Jon Dahl Tomasson - Sweden coach

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

You don't sell your best players when you're 2nd in the league at the halfway point, project or no project. Last season fell apart because Mowbray refused to sign a striker in Jan and so when BBD's purple patch ended we were fucked. It was all on Mowbray. 

Was it all on him that we were 2nd in the first place when he had his best player sold with no money for reinvestment?

Its not as if we couldnt replace Rothwell, we could have used the money and then had one or two assets for the long term. 

[Sweaty Gussets]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Was it all on him that we were 2nd in the first place when he had his best player sold with no money for reinvestment?

Its not as if we couldnt replace Rothwell, we could have used the money and then had one or two assets for the long term. 

Yep, all on him, which made it even more bizarre that he'd self-sabotage and undo all his good work by not signing a striker from a position of strength. 

Who knows who was available? There was lots of talk about Dembele but I'd imagine B'mouth pay him a lot more than we could. So, no, there are no guarantees we could have replaced Rothwell in January at all. 

[chaddyrovers]

4 hours ago, Wheelton Blue said:

FFS, 3 summer windows my arse.

Clubs who mean business grab the bull by the horns, and go for it.

But not us; we'll still be pissing about when the next man comes in.

Which do you mean by go for it? If it spending loads of money we don't have it due to FFP but we can trade and buy the squad that wise. We now have invested in the recruitment department and brought in Gus Williams and several new staff members to we need to allow that to find the right players and for the right prices. Hopefully we can find some gems in European market like Belgium, Germany and Scandinavia areas. Plus keep developing and using our own players from the academy.   

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Our owners have intervened twice in the last year to prevent us profiting on players and making over £10m in favour of letting said players leave for free. Not the decisions of owners invested in a project.

You don't sell your players on the cheap which we would be in the past summer with BBD. His worth is much more to the team that is challenging for top 6 which I didn't expect this season. 

On Rothwell I would have sold him last January and given that he wasn't going to sign a new contract and wanted out for number of months due to family reasons. 

[chaddyrovers]

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Was it all on him that we were 2nd in the first place when he had his best player sold with no money for reinvestment?

Its not as if we couldnt replace Rothwell, we could have used the money and then had one or two assets for the long term. 

Who did Mowbray have line up to replace Rothwell? wasn't it Sunderland midfielder Dan Neil? 

[roversfan99]

12 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Who did Mowbray have line up to replace Rothwell? wasn't it Sunderland midfielder Dan Neil? 

Not a clue. Point being we could have signed 1 or 2 long term assets for the same money. Pissed over £12m down the drain and then continue to bang on about projects.

 

[roversfan99]

21 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

Yep, all on him, which made it even more bizarre that he'd self-sabotage and undo all his good work by not signing a striker from a position of strength. 

Who knows who was available? There was lots of talk about Dembele but I'd imagine B'mouth pay him a lot more than we could. So, no, there are no guarantees we could have replaced Rothwell in January at all. 

The 2 strikers mentioned in the LT that he turned down were Forss and Connolly who went to Hull and Boro. Neither I dont think would have made a difference. A budget of 700k and a couple of loans was poor from the owners following the Armstrong sale and in a position of strength.

He also went for Jed Wallace, he said so last week in a Sunderland press conference. The issue is more with allowing players to run their contracts down after rejecting bids for them, totally against the supposed project.

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Not a clue. Point being we could have signed 1 or 2 long term assets for the same money. Pissed over £12m down the drain and then continue to bang on about projects.

 

when did we get 12 million offer for Rothwell or even BBD?

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

when did we get 12 million offer for Rothwell or even BBD?

£4m for Rothwell, £8.4m for Brereton so over £12m, I think anyway. Might not be exact.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

The 2 strikers mentioned in the LT that he turned down were Forss and Connolly who went to Hull and Boro. Neither I dont think would have made a difference. A budget of 700k and a couple of loans was poor from the owners following the Armstrong sale and in a position of strength.

He also went for Jed Wallace, he said so last week in a Sunderland press conference. The issue is more with allowing players to run their contracts down after rejecting bids for them, totally against the supposed project.

Lenihan and Nyambe were still in discussions with the club in January and was even towards end of the season? 

Haven't several posters claimed that Mowbray had more money to spend then he claim and he never spent his entire transfer budget each window?

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Lenihan and Nyambe were still in discussions with the club in January and was even towards end of the season? 

Haven't several posters claimed that Mowbray had more money to spend then he claim and he never spent his entire transfer budget each window?

