Summer transfer window 2021.

[Ghost7]

All of this would be fine if we combined it with some shrewd permanent signings in the (300k - 900k range). I doubt any Rovers fans are expecting millions to be spent but just a handful of signings to show that the club is still active and investing in it's own future would be nice... I'm presuming Mowbray didn't expect to be in a job this summer and the transfer activity does have a look of that.

[JacknOry]

Wonder which PL club we'll have for a friendly next year. I suggest when we do, we scour through their kids to figure out which one we'll be loaning in. TM obviously loves to butter up the managers (probably over a slice of the ole drizzle) so we can have one of their kids for a season. Elliott last year and Poveda this year. 

[JBiz]

3 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Am I alone in being absolutely sick and fed up and bored stiff of this whole farce?

The club is an embarrassment.

I remember the good old days when we used to be better than the likes of Leeds. Better first team, better academy, above them in the pecking order.

Yes, that was the case not 20-30 years ago but 4-5 years ago. We used to turn up at their ground and outplay them. Recently.

Now we are gratefully accepting Leeds' kindness in allowing one of their youngsters out to us for the season. I suspected as much when we got Leeds to come to Ewood pre-season - I knew they would have their hopes pinned on Leeds returning the favour by sending someone our way for the year.

Some call this good management. I call it corner cutting.

Reading the Leeds' Director of Football comments on the move:

"We feel Ian can make an impact here in the future and we've been very impressed with how Blackburn have developed players such as Harvey Elliott at Liverpool"

Life comes at you fast doesn't it? As I say, only a few years ago we were better than Leeds, now they see us as a destination for their kids to go and develop. Some people might be impressed or happy at the Leeds' director of football seeing us as a good place to send their prospects. I'm not impressed or happy with it. I think all it does is highlight how they have rapidly progressed and how we have rapidly regressed in the space of a few years to the extent that they are now a million miles ahead of us.

This is the way Venkys and their stooges want us to be. Basically a farm for the big boys down the road to send their prospects to develop then take back and enjoy the benefit of.

If that's the way you want to do business so be it. But there won't be many more Adam Armstrong fees and there certainly won't ever be a promotion off it. I can't accept that.

 

 

If you view every single thing that happens in the present, related to history, whether it’s 5/10/20 years, with the idea that “we should’ve been better than this”  or “we used to be better than leeds and Brentford” you’ll always come to frustration, even if do agree that it’s true.

Concentrating on the present and near future though, for me; it’s hard to agree with how much you and others seem to hate these two signings.

Proof will be in the performance pudding of course, but these two seem far more likely to be Harvey Elliott than Mo Barrow (in terms of potential impact) 

Which is all that matters. Far more confident going into the season with them, than without!

 

 

[bluebruce]

32 minutes ago, Mercer said:

I think your figures are very wrong.

My understand is it is an expensive deal (loan fee and wages) for Rovers.

I hope you're wrong, because that would be a terrible mistake by us.

With our current financial situation we shouldn't be paying any kind of loan fee for ANYONE. We are desperately in need of tying down some players so we aren't repeating this 5 loans cycle again every summer. If we can pay a loan fee we can pay a transfer fee, or renew a contract on an asset. We are doing these parent clubs a favour as much as they're doing us one, possibly more.

[arbitro]

We will soon have many key players out of contract and Mowbray admits cash is the stumbling block. Therefore it makes little sense to me to spend money on other teams players when we can't offer our own assets more.

Somehow our priorities are all wrong.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, arbitro said:

We will soon have many key players out of contract and Mowbray admits cash is the stumbling block. Therefore it makes little sense to me to spend money on other teams players when we can't offer our own assets more.

Somehow our priorities are all wrong.

I don't think contracts aren't getting signed because we won't cough up the cash, I think the players in question want out or potentially want to see what interest there is.

[tomphil]

Well we are stocking up a nice array of potential attacking talent so lets hope the manager lets them attack. I hope they aren't here to have possession stats drilled into them every day.

[Leonard Venkhater]

6 minutes ago, arbitro said:

We will soon have many key players out of contract and Mowbray admits cash is the stumbling block. Therefore it makes little sense to me to spend money on other teams players when we can't offer our own assets more.

Somehow our priorities are all wrong.

When decisions sound so counter-intuitive, you can't help feeling there is something else, a missing piece that explains (but may not justify) the decision...e.g.  sacking one of the most experienced managers in the country/replacing him with a novice.. Now we are said to be paying substantial fees plus wages to develop players for other clubs, blocking the pathways for our own...instead of sorting out contracts for our assets....

Edited August 24, 2021 by Leonard Venkhater

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

When decisions sound so counter-intuitive, you can't help feeling there is something else, a missing piece that explains (but may not justify) the decision...e.g.  sacking one of the most experienced managers in the country/replacing him with a novice.. Now we are said to be paying substantial fees plus wages to develop players for other clubs, blocking the pathways for our own...instead of sorting out contracts for our assets....

We don't know that loans are blocking contracts for our assets. If Nyambe won't sign, loaning in Clarkson isn't the reason we haven't sorted Nyambe's contract.

