That *was* the January Window

[JHRover]

21 minutes ago, Galgaterover10 said:

I agree with your general point about venkys I have zero faith they will get this new model right. However in the balance of fairness and accuracy Brentford spent 10m on Toney the summer they sold Watkins and Maupay for 50 plus million! Their net spend that summer was about 35m in profit. We are still selling players for 2.5m so hard to fully judge currently. 
 

 

And yet for Watkins see Armstrong, Rothwell and Diaz who between them we could have had pushing £30 million. Yet due to poor management only got circa £15 million, none of which was immediately reinvested due to various excuses, then about a third was allowed back in over a year later to try to rebuild the spine of the team and spread around 4-5 signings, then we have people saying despite the £10 million profit and dismantling of the wage bill we still had to sell Brockhall and are still in the pitiful state we are at present, focusing on getting people out and off the wage bill before potential incomings arrive.

In short we've had a chance to emulate Brentford and have already proven we cannot or will not and have a book of excuses as to why.

[47er]

55 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Brentford had a plan, led by their owner who has a brain and is invested in the club. He has used his skills to overcome their financial weakness and small fanbase to get them to the PL. This included investment - they paid up to £10 million for Ivan Toney as a Championship club - yet we are told we cannot do this ourselves.

So we are nowhere near and never will be near Brentford. Even if we got new owners we would struggle as they were so good at it but with Venkys making things up on a whim....never.

Its the "sold them high" bit we can't seem to get the hang of!

[JHRover]

1 minute ago, 47er said:

Its the "sold them high" bit we can't seem to get the hang of!

We did it once, and showed that even when we do sell them high (still less than we should have got) that we won't spend it.

[Underground, Roverground]

51 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Brentford had a plan, led by their owner who has a brain and is invested in the club. He has used his skills to overcome their financial weakness and small fanbase to get them to the PL. This included investment - they paid up to £10 million for Ivan Toney as a Championship club - yet we are told we cannot do this ourselves.

So we are nowhere near and never will be near Brentford. Even if we got new owners we would struggle as they were so good at it but with Venkys making things up on a whim....never.

I met Brentford’s Strategic Advisor about 2 months ago. Very nice chap who also does a bit of motivational speaking and is actually a retired school teacher with no football background.

They had no plan until Christmas 2011, but did have owners and a CEO who were willing to listen. They realised that several plans could work, but would need alignment between all parties on whatever plan they chose. This required buy in from Owners, CEO, DoF, manager, players and fans. Also required patience. 

They ultimately picked a player trading model (as they didn’t have resources at the time to compete with Championship clubs) coupled with a playing style that would be consistent throughout management changes to give the club identity and maximise player value. 

To me, it sounds like Rovers are trying this too, but that we haven’t necessarily got the alignment correct or the communication. The positive is that there appears to be a plan, even if we don’t all agree with it.

[tomphil]

13 minutes ago, 47er said:

Its the "sold them high" bit we can't seem to get the hang of!

Buy high and let go for nothing isn't the model Brentford started with yet we can see an example of our stupidity just landed in the Prem at Sheff U.

Imagine if he does well and Villarreal get a fee for him !

Waggot and/or the shadow idiot should have been sacked for that alone never mind the others who walked for nothing. That is half the reason we are where we are now. How can you pay people to boost income and grow players to sell when they end up doing the exact opposite !!!

Brentford model my arse it will always be the Venky Model here AKA the penny wise pound foolish dud model that is designed to lose them money.

That's why they are being investigated.

Edited January 7 by tomphil

[Galgaterover10]

11 minutes ago, JHRover said:

We did it once, and showed that even when we do sell them high (still less than we should have got) that we won't spend it.

But we have done this haven’t we? We reinvested some of Armstrong money into hyam, brittain and smodzics? This summer part of kaminski money went into the keeper and telatovic? It’s just figures are not as eye opening because we are awful at selling players. 

