Summer transfer window 2021.

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

I have to disagree RF99 Mowbray knew which players he was letting go he also knew that Armstrong would be leaving and he also knew which players were not being offered a deal. He is the manager it’s his job to manage hence the job title. He also knew which players were freebies in January and a good manager would have been all over it getting his ducks in a row and at an early stage. Mowbray still hasn’t addressed the defence to an adequate standard despite 4 years. The midfield is another enigma never settled and never the same whilst tactically at time he has been utterly found out. His comments in the media are often ill advised yet he still persists. It’s time he accepted some of the blame portion 

Many of the best freebies went elsewhere when we spent a couple of months in embargo at the start of the summer and couldnt offer the security of a contract, Mowbray said that players went elsewhere during that time, and you cannot formally offer a contract to a player until they go into their final month.

He did know that Armstrong was likely to leave but my point is that this summer is on Venkys. He has brought in a huge fee from one of his signings, the wage bill has been considerably cut, now he couldnt expect all or most of that money to be reinvested, but to be reliant solely on heavily sponsored loans for kids, that after an embargo, these are limitations beyond his control, conditions to which competent owners wouldnt allow their manager to work under.

The comment about what he has failed to do over the last 4 years is a totally separate argument and one that I would agree with much of. Comments, I am not arsed about personally, and also plenty of speculation about his motivation skills, but I don't see a team that isnt playing for him. The squad coming into this summer, again, different argument and I would agree with you. Tactical choices, again, would agree with you.

I am far from Mowbrays biggest fan and have wanted him out for a long while, but I think that he has possibly overstayed his welcome to the point when he is blamed for things that he isnt to blame for, when there is so much that he still can be blamed for.

9 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

What does experience actually bring? 

If you have ability you're good enough, only thing experience brings is game management, and with the manager we have, even experience won't help with game management.

Experience will always help with game management.

If we lost a couple on the bounce, I think our young side would find it very difficult to get themselves out of such a rut quickly. We lack know how and we lack leadership. You also think back to when we used to be winning, how Graham and Dack used to be the masters of running down the clock, now there are extreme opposites to that when we have seen Derbyshire and Gallagher both being naive over the years and have cost us 2 points. I think Ayala makes a big difference but we cant be overly reliant on a man who will be injured at any time.

Of course it depends on the individual, indeed not only did Trybull fail to impress from a footballing perspective, but he hardly seemed like a leader.

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Of course it depends on the individual, indeed not only did Trybull fail to impress from a footballing perspective, but he hardly seemed like a leader.

I have to admit that's very true. He's probably not the one really. My question about definitely wasn't a recommendation for his return. I think we need a bit of something though. Poveda has talent, so does Clarkson, but we need players capable of seeing out games and grinding out results. I'm not saying the young lads are incapable, but they need some help along the way.

 

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, phili said:

Waggott and Cheston both said 20 months ago we needed to sell Dack to balance the books with FFP and we needed to sell another couple of players to bring new players in. Covid delayed this by 12 months, so he would have known in December at the latest that we needed to sell a couple of players this Summer to do anything.

Knowing this etc, he should have spent cash in January on who he needed to bring in on permanent signings.

FFP is likely to be replaced next season with a  % of turnover on wages of 120% first year, 100% in second year and then from third year onwards of 75%. Breaches will then cost a fine for each % point over these limits. So it will be up to Waggott to boost our revenues quickly.

was this comment made before the Dack injury at the Wigan home game in December 2019

More stupid spending rules instead of allowing club owners to invested whatever they want instead of these rules that will favour the big supporters teams and Relegated PL teams again. But thats what the EFL want?

25 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

Why is there an assumption that there was money readily available in January to bring in all of these permanent signings? We made one in Pickering, and loaned a couple of kids again to fill a gap. I doubt Mowbray was sat there on a noticeable budget and chose not to spend it.

Surely last January Mowbray and the club knew that Armstrong would be sold this summer and most of the out of contract players would be released which was the right decision. 

So why didn't he sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong last January? or why haven't we sign one since AA left us? It will be interesting to see who we sign. 

