January Transfer Window.

[Sweaty Gussets]

1 minute ago, BigBar said:

There is an increasing volume of clowns on here that appear to log in not to give their own opinions but to question others opinions. Very strange approach, more interested in aggro than contributing any of value or worth. Quite pathetic really.

Or just people getting a bit sensitive because they don't like having their 'opinions' challenged. Quite pathetic really. 

[Miller11]

3 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Plenty. I just don't think it's a good enough league for Championship clubs to scout from direct. L1 and L2 clubs utilise that market and there's a lot of data on it.

And again, we both know deep down that you don't genuinely believe we aren't doing due diligence. Agents are the busiest people in the world, before you see players you know everything about them down to their dogs name and their first primary school. Surely it's reasonable to think we must have believed we had a chance at the players we've targeted. If we didn't bother trying to get these players, then people would be moaning saying we never try and getting upset when a Sorba Thomas goes to a Preston or something.

The January window is very difficult and it’s clear they've made very solid attempts, but the wage budget is the wage budget. If they miss out on Porteous because Watford can offer him double what they can, then what's to be done? Does that mean they never should have tried in the first place? CB isn't a priority area anyway so there's no reason to go out and find another CB. RP represented value and they tried to capitalise on that, if he doesn't come here then it's time to move on and that's fine.

I don’t know if we have dedicated scouts over there these days, and first team ready players might be tough to come by… Brown being a good example. I wouldn’t mind another Duff or Lenihan though.

If I didn’t have concerns that our due diligence wasn’t up to scratch I wouldn’t have said it. There’s something not right in the process if we are constantly identifying players beyond our financial means. I’m not in the least bit bothered we’ve missed out on Porteus, but trying and failing to land him counts for very little if we don’t address the more pressing needs in the squad. If we’ve left ourselves time to move on to other targets, that’s ok. Too often though we end up with hard luck stories of near misses and tales of players having unrealistic demands rather than players on the pitch.

[Tugayisgod]

1 hour ago, Sparks Rover said:

Ye, I say our first team scouting dept is shite.  They never come up with anyone good who nobody hadn't already heard of.  

The recruitment teams job 

 

[ItsRoverZ]

3 minutes ago, Tugayisgod said:

The recruitment teams job 

 

So Broughton and maggot are where the deals are falling through?

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

I think we both know that's not true. Out of a recruitment department that's now extremely large at 15+ people including all the part time staff, only around 2 or 3 have a data focus. Rovers are out at more games than pretty much most teams in the Championship. They have more live match based scouts than most teams in the Championship. Again, it's not an issue of identification, it's an issue of actually convincing those players to come here. We don't have the budget and we don't have the pull we once had.

I've read it all now. So according to you, the job of this army of 15 is to identify players who theoretically might possess the qualities we require but who we can't afford?

What's the point in that? Surely they need to be identifying players who would be of benefit who we can afford?

[ItsRoverZ]

1 minute ago, ItsRoverZ said:

So Broughton and maggot are where the deals are falling through?

Maggot was a typo but I'm keeping it 

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Yet can't afford to sign players?

What's the point in having such a big scouting department if:

A) we can't afford players

we can't find gems

C) the scouting team are wasting time scouting unaffordable players

Thank goodness someone else has pointed out the ludicrous nature of what is being claimed by an insider in the recruitment game. I thought my head was going to explode.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Too often though we end up with hard luck stories of near misses and tales of players having unrealistic demands rather than players on the pitch.

Certainly agree there, it's frustrating there's no denying it, but I don't believe the frustration should be aimed at the identification section of the process.

[Sweaty Gussets]

5 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

So according to you, the job of this army of 15 is to identify players who theoretically might possess the qualities we require but who we can't afford?

In the case of Undav all the wages/fees have been agreed with Brighton. It's either the player who his dragging his feet, or Brighton have changed their minds and have decided not to let him leave on loan. 

[Bethnal]

2 minutes ago, ItsRoverZ said:

So Broughton and maggot are where the deals are falling through?

Not as I read it. Sign-off comes from India, I assume, so they’re likely hamstrung by having an approval process from the 1950s, i.e. “leave it with us while we deliberate.” I suspect more blame falls on Waggott for not conveying the need for a swift approval process to the owners, but if he pushes there/criticises, the next communication he receives is his P45. There’s very little wrong with the club that doesn’t start with the owners. They’re simultaneously keeping the club afloat with cash injections and causing it to need constant cash injections by being so bad at owning a football club. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I've read it all now. So according to you, the job of this army of 15 is to identify players who theoretically might possess the qualities we require but who we can't afford?

What's the point in that? Surely they need to be identifying players who would be of benefit who we can afford?

