Gregg Broughton

[den]

The most important part of that Broughton interview for me was the enforced cut in the wage bill of 15% on top of the club having to finance any buys itself. 
That is the owners cutting their financial input significantly with no guarantees of future commitment. That’s a huge backward step and must leave everyone at Ewood in the dark and quite worried. How can any kind of plans be laid under those circumstances? Very difficult and hard to see how any kind of progress can be made. Indeed the opposite is far more likely I.M.O.

[DackDackGoose]

On the other hand if we hadn't made those first three quick signings perhaps the small funds we did have wouldv'e been better reinvested. 

[Exiled in Toronto Mk2]

The differences between what JDT and GB say to me just sound like the different perspectives that the DoF / Coach structure introduces: JDT wants more and better players whereas GB has to balance the reduced budget. Under the old system, Mowbray had to make the squad/money trade-offs himself.

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, tomphil said:

It's always been my assumption that the plan is to give Pears as many games as possible to get value into him then he'll be the next off the conveyor belt.

Of course his form will dictate that but the idea that Leo is just waiting in the wings to step up in a 'not if but when' scenario i reckon isn't the case.

I'd much rather just play the better GK. 

Pears' value would pale in comparison to Wahlstedt's if he's any good.

[Eddie]

10 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

3. He mentions the Raya money but suggest the club was not reliant on it, so why mention it? That £5million now would of had big baring imo. The suggestion is now we will see it over 3 years when deal goes through.

I think you're unnecessarily harsh to him on this point. It was of course going to be mentioned, either by him directly or through a question - so it makes sense to address it.

As for the 3 year comment, most transfer fees are paid in installments, but he's more likely referring to the fact that the Championship's FFP rules are over a rolling 3 year period. So an injection of an 'unexpected' 5 million puts us in good standing regarding our FFP status for the subsequent 3 years. 

[Southside Rover]

I normally like what I hear from GB but personally this time I wasn't sold.

Speaks well and answes the questions but to me he came across as covering for the owners and painting a glossy and rosey outlook. Yes I get it, what's he likely to say in public about his bosses but I think he could answer a question and stop short of all the praise and support for them.

Saying the squad is stronger I just don't buy. It might well turn out to be but in most cases our signings are relatively unknowns or certainly at this level.

Also, he spoke glowingly about Phillips but when moving in to Wharton, was there a subtle dig about playing games, build momentum and walk in to a 1st team premier league squad as a starter?

[Eddie]

12 minutes ago, Southside Rover said:

Also, he spoke glowingly about Phillips but when moving in to Wharton, was there a subtle dig about playing games, build momentum and walk in to a 1st team premier league squad as a starter?

That wasn't a dig at all. He spoke highly of Wharton, but was making it clear that he felt that he'd benefit from guaranteed playing time and development by staying here. 

It's exactly the kind of message that we should have for young players. I would have preferred if he had mentioned the possibility of Wharton getting Premier League football with us at some point in the next couple of years, but other than that the message was pretty spot on.

We have to make it clear to young players that it's important that they get first team football, that we're a club that can develop their talent, and that they can either reach a higher level of football through our success or that we won't stand in their way and that regular playing time in your early years is a springboard to greater things.

Not a dig at all.

[philipl]

If we are still in contention, which I believe we will be, after

- a £5m cut to the transfer budget mid window 

- a 15% cut to wage budget on top of already one of the smallest budgets in the Championship 

- a block on signing players over 27

Broughton and his team are miracle workers.

And sure the DoF is going to undermine the entire football club by saying  on Rovers TV the squad is weaker! What planet are some people on?

Despite the 3 early signings, the reality is we have scarcely seen anything of the 7 new players and we are 7 games into what will be a minimum of a 50 game season.

We can't meaningfully offer supporters' judgement until after the forthcoming 7 games in 22 days including some pre-season bookies' favourites for promotion. 

 

[roverblue]

Not condoning the 15% wage cut but I am sure I read both on here and in the newspapers that squads have to cut their turnover to wage ratio to 75% or something in the near future.

So whilst a ball ache this summer it might have a positive from that perspective? 

[Atko's Engine]

As ever I really enjoyed that interview with GB. He is articulate, answers questions in a straightforward manner and doesn't shirk responsibility. Seems like he doesn't get ruffled too easily either.

We've no way of knowing if what he is saying is 100% true of course, but to have someone on board who regularly fronts up to fans & explains the rationale behind the decision-making process and doesn't just waffle management gobbledegook is hugely refreshing.

Despite his platitudes towards the owners, he & his team clearly had the rug pulled out from under their feet midway through the implementation of a clearly thought-out transfer strategy that was 6-9 months in the making. Since that fateful change, to still be able to bring in the likes of Wahlstedt & Moran, despite stiff competition, is testament to his perseverance, recruitment research & also (in Moran's case especially, less so Hill's) the trust placed in the belief in the quality of coaching he'll receive here.