[roversfan99]

8 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Well we have to see over the coming seasons but a club of Rovers size cannot keep running at wage to turnover it has over the past seasons can it? 

So we need a proper short term, medium and long term plan from the footballing people at the club

I hope we can invest a few million pounds into a permanent striker signing myself but we have to meet these daft FFP rules(which I never been in favour from moment one as they favour bigger clubs with bigger budgets.) Can't blame Venkys for the FFP rules. 

Surely we have to work in whatever market we have? 

We need 4 or 5 signings before the deadline including a permanent striker, wide man, left back and centre back. 

These players like Poveda and Clarkson clearly have their ability and talent otherwise they wouldn't be Leeds United and Liverpool would they? 

Who are these quality freebies out there? Can you give me an example of a striker who has the quality we want? Would you want Connor Wickham here? Surely there is a reason why they are still unattached at this stage of the season?

More experience PL players who are available are on big wages. What is Ben Davies wages or Matt Clarke wages? spending more money on these expensive wages would mean less signings? 

Also can you expect why it unnecessarily strict budget considering the last 3 years financial backing Mowbray has received in terms of transfers fees and wages? Maybe if Mowbray has been better in the transfer market and use the money more wisely in the first 2 seasons and maybe we wouldn't be in this situation. 

It is unrealistic in that none of the considerable savings at all made this summer are to be reinvested it seems, Mowbray keeps saying that it is (almost exclusively, maybe we will be pleasantly surprised but I doubt it) a case of asking the big clubs to lend us kids on heavily sponsored deals. I refuse to accept that in a summer that we have brought a considerable profit on a Mowbray signing, and have made a huge saving on the wage budget, that such restrictive (essentially to the point of being non-existent) budgets to replace those players are necessary. FFP is not an excuse, because all I am asking for is moderate spending of a fraction of that money. The taps have been turned off, the embargo was unnecessary, yet people still don't seem to hold the owners responsible.

You repeatedly ask me for names of signings, I honestly havent got a clue. I have specifically said that I wouldn't want Wickham here.

You could also have said the same about Jack Byrne who was at Man City, Samuelsen who was at West Ham, Stephen Hendrie was at West Ham, Branthwaite is at Everton, Kasey Palmer was at Chelsea, Todd Kane was at Chelsea, they were all shit.

That isnt me saying that Poveda and Clarkson will not be any good, but merely being contracted to a big team does not make you a good player.

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

That isnt me saying that Poveda and Clarkson will not be any good, but merely being contracted to a big team does not make you a good player.

Agreed. Our 23's consistently show that in the PL2 each year. The bigger teams always seem to have one or two that are levels above the rest.

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

was this comment made before the Dack injury at the Wigan home game in December 2019

More stupid spending rules instead of allowing club owners to invested whatever they want instead of these rules that will favour the big supporters teams and Relegated PL teams again. But thats what the EFL want?

Surely last January Mowbray and the club knew that Armstrong would be sold this summer and most of the out of contract players would be released which was the right decision. 

So why didn't he sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong last January? or why haven't we sign one since AA left us? It will be interesting to see who we sign. 

So you are implying that Mowbray had the money sat there for a replacement for a player still at the club at that time, 6 months before we received the considerable amount that we did for him, yet chose not to buy anyone?

5 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I have to admit that's very true. He's probably not the one really. My question about definitely wasn't a recommendation for his return. I think we need a bit of something though. Poveda has talent, so does Clarkson, but we need players capable of seeing out games and grinding out results. I'm not saying the young lads are incapable, but they need some help along the way.

 

Agreed, we do need experience, 100%. It seems like those twats in India have restricted us to the point that a free agents are beyond our means, not aided by being in embargo when the better free agents got fixed up elsewhere!

[rigger]

On 22/08/2021 at 09:27, arbitro said:

I can't stand Waggott but why would he lie about that? Saying the deal is done, even by his standards is pretty concrete to me.

You can tell when Waggott is lying. His lips move.

[phili]

46 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

Why is there an assumption that there was money readily available in January to bring in all of these permanent signings? We made one in Pickering, and loaned a couple of kids again to fill a gap. I doubt Mowbray was sat there on a noticeable budget and chose not to spend it.