[Mashed Potatoes]

17 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Buy high and let go for nothing isn't the model Brentford started with yet we can see an example of our stupidity just landed in the Prem at Sheff U.

Imagine if he does well and Villarreal get a fee for him !

Waggot and/or the shadow idiot should have been sacked for that alone never mind the others who walked for nothing. That is half the reason we are where we are now. How can you pay people to boost income and grow players to sell when they end up doing the exact opposite !!!

Brentford model my arse it will always be the Venky Model here AKA the penny wise pound foolish dud model that is designed to lose them money.

That's why they are being investigated.

You are assuming that the players who walked for nothing did so because of decisions taken by those at Ewood Park rather than back in India - I don't see justification for firing Waggott over decisions taken by Venkys.

[ABBEY]

25 minutes ago, Underground, Roverground said:

I met Brentford’s Strategic Advisor about 2 months ago. Very nice chap who also does a bit of motivational speaking and is actually a retired school teacher with no football background.

They had no plan until Christmas 2011, but did have owners and a CEO who were willing to listen. They realised that several plans could work, but would need alignment between all parties on whatever plan they chose. This required buy in from Owners, CEO, DoF, manager, players and fans. Also required patience. 

They ultimately picked a player trading model (as they didn’t have resources at the time to compete with Championship clubs) coupled with a playing style that would be consistent throughout management changes to give the club identity and maximise player value. 

To me, it sounds like Rovers are trying this too, but that we haven’t necessarily got the alignment correct or the communication. The positive is that there appears to be a plan, even if we don’t all agree with it.

Maggot may talk of this model but they are not implementing it .

Maggot couldn't pull in the old suttys at 130Am 

[arbitro]

Our most recent policy has been to increase the value of players and let them leave for nothing.

Ludicrous decision making which has come back to haunt us.

[tomphil]

13 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

You are assuming that the players who walked for nothing did so because of decisions taken by those at Ewood Park rather than back in India - I don't see justification for firing Waggott over decisions taken by Venkys.

He runs the club here in his title of CHIEF EXECUTIVE and you are doing the assuming that these decisions are being made or not made 3000 miles away.

In his role as CHIEF EXECUTIVE of Blackburn Rovers football club it is his job to ensure these things don't happen whether that is by insisting the owners sanction contract talks well in advance of deals beginning to run out or even if he has to do it off his own bat. As CEO he has the legal right to do such things because that is his job unless it's contractually specified that it isn't.

The buck stops with him and after so much financial damage has been inflicted by letting so many walk for nothing, one who cost 6 million, then if he was prevented from doing anything about it he should have tendered his notice.

Don't forget we also had a manager and his assistant basically publically advising these lads to walk several months before most did. Where was the CEO then ?

As far as the info we have it all came about because he low balled some of them then used covid as the reason to them totally stop contract talks.  Then he said the initial offers remained on the table and it was seemingly a case of sign them or don't but that's it.

Only towards the end did they then panic and start claiming they were pushing the offers to the hilt in some cases.

Clowns.

[Mashed Potatoes]

3 minutes ago, tomphil said:

He runs the club here in his title of CHIEF EXECUTIVE and you are doing the assuming that these decisions are being made or not made 3000 miles away.

In his role as CHIEF EXECUTIVE of Blackburn Rovers football club it is his job to ensure these things don't happen whether that is by insisting the owners sanction contract talks well in advance of deals beginning to run out or even if he has to do it off his own bat. As CEO he has the legal right to do such things because that is his job unless it's contractually specified that it isn't.

The buck stops with him and after so much financial damage has been inflicted by letting so many walk for nothing, one who cost 6 million, then if he was prevented from doing anything about it he should have tendered his notice.

Don't forget we also had a manager and his assistant basically publically advising these lads to walk several months before most did. Where was the CEO then ?

As far as the info we have it all came about because he low balled some of them then used covid as the reason to them totally stop contract talks.  Then he said the initial offers remained on the table and it was seemingly a case of sign them or don't but that's it.