Telalovic is clearly punt, but one which has logic behind it. He seems to be an English style player, & although he his minimal 1st team experience he must have something about him to have been anywhere near the BM first 11. I'd rather this, than know we'd committed £8m to Ellis Simms for example.

Overall the new signings show promise, and are evidence of creativity & exploitation of new avenues of recruitment. Will the 7 improve on BBD, Dack, Ayala, Kaminski, Morton et al? Who knows, but if they don't it wont be for the want of trying on GB's part at least.

[tomphil]

9 hours ago, Exiled_Rover said:

I'd much rather just play the better GK. 

Pears' value would pale in comparison to Wahlstedt's if he's any good.

JDT will do that unless he gets told otherwise.

[JHRover]

16 hours ago, only2garners said:

I have just received the approved minutes, so they should be on the website in the next day or two.

Steve Waggott wasn't at the meeting. He has been on holiday and I think is back tomorrow.

We did of course raise the issue of the Cardiff game (I think you might mean Blackburn End!) - everyone was unanimous in their opposition to the stand closure.

So in the absence of Waggott there was no owner, representative or board member at the meeting?

In which case this does not qualify as a 'consultation meeting' with fans under league rules, which must be attended by at least one of the above.

[JHRover]

So a few snippets from what I've seen and heard (Not gone through the full interview yet):

1) The budget was slashed mid-transfer window with zero warning from India, torpedoing Broughton and JDTs plans.

2) Broughton tried to warn the owners that this would quite possibly lead to JDT becoming disillusioned and leaving the club, a travesty after an excellent first season, the owners don't seem to have taken that on board and don't care.

3) Despite claims to the contrary he has confirmed that there was an embargo on signings in place, which was so strict that it even prevented us signing Batth on a free/low cost short deal from Sunderland even though JDT had identified him as what was needed in defence. I ask again why this is better than being under an EFL imposed embargo for breaching FFP rules (where you can sign players within certain parameters).

4) 'Geopolitical issues' keeps being repeated by Broughton and the local media as the 'reason' for this chaos but none seem willing or able to actually spell out how geopolitics are affecting Rovers' transfer plans. A tax/financial investigation isn't geopolitical, unless the suggestion is that this is motivated by political reasons.

[only2garners]

29 minutes ago, JHRover said:

So in the absence of Waggott there was no owner, representative or board member at the meeting?

In which case this does not qualify as a 'consultation meeting' with fans under league rules, which must be attended by at least one of the above.

Mike Cheston was there.

[pk1875]

5 minutes ago, only2garners said:

Mike Cheston was there.

Cheston was there?

 

I bet his input was riveting

 

[AllRoverAsia]

35 minutes ago, JHRover said:

So a few snippets from what I've seen and heard (Not gone through the full interview yet):

1) The budget was slashed mid-transfer window with zero warning from India, torpedoing Broughton and JDTs plans.

2) Broughton tried to warn the owners that this would quite possibly lead to JDT becoming disillusioned and leaving the club, a travesty after an excellent first season, the owners don't seem to have taken that on board and don't care.

3) Despite claims to the contrary he has confirmed that there was an embargo on signings in place, which was so strict that it even prevented us signing Batth on a free/low cost short deal from Sunderland even though JDT had identified him as what was needed in defence. I ask again why this is better than being under an EFL imposed embargo for breaching FFP rules (where you can sign players within certain parameters).

4) 'Geopolitical issues' keeps being repeated by Broughton and the local media as the 'reason' for this chaos but none seem willing or able to actually spell out how geopolitics are affecting Rovers' transfer plans. A tax/financial investigation isn't geopolitical, unless the suggestion is that this is motivated by political reasons.

Does India have a problem with the UK that would compel India to seize Venkys assets in India?

I think not.

Edited September 14, 2023 by AllRoverAsia

[Bethnal]

9 hours ago, Eddie said:

That wasn't a dig at all. He spoke highly of Wharton, but was making it clear that he felt that he'd benefit from guaranteed playing time and development by staying here. 

It's exactly the kind of message that we should have for young players. I would have preferred if he had mentioned the possibility of Wharton getting Premier League football with us at some point in the next couple of years, but other than that the message was pretty spot on.

We have to make it clear to young players that it's important that they get first team football, that we're a club that can develop their talent, and that they can either reach a higher level of football through our success or that we won't stand in their way and that regular playing time in your early years is a springboard to greater things.

Not a dig at all.

I thought there was a small dig at Gareth Seddon in there. Said the words “if a player has the right representation” in the BBC Lancs interview, when talking about leaving to walk into a starting XI. Clearly explaining that we know where we are as a club and if a big, big Premiership or European club comes in, we understand that the pull would be big, but that there’s a greater chance of maintaining “career momentum,” as he put it, at Rovers.

