Transfer Window - COMPLETE. Where’s Gregg?

[ben_the_beast]

Yes it's a little concerning we've yet to sign anybody given our depleted squad. But I don't think that we have wavered from the plan at all. It was always said by both JDT and GB they wanted to assess the players at their disposal first, before then looking into the transfer market. 

That makes sense. This is why it was concerning that it took us around 6 weeks to bring them in. The pace we moved in making a managerial appointment was always going to lead to huge time based pressures. We didn't set them up with the tools / time needed for success. They may well still achieve it, but waggot and pasha etc didn't make it easy for them. 

[chaddyrovers]

39 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

So you just take at face value anything you get told?

Don’t take anything with a pinch of salt? You don’t try reading between the lines? You don’t look at somebody’s track record of being economical with the truth?

Certainly a novel way to approach life.

 

Of course I look at people track record and what they have said in the past. one of the source is a friend of mine, 

36 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Has it ever occurred to you that your "several different sources" all originally got their information from the same liar of a CEO?

that isn't the case

30 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Chaddy - don’t take up professional poker! 😁

Big fan of playing Poker. 

[Theaxe15]

How has the number of forum pages become a measurement of time???

[booth]

Signing a player has replaced the slow burn of getting a manager in.

Seeing good options being snapped up while everyone debates about bullshit.

It could be that we're waiting for the Brereton money before anything can be spent.

[Miller11]

I’ve heard that Nyambe’s initial offer was “derisory” and “insulting” from two journalists whose every word Chaddy usually hangs on.

It was described to me as “not even a raise, just an extension” by a club employee.

There would have to be some serious movement in the negotiation process for the terms he turned down to be described as “a good offer”.

[andyroversmad]

54 minutes ago, Trinidad Rover said:

100 pages without a signing.

What was the magical number last year? I'm predicting 196 before someone through the door.

I'm going with page 152 for our first signing.

[chaddyrovers]

5 minutes ago, andyroversmad said:

I'm going with page 152 for our first signing.

143

[Mattyblue]

14 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Of course I look at people track record and what they have said in the past. one of the source is a friend of mine, 

that isn't the case

Big fan of playing Poker. 

Unless your pal was involved in the negotiations, he obviously is hearing it second hand, or third hand. Even if your mate is the most trustworthy bloke you know, he’s still only passing on what he’s been told, even if what he’s being told is a load of tripe.

So it all ends up very Chinese whispers, especially when the ‘first hand’ will be agents, or certain club employees with their own agendas - as everybody will have, that’s just a typical negotiation.
 

[XLM]

Critical analysis should be mandatory in schools.

Lesson 1: consider the person's motivations and biases

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, MarkBRFC said:

So what you are saying is, "The Club has done all it can"?

Never mind "One Of Our Own", that appears to be the real tagline at play here.

' The Club Waggot has done all it  can it's prepared to do'

Probably more apt !

Although my opinion is they low balled years ago saying you've come through the ranks and were on X amount so here's a rise to Y and that's it.  You can't be expecting the same money as the managers big buys and marquee signings (even though you are now key members of the team like/unlike them)

Then they look elsewhere, get courted and realize there are better contracts and will be signing on fees at other clubs similar to ourselves.  

Later on the club back tracks and offers more realizing they've fooked up but it's too late....and still not enough.  Great work !

 

[XLM]

Even regardless of whether the offers were "good" or whether the players overvalued their worth, we wanted them to sign, otherwise we wouldn't have offered terms.

They didn't sign, and we had no contingency plan. What was the plan if they don't sign by end of summer 21, start of winter window 21/22, end of 21/22 season? It's a fact to say that either there weren't plans, or - at best - the plans didn't work (and in which case, they were inadequate).

It's a lack of basic professionalism, just hoping that they sign at some point is not acceptable at that level of any organisation.

Edited June 28, 2022 by XLM

[bigbrandjohn]

11 minutes ago, tomphil said:

' The Club Waggot has done all it  can it's prepared to do'

Probably more apt !

Although my opinion is they low balled years ago saying you've come through the ranks and were on X amount so here's a rise to Y and that's it.  You can't be expecting the same money as the managers big buys and marquee signings (even though you are now key members of the team like/unlike them)

Then they look elsewhere, get courted and realize there are better contracts and will be signing on fees at other clubs similar to ourselves.  

Later on the club back tracks and offers more realizing they've fooked up but it's too late....and still not enough.  Great work !

 

Thats how it works in life unfortunately. You have to leave a company to get a 30% increase.  Otherwise it is a bobbins inflation increase. 

