Which utterly brilliant manager will we be delighted to welcome next?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

What sort of jump are we supposedly talking then? 

Boro pay their middle pack a solid 50-75% more than ours. Their top earner will be on a solid 10kpw more than ours as well.

it’s not just about Gibson vs The Venkys and a willingness to spend either. It’s about income. Boro *real* income (not training ground sales) is significantly higher than ours, giving them much more FFP wiggle room.

[Wegerleswiggle]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

What sort of jump are we supposedly talking then? 

 

I would estimate almost double

[K-Hod]

48 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Is there any chance we name this thread something a little less depressing & negative?

In a word, no. Someone should have gotten in there first with a new thread.

To be fair, the longer it goes on, the more relevant it becomes….

[roversfan99]

5 hours ago, Paul Mani said:

I think we can…

Firstly, we don’t know the budget (I’d like to think a new management team might’ve negotiated a similar budget to the one TM had a couple of years ago - one that allowed him to speculate with purchases like - BBD, SG, AA).

Seconndly - If they’re aiming to be “a sustainable Premier League football club” going down the Brentford route, that involves buying low, selling high and then reinvesting chunky portions of the cash so that you continue to improve the team.

And finally, if all of the above never came to fruition, my point about excitement on transfers was mainly focused on the fact that a new management team will naturally look in different places for different profiles of players based on their opinion and experience, as opposed to the old regime. Regardless of cost.

Surely its's not about positivity/negativity, glasses being half full or half empty, enjoying the ride and mindsets.

You compare to Brentford, they have a totally different structure with no academy but a B team. They also have the knowledge that any time an asset is sold, a chunk is reinvested and the process is continued. With our owners, they are inconsistent with funding as proven last season, so a similar method can't work.

Also, more fool any prospective new employee if they believe what Venkys tell them, regarding resources or indeed plans. After 12 years, surely everyone would agree that we have been burnt by them more than enough to be wary, whether it is what they say directly or indeed indirectly?

When they came, it was all Champions League and 5 year budgets. The sort of objectives that have fed through since have become less laughable but equally as fanciful based on their corresponding actions. Even last season, they (apparently themselves) stated on the official site that they were fully behind the club and endeavoured to come to Ewood at least once last season. What happened? They reinvested no money and never showed up!

 

[Spartakfenni]

42 minutes ago, Mercer said:

We now begin to see the consequences of our shambolic managerial recruitment process.

Lenihan off to Middlesbrough is, IMO, an avoidable loss.  Seems, quite reasonably from his point of view, he was waiting to see who our new manager would be but the lad wasn't going to wait for ever.  The signs were the new contract with us had been agreed.

Not a world beater but will be difficult and costly to replace at this level.  This means immediately our new manager will have less to spend on strengthening other parts of the team as we will need a replacement for Lenihan because if anyone thinks we will get through a season with two from Ayala / Carter / Wharton then they need to think again. 

Don't think our owners and Waggott will ever learn - completely and utterly shambolic management.

 

He was always going to go. He waited around to ensure he maximised the offers. He’s found his level, and Middlesbrough paying big bucks. No Premiership team we’re going to take a gamble on him, even those that have just been promoted.

[JHRover]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Boro pay their middle pack a solid 50-75% more than ours. Their top earner will be on a solid 10kpw more than ours as well.

it’s not just about Gibson vs The Venkys and a willingness to spend either. It’s about income. Boro *real* income (not training ground sales) is significantly higher than ours, giving them much more FFP wiggle room.

So what about the £20 million we have brought in from selling Armstrong and the forced sale of Brereton that will have to happen?

That money wipes out comfortably any revenues Middlesbrough have that we don't.

That's before we get onto wage bills. Any guesses what theirs is compared to ours now?

No this comes back to willingness.

Gibson wants to spend and will get around FFP  to do do.

Venkys don't want to spend, will use FFP as a convenient shield and have slashed the budgets again as they did in 2015-16. Mowbray himself alluded to it in his parting comments.

We've just got to hope the outcome to these cuts is different to 2017. I don't see much reason for optimism on that

 

[arbitro]

15 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Boro pay their middle pack a solid 50-75% more than ours. Their top earner will be on a solid 10kpw more than ours as well.

it’s not just about Gibson vs The Venkys and a willingness to spend either. It’s about income. Boro *real* income (not training ground sales) is significantly higher than ours, giving them much more FFP wiggle room.