Not interested in gossip from supposed ITK's.

[chaddyrovers]

17 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

£4m for Rothwell, £8.4m for Brereton so over £12m, I think anyway. Might not be exact.

fair enough. I think BBD is worth at least double that if not more if we get promotion with him this season

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Not interested in gossip from supposed ITK's.

Who says it Gossip tho?

[roversfan99]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

fair enough. I think BBD is worth at least double that if not more if we get promotion with him this season

Who says it Gossip tho?

Even if we did then he might not stay but presuming he would, I dont think it fits with all of this project waffle to make such high risk high reward decisions on assets.

Gossip is defined as "casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true." Thus it is gossip.

 

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Even if we did then he might not stay but presuming he would, I dont think it fits with all of this project waffle to make such high risk high reward decisions on assets.

But we still get the financial reward of the PL money to offset any money we get from selling him now. We simple don't know what BBD will do after this season. 

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Gossip is defined as "casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true." Thus it is gossip.

 

Well Mowbray ain't going to tell us is he that he didn't need to sell Rothwell to fund other signings is he? 

[Sweaty Gussets]

45 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

£4m for Rothwell, £8.4m for Brereton so over £12m, I think anyway. Might not be exact.

Did you have those figures confirmed by the clubs involved or was it just gossip?

[J*B]

3 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Our owners have intervened twice in the last year to prevent us profiting on players and making over £10m in favour of letting said players leave for free. Not the decisions of owners invested in a project.

The people underneath will talk about projects and visions as they are typical soundbites which can help to buy time with supporters.

It depends how you spin in really. 

If they intervened on Rothwell because they thought (or had been told) they couldn’t adequately replace him with the funds offered, then the decision not to sell him makes perfect sense. 

If they intervened on Brereton because they thought (or had been told) they couldn’t adequately replace him with the funds offered… or if signing a player for circa ~7M and selling him for circa ~8M vs. him leaving for free in 12 months makes hardly any difference to FFP, then it makes sense. 

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, J*B said:

It depends how you spin in really. 

If they intervened on Rothwell because they thought (or had been told) they couldn’t adequately replace him with the funds offered, then the decision not to sell him makes perfect sense. 

If they intervened on Brereton because they thought (or had been told) they couldn’t adequately replace him with the funds offered… or if signing a player for circa ~7M and selling him for circa ~8M vs. him leaving for free in 12 months makes hardly any difference to FFP, then it makes sense. 

Even forgetting FFP, as a club that has spent less than £12m across 3 seasons, that is a hell of a lot of money. With all that spiel about projects and journeys that we constantly hear, it makes zero business sense to turn our nose up at that to gamble on promotion. I dont get how it can be spun the other way. 

If we repeatedly cannot replace outgoing players then there is a huge underlying issue with our recruitment.

[J*B]

3 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Even forgetting FFP, as a club that has spent less than £12m across 3 seasons, that is a hell of a lot of money. With all that spiel about projects and journeys that we constantly hear, it makes zero business sense to turn our nose up at that to gamble on promotion. I dont get how it can be spun the other way. 

If we repeatedly cannot replace outgoing players then there is a huge underlying issue with our recruitment.

You’d hope the new team running the footballing side of the business are much better than their previous.

Obviously the previous situation is totally unsustainable in anything other than the short term. 

If they’ve any sense they have made a decision on BBD this summer based around any combination of: can’t replace him for ~8M, don’t have time to sign anyone, don’t have any recruitment plans lined up to replace him, have to build a new footballing side of the business, don’t want to put JDT on the back foot by selling his best player… and in future it wouldn’t happen the way it has. 

I suspect we’ll find out in the next 18 months! 

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, J*B said:

You’d hope the new team running the footballing side of the business are much better than their previous.

Obviously the previous situation is totally unsustainable in anything other than the short term. 

If they’ve any sense they have made a decision on BBD this summer based around any combination of: can’t replace him for ~8M, don’t have time to sign anyone, don’t have any recruitment plans lined up to replace him, have to build a new footballing side of the business, don’t want to put JDT on the back foot by selling his best player… and in future it wouldn’t happen the way it has. 

I suspect we’ll find out in the next 18 months! 

I wouldn't hold my breath because the common denominator throughout the last 12 years has been Venkys and it is them that are responsible for our inability to stick consistently to a business model.

This is the first season in the supposed project and regardless of when Tomasson and Broughton came in, there is much more emphasis on the short teem becauss if we dont get promoted, we have essentially spent over £8m to loan Brereton for a season.