[arbitro]

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I don't think contracts aren't getting signed because we won't cough up the cash, I think the players in question want out or potentially want to see what interest there is.

I don't see it that way. Our players are our assets and we stand to lose millions by not offering them what they are worth or even the going rate for mid table Championship. Mowbray admits money will be a factor, even if we do offer contracts to all of them.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19498097.mowbray-offers-bleak-contract-outlook-blackburn-rovers/

[arbitro]

3 minutes ago, JoeH said:

We don't know that loans are blocking contracts for our assets. If Nyambe won't sign, loaning in Clarkson isn't the reason we haven't sorted Nyambe's contract.

If we can't offer Nyambe what he is worth yet pay a loan fee and a percentage of the wages of Clarkson then it is. It's feasible that neither will be here next season but I would certainly prefer to spend on our own assets.

Mowbray has talked about the money situation and offered excuses why we have none to spend get he is prepared to spend money on players who absolutely won't play a part after this season. 

[islander200]

5 minutes ago, arbitro said:

I don't see it that way. Our players are our assets and we stand to lose millions by not offering them what they are worth or even the going rate for mid table Championship. Mowbray admits money will be a factor, even if we do offer contracts to all of them.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19498097.mowbray-offers-bleak-contract-outlook-blackburn-rovers/

Agreed that the contract situation is very worrying.But we do not know what these players want to renew.

We need players in we are very short on numbers and personally I don't want Mowbray being given the money to bring in a handful on permanent as if a new manager is appointed next season he may not fancy them and will leave us with even more dead weight to try get rid of, and as seen in the past it's easier said than done, we end up paying up their contracts.

If the loan signings help keep us in this division then they will be worth it.Our young players will get opportunities but the people who believe more than 4 or 5 of our under 23s will be ready to play this season then that are being overly positive 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, arbitro said:

If we can't offer Nyambe what he is worth yet pay a loan fee and a percentage of the wages of Clarkson then it is. It's feasible that neither will be here next season but I would certainly prefer to spend on our own assets.

Mowbray has talked about the money situation and offered excuses why we have none to spend get he is prepared to spend money on players who absolutely won't play a part after this season. 

But what Nyambe and his agent think he's worth and what everyone else thinks he's worth might not currently be matching up? 

There's nothing concrete to say that the reason the likes of Nyambe and Brereton aren't done is because we can't afford them.

[tomphil]

17 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

I hope you're wrong, because that would be a terrible mistake by us.

With our current financial situation we shouldn't be paying any kind of loan fee for ANYONE. We are desperately in need of tying down some players so we aren't repeating this 5 loans cycle again every summer. If we can pay a loan fee we can pay a transfer fee, or renew a contract on an asset. We are doing these parent clubs a favour as much as they're doing us one, possibly more.

Has there actually been any shrewd buys or free transfer additions in Mowbrays tenure though ?

Let me clarify it by saying AA and Dack were great signings but both cost money and joined in league 1 where they already had pedigree.  So more of a you get what you pay for scenario.

Brereton and Gallagher cost millions and however they eventually work out they were anything but shrewd buys.

I'm talking about the lower priced punts to develop and the Brentford model they've always banged on about. There's been little to non i can think of in the last 4 years apart from Kaminsky recently.

That proves it can be done even by this lot however the scouting that allegedly delivered him probably cost a small fortune to set up. Now its probably been cut back or disbanded as well.

This is why we are now relying so heavily on these loans that are themselves costing money. Because this regime has proved poor to large degree in the transfer market in finding anything of any use and developing it. The successes tend to either cost good money, come from the academy or be loaned in.

They really haven't got the nous or the balls to do a Brentford etc.

[Guest]

Just now, tomphil said:

Has there actually been any shrewd buys or free transfer additions in Mowbrays tenure though ?

Let me clarify it by saying AA and Dack were great signings but both cost money and joined in league 1 where they already had pedigree.  So more of a you get what you pay for scenario.

Brereton and Gallagher cost millions and however they eventually work out they were anything but shrewd buys.

I'm talking about the lower priced punts to develop and the Brentford model they've always banged on about. There's been little to non i can think of in the last 4 years apart from Kaminsky recently.

That proves it can be done even by this lot however the scouting that allegedly delivered him probably cost a small fortune to set up. Now its probably been cut back or disbanded as well.

This is why we are now relying so heavily on these loans that are themselves costing money. Because this regime has proved poor to large degree in the transfer market in finding anything of any use and developing it. The successes tend to either cost good money, come from the academy or be loaned in.

They really haven't got the nous or the balls to do a Brentford etc.

Rothwell is a good example. Came very cheap. Major part of what we do now. Would sell for a lot more than he came for. If he was on a 4+ year deal he'd be worth even more than that too.

[briansol]

1 hour ago, Blue blood said:

Thanks for the well reasoned reply. I disagree with a fair bit (as you with me) but appreciate the tone and your explanation. 

Think we both agree Bauer was a cock up by TM. 

