roversfan99

Swansea are in crisis, a good manager gone a week before the season and replaced by someone unproven, and so many key losses/absentees, Guehi, Woodman and Hourihane returning to their parent clubs, Ayew leaving on a free, Grimes with a knock and an unsure future, Roberts injured, Walsh a doubt and Fulton suspended. 7 of the 11 that started the play off final al out. We wont have many easier games all season from an opposition persepctive. That being said, we dont win our opening day under Venkys, usually off the back of a languid summer, this one is very much no different so I am certainly not confident. I also feel like the crowd will be (understandably) but depressingly low. Kaminski Nyambe Lenihan Ayala Pickering Travis Davenport Dolan Rothwell Brereton Armstrong Subs - God knows! Gallagher, Buckley, Carter, Chapman and 3 more kids. Any chance of a signing at any point seems remote.

I doubt that he could have been possible even with a sale of Armstrong with no funds guaranteed but I am unsure why Surridge warrants such a fee, especially in a covid marketplace, never particularly impressed that much bar some moderately decent loan spells. That being said, Stoke have impressed me in this window and shown us how to act. They sold their key asset Collins early in the window to Burnley, bringing in a good replacement in Wilmot soon after, also signing Vrancic on a free and now Surridge to boost the forward line. They also will soon have Campbell back from injury, joining Doughty and Fox.

Crooke doesnt know what hes talking about but is probably echoing what the LT reported last week, which is why the embargo happened. I still revert back to asking why we signed a player for a fee in January when we are so perilously on the line of FFP regulation breaking, or are been beyond that?! Or indeed why there isnt more urgency to get Armstrong sold.

I mentioned in another thread but surely with full capacity stadiums allowed, the option to stream games from the UK will be discontinued otherwise attendances across the country will never return to normal?

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/scottish-daily-mail/20210731/283390539901649 Saw this, but seems like it isnt for this season.

Where is this rumour from? He used to play for Barnsley but I don't think he was particularly great. Doesn't fit into the loans from Prem teams only policy.

What is the situation with walk ons, are they allowed past a certain time as Leeds games went off sale a couple of hours prior? Is there still a surcharge? Another thing that I was wondering about is potential streaming, surely that service should stop now that fans are allowed without restrictions, otherwise it will massively hinder attendances across the board?

What sort of logic is that? Obviously we dont want to sign overpriced players of any age, you can also point to overpriced younger players (Kevin Davies, Ashley Ward, Ben Brereton, Sam Gallagher) or indeed shrewd older ones (Downing, Friedel, Nelsen, Berg, Graham) so there is little pattern. The squad is crying out for experience, when we hit a tough run I really do worry. I feel like you are being purposely obtuse about my Pickering comments. My point is that I don't understand how we can go from signing players for above 500k to not being able to sign a couple of freebies within 6 months, how the landscape can change so much. If the embargo was sustainability related as per the LT, then it makes it even more perplexing, although it makes no sense either way. Also those players you listed that Bowyer signed were under another transfer embargo, hence why he could only afford to bring in absolute shite to replace all of our best players leaving.

Again, I dont have sympathy with Mowbray because at the end of the day, he is already a year into continued paid employment at a big Championship club that he does not warrant and wouldnt have under owners who cared. But Tony Mowbray is perhaps a great example of how managers tend to have a shelf life and if you are kept on too long beyond that shelf life, things get sour to the point where things get exaggerated out of control and you go from leaving with your head held high to being seen as a villain. He is at the point now where he is blamed for things out of his control and made out to be far worse than what he has actually been, understandably as we are all frustrated with how stagnant and hopeless it seems. @Mercer suggesting that the relegation was indefensible is beyond hyperbolic, typical to someone on the wind up, hence the comments about Coyle being better and boasting about having a journalists phone number. If Mowbray had left last summer, I think he would have been deemed to have done a good overall job here, nothing remarkable, but any return (not as our manager) would be warmly received. His first task was to keep us up, and I have always said that there is no use in extrapolating results (same as people doing so with the 2 in 17 stat from last season) and that he did fail that season, it was a very difficult task with a shoddy squad already in the relegation zone, he came close but not close enough. Then what followed was good (not perfect, I found the attitude from him before that Charlton game very aggravating) in getting us promoted comfortably at the first attempt, and very much stabilising us as a Championship mid table side. It became evident a while back that he had taken us as far as he could and had no idea how to push us on further, confused tactical ideas, recruitment wastage etc, no more signs of progression. As a side note, I have been surprised by the reaction in the ground v Leeds and also what I heard on the stream watching the Leeds game, various songs specifically in support of Tony Mowbray.

That is the impression that I am under, I am in the same situation as yourself, presumably in the same seat? Would also not mind clarification though myself.

That may be true in that the likes of Holtby and Evans made little financial sense to retain due to their wages v reliability. The thing is though we are still weaker without them for 2 reasons, one is at least one of them would be starting on Saturday if they was still here with the other on the bench, they have left spaces in our squad that we havent replaced. They also (along with a couple of others who maybe had less chance of playing) have stripped the squad of most of its remaining experience, we only now have Johnson really who is injured and Ayala who seems unwilling to even play with slight discomfort. I was basing my statements on the fact that we (according to the LT) were on course to fail FFP regulations this summer, something that would have been known about 6 months prior. Wages perhaps are too high/there is too much wastage, income has not been maximised, it all contributes. I am talking about the one off decision to make a reasonable outlay on a fee for a new player in January when our financial/sustainability situation was so perilous. I would ask if over 500k was a luxury that we simply couldnt afford, and if we perhaps needed to go for a freebie in the summer instead. Even if the embargo had nothing to do with sustainability, I find it baffling that we can go from spending over half a million in January, to not being able to add a couple of freebies in the summer to give us some experience which we are lacking. 100%. I do understand and agree with the idea (although its not been done successfully by Venkys at all) of signing players for cheap, improving them, sell them at a profit, then replace and continue the cycle. But you can not fill a team with such players. Experienced players are critical for guidance and know how and we've jettisoned most of ours and dont seem like we have any intention of replacing any of it. When we hit bad form this season, I don't see who will provide the experience to help to drag us back out of it.