[Sweaty Gussets]

14 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

it makes zero business sense to turn our nose up at that to gamble on promotion. I dont get how it can be spun the other way. 

Or it makes zero business sense to gamble on not getting promotion as a result of selling your better players. 

AKA £10m now, or £150m in a years time. 

And as Venky's appear happy to cover the losses anyway, and also invest in players, you are building your argument around a false premise. 

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

Or it makes zero business sense to gamble on not getting promotion as a result of selling your better players. 

AKA £10m now, or £150m in a years time. 

And as Venky's appear happy to cover the losses anyway, and also invest in players, you are building your argument around a false premise. 

I dont think that personally it makes sense to be gambling. The thing with the Championship is that even if you finish 3rd-6th, probability wise you are more likely to not get promoted.

You look at Brentford, they often are mentioned as a good business model. They were a top 6 side for a few years but it took them a while to actually get over the line. They have always had assets (Hogan, Gray, Maupay, Watkins, Benrahma, Toney, Mbuemo) that they always sold at the right time to enhance value, but then reinvested a big chunk of that money back into the next asset immediately, and always remained very competitive. It was only a matter of time before they went up despite not having parachute money, it just took good recruitment and a consistent plan.

We simply havent had a consistent model, last summer we sold Armstrong and spent nothing, at the end of this season we will probably lose Brereton and have no readily available funds to replace. We have never even made the top 6.

[chaddyrovers]

12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I wouldn't hold my breath because the common denominator throughout the last 12 years has been Venkys and it is them that are responsible for our inability to stick consistently to a business model.

This is the first season in the supposed project and regardless of when Tomasson and Broughton came in, there is much more emphasis on the short teem becauss if we dont get promoted, we have essentially spent over £8m to loan Brereton for a season.

We have invested massively a new team in the recruitment departments where we can look and find these gems where in the summer just gone we wouldn't have that knowledge or inside on potential signings. 

We kept BBD cos he is one of the best player in the league and we never received an offer we deemed suitable to sell. 

[roversfan99]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

We have invested massively a new team in the recruitment departments where we can look and find these gems where in the summer just gone we wouldn't have that knowledge or inside on potential signings. 

We kept BBD cos he is one of the best player in the league and we never received an offer we deemed suitable to sell. 

We have heard it all before regarding recruitment and plans and projects. Under Venkys we have added staff seemingly with the premise of pushing on only to see everything stripped back again a year or 2 later.

[J*B]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

I dont think that personally it makes sense to be gambling. The thing with the Championship is that even if you finish 3rd-6th, probability wise you are more likely to not get promoted.

You look at Brentford, they often are mentioned as a good business model. They were a top 6 side for a few years but it took them a while to actually get over the line. They have always had assets (Hogan, Gray, Maupay, Watkins, Benrahma, Toney, Mbuemo) that they always sold at the right time to enhance value, but then reinvested a big chunk of that money back into the next asset immediately, and always remained very competitive. It was only a matter of time before they went up despite not having parachute money, it just took good recruitment and a consistent plan.

We simply havent had a consistent model, last summer we sold Armstrong and spent nothing, at the end of this season we will probably lose Brereton and have no readily available funds to replace. We have never even made the top 6.

We couldn’t spend any money because of FFP despite selling Armstrong, as the latest accounts show. We also had to sell our training ground to our owners. 

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

You look at Brentford, they often are mentioned as a good business model. They were a top 6 side for a few years but it took them a while to actually get over the line. They have always had assets (Hogan, Gray, Maupay, Watkins, Benrahma, Toney, Mbuemo) that they always sold at the right time to enhance value, but then reinvested a big chunk of that money back into the next asset immediately, and always remained very competitive. It was only a matter of time before they went up despite not having parachute money, it just took good recruitment and a consistent plan.

We simply havent had a consistent model, last summer we sold Armstrong and spent nothing, at the end of this season we will probably lose Brereton and have no readily available funds to replace. We have never even made the top 6.

We couldn't spend much last season cos we were on the FFP threshold. 

Do you honestly think selling BBD for less than double figures would be wise really for the team in terms of results and league table? Would we be 3rd right now in the league table if we sold BBD this summer? 

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

We have heard it all before regarding recruitment and plans and projects. Under Venkys we have added staff seemingly with the premise of pushing on only to see everything stripped back again a year or 2 later.

The past is the part but we need have brought in people in specific roles that our Director of Football and Head of Recruitment so the time to judge isn't on Christmas eve but after next summer transfer window?