Martinez - man that would have been an improvement had we got him. Thinking on the difference in class makes you want to weep. Again though like with Tosin, unless they push you over the finish line to promotion, in some respects they are a waste. In which case longer term a solid league 1/championship keeper would have been better for us long term. That said given how many goals he cost us maybe Martinez would have been the difference... 

Douglas and Trybull I see the point (especially with the former) but again it's the short termism which is a huge problem. Let's say all of the loans worked out last season, if we didn't get promoted that's still half a team to replace. That's no way to build a team, be sustainable on or off the pitch. Also as you said Trybull was a decent enough squad player - that's not a difference maker, so why waste a loan on that? Surely we could have had a decent enough squad player from the pool of freebies/lower leagues, and benefit from that continuity and asset wise for more than one season. 

The more I reflect on it, it's the wholesale nature of it that's the problem. You can make a decent case for most of the loans (not Walton mind) but when you put it all together it ruins continuity, increases transfer workload and doesn't help finances. It's sticking plasters on gaping wounds. 

Agree there is a risk of league 1 players not making it, even if they look promising. But equally a fair number do make it. That's where good scouting comes in. It is possible. Likewise as you say scouting abroad could also have mitigated this issue. Point is, either way, there are ways around these difficulties if we could be arsed to take them. 

Fair point on loans to buy with lower leagues although think it could certainly work with premiership youngsters. 

As for Braithwaite, even as a stop gap he was pretty poor. And so we got no benefit from it, only Everton did as he learned from his mistakes here. At least our youngsters would have learned and still been on our books. Or a loan to buy (admittedly that probably wouldn't have been from lower leagues on reflection) could have helped with the potential summer transfer window. Another centre back was/is needed. Ayala's injury record is horrific, Warton could take a fair while to come back and we are assuming he will come back at the same level (some don't.) Especially if they could cover a full back position, knowing we were a bit weak in those areas, and a defensive signing made a lot of sense. 

Anyhow quibbles about individuals aside, a successful team cannot be built on youth loans from the big 6. It's not a good foundation for the club whatsoever. 

Thanks for a great reply, for which I very much agree with you conclusion. 

[tomphil]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

Rothwell is a good example. Came very cheap. Major part of what we do now. Would sell for a lot more than he came for. If he was on a 4+ year deal he'd be worth even more than that too.

Now you are just repeating what mowbray has said in the press.

In reality is he a major part of what we do ?  For most of his time here hes seemed to be a bit part player and now he's being put in the shop window.

Where is the evidence of what he is actually worth ?   There isn't any.

[roversfan99]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Thanks for info. 

Hope we get Healey from Toulouse

if we don't get a permanent striker in then only 3 people to blame and not of it is the fault of the staff af the club or fans

If none of them is Balaji Rao, then you are wrong, if we are indeed as skint as it seems.

[47er]

6 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Has there actually been any shrewd buys or free transfer additions in Mowbrays tenure though ?

Kaminsky? Dropped a clanger with Raya though.

[Paul Mellelieu]

3 hours ago, harryhealless1928 said:

The most important transfer activity should be a change of manager.

If we really are in the financial mess that is reported, why do we need to replace Armstrong? 

Shouldnt the money be spent in at least tying down Kaminski,Brereton & Rothwell to longer contracts to get a decent fee if they go? In a less than ideal scenario  which we have Id chance Nyambe & Lenihan leaving on frees.

It would be a change of owner,

[47er]

22 minutes ago, arbitro said:

I don't see it that way. Our players are our assets and we stand to lose millions by not offering them what they are worth or even the going rate for mid table Championship. Mowbray admits money will be a factor, even if we do offer contracts to all of them.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19498097.mowbray-offers-bleak-contract-outlook-blackburn-rovers/

How can you build a side over time if you can't even afford the wages of the ones you've collected? Bizarre.

"Bleak contract outlook"!

BLEAK OUTLOOK FULL STOP. Pleasington here we come.

[islander200]

11 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Rothwell is a good example. Came very cheap. Major part of what we do now. Would sell for a lot more than he came for. If he was on a 4+ year deal he'd be worth even more than that too.

Echo what Tomphil said .He hasn't done much in terms of numbers since he has been here and can only really be described as a regular in his time here.We got him on. Free transfer and he is likely to leave here the same way 

[Paul Mellelieu]

22 minutes ago, arbitro said:

If we can't offer Nyambe what he is worth yet pay a loan fee and a percentage of the wages of Clarkson then it is. It's feasible that neither will be here next season but I would certainly prefer to spend on our own assets.

Mowbray has talked about the money situation and offered excuses why we have none to spend get he is prepared to spend money on players who absolutely won't play a part after this season. 

But do any of us know the numbers?

[islander200]

3 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Echo what Tomphil said .He hasn't done much in terms of numbers since he has been here and can only really be described as a regular last season in his time here.We got him on. Free transfer and he is likely to leave here the same way 

 

[47er]

20 minutes ago, islander200 said:

But we do not know what these players want to renew.

But we do know that this number of players running out of contract is unprecedented for us.

We do know that every year we are going backwards.