[tomphil]

10 minutes ago, bigbrandjohn said:

Thats how it works in life unfortunately. You have to leave a company to get a 30% increase.  Otherwise it is a bobbins inflation increase. 

As others have said though the starting point for them as academy graduates, low cost signings was low.

So the club offering 6 grand a week plus bonuses to someone who was on 3 to 4k is a good rise.  Problem is the standard wage for established similar players in this league and some already at the club at the time was 10/11 grand a week.

So they are perfectly entitled imo to ask for that especially when we are carrying players on 14/15k and above.

I'm certain earlier in the talks some middle ground could have been reached with at least one or maybe two of them.  It doesn't set a good tone here if those coming through the ranks can't even aim to get a regular championship wage here.

Once they start getting noticed and the contracts start ticking down so signing on fees come into play elsewhere they suddenly realize they can be quids in.

Edited June 28, 2022 by tomphil

[Hi Mack]

We need a new thread for out of contract players. Or the Lenihan/Nyambe/Rothwell thread. 

[unsall]

2 hours ago, JHRover said:

There clearly is or certainly was an issue with extending contracts. Armstrong, BBD, Nyambe, Rothwell and Lenihan are living proof of that. The only reassurance since then is the commitment of Travis, Kaminski and Gallagher which suggests something changed later on last season.

But prior to that we had gone circa 2 years without getting any senior player tied down to new terms.

That suggests to me something wrong at the clubs end. Whether that be budgets, negotiators, timings, who knows, but for ALL of those players to turn down the offers after so long tells me there's a problem with how the club went about it.

'Nothing we can do about it' is precisely the attitude Waggott wants us all to take. Of course there are other things the club could have done, as is the case in every contract negotiation - offer more money, increase the budget, come to the table much earlier

Yeah they could break their wage structure and offer silly money, we are trying to get our wage to turnover down, in the next few years it has to get down to 70% of turnover, not sure how it’s going to be done.

[RoversClitheroe]

41 minutes ago, XLM said:

Even regardless of whether the offers were "good" or whether the players overvalued their worth, we wanted them to sign, otherwise we wouldn't have offered terms.

They didn't sign, and we had no contingency plan. What was the plan if they don't sign by end of summer 21, start of winter window 21/22, end of 21/22 season? It's a fact to say that either there weren't plans, or - at best - the plans didn't work (and in which case, they were inadequate).

It's a lack of basic professionalism, just hoping that they sign at some point is not acceptable at that level of any organisation.

Absolutely spot on.

Conversation over as far as I'm concerned.

Let's stop trying to support Waggott and believing every single word the man says.

Proof is in the pudding.

[Mattyblue]

7 minutes ago, unsall said:

Yeah they could break their wage structure and offer silly money, we are trying to get our wage to turnover down, in the next few years it has to get down to 70% of turnover, not sure how it’s going to be done.

Then we all need to ‘get real’ to turn a phrase. And that includes some honest speaking from the club hierarchy.

If the new wage structure and a drive to 70% means we can’t compete with run of the mill Championship clubs, for run of the mill Championships players, how long do we have left even as a run of the mill Championship club?

Edited June 28, 2022 by Mattyblue

[roversfan99]

The blame can't go solely on Waggott, as incompetent as he is at other key aspects of his job. There is clearly still a lack of joined up thinking at the club hence why Rothwell was about to be sold for a considerable profit only for the owners to stop it.

 

[JHRover]

14 minutes ago, unsall said:

Yeah they could break their wage structure and offer silly money, we are trying to get our wage to turnover down, in the next few years it has to get down to 70% of turnover, not sure how it’s going to be done.

"Silly money"

This is another one that irritates me. The suggestion being those players were demanding "silly money" to stay rather than just the going rate for an experienced Championship CB/RB. That isn't silly the only silly people are Rovers for thinking they can continue to take advantage of these academy products indefinitely, forcing them to stay on below market rate wages just because they've come through our academy.

So us coming to an agreement with two academy players requires us to offer "silly money" whilst powerhouses like Stoke and Middlesbrough are able to offer them this "silly money"? How does that work? Does it not annoy you that those clubs are in a position to cherry pick our assets for nothing?

Are you saying that those clubs are paying "silly money" whereas we aren't? Not long ago we were paying Mulgrew big money to do nothing and are paying Ayala big money to play half a season.

Then we have to replace these lads. If anyone has any bright ideas about how we find as good or better without paying a transfer fee or committing to wages on similar or more than they were looking for I'd like to hear it. Of course the 'plan' will be to delve into loans for another season, which won't arrive until the last minute and won't enable the club to profit in future - which hits turnover earning potential again.

