Fans Forum/Roverstore/Commercial Chat

[RevidgeBlue]

3 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

He probably is an attractive proposition because he is clearly capable of doing a good if unspectacular job at this level, with his most recent 2 seasons at this level leading to a recently promoted team making the play offs and a team who had just sold its best player and reinvested nothing to one place outside the play offs.

Obviously not factoring in a weird hatred partially driven by wanting to deflect any blame away from Venkys.

Did the Sunderland board Harbour "a weird hatred" towards him as well then or did they recognise like most of us on here did he wasn't the person to take their Club forward?

Ditto the Coventry board and whichever Club he left in the lower Leagues before being rescued off the managerial scrapheap to join us.

[roversfan99]

4 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Did the Sunderland board Harbour "a weird hatred" towards him as well then or did they recognise like most of us on here did he wasn't the person to take their Club forward?

Ditto the Coventry board and whichever Club he left in the lower Leagues before being rescued off the managerial scrapheap to join us.

The fans at Sunderland fron what Ive seen dont seem overly keen that hes gone. 

He wasnt the man to take us forward here anymore but he still did a good job. Mind you, nobody could take us forward now because of said owners. He did a good job at Sunderland too.

[Mashed Potatoes]

8 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Did the Sunderland board Harbour "a weird hatred" towards him as well then or did they recognise like most of us on here did he wasn't the person to take their Club forward?

Ditto the Coventry board and whichever Club he left in the lower Leagues before being rescued off the managerial scrapheap to join us.

Judging from the Sunderland board's recent behaviour decking out part of their ground in Newcastle colours I am not sure that the individual who owns the club is necessarily the best judge of what is best for them.

[tomphil]

Most football fans are bonkers there now seems to be this myth attached to Mowbray that he provides an exciting brand of attacking football.

Nothing could be further from the truth and his reluctance to do so regularly here is what got peoples backs up. What they are missing is the fact the players he inherited at Sunderland, those they brought in and the demands of the fans and board meant he had no choice.

The ire was that this season most of that had disappeared in favour of a more pragmatic possession based wide forward style.

I can almost guarantee that if they hadn't moved him on when they did the  Mackem hordes would have been calling for his head before long during another death spiral.

Same thing will happen at Brum if he is there very long although they are so desperate for some stability they'll welcome him like some Championship form of an Allardyce like fire fighting saviour, which is basically what he really is.

[chaddyrovers]

5 hours ago, tomphil said:

Most football fans are bonkers there now seems to be this myth attached to Mowbray that he provides an exciting brand of attacking football.

Still people think Mowbray is better manager than JDT. Its totally baffling to me

[1864roverite]

On 04/01/2024 at 20:34, RoversClitheroe said:

Interested to also hear @1864roverite viewpoint as I think you also regularly meet Waggot, and still waiting on these positive changes that were talked up 

Yes I have had a recent meeting with him and I expect another soon

[Upside Down]

Just now, 1864roverite said:

Yes I have had a recent meeting with him and I expect another soon

And the positive changes you were bleating about for so long?

[J*B]

2 minutes ago, 1864roverite said:

Yes I have had a recent meeting with him and I expect another soon

How many of these fans meeting is the CEO club having? It feels like he’s got an open diary for informal chats at Ewood!

Question Number 1:

Steve, you’ve clearly plenty of time for meeting fans but you want me to believe you have no idea the Blues Bar is being used for a Liverpool Legends night?

[wilsdenrover]

1 minute ago, J*B said:

How many of these fans meeting is the CEO club having? It feels like he’s got an open diary for informal chats at Ewood!

Question Number 1:

Steve, you’ve clearly plenty of time for meeting fans but you want me to believe you have no idea the Blues Bar is being used for a Liverpool Legends night?

Perhaps if we all meet him (separately not together!) he’d have no time left to cause any more harm 🤔

[J*B]

2 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Perhaps if we all meet him (separately not together!) he’d have no time left to cause any more harm 🤔

Not a bad suggestion - if we can rota it between us we shouldn’t have to go more than once a month. 

[wilsdenrover]

32 minutes ago, J*B said:

Not a bad suggestion - if we can rota it between us we shouldn’t have to go more than once a month. 

Let’s send Abbey first.

[Upside Down]

23 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Let’s send Abbey first.

Question 1: Hi Steve, please resign. We've already drawn up the letter just sign here.

[glen9mullan]

Match feed was going off topic.

Just to clear up a few things which maybe lost in translation or being read or written confusingly .

Blackburn rovers has many parts and for 19 days a season  Ewood Park is used to host first team fixtures for the football team.