Venky's were prepared to fund transfers in January if suitable players could be found as people keep saying if you ask them for additional funds for a player they will grant them.

Mowbray convinced he could make do till the summer with loans and then sign players this summer, which has now changed to we'll loan players this summer and sign new ones next summer.

Waggott and Mowbray present a budget each year to Venky's of what they need and how the budget will adhere to FFP. They are the ones who have come up with the plan etc and Venky's just pay for it. Everything that has happened this summer and the issues with FFP are down to 3 people, Waggott, Mowbray and Venus. No one else.

It's sort of like all 3 expected to be gone by now and are struggling to come up with excuses of why they have f%cked it up so spectacularly!!

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

45 minutes ago, Torgeir said:

Johnson and Bennett looked like the two least experienced players last season when they came on towards the end. Bennett either ran down the win and lost possession or sent an early cross without address. Johnson will also lose the ball in possession a number of times and doesn't have any pace to win the ball back when we get caught on the break. Davenport is a great player to put on and will continue the fight Travis (and partially Buckley) puts on.

The one thing Johnson does add is height and heading ability to the midfield, may have been useful against WBA at the weekend or against a team playing long ball as they get increasingly desperate towards the end of a match. I do agree his ball retention isn't the best at times.

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, phili said:

Venky's were prepared to fund transfers in January if suitable players could be found as people keep saying if you ask them for additional funds for a player they will grant them.

Mowbray convinced he could make do till the summer with loans and then sign players this summer, which has now changed to we'll loan players this summer and sign new ones next summer.

Waggott and Mowbray present a budget each year to Venky's of what they need and how the budget will adhere to FFP. They are the ones who have come up with the plan etc and Venky's just pay for it. Everything that has happened this summer and the issues with FFP are down to 3 people, Waggott, Mowbray and Venus. No one else.

It's sort of like all 3 expected to be gone by now and are struggling to come up with excuses of why they have f%cked it up so spectacularly!!

I take the statement in bold regarding Venkys blindly signing off cheques with a large pinch of salt every time. 

If there was any logic to that theory that you have that Mowbray wanted to wait until the summer to invest, why is that money still not available? What has changed in those last 6 months? Surely that would have only have made our ability to abide by FFP reduce even more had he splashed out on signings in January? Why would Mowbray continuously avoid spending money on players? These conspiracies make no sense.

Mowbray is to blame for a lot of things but the financial running of the club and avoidance of FFP is not one of those. How he spends his budget is a different topic.

Indeed, the fact that he is even still here is down to those cretins in India. I do not believe any conjecture about him being allowed to invest in January, choosing not to, and then being to blame for not being able to predict that it was a "now or never" situation in January.

[islander200]

30 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

So you are implying that Mowbray had the money sat there for a replacement for a player still at the club at that time, 6 months before we received the considerable amount that we did for him, yet chose not to buy anyone?

Agreed, we do need experience, 100%. It seems like those twats in India have restricted us to the point that a free agents are beyond our means, not aided by being in embargo when the better free agents got fixed up elsewhere!

How are the owners at fault for the embargo that restricted us?

They employ people to deal with that sort of thing.The.people on the ground Waggott and Cheston etc are the ones at fault for that.

Are you trying to say that Mowbray had no idea what was coming?I don't believe that for one minute.Waggot , Cheston, Mowbray and the rest working on the ground would know what was likely to happen.

Mowbray says different things to the media every time he is interviewed.Just before Armstrong was sold he said in an interview that a little bit of money would be spent on a permanent signing.

The owners are shit, they do put money in though that can't be disputed.They Pay the majority of the wage bill and have given money for signings every season that Mowbray has been here.