I believe we're clearly going after players we feel we have a chance at securing...

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Thank goodness someone else has pointed out the ludicrous nature of what is being claimed by an insider in the recruitment game. I thought my head was going to explode.

Dialogue with me then. My take is that the players they've worked on are players they clearly believe are attainable - and I think we'd all agree that Porteous' and Undav's are attainable. Frustratingly we seem to have missed out.

[Miller11]

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Certainly agree there, it's frustrating there's no denying it, but I don't believe the frustration should be aimed at the identification section of the process.

Believe me, I wasn’t criticising the individual scouts. I know several of them personally. 

[Guest]

Overall the argument from me is that the issues don't lie within the identification stage of our process.

We, much like most Championship clubs (and most even more so), are shopping at the same Tesco when it comes to domestic scouting. "Go to ALDI", okay well we've been to Aldi, but it's a bit more risky in there. Some things you try are great, your Kaminski's of the aisle, some are dreadful and you end up back in Tesco with your tail between your legs. But the main issue is the work permits when it comes to the ALDI players. 

The ones who get the work permits are very few and far between, meaning you're sat next to scouts from a dozen other English clubs when you look at them. If one of those clubs happens to be a part of the 18 teams in this league with a bigger wage budget than us, instantly it becomes a very difficult job.

[USABlue]

On 25/01/2023 at 11:24, Exiled_Rover said:

Positive talks with Mowbray? I call foul on that one.

Wonder if he bad mouthed us to encourage the kid to go Sunderland

[RevidgeBlue]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I believe we're clearly going after players we feel we have a chance at securing...

We're not securing them though are we? I've made this point in numerous previous windows. if we don't land them we might as well be going for De Bruyne and Haaland. No prizes for wasting time and resources missing out on a player/players.

[Guest]

Just now, RevidgeBlue said:

We're not securing them though are we? I've made this point in numerous previous windows. if we don't land them we might as well be going for De Bruyne and Haaland. No prizes for wasting time and resources missing out on a player/players.

We've landed Sorba Thomas, a player who if he'd gone to Preston, people would've been questioning our lack of initiative to get him ourselves.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

No prizes for wasting time and resources missing out on a player/players.

I do agree, but you miss out on 99% of all of your targets, that's the nature of the beast. When Jan 1st rolls around you have a 30 strong list of strikers you'd be happy with and with each day that passes another one is crossed off for some reason or another.

Eventually you end up with one, it might not have been the ideal one or the one you'd have chosen if you could've, but you get one. Do you say "great we got a striker" or do you say "that's such a waste of time we've missed out on 29 players this window". Maybe that's an outlook thing

[Ossydave]

2 hours ago, Mellor Rover said:

We beat them 1-0 in his first game

He was appointed on the Friday, didn't even have time for a training session.  Wagners Norwich now are not the team we beat.

[Guest]

Just now, Ossydave said:

He was appointed on the Friday, didn't even have time for a training session.  Wagners Norwich now are not the team we beat.

Lucky for us! Same with Edwards at Watford earlier in the season. Small gains help I suppose

[Ossydave]

2 hours ago, Exiled_Rover said:

Except we beat them twice...

no shit Sherlock

[joey_big_nose]

1 hour ago, Danny O.Brien said:

Lucas Joao is two years too late. We need to go the Armstrong route buy cheap with a sell on clause. Has a good season or so here and gets a move. Atleast we benefit from it and might actually get some return on our investment. If we could do that and have continued success doing it, we might actually be an appealing option for players.

Strikes me as the sort of player who could play well into his 30s... not particularly about pace. More strength, technique and movement. Like Graham could see him being a very good number nine up to 35ish. Danny Graham played for us from ages 31 to 35. 

If there is a realistic chance to sign him, and he passes medical, I'd say we should do everything to get him.

But I suspect the Parachute teams will all be having a close look so not sure if realistic at all for us.

[RevidgeBlue]

12 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

In the case of Undav all the wages/fees have been agreed with Brighton. It's either the player who his dragging his feet, or Brighton have changed their minds and have decided not to let him leave on loan. 

In that particular instance it would appear we've put the majority of our eggs in the basket of a player who doesn't particularly want to come here and a Club who aren't particularly keen to let him go either. We should have been able to sniff out any ambivalence at an early stage and either moved on or at the very least had other options ready to go which it appears we haven't.

[Guest]

Lucas Joao is being offered around everywhere by his agent and is free to go. If Reading don't want him and the agent can't find him a club then how great is he?

[J*B]

Just now, JoeH said:

Lucas Joao is being offered around everywhere by his agent and is free to go. If Reading don't want him and the agent can't find him a club then how great is he?

Not very, don’t want him.