However Ewood in itself is part of a wider business which operates throughout the whole year and to be honest most of its business operations are non football related.  This is firmly the remit of SW. Operating the business , being accountable for the P & L , Marketing , sponsorship,  Ticketing , Security, up keep of the ground, community engagement, business plans, business ventures (un football related) . He is accountable aa a company director to abide by all company/financial regulations and sign off accounts.

Away from that believe it or not there is another side of the business which is playing side, academy, results etc. This falls under GB , as pointed out by himself in numerous interviews. He is accountable to the owners and has full responsibility.

The cross over is of course the money, and how much the SW side can generate as a business or extract from the owners to provide for GB. 

The compromise comes when there is no money and GB had a decision to make on who he can sell to generate his own, noting any losses incurred by the business side would need to be fed too.

The two have clearly different remits.

SWs is the balance sheet.

GB is the playing side and results 

Given no funds are forthcoming GBs side is becoming impossible. We can link this back to SW who has not exactly put bums on seats to generate or be self sufficient.

However SW would argue not only are we operating within FFP, he is ensuring we don't over commit with irresponsible spending on wages or transfer fees which leaves us foul of FFP or worse unable to operate or pay bills.

When this was one Party I.e just a CEO fully accountable for the lot, then it was much easier to go gunning for the CEO regarding results, now all we can gun for him is bums on seats and commercial activity unrelated to the playing side.  The pressure on him or the opportunity to remove him was 2,3,4 and so on years ago.

This new model means anything football related the buck stops with the DOF, who is answerable only to the owners.

So in terms of picking your battles, although there is a link from a financial perspective, that's where it ends as both parties have carte blanche to operate how they see fit the things they are responsible for.

I strongly believe had Swag asked for £15 million in each of the last two January  transfer windows, it would of been granted. He didn't because he didn't want to gamble with the clubs future had promotion failed. 

Ultimately we've downgraded year upon year to keep afloat,  playing it safe. In business terms you could say he has acted responsibly. This wouldn't be the popular view, as we all want to to see success, but the spin of the coin don't always end in success and had we spent beyond our means and failed , then we would be in a pretty damning position.

A more cavalier and ambitious CEO would of thrown the kitchen sink at promotion, some have already done so and succeeded, Bournemouth being one of them. Though others have failed by doing so.

I genuinely feel we have missed the boat and are scraping the bottom of the barrel now. The lack of proper investment into the playing side bar the academy has us in a precarious position. 

I can't see us reaching the heights of the time before venkys, as we've done a fantastic job of handicapping ourselves on all fronts.

 

Edited January 7 by glen9mullan

[arbitro]

A big part of the FFP issues have Waggotts prints on them. How many players have walked away after letting their contracts run down? How many average players were given three and four year deals under Mowbray? How much was spent under Mowbray on under achieving players? Waggott was the de facto Director of Football for several years and financially the club was a disaster and in many ways paved the way for the ridiculous situation of loaning players out to bring new ones in.

And lets not forget it was him (aided and abetted by some of his cohorts) who tried to sell Brockhall, one of the jewels in the crown from Jack Walkers time here.

I have said many times that Waggott is under qualified to run a professional organisation but is happy to take a huge salary.

[Mattyblue]

A former agent that somehow got into football administration and had fanbases happy to see the back of him wherever he’d been… but of course, somehow ends up here supposedly on the recommendation of the team manager and his property developer assistant. 

Typical VenkyWorld appointment.
 

[ABBEY]

13 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

Let’s send Abbey first.

I'd last five seconds before I tipped his desk and thrown out

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, arbitro said:

A big part of the FFP issues have Waggotts prints on them. How many players have walked away after letting their contracts run down? How many average players were given three and four year deals under Mowbray? How much was spent under Mowbray on under achieving players? Waggott was the de facto Director of Football for several years and financially the club was a disaster and in many ways paved the way for the ridiculous situation of loaning players out to bring new ones in.

And lets not forget it was him (aided and abetted by some of his cohorts) who tried to sell Brockhall, one of the jewels in the crown from Jack Walkers time here.

I have said many times that Waggott is under qualified to run a professional organisation but is happy to take a huge salary.

Mowbray himself talked about all sorts of models during his time here we even had the Barnsley model being quoted, look where they ended up.  That is the most likely for us i'd say.

He tried the Swansea model on the pitch which say his strongest squad/wage bill finish in our lowest position.  They talked Brentford and all sorts of other crap but did nothing but just plod on doing the same old thing until the ownership decided on sweeping changes.

Now what appeared to be a step in the fight direction is clearly turning into overkill and taking us on a one way ticket to league 1 again.

These ideas should have been put into place properly years ago but the chances were all spurned and we now seemingly have zero other choice.