The biggest problem with our owners is who they leave in charge to run the club .Most owners do not get involved with the day to day running of their clubs they put competent people in place 

Edited August 23, 2021 by islander200

[chaddyrovers]

22 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

It is unrealistic in that none of the considerable savings at all made this summer are to be reinvested it seems, Mowbray keeps saying that it is (almost exclusively, maybe we will be pleasantly surprised but I doubt it) a case of asking the big clubs to lend us kids on heavily sponsored deals. I refuse to accept that in a summer that we have brought a considerable profit on a Mowbray signing, and have made a huge saving on the wage budget, that such restrictive (essentially to the point of being non-existent) budgets to replace those players are necessary. FFP is not an excuse, because all I am asking for is moderate spending of a fraction of that money. The taps have been turned off, the embargo was unnecessary, yet people still don't seem to hold the owners responsible.

But the Armstrong fee has come into the club and 40% of gone to Newcastle so thats around 6 million pounds gone. But as Phili's comments has pointed out Waggott, Mowbray and Venus come up with the plan each season and Venkys/Pasha sign it off. So surely its Waggott and Mowbray fault not the owners? 

But if we overspend this summer it will affect next season budget and we could be break FFP rules next season. So it could be 12 months of careful planning this season of not over spending following by higher transfer spending next season hopefully under a new manager/footballing structure. 

Yes I agree with you I would like us to buy 3 or 4 players this summer but not if its effects us next season FFP wise and Embargo wise. 

22 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I have specifically said that I wouldn't want Wickham here.

I didn't see that comment until after I replied to previous post of yours. 

19 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

So you are implying that Mowbray had the money sat there for a replacement for a player still at the club at that time, 6 months before we received the considerable amount that we did for him, yet chose not to buy anyone?

We knew if we wasn't going up that Armstrong would move on so surely last January we had players in mind who we could sign as replacements but he choose not to buy a replacement before we sold Armstrong this summer. that would have given the new striker 6 months head start. Maybe even a foreign striker and allow 6 months to settle into the area and club but Mowbray refuse/didn't. 

 

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, islander200 said:

How are the owners at fault for the embargo that restricted us?

They employ people to deal with that sort of thing.The.people on the ground Waggott and Cheston etc are the ones at fault for that.

Are you trying to say that Mowbray had no idea what was coming?I don't believe that for one minute.Waggot , Cheston, Mowbray and the rest working on the ground would know what was likely to happen.

They are at fault by not employing the right people 

Mike Cheston has been a finance director, or similar, and oversaw 2 embargoes. He clearly isn’t much good at his job

The Venkys have very deep pockets but for whatever reason they are the only rich club owner not flexing the rules. That might be down to extremely poor commercial advice from the two rather uninspiring blokes they allow to run the club 

[chaddyrovers]

1 minute ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

They are at fault by not employing the right people 

Mike Cheston has been a finance director, or similar, and oversaw 2 embargoes. He clearly isn’t much good at his job

The Venkys have very deep pockets but for whatever reason they are the only rich club owner not flexing the rules. That might be down to extremely poor commercial advice from the two rather uninspiring blokes they allow to run the club 

Waggott and Cheston should have been removed this summer. 

We need fresh blood and people inside the boardroom who know the rules and can work the rules to our advantage

[tomphil]

10 minutes ago, phili said:

Venky's were prepared to fund transfers in January if suitable players could be found as people keep saying if you ask them for additional funds for a player they will grant them.

Mowbray convinced he could make do till the summer with loans and then sign players this summer, which has now changed to we'll loan players this summer and sign new ones next summer.

Waggott and Mowbray present a budget each year to Venky's of what they need and how the budget will adhere to FFP. They are the ones who have come up with the plan etc and Venky's just pay for it. Everything that has happened this summer and the issues with FFP are down to 3 people, Waggott, Mowbray and Venus. No one else.

It's sort of like all 3 expected to be gone by now and are struggling to come up with excuses of why they have f%cked it up so spectacularly!!

Imo they are just trying this to cover their arses for wasting the last few seasons and its budgets going nowhere.

Getting in 12 million or whatever for a player he paid about 3 for will have strengthened his hand. If they'd been given another budget like last season even if FFP allowed it nothing other than what we've seen before would happen.

At least the youth angle gives it a bit of interest although i won't be saying that if we embark on a death sprial and go down. By summer he'll probably be getting money for Brereton one way or another and maybe some nice compen sums for a few others.