The point lots of people are making is how much it will cost to replace him. If we get an oven ready Championship centre half he will want paying accordingly not to mention a potential transfer fee.

Financially the whole deal makes no sense from a Rovers perspective.

Edited June 9, 2022 by arbitro

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, JHRover said:

1. So what about the £20 million we have brought in from selling Armstrong and the forced sale of Brereton that will have to happen?

2. That money wipes out comfortably any revenues Middlesbrough have that we don't.

3. That's before we get onto wage bills. Any guesses what theirs is compared to ours now?

1. That's not sustainable long term income. Boro probably bring in double what we bring in every single week as a club in terms of income. 

2. I don't think it does. Middlesbrough attendace is over 10,000 higher than ours every week. They're bringing in double what we bring in on a weekly basis. Add in their probable sale of Djed Spence etc... and it's hardly a wipe out.

3. It doesn't matter what their losses are or what our losses are, their income is still higher than ours and that's what matters for FFP. We're not talking about profit (or lack thereof)

 

Edited June 9, 2022 by JoeH

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Financially the whole deal makes no sense from a Rovers perspective.

If a player wants to move for a significant pay day then how do you stop him? It's not just the wages, he and his agent will be getting a nice fat lump sum just for going as well.

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

1. That's not sustainable long term income. Boro probably bring in double what we bring in every single week as a club in terms of income. 

2. I don't think it does. Middlesbrough attendace is over 10,000 higher than ours every week. They're bringing in double what we bring in on a weekly basis. Add in their probably sale of Djed Spence etc... and it's hardly a wipe out.

3. It doesn't matter what their losses are or what our losses are, their income is still higher than ours and that's what matters for FFP. We're not talking about profit (or lack thereof)

 

Out of interest, do you think that Venkys would invest more was it not for FFP?

[47er]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Out of interest, do you think that Venkys would invest more was it not for FFP?

No.

[Guest]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Out of interest, do you think that Venkys would invest more was it not for FFP?

I'd be completely guessing really. Maybe? I think we could've spent money in January given the sale of Armstrong and the training ground sale. But given Ben Brereton and Sam Gallagher and the money they cost, I'd say the track record suggests Venky's aren't afraid of throwing cash at it.

[Mattyblue]

2 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I'd be completely guessing really. Maybe? I think we could've spent money in January given the sale of Armstrong and the training ground sale. But given Ben Brereton and Sam Gallagher and the money they cost, I'd say the track record suggests Venky's aren't afraid of throwing cash at it.

Then why don’t they invest in club infrastructure that isn’t impacted by FFP?

 

Edited June 9, 2022 by Mattyblue

[Leonard Venkhater]

Just now, JoeH said:

I'd be completely guessing really. Maybe? I think we could've spent money in January given the sale of Armstrong and the training ground sale. But given Ben Brereton and Sam Gallagher and the money they cost, I'd say the track record suggests Venky's aren't afraid of throwing cash at it.

If they aren't afraid of throwing cash at it, why the ever lengthening list of second/rate or novice (cheap)managers?

[Guest]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

Then why don’t they invest in club infrastructure that isn’t impacted by FFP?

 

Again, I don't know? I don't understand why me explaining the wages Boro pay out has become an interrogation about Venky's willingness to spend money on infrastructure? I'm not privy to their dealings or feelings.

[Mattyblue]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

Again, I don't know? I don't understand why me explaining the wages Boro pay out has become an interrogation about Venky's willingness to spend money on infrastructure? I'm not privy to their dealings or feelings.

You said ‘maybe’ to them being open to investment, I asked a follow up question to why you think so. ‘Tis a forum after all.

No need to get narky. 😁

 

Edited June 9, 2022 by Mattyblue

[roversfan99]

Its a myth thats developed that hasnt even come from those in the club really, it wasnt mentioned by Waggott nor Mowbray when we didnt spend last summer, they mentioned being preoccupied in India. The lack of willingness to spend on things that arent FFP eligible prove it to be nonsense.

[47er]

6 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I'd be completely guessing really. Maybe? I think we could've spent money in January given the sale of Armstrong and the training ground sale. But given Ben Brereton and Sam Gallagher and the money they cost, I'd say the track record suggests Venky's aren't afraid of throwing cash at it.

Sporadically and irrationally. Then when it doesn't work---back to sleep for 3 years.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mattyblue said:

You said ‘maybe’ to them being open to investment, I asked a follow up question to why you think so. ‘Tis a forum after all.