Alongside the ownership those who should be held to account are Waggot and Shadowman who are paid hundreds of thousands to run the show for Venkys.  And who hold joint responsibility for dragging us downwards again after a brief flirt with going the right way.

Utterly useless to a man.

[wilsdenrover]

13 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

Match feed was going off topic.

Just to clear up a few things which maybe lost in translation or being read or written confusingly .

Blackburn rovers has many parts and for 19 days a season  Ewood Park is used to host first team fixtures for the football team.

However Ewood in itself is part of a wider business which operates throughout the whole year and to be honest most of its business operations are non football related.  This is firmly the remit of SW. Operating the business , being accountable for the P & L , Marketing , sponsorship,  Ticketing , Security, up keep of the ground, community engagement, business plans, business ventures (un football related) . He is accountable aa a company director to abide by all company/financial regulations and sign off accounts.

Away from that believe it or not there is another side of the business which is playing side, academy, results etc. This falls under GB , as pointed out by himself in numerous interviews. He is accountable to the owners and has full responsibility.

The cross over is of course the money, and how much the SW side can generate as a business or extract from the owners to provide for GB. 

The compromise comes when there is no money and GB had a decision to make on who he can sell to generate his own, noting any losses incurred by the business side would need to be fed too.

The two have clearly different remits.

SWs is the balance sheet.

GB is the playing side and results 

Given no funds are forthcoming GBs side is becoming impossible. We can link this back to SW who has not exactly put bums on seats to generate or be self sufficient.

However SW would argue not only are we operating within FFP, he is ensuring we don't over commit with irresponsible spending on wages or transfer fees which leaves us foul of FFP or worse unable to operate or pay bills.

When this was one Party I.e just a CEO fully accountable for the lot, then it was much easier to go gunning for the CEO regarding results, now all we can gun for him is bums on seats and commercial activity unrelated to the playing side.  The pressure on him or the opportunity to remove him was 2,3,4 and so on years ago.

This new model means anything football related the buck stops with the DOF, who is answerable only to the owners.

So in terms of picking your battles, although there is a link from a financial perspective, that's where it ends as both parties have carte blanche to operate how they see fit the things they are responsible for.

I strongly believe had Swag asked for £15 million in each of the last two January  transfer windows, it would of been granted. He didn't because he didn't want to gamble with the clubs future had promotion failed. 

Ultimately we've downgraded year upon year to keep afloat,  playing it safe. In business terms you could say he has acted responsibly. This wouldn't be the popular view, as we all want to to see success, but the spin of the coin don't always end in success and had we spent beyond our means and failed , then we would be in a pretty damning position.

A more cavalier and ambitious CEO would of thrown the kitchen sink at promotion, some have already done so and succeeded, Bournemouth being one of them. Though others have failed by doing so.

I genuinely feel we have missed the boat and are scraping the bottom of the barrel now. The lack of proper investment into the playing side bar the academy has us in a precarious position. 

I can't see us reaching the heights of the time before venkys, as we've done a fantastic job of handicapping ourselves on all fronts.

 

Regarding the bit I’ve emboldened.

Are you saying  GB could raise money (through player sales) to buy new players just for it to be taken away to ‘offset’ losses incurred on things for which SW is responsible?

 

[glen9mullan]

2 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

Regarding the bit I’ve emboldened.

Are you saying  GB could raise money (through player sales) to buy new players just for it to be taken away to ‘offset’ losses incurred on things for which SW is responsible?

 

It's the same at all clubs,  we have operating cost which are not met by other revenue streams.

Don't matter which is sat in the seat, bills still need to be paid

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

It's the same at all clubs,  we have operating cost which are not met by other revenue streams.

Don't matter which is sat in the seat, bills still need to be paid

I get that but I think it just shows the lunacy of GB being accountable (to Venkys) for our transfer dealings when he has zero control over even the ‘self generated’ aspect of the playing side budget. 

 

 

[glen9mullan]

2 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

I get that but I think it just shows the lunacy of GB being accountable (to Venkys) for our transfer dealings when he has zero control over even the ‘self generated’ aspect of the playing side budget. 

 

 

Given the manager has no set achievement goals,  I'd have at a guess no does GB, bar generate young players from the academy , so we are self sustainable 

[wilsdenrover]

1 minute ago, glen9mullan said:

Given the manager has no set achievement goals,  I'd have at a guess no does GB, bar generate young players from the academy , so we are self sustainable 

I think we’d need an Adam Wharton each and every year to be self sustainable from the academy only.

I can only see things getting worse.

[RevidgeBlue]

18 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

Match feed was going off topic.

Just to clear up a few things which maybe lost in translation or being read or written confusingly .