See the fallacy of it all? We lose 2 assets worth multi-millions and now we will probably borrow replacements of no financial value to the club. So much for worrying about the finances.

I keep on hearing about this wages to turnover thing - lots of talk about reducing wages but not much talk about increasing turnover. Of course the increasing turnover bit is the tricky part that actually requires skill, effort and a plan - none of which we have at Rovers, so instead we get squeezing the diehards until they pop and cutting costs everywhere we can.

We can keep on cutting the wage bill every year and losing key players as a direct result - eventually that will destroy turnover because we will end up in League One again - that is inevitable sooner or later if the Club puts all its energy into cutting costs. You can't keep relying on finding good loans or pulling rabbits out of the hat and you can't keep losing players as soon as they mature especially not to divisional rivals on free transfers.

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by JHRover

[bluebruce]

I hope one of the first things Broughton does is assess and revise our not-fit-for-purpose wage structure (that's structure not budget) and contract renewal strategies. We can't be routinely shedding millions off asset values every summer like the last two just because of the penny pincher's ineptitude and false economy.

[booth]

26 minutes ago, Hi Mack said:

We need a new thread for out of contract players. Or the Lenihan/Nyambe/Rothwell thread. 

Agreed. If a transfer link was posted I'd miss it due to all this.

They've gone, yes it's idiotic, let's move on.

[1864roverite]

57 minutes ago, tomphil said:

As others have said though the starting point for them as academy graduates, low cost signings was low.

So the club offering 6 grand a week plus bonuses to someone who was on 3 to 4k is a good rise.  Problem is the standard wage for established similar players in this league and some already at the club at the time was 10/11 grand a week.

So they are perfectly entitled imo to ask for that especially when we are carrying players on 14/15k and above.

I'm certain earlier in the talks some middle ground could have been reached with at least one or maybe two of them.  It doesn't set a good tone here if those coming through the ranks can't even aim to get a regular championship wage here.

Once they start getting noticed and the contracts start ticking down so signing on fees come into play elsewhere they suddenly realize they can be quids in.

So explain the differences between Travis and Kaminski new deals and the ones who have left ? Kaminski is an established international keeper worth a lot more than DL and RN together and yet he signed - Travis offers more to the team than RN and again he signed as have a host of young players who should hopefully make it to the first team.

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

So explain the differences between Travis and Kaminski new deals and the ones who have left ? Kaminski is an established international keeper worth a lot more than DL and RN together and yet he signed - Travis offers more to the team than RN and again he signed as have a host of young players who should hopefully make it to the first team.

Kaminski would have already been on a senior wage therefore his increase will likely have been much smaller and taken much less negotiating than Nyambe and Rothwell in particular who may have expected wages befitting their statuses when their previous contracts were when Nyambe hadnt established himself and when Rothwell had signed from Oxford.

[JHRover]

4 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

So explain the differences between Travis and Kaminski new deals and the ones who have left ? Kaminski is an established international keeper worth a lot more than DL and RN together and yet he signed - Travis offers more to the team than RN and again he signed as have a host of young players who should hopefully make it to the first team.

Kaminksi and Travis signing was excellent news and praise goes to the Club for sorting those situations out in good time. I hope that hard lessons were learned from the out of contract crew and that the Club approached things differently from now on. But that doesn't mean I can forgive or forget what has happened with the others.

I'll have to argue that Kaminski isn't worth more than Lenihan and Nyambe combined.

Having said that if a rival or higher club wanted either of them they would have to meet our asking price, which is the privilege that comes with having your key players under proper contracts. The same won't necessarily be the case for the younger players you refer to, as once they start (hopefully) making the grade at Championship level we will have to give them improved terms and in good time. The deals dished out recently do the job for the time being but will have to be increased before vultures start circling.

[tomphil]

3 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

So explain the differences between Travis and Kaminski new deals and the ones who have left ? Kaminski is an established international keeper worth a lot more than DL and RN together and yet he signed - Travis offers more to the team than RN and again he signed as have a host of young players who should hopefully make it to the first team.

Who knows but as i said earlier the starting points for players are different.

A bit like the daft match by match ticket pricing strategies everyone at Rovers seems to be on different wages.

Kaminski as you say is an established keeper and came for a fee i think so he's on established money to start with.  The debate is the lads we are on about weren't on that type of money but were probably asking for it, which is fair enough.

Other factors obviously come into play but maybe Travis was on a better deal to start with. Or more likely he's happy here and his personal life is settled so for now he was happy to extend.