Real danger we are going to be lumbered with this little clique for a few years yet running the show.

It won't end well Venkys need to grow a pair a get ready for real change in summer if not before. Mowbray and co shouldn't be in last chance saloon hoping for an extended stay they should be in the departure lounge waiting for the flight home.

[islander200]

4 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

They are at fault by not employing the right people 

Mike Cheston has been a finance director, or similar, and oversaw 2 embargoes. He clearly isn’t much good at his job

The Venkys have very deep pockets but for whatever reason they are the only rich club owner not flexing the rules. That might be down to extremely poor commercial advice from the two rather uninspiring blokes they allow to run the club 

Yeah the underlying issue is who they put in place to run the club, have never disputed that.

My argument here is the people on the ground are the ones who got us into an embargo.Mowbray would have known the situation, there is absolutely no doubt about that.

 

[phili]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I take the statement in bold regarding Venkys blindly signing off cheques with a large pinch of salt every time. 

If there was any logic to that theory that you have that Mowbray wanted to wait until the summer to invest, why is that money still not available? What has changed in those last 6 months? Surely that would have only have made our ability to abide by FFP reduce even more had he splashed out on signings in January? Why would Mowbray continuously avoid spending money on players? These conspiracies make no sense.

Mowbray is to blame for a lot of things but the financial running of the club and avoidance of FFP is not one of those. How he spends his budget is a different topic.

Indeed, the fact that he is even still here is down to those cretins in India. I do not believe any conjecture about him being allowed to invest in January, choosing not to, and then being to blame for not being able to predict that it was a "now or never" situation in January.

Put it this way, Venky's only discuss things with Pasha and Mowbray. 

Waggott and Cheston have never once spoken to Venky's themselves directly, only to their underlings.

What has probably changed in the last 6 months is the realisation we have not been run all that well and not even the sale of Armstrong has been enough to cover FFP and allow us to sign players. We seem to now have a wage ceiling of £5k a week, which is very new.

If you know you are likely to go into an embargo you spend as much as possible before you do, knowing you will have assets to sell if you need to sell them. You never make do with loan signings unless you are absolutely desperate. It's better to test your own kids instead of using a loan signing as you are building your asset value up.

 

[chaddyrovers]

10 minutes ago, phili said:

Put it this way, Venky's only discuss things with Pasha and Mowbray. 

Waggott and Cheston have never once spoken to Venky's themselves directly, only to their underlings.

well Pasha was sat next to Waggott on Saturday at the game if my eyes are correct. 

Why doesn't Pasha recommend the removal of Waggott, Cheston and Mowbray from the club? 

11 minutes ago, phili said:

What has probably changed in the last 6 months is the realisation we have not been run all that well and not even the sale of Armstrong has been enough to cover FFP and allow us to sign players

Thats my point to RF99 that the Armstrong's sale hasn't bought enough money into the club for sign 4 or 5 permanent signings

[roversfan99]

10 minutes ago, islander200 said:

How are the owners at fault for the embargo that restricted us?

They employ people to deal with that sort of thing.The.people on the ground Waggott and Cheston etc are the ones at fault for that.

Are you trying to say that Mowbray had no idea what was coming?I don't believe that for one minute.Waggot , Cheston, Mowbray and the rest working on the ground would know what was likely to happen.

Mowbray says different things to the media every time he is interviewed.Just before Armstrong was sold he said in an interview that a little bit of money would be spent on a permanent signing.

The owners are shit, they do put money in though that can't be disputed.They Pay the majority of the wage bill and have given money for signings every season that Mowbray has been here.

The biggest problem with our owners is who they leave in charge to run the club .Most owners do not get involved with the day to day running of their clubs they put competent people in place 

Because they chose to employ and keep in situ these people who should have been fired long ago. I definitely dont put the blame of FFP and embargo down to Mowbray, he is a football manager. (And not a good one)

The owners have to put so much in to cover losses because they don't have the competence and the interest to put the time in and delegate to the right people to avoid incurring unavoidably high losses in the first place, as you touch on.