Blackburn rovers has many parts and for 19 days a season  Ewood Park is used to host first team fixtures for the football team.

However Ewood in itself is part of a wider business which operates throughout the whole year and to be honest most of its business operations are non football related.  This is firmly the remit of SW. Operating the business , being accountable for the P & L , Marketing , sponsorship,  Ticketing , Security, up keep of the ground, community engagement, business plans, business ventures (un football related) . He is accountable aa a company director to abide by all company/financial regulations and sign off accounts.

Away from that believe it or not there is another side of the business which is playing side, academy, results etc. This falls under GB , as pointed out by himself in numerous interviews. He is accountable to the owners and has full responsibility.

The cross over is of course the money, and how much the SW side can generate as a business or extract from the owners to provide for GB. 

The compromise comes when there is no money and GB had a decision to make on who he can sell to generate his own, noting any losses incurred by the business side would need to be fed too.

The two have clearly different remits.

SWs is the balance sheet.

GB is the playing side and results 

Given no funds are forthcoming GBs side is becoming impossible. We can link this back to SW who has not exactly put bums on seats to generate or be self sufficient.

However SW would argue not only are we operating within FFP, he is ensuring we don't over commit with irresponsible spending on wages or transfer fees which leaves us foul of FFP or worse unable to operate or pay bills.

When this was one Party I.e just a CEO fully accountable for the lot, then it was much easier to go gunning for the CEO regarding results, now all we can gun for him is bums on seats and commercial activity unrelated to the playing side.  The pressure on him or the opportunity to remove him was 2,3,4 and so on years ago.

This new model means anything football related the buck stops with the DOF, who is answerable only to the owners.

So in terms of picking your battles, although there is a link from a financial perspective, that's where it ends as both parties have carte blanche to operate how they see fit the things they are responsible for.

I strongly believe had Swag asked for £15 million in each of the last two January  transfer windows, it would of been granted. He didn't because he didn't want to gamble with the clubs future had promotion failed. 

Ultimately we've downgraded year upon year to keep afloat,  playing it safe. In business terms you could say he has acted responsibly. This wouldn't be the popular view, as we all want to to see success, but the spin of the coin don't always end in success and had we spent beyond our means and failed , then we would be in a pretty damning position.

A more cavalier and ambitious CEO would of thrown the kitchen sink at promotion, some have already done so and succeeded, Bournemouth being one of them. Though others have failed by doing so.

I genuinely feel we have missed the boat and are scraping the bottom of the barrel now. The lack of proper investment into the playing side bar the academy has us in a precarious position. 

I can't see us reaching the heights of the time before venkys, as we've done a fantastic job of handicapping ourselves on all fronts.

 

Interesting post, I'd heard well before GB's arrival that the Club were looking to move towards the DOF model with Waggott being responsible for non footballing issues.

"The buck" certainly didn't stop with the DOF for the debacle last January did it? Absolutely zero accountability.

Do you think they're both virtually unsackable? It's an extremely grim prospect to contemplate two such unsuitable characters running the separate arms of the Club with zero accountability as long as they keep the lights on and just about keep our noses above water on the pitch.

[glen9mullan]

10 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Interesting post, I'd heard well before GB's arrival that the Club were looking to move towards the DOF model with Waggott being responsible for non footballing issues.

"The buck" certainly didn't stop with the DOF for the debacle last January did it? Absolutely zero accountability.

Do you think they're both virtually unsackable? It's an extremely grim prospect to contemplate two such unsuitable characters running the separate arms of the Club with zero accountability as long as they keep the lights on and just about keep our noses above water on the pitch.

Yep, I think these two only go if they decide to go themselves.

Feet under carpet 

[RevidgeBlue]

24 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Yep, I think these two only go if they decide to go themselves.

Feet under carpet 

What a situation to be in.

Imo it is a complete waste of time anyone trying to engage with Waggott. Turkeys dont vote for Christmas. The better bet iimo s to try and engage with the owners direct to try and make them see some ssort of sense but that has been tried, all sorts of promises were made and yet here we are. Furthermore now, even if further contact was achievable, they would no doubt argue since the restrictions they are doing all they can in the circumstances.

The boat probably sailed with Mowbray and his weird reluctance to make a real push for the Premier League whist it was still a genuine possibility. I know a lot of posters won't have it but I'm still firmly of the view based on what I've been told that Mowbray and Waggott had a substantial watchest made available to them Jan 22 but declined to use it.

If these restrictions are going to be an indefinite open ended thing with no time limit then the only thing likely to save us from operating at a level lower than we've ever done is new ownership and if any supporters have any connections in the world of sports ownership or high finance that's probably where everyone's energy should be directed in an attempt to drum up interest.