Going off the previous managers we've had under this lot i'd rate TM's signing as a bit above average on the whole. Biggest shadow cast on it really was Whittingham as he was something of a big signing and must've cost a decent contract but he really wasn't needed in the grand scheme of things. Other than that when you're not throwing money about and signing lower level players it's always going to be chuck and chance. Thank god they stumped up for and he chose Dack though !

I could not think of a better pair, she now has 3 big tits.

It's the 4-1 wins he predicts we should stroll to every few weeks, he's a bookmakers dream but if he's predicting them next season I think we need to get him some proper help

In theory yes but when you've got 200 Brentford fans in the bottom of a near 8000 seat stand on a Tuesday night it's a bit eerie. Looking out on it it's better when there are 300 home fans in there as well at least it looks and sometimes sounds like there is a bit of life in there and i'm sure it's better for the team which is an important factor. Course if the BBE is three quarters full it can cover for that when the teams attacking that way they usually get up for it but will it be or will it be half full like last season ?

It might be an idea if they came up with pricing to fleece these alleged big followings like they fleece visiting fans instead of moving home fans etc and banking on numbers coming at our often lower than them ticket prices. But of course that would be inconveniencing away fans on their big day out at Ewood, can't have that, pack em in says Mike.

Moving to noon kick offs without the need of a TV commitment is inconveniencing fans more than anything but hey ho Leeds bringing 3k instead of 6 and loads of season ticket holders who've already paid not turning up is right up the street of the OB. WBA, Stoke, Bolton, Wigan all sub 3.5k unless going well or an attractive date on the calender. Same applies to the Sheff clubs and this is before TV or midweek is factored in which it will be for a lot of those.

Grabbi would've been a decent punt on a free or low fee for a club set to try and stay in the championship

Not much has touched the sides though and the share capital on the VLL books is what has under pinned the continued losses they've racked up plus maybe possibly the original purchase money and debt then. God knows where the rest has come and gone from, maybe just moved through the club into other things ? Oversees ventures, partners pockets, other investments ? There is still something at the heart of all this and remember the club was bought as a business tool not really a hobby.

Was it not the we've all shaved our hair off for religious reasons because Rovers have been relegated car crash interview where they were confused ?

I wonder if there was ever any connection between the Global Adviser and the eleven, always thought it was an odd name for Madame to suddenly just conjure out of thin air

And all i'm saying is what has it been spent on, where has it all gone and where and what sources does it actually come from ? All perfectly understandable questions for something that's a public (& audited) fact. And they do wash kits at Ewood don't they ?

I could come up with a few things that would make as much sense as the old 'oh they are stupid, misguided or plain stubborn' theories that's for sure although there's an element of all those in the equation no doubt. I don't want to put Biz off his dinner though so I won't bother I will say though 250 million isn't stupid no one in this universe is capable of that, everything for a reason, as they say.

I'm not having it they've spewed 250 million on their Rovers venture without having a large whack back somewhere along the line, no way. No wonder some people think it's a launderette.

Well last time we ended up with Sam Hart

Strong rumour he's a telegraph plant to keep debates raging, probably not but it's odd he's never copped a ban he's just a wum who actually ruins most debates before they get going. Telerag is probably over loaded with dingles these days though.

When it kicks off early Leeds bring about 3k or so but at 3pm they'll bring 5 or 6k so it's being altered just to accommodate that lot when simply restricting them to 3.5 thousand and leaving it at 3pm so you get as many home fans in as possible is the way to do it.

It was odd seeing as the clubs income has just got a guaranteed rise of about 5 million although most of that will be swallowed up straight away with pay rises, bonuses, new contracts etc but still they should be looking at more of a break even or thereabouts scenario. Typical red top rag guff they should be held accountable for this type of thing. Taking things from one form of media and quoting out of context to put a spin on it in another is journo's and amateur hacks common practice and it stinks

I'm sure if the police had their way they'd have them all kick off at twelve and yes it's probably an easier day for everyone - except the fans - just typical football really run by suits FOR suits and paid for by fans & media mostly. Didn't someone say the stadium manager is ex five 0 ? If he's comfy with his old colleagues and the club leave it to them to decide it's a cosy number all around. Hopefully Waggot as a proper CEO puts his foot down and says sorry but every penny counts we needs as many through the turnstiles as possible so unless the cameras are here or there is significant grounds I,e like a Burnley game then no we won't move the kick off voluntarily. Why does no else do it but we do ? It's wrong.

We'll know if that's the case if they start shunting them to dinner time kick offs again when there are no TV cameras in town. As I far as i'm aware no other clubs to this very often, Preston, Wigan & Bolton regularly play host to over 5k visiting fans without that charade.

Probably 250 million in hock to the VLL parent company including the original purchase etc and something that probably shows up on VH group books a 250 million pound oversees asset/investment. However it's done it can't be harming them and the only issue FFP should have with that is if massive debts can be weighed against the club somehow, after all that's why it came in in the first place isn't it ?

Can't argue with that they did after all have a massive audit by two different accounting firms plus there own bean counter and supposedly came up with a plan and new way of doing things. If that plan only allows a million or two into transfers on top of the costs being underwritten then so be it, if it doesn't then it's flawed. Don't see the sponsorship ever coming off though because the way they do things on the books is the way it suits the parent companies accounting process so to stray away from that you'd have to have a different outlet or family member digging directly into their own pockets, perish the thought

We've been through the sponsorship thing before though and they could have done that last time but didn't. Hopefully all this is nothing as we've been told everything for the past few years has been done to comply with FFP indeed they lifted the last embargo ( after some sales). It all has a familiar ring to it though, GB spent a couple of mill then the door slammed and we were told embargo, the team matured for a season or so them mass sales began. At first we were told players were sacrificed to come out of the embargo then as more sales followed it was to reduce debt then we were told of course it was because they ALL wanted to leave !!! Like I said I hope it's wide of the mark but it could all be part of the script again.

Because they probably have no idea where it's come from or if it is true that's the problem these days not being run from Blackburn or the UK they can't confirm or deny anything without checking their various levels of people who run it. Maybe TM has already had a phone call, no meeting till June / July in India and there won't be any money ! Rinse and repeat.

I'll leave it there then for the players he starts linking us with instead

200 in the BBE upper tier won't have much effect sadly and it goes against the old cost cutting remit.