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

But the Armstrong fee has come into the club and 40% of gone to Newcastle so thats around 6 million pounds gone. But as Phili's comments has pointed out Waggott, Mowbray and Venus come up with the plan each season and Venkys/Pasha sign it off. So surely its Waggott and Mowbray fault not the owners? 

But if we overspend this summer it will affect next season budget and we could be break FFP rules next season. So it could be 12 months of careful planning this season of not over spending following by higher transfer spending next season hopefully under a new manager/footballing structure. 

Yes I agree with you I would like us to buy 3 or 4 players this summer but not if its effects us next season FFP wise and Embargo wise. 

I didn't see that comment until after I replied to previous post of yours. 

We knew if we wasn't going up that Armstrong would move on so surely last January we had players in mind who we could sign as replacements but he choose not to buy a replacement before we sold Armstrong this summer. that would have given the new striker 6 months head start. Maybe even a foreign striker and allow 6 months to settle into the area and club but Mowbray refuse/didn't. 

 

I have never suggested that we spend wrecklessly, spend to go into embargo, that we overspend, this is all a straw man argument. Maybe we will surprise me and sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong for a couple of million. I also would have liked one or two free agents to give some experience. I do not suggest wild spending or indeed anything that you havent suggested yourself.

My suggestion would be that if you think that next summer, a new manager under a new structure will come in entrusted with a healthy kitty to spend on new players and this summer is all part of a clever tactical plan, I wouldn't put money on it!

I do not believe that Mowbray had money available to spend on a replacement for Armstrong in January, 6 months prior to his potential sale, and chose not to. Same to you @phili and if that is an assumption that has to be made to continue with this line of discussion, then fair enough, count me out. I will continue to blame him for the many things that I feel like I know that he is to blame for, strange tactical decisions, poor results, poor signings etc.

[phili]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Because they chose to employ and keep in situ these people who should have been fired long ago. I definitely dont put the blame of FFP and embargo down to Mowbray, he is a football manager. (And not a good one)

The owners have to put so much in to cover losses because they don't have the competence and the interest to put the time in and delegate to the right people to avoid incurring unavoidably high losses in the first place, as you touch on.

I have never suggested that we spend wrecklessly, spend to go into embargo, that we overspend, this is all a straw man argument. Maybe we will surprise me and sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong for a couple of million. I also would have liked one or two free agents to give some experience. I do not suggest wild spending or indeed anything that you havent suggested yourself.

My suggestion would be that if you think that next summer, a new manager under a new structure will come in entrusted with a healthy kitty to spend on new players and this summer is all part of a clever tactical plan, I wouldn't put money on it!

I do not believe that Mowbray had money available to spend on a replacement for Armstrong in January, 6 months prior to his potential sale, and chose not to. Same to you @phili and if that is an assumption that has to be made to continue with this line of discussion, then fair enough, count me out. I will continue to blame him for the many things that I feel like I know that he is to blame for, strange tactical decisions, poor results, poor signings etc.

He turned down signing a permanent CB and CM that the recruitment department had identified and funds were available for to sign the 2 youth CB's to tide us over in January. 

So yeah cash was available if he wanted to spend it, he just chose not to. 

[RevidgeBlue]

13 minutes ago, phili said:

If you know you are likely to go into an embargo you spend as much as possible before you do, knowing you will have assets to sell if you need to sell them 

Whilst I broadly agree with you about  the embargo being 100% the fault of the Coventrio and that in general when Mowbray has had to ask for funds they always seem to have been forthcoming, not sure I agree with that bit.

What's the point in spending big in January if it's going to put you in a bigger FFP hole just 6 months or so later? I can see the logic if the day of reckoning was not for 2 or 3 seasons but any acquisitions would be unlikely to massively appreciate in that short time frame and you'd be reliant on being able to sell them again for no less than you bought them.

The only way it'd be worthwhile is if you could more or less guarantee a signing would make the difference between being promoted and missing out. 

We were never in that position in January or even remotely close to it.

[roversfan99]

Just now, phili said:

He turned down signing a permanent CB and CM that the recruitment department had identified and funds were available for to sign the 2 youth CB's to tide us over in January. 