I think with the way he talked about the Phillips situation, combined with this (as well as the rumour of Gareth Seddon being Tyrhys Dolan’s new agent) is a dig at the Phillips deal, if not the timing of it.

My kind of shade throwing.

Edited September 14, 2023 by Bethnal

[Gav]

We often criticize the club, nobody more than me, but this interview is refreshing, lots of detail that they don't need to divulge, as we have witnessed over the past 12yrs. 

Nobody can read this and still think Venkys are our best option moving forward, its death by 1000 cuts, we need them out.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, roverblue said:

Not condoning the 15% wage cut but I am sure I read both on here and in the newspapers that squads have to cut their turnover to wage ratio to 75% or something in the near future.

So whilst a ball ache this summer it might have a positive from that perspective? 

Yup, Wages to Turnover % needs to be at 70% by 2026 or something. Last financial report had us at 147% for 2021/22, no doubt it's come down fairly significantly to 110-120% since then, maybe a little lower.

Whilst it's frustrating, being one of the few clubs who's making a head start on this requirement (albeit due to circumstances out of the clubs control), coupled with the fantastic academy churn out we have, we'll be in a very strong position come that deadline.

If we don't manage to get promoted before 2026, we'll be one of the (if not the) most prepared clubs in the league for the changes.

[Crimpshrine]

7 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Yup, Wages to Turnover % needs to be at 70% by 2026 or something. Last financial report had us at 147% for 2021/22, no doubt it's come down fairly significantly to 110-120% since then, maybe a little lower.

Whilst it's frustrating, being one of the few clubs who's making a head start on this requirement (albeit due to circumstances out of the clubs control), coupled with the fantastic academy churn out we have, we'll be in a very strong position come that deadline.

If we don't manage to get promoted before 2026, we'll be one of the (if not the) most prepared clubs in the league for the changes.

They could, of course reduce the ratio of wages to turnover by increasing the turnover.  More sponsors, better ticket prices to increase crowds and, therefore, other income on matchdays,  availability of replica shirts, use of Ewood facilities on non match days. 

Or just cut wages, that's much easier.

[JHRover]

23 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Yup, Wages to Turnover % needs to be at 70% by 2026 or something. Last financial report had us at 147% for 2021/22, no doubt it's come down fairly significantly to 110-120% since then, maybe a little lower.

Whilst it's frustrating, being one of the few clubs who's making a head start on this requirement (albeit due to circumstances out of the clubs control), coupled with the fantastic academy churn out we have, we'll be in a very strong position come that deadline.

If we don't manage to get promoted before 2026, we'll be one of the (if not the) most prepared clubs in the league for the changes.

I doubt that. They'll just find some other way to sink us like they always do.

I remember after promotion from League One we were told that we weren't going to go daft and spend big money to try and bounce to the PL. We were going to be sensible and structured and invest correctly, in doing so avoiding FFP issues and building something that would enable us to be well placed medium term after all these other clubs had suffered through overspending and FFP trouble.

Fast forward just 2-3 years and we've let a raft of said assets walk away for nothing, nobly claiming we had no alternative, and into the mix have had to sell off our training ground apparently to ensure compliance. Not many clubs have done that.

I was told that the likes of Stoke, Bristol City, Middlesbrough, spending millions a year and huge wages, would get their comeuppance under FFP whilst we would be sat pretty with a solid base.

As it turns out none of those clubs have faced sanctions, despite spending and losing a lot more than us, whilst we have effectively sanctioned ourselves, be that due to 'geopolitical issues' affecting the owners or due to imposing harsh cuts and restrictions allegedly to achieve FFP compliance.

This is just more of the jam tomorrow talk. Expecting us to believe that a bit of pain over the next 2-3 years is going to lead to a big bright future where we cruise along and all these rival clubs get crippled with FFP issues. It won't happen. We will get to 2026 (assuming we survive in the Championship until then) and it will just be more of the same - claims we have to sell assets and make cuts to comply, rapidly changing situation with the owners in India, cashflow problems, profits taking a hit.

They treat the club with neglect and contempt and decide budgets and 'strategy' on a whim. I firmly believe we now have the shadow man and Waggott doing what they think is best with whatever budget India decides to hand down each year. Broughton and JDT are mere pawns in that, brought in under the impression there was a plan and ambition here and now realising that these owners have neither, just make it up as they go along depending on how they feel each summer.

Edited September 14, 2023 by JHRover

[Exiled_Rover]

2 hours ago, Bethnal said:

I thought there was a small dig at Gareth Seddon in there. Said the words “if a player has the right representation” in the BBC Lancs interview, when talking about leaving to walk into a starting XI. Clearly explaining that we know where we are as a club and if a big, big Premiership or European club comes in, we understand that the pull would be big, but that there’s a greater chance of maintaining “career momentum,” as he put it, at Rovers.

