they could ever achieve that with what’s gone on in the past now.

Perhaps a new owner could.

You don’t have to build on it. You can’t build on being the best team in the country. You need to maintain it. It’s the values that are important. We could finish 12th in League One and still maintain the majority of the values.