So yeah cash was available if he wanted to spend it, he just chose not to. 

Who were they? Again, if true, managers I suspect regularly decline players they dont want personally, the manager should have the final say.

But either way, the assumption was a replacement for Armstrong.

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I have never suggested that we spend wrecklessly, spend to go into embargo, that we overspend, this is all a straw man argument. Maybe we will surprise me and sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong for a couple of million. I also would have liked one or two free agents to give some experience. I do not suggest wild spending or indeed anything that you havent suggested yourself.

I've not saying you have said recklessly spending but Mowbray lack of planning and proper organise transfer plan for each season has cost us. And it appears that him and Waggott screwed up this season budget. I think Mowbray was surprised he is still in a job but is this down to the club not able to bring in the right replacement. Didn't someone post that we spoke to Wilder, Neil and Nathan Jones this summer about replacing Mowbray. Can't remember who said it btw

I hope we do sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong. I think Dale would be decent for a million or even Morris from Barnsley for a couple of million pounds

 

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

My suggestion would be that if you think that next summer, a new manager under a new structure will come in entrusted with a healthy kitty to spend on new players and this summer is all part of a clever tactical plan, I wouldn't put money on it!

I hope we have a new footballing structure at the club by next summer and new man in the dugout. 

Healthy kitty? Only after a similar budget to what Mowbray had in a season. Thats all. Invest it wisely and sensible. 

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

do not believe that Mowbray had money available to spend on a replacement for Armstrong in January, 6 months prior to his potential sale, and chose not to.

Surely Mowbray knew Armstrong would be gone this summer if we werent promote so why not look at buying a replacement for him last January. Whether he would got the finances to do so I don't know but surely some long term planning should have happen at club. Maybe having a Director of football with Head coach structure would served us much better. 

[islander200]

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Because they chose to employ and keep in situ these people who should have been fired long ago. I definitely dont put the blame of FFP and embargo down to Mowbray, he is a football manager. (And not a good one)

The owners have to put so much in to cover losses because they don't have the competence and the interest to put the time in and delegate to the right people to avoid incurring unavoidably high losses in the first place, as you touch on.

I have never suggested that we spend wrecklessly, spend to go into embargo, that we overspend, this is all a straw man argument. Maybe we will surprise me and sign a permanent replacement for Armstrong for a couple of million. I also would have liked one or two free agents to give some experience. I do not suggest wild spending or indeed anything that you havent suggested yourself.

My suggestion would be that if you think that next summer, a new manager under a new structure will come in entrusted with a healthy kitty to spend on new players and this summer is all part of a clever tactical plan, I wouldn't put money on it!

I do not believe that Mowbray had money available to spend on a replacement for Armstrong in January, 6 months prior to his potential sale, and chose not to. Same to you @phili and if that is an assumption that has to be made to continue with this line of discussion, then fair enough, count me out. I will continue to blame him for the many things that I feel like I know that he is to blame for, strange tactical decisions, poor results, poor signings etc.

Totally agree what you say about the owners apart from the just covering losses part ,they have given competitive funds since Mowbray here and when we first came down agreed to spend silly money stupidly.

But Mowbray has had a very big hand in the situation we find ourselves in.He will have meetings etc with the finance people and would have known were we stood.

It was on his recommendation that lucrative and long term deals were given to the "men" in the dressing room only for 5 minute later the likes of Mulgrew on way out and we had to pay him for nothing for 2 years.Plus the decision to spend 12 million quid on two young players was on his recommendation.

You keep making out we should feel sorry for Mowbray that we can't do anything in the market when it is his mistakes that put us in this position

[chaddyrovers]

6 minutes ago, phili said:

He turned down signing a permanent CB and CM that the recruitment department had identified and funds were available for to sign the 2 youth CB's to tide us over in January. 

So yeah cash was available if he wanted to spend it, he just chose not to. 

Guess this is one of the reason why Stuart Harvey left cos Mowbray refuse to listen to him? 

do you have any names for each signing? 

Was the Pickering signing Mowbray decision or a decision made by the club following the recommendation of Harvey and recruitment department? 

thanks in advance