No need to get narky. 😁

 

My maybe comment was prefixed with, "i'm completely guessing" and came following another question which had nothing to do with Middlesbrough and their wages. I'm not here to defend Venkys or pretend to know what they wanna do.

[AspRover]

10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Out of interest, do you think that Venkys would invest more was it not for FFP?

I always get the impression that the Venky's would chuck money unexpectedly and sporadically at things that caught their imagination. Stadium maintenance isn't interesting, but Jordan Rhodes came straight out of the proverbial back pocket.

So maybe? But probably not in the ways we need it to be invested. 

Edit - as I was typing that several people essentially said the same thing quicker than I managed, didn't mean to be repetitive!

Edited June 9, 2022 by AspRover

[47er]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Its a myth thats developed that hasnt even come from those in the club really, it wasnt mentioned by Waggott nor Mowbray when we didnt spend last summer, they mentioned being preoccupied in India. The lack of willingness to spend on things that arent FFP eligible prove it to be nonsense.

Bang on. Preventing the stands' girders rusting away isn't affected by ffp but it still doesn't happen.

[Mattyblue]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

My maybe comment was prefixed with, "i'm completely guessing" and came following another question which had nothing to do with Middlesbrough and their wages. I'm not here to defend Venkys or pretend to know what they wanna do.

It’s all to do with Middlesbrough and their wages.

Blackburn Rovers never struggled to compete with bloody Middlesbrough until recent years. The crux of the matter is, even putting FFP restrictions on owner team investment aside, why this club has reached such a state commercially that even our top earners can’t get close to their ‘middle pack’.

Edited June 9, 2022 by Mattyblue

[JHRover]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

1. That's not sustainable long term income. Boro probably bring in double what we bring in every single week as a club in terms of income. 

2. I don't think it does. Middlesbrough attendace is over 10,000 higher than ours every week. They're bringing in double what we bring in on a weekly basis. Add in their probable sale of Djed Spence etc... and it's hardly a wipe out.

3. It doesn't matter what their losses are or what our losses are, their income is still higher than ours and that's what matters for FFP. We're not talking about profit (or lack thereof)

 

It's not a question of what is sustainable. Its a question of what is allowed under the rules.

People on here have been beating the FFP drum for years, advocating the importance of selling players at big profits to trade. Well we've done that with Armstrong and Brereton yet I'm supposed to believe that despite the good work done on those players and massive funds received that we are still at a massive disadvantage and unable to compete with .... Middlesbrough?

We talk about the Brentford model yet reinvestment and retention of key players on robust contracts essential to their model... we haven't done that here. Selling players and reinvesting is precisely how Brentford competed and won promotion... not by letting key players leave on frees to rivals. So it is sustainable and is a route to competing.

Middlesbrough's income may be greater than ours ... but they only play 23 home games a season like we do. They aren't getting big crowds on every weekend. As I say it matters not if we have a big sale every year to two to wipe out the difference.

I'm not sure what you are on about at paragraph 3. Of course losses matter, FFP is based on profit and loss, central to which are income and expenditure. Their income might be much higher but so are their outgoings, or at least they should be given the massive cuts at Rovers since last year. How many big earners left now?

[arbitro]

2 minutes ago, JoeH said:

If a player wants to move for a significant pay day then how do you stop him? It's not just the wages, he and his agent will be getting a nice fat lump sum just for going as well.

None of us know the figures involved despite many assertions and assumptions. From what I heard Rovers didn't try particularly hard and negotiations pretty much stalled from the first offer and I have a vague recollection of Lenihan saying he wanted to stay. In fact somebody on here posted that Waggott told him he thought Lenihan would stay.

 

 

[Mercer]

11 minutes ago, JoeH said:

1. That's not sustainable long term income. Boro probably bring in double what we bring in every single week as a club in terms of income. 

2. I don't think it does. Middlesbrough attendace is over 10,000 higher than ours every week. They're bringing in double what we bring in on a weekly basis. Add in their probably sale of Djed Spence etc... and it's hardly a wipe out.

3. It doesn't matter what their losses are or what our losses are, their income is still higher than ours and that's what matters for FFP. We're not talking about profit (or lack thereof)

 

Latest filed accounts for both clubs blow your arguments out of the water.

Rovers turnover £15million v M'boro £14million

Rovers wages £26million v M'boro £27million