I think with the way he talked about the Phillips situation, combined with this (as well as the rumour of Gareth Seddon being Tyrhys Dolan’s new agent) is a dig at the Phillips deal, if not the timing of it.

My kind of shade throwing.

Get Dolan out of the door in January then if he's signed up with that snake. 

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

Yup, Wages to Turnover % needs to be at 70% by 2026 or something. Last financial report had us at 147% for 2021/22, no doubt it's come down fairly significantly to 110-120% since then, maybe a little lower.

Whilst it's frustrating, being one of the few clubs who's making a head start on this requirement (albeit due to circumstances out of the clubs control), coupled with the fantastic academy churn out we have, we'll be in a very strong position come that deadline.

If we don't manage to get promoted before 2026, we'll be one of the (if not the) most prepared clubs in the league for the changes.

Doesn't that need to be signed up to by the EFL / FA? Which I gather hasn't been agreed yet. 

[Dreams of 1995]

53 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I doubt that. They'll just find some other way to sink us like they always do.

I remember after promotion from League One we were told that we weren't going to go daft and spend big money to try and bounce to the PL. We were going to be sensible and structured and invest correctly, in doing so avoiding FFP issues and building something that would enable us to be well placed medium term after all these other clubs had suffered through overspending and FFP trouble.

Fast forward just 2-3 years and we've let a raft of said assets walk away for nothing, nobly claiming we had no alternative, and into the mix have had to sell off our training ground apparently to ensure compliance. Not many clubs have done that.

I was told that the likes of Stoke, Bristol City, Middlesbrough, spending millions a year and huge wages, would get their comeuppance under FFP whilst we would be sat pretty with a solid base.

As it turns out none of those clubs have faced sanctions, despite spending and losing a lot more than us, whilst we have effectively sanctioned ourselves, be that due to 'geopolitical issues' affecting the owners or due to imposing harsh cuts and restrictions allegedly to achieve FFP compliance.

This is just more of the jam tomorrow talk. Expecting us to believe that a bit of pain over the next 2-3 years is going to lead to a big bright future where we cruise along and all these rival clubs get crippled with FFP issues. It won't happen. We will get to 2026 (assuming we survive in the Championship until then) and it will just be more of the same - claims we have to sell assets and make cuts to comply, rapidly changing situation with the owners in India, cashflow problems, profits taking a hit.

They treat the club with neglect and contempt and decide budgets and 'strategy' on a whim. I firmly believe we now have the shadow man and Waggott doing what they think is best with whatever budget India decides to hand down each year. Broughton and JDT are mere pawns in that, brought in under the impression there was a plan and ambition here and now realising that these owners have neither, just make it up as they go along depending on how they feel each summer.

I agree wholeheartedly that the scale of ambition required for promotion means it is an unlikely task under Venkys

Where your argument continues to fall down is the idea that clubs like Stoke, Bristol and Middlesbrough are breaking FFP successfully

They aren't. They simply have more money to spend than us

There is also the argument that they remain exactly where we are. In the Championship. Who, apart from Middlesbrough, have not been as successful as we have

This is where your argument about clubs 'circumventing' FFP falls on its face. It is not based in fact. It doesn't make the rest of what you write wrong, but this particular theory of yours that other clubs are not following the same rules as us is baseless

[roversfan99]

8 hours ago, philipl said:

If we are still in contention, which I believe we will be, after

- a £5m cut to the transfer budget mid window 

- a 15% cut to wage budget on top of already one of the smallest budgets in the Championship 

- a block on signing players over 27

Broughton and his team are miracle workers.

And sure the DoF is going to undermine the entire football club by saying  on Rovers TV the squad is weaker! What planet are some people on?

Despite the 3 early signings, the reality is we have scarcely seen anything of the 7 new players and we are 7 games into what will be a minimum of a 50 game season.

We can't meaningfully offer supporters' judgement until after the forthcoming 7 games in 22 days including some pre-season bookies' favourites for promotion. 

 

Has your view that Venkys are amongst the top 10% of owners changed following this summer?

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

Yup, Wages to Turnover % needs to be at 70% by 2026 or something. Last financial report had us at 147% for 2021/22, no doubt it's come down fairly significantly to 110-120% since then, maybe a little lower.

Whilst it's frustrating, being one of the few clubs who's making a head start on this requirement (albeit due to circumstances out of the clubs control), coupled with the fantastic academy churn out we have, we'll be in a very strong position come that deadline.

If we don't manage to get promoted before 2026, we'll be one of the (if not the) most prepared clubs in the league for the changes.

Have we made a head start on this? If indeed it goes ahead, a huge if. Most of our players are not contracted beyond 2026 anyway, and the aggressive slashing of the budget prevented us signing players like Batth and a loan signing, neither who would be contracted up until then.