More desperate gossip which will no doubt have zero substance to it.

My issue is with the theory that Venkys themselves are choosing projects that they want to invest in, yet suddenly 6 months later the taps are totally off. The manager should be the one tasked with making signings, if there is an aim that we make profit on younger players then he follows that and is judged on that. Obviously the manager shouldnt be Mowbray. Who do you think wanted Pickering specifically? And indeed Brereton and Gallagher? With Pickering, like anyone else I have no idea how he will be and I am not judging him as an individual. My point was that it was either a wreckless signing financed by the owners if we was not on track with FFP. Or if the LT was wrong and it had no impact on that as you suggest, then my issue is with the sudden turning off the taps 6 months later, and the general bizarre lack of consistency. I agree with the idea of signing players for cheap and selling at a profit, although Venkys have certainly not achieved that as a strategy. Are the last ones Duffy, Gestede and Cairney, all sold on the cheap due to another embargo and thus desperation for money? But you cant only sign younger projects, you need some experience and know how, not every player is about potential. Lets hope that Venkys have had enough, then there may be a light at the end of the tunnel.

What are these facts that prove Mowbray to be a worse manager than Coyle? Assuming that they are based solely on their Rovers careers. Even if you take out the promotion season, Mowbray has finished 15th twice and 11th. Coyle left us in 22nd or 23rd. I presume it is based on a specific run of form extrapolated but your overall statement cannot be true. Mowbray deserves to be sacked and that is something based on his own merits. You dont need to make nonsensical comparisons based on hand picked runs of form to justify that he needs to be sacked. Meeting FFP regulations obviously encorporates everything, there are various methods to help to increase income and reduce expenses. It is not JUST wages that cause the problem. Increasing income via ticketing/advertising policies, selling assets at the correct time, not spending much on incoming transfers, having a low wage bill etc. Meeting or indeed failing to meet FFP encorporates all of that. If this is the case as per the LT that we failed FFP, we should have known that would or could be the case 6 months prior. In which case, surely dont spend over 500k on a new player! And to answer your question, the deal didnt have to be done in January, but someone cheaper, a free or a loan. If not and Phili is correct and we went into embargo due to late submission of accounts/funding methods then as I touch on below, why are we spending a reasonable fee on Crewes left back when 6 months later we cant even afford freebies? Where is the consistency and the logic? Even if there were no issues with FFP and the LT was wrong, its just bizarre how we can be spending on fees then literally unable to sign freebies within 6 months. I based my assumption we went into embargo due to issues with FFP based on an article in the Lancashire Telegraph a week or 2 ago. But whether it was down to sustainability issues, late submission of accounts or funding issues, I of course stand by my criticism of Venkys for allowing it to happen, massively hindering the manager. But even putting the embargo to one side, why are we spending 500k (the 350k will surely then be listed as a creditor so it will still be in the accounts regardless of payment date) on a player in January yet 6 months later, the goal posts are moved to the extent that we cant even sign free agents? Its just illogical from the owners, no joined up thinking. Assuming that your theory is correct regarding Venkys being willing to invest only in specific projects which take their fancy, it is little wonder that we are so screwed. What makes them qualified to do so? My doubts over this theory personally would stem from, what is exciting them so much about a left back from Crewe when 6 months later, we cant even sign up freebies because the belt has been tightened so much? But yeah, whatever the reason for the embargo, nothing them tossers in India do makes any sense. The theory of them picking projects to spend on has been mentioned before, im unconvinced personally but either way, there is never any logic to what they do. Even if it didnt cause the embargo, that Pickering deal for a reasonable fee makes no sense when we are here 6 months later we are on a loans only policy.

Spending over 500k on a fee 6 months before sustainability regulations to which our losses ie our expenses against our income were too high was a showing of negligence by the owners. The wages are too high compared to the income which is not as high as it should be yes but spending over 500k on a fee was not a wise financial decision. He might well turn into a good signing but perhaps one that we couldnt afford within those regulations.

Mentioned it in a longer post earlier, but how irresponsible was it from the owners to allow Mowbray to spend over half a million on a left back 6 months before we went into embargo for FFP regulation issues?

Mowbray is not fit to continue as Rovers manager but he is not factually a worse manager than Coyle.

Lets perfect one formation first. Many examples of teams who have gone up after perfecting one formation. Consistency and knowing exactly what your role is has been underestimated. As I said, 3 at the back tends to need central defenders who are good on the ball, none of ours are, that isnt their game.

Russell Martin seems like one of these all the range managers, obsessed with style of play, playing from the back, philosophise and all of the modern lingo. I remember last season when MK Dons went on a poor run and he was defending himself by saying about sticking to his principles etc and he got loads of praise. They had a fairly unremarkable season really. Swansea dont look in good shape at the moment, so many key players have left too. They couldnt have hand picked a better opening day fixture though!

He has also suggested Ogilive who is about to join Portsmouth, and Reach who now isnt good enough now it seems that he is going elsewhere.

I am aware of FFP rules but there are so many way that the owners could massively reduce the losses they incur that some seem desperate to praise them for offsetting, much of it comes down to hiring people worthy of their jobs, which they have never done. Better