Only towards the end did they then panic and start claiming they were pushing the offers to the hilt in some cases.

Clowns.

I am afraid that just because he is called Chief Executive doesn't mean that in our case that he has the powers that would usually be associated with that title. Judging from the speed with which Venkys dispensed with the services of John Williams I don't believe anybody at Ewood Park is ever going to be in a position to stop Venkys making daft decisions.

[1864roverite]

53 minutes ago, Underground, Roverground said:

I met Brentford’s Strategic Advisor about 2 months ago. Very nice chap who also does a bit of motivational speaking and is actually a retired school teacher with no football background.

They had no plan until Christmas 2011, but did have owners and a CEO who were willing to listen. They realised that several plans could work, but would need alignment between all parties on whatever plan they chose. This required buy in from Owners, CEO, DoF, manager, players and fans. Also required patience. 

They ultimately picked a player trading model (as they didn’t have resources at the time to compete with Championship clubs) coupled with a playing style that would be consistent throughout management changes to give the club identity and maximise player value. 

To me, it sounds like Rovers are trying this too, but that we haven’t necessarily got the alignment correct or the communication. The positive is that there appears to be a plan, even if we don’t all agree with it.

You forgot to add the most important aspect of their footballing operation. They used an algorithm to scout their talent ensuring they got the best results from players who were relatively unknown and then working with their results ensuring a much better return both within the initial investment and when selling a player - Rovers have the ability to operate similarly but are hamstrung by the indecision and current processes they use from the owners - if they removed that obstacle then I am certain our footballing operation would be enhanced 

[Upside Down]

55 minutes ago, Underground, Roverground said:

I met Brentford’s Strategic Advisor about 2 months ago. Very nice chap who also does a bit of motivational speaking and is actually a retired school teacher with no football background.

They had no plan until Christmas 2011, but did have owners and a CEO who were willing to listen. They realised that several plans could work, but would need alignment between all parties on whatever plan they chose. This required buy in from Owners, CEO, DoF, manager, players and fans. Also required patience. 

They ultimately picked a player trading model (as they didn’t have resources at the time to compete with Championship clubs) coupled with a playing style that would be consistent throughout management changes to give the club identity and maximise player value. 

To me, it sounds like Rovers are trying this too, but that we haven’t necessarily got the alignment correct or the communication. The positive is that there appears to be a plan, even if we don’t all agree with it.

The difference being that Brentford had committed people involved who were invested in every way possible. They played the smart way and payed off for them.

Here we just have a bunch of complete retards that probably have to have a note in their underpants saying 'wipe ass, use toilet paper'.

[tomphil]

2 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

I am afraid that just because he is called Chief Executive doesn't mean that in our case that he has the powers that would usually be associated with that title. Judging from the speed with which Venkys dispensed with the services of John Williams I don't believe anybody at Ewood Park is ever going to be in a position to stop Venkys making daft decisions.

The thing is though he is quick enough to take credit when we do do something if you listen to interviews. Yes of course he credits the owners as well but there is plenty of we and I so it all works both ways.

Had we got a couple of those players signed up on improved terms before the rot in their minds had chance to set in then sold them later i'm sure he'd have been crowing about what good worked they'd all done.

Which would have been fair enough but to be absolved of any accountability because everyone assumes it's always the owners fault doesn't really wash if we are being truthful.

We know the issues with them but they do actually pay some people very handsomely to do certain jobs.

[KentExile]

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

And yet for Watkins see Armstrong, Rothwell and Diaz who between them we could have had pushing £30 million. Yet due to poor management only got circa £15 million, none of which was immediately reinvested due to various excuses, then about a third was allowed back in over a year later to try to rebuild the spine of the team and spread around 4-5 signings, then we have people saying despite the £10 million profit and dismantling of the wage bill we still had to sell Brockhall and are still in the pitiful state we are at present, focusing on getting people out and off the wage bill before potential incomings arrive.

In short we've had a chance to emulate Brentford and have already proven we cannot or will not and have a book of excuses as to why.

The increased instances of players signing new long term contracts since Broughton arrived would indicate that someone is aware of these facts and is actively trying to rectify things moving forwards.

Edited January 7 by KentExile

[J*B]

23 minutes ago, KentExile said:

The increased instances of players signing new long term contracts since Broughton arrived would indicate that someone is aware of these facts and is actively trying to rectify things moving forwards.

Which is great, but doesn’t change the fact that 20M worth of talent has left for free previously. How long does it take Rovers to generate 20M? That’s on Waggott who was in charge. 

[KentExile]

8 minutes ago, J*B said:

Which is great, but doesn’t change the fact that 20M worth of talent has left for free previously. How long does it take Rovers to generate 20M? That’s on Waggott who was in charge. 

Absolutely!

Although my post was mainly a response to the assertation from a previous poster that

2 hours ago, JHRover said:

In short we've had a chance to emulate Brentford and have already proven we cannot or will not and have a book of excuses as to why.

 

[arbitro]

Waggott approved contract extensions for the likes of Smallwood, Mulgrew, Bennett and Evans with at least two of them on big money. And by the way the Mulgrew one paid dividends as he went out on loan a short time after and had a foul of games in between loans didn't play again for us. 

The two extremes of doling out contracts to mediocrity and not tying down assets sums up Venkys and also Waggots tenure here.

[Ricky]

I see one time target Clarke-Harris from Peterborough is being linked to Wrexham. Annoyingly they are probably a better proposition than us at the moment.

[B16Rover]

If Waggot is on 300k as people on here say, that equates to 5.7k per week.  

Of the 28 man squad listed on the website, what proportion earn more a week than our failing CEO?

https://www.rovers.co.uk/teams/

[tomphil]

31 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Waggott approved contract extensions for the likes of Smallwood, Mulgrew, Bennett and Evans with at least two of them on big money. And by the way the Mulgrew one paid dividends as he went out on loan a short time after and had a foul of games in between loans didn't play again for us. 

The two extremes of doling out contracts to mediocrity and not tying down assets sums up Venkys and also Waggots tenure here.

Yes and they used the money they had left in the pot the Jan pre covid which they didn't invest in players to extend by a couple of months several of those players into the covid era.

Some of them had played no part anyway but they gave them extra wages anyway.

We are talking the likes of Gladwin and then Smallwood who Mowbray, Venus and Waggot (North East cartel with a player on that cetain agent from the same areas books) to just sit on his nice contract and do nothing until it ran out and he went to his pre arranged deal at Hull.  A full season where he also declined to turn out for the U23's.

All that is in the public domain, they were taking the piss looking after their pals with the clubs money that should have been used to strengthen the team.

Stinks and all on Waggots watch, then the money wasted on another ex Boro lad in Downing.

[bluebruce]

8 hours ago, martonrover said:

The defence definitely needs reinforcing, but we still need a decent striker.

We are ridiculously dependent on a couple of players, (one especially) for goals.

If Szmodics gets injured we're going to be dire.

Aye, we need a striker too, but the discussion was about whether that's more pressing than our need for a better goalkeeper to stop them at the other end. Since we are doing much worse at keeping them out than we are at putting them in, our goalkeeping situation is equivalent to our striking situation if we didn't have Szmodics in the first place.

[Mercer]

Hear Rovers have asked Brighton about their young goalie Beadle.  Highly rated but not the experienced goalie we need.

[roversfan99]

2 hours ago, J*B said:

Which is great, but doesn’t change the fact that 20M worth of talent has left for free previously. How long does it take Rovers to generate 20M? That’s on Waggott who was in charge. 

Waggott is a useless idiot but its on the owners. They kept intervening and rejecting offers prior to their contract expiry.

[J*B]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Waggott is a useless idiot but its on the owners. They kept intervening and rejecting offers prior to their contract expiry.

Then as CEO your job - alongside the other senior team - is to explain why rejecting the bids is the wrong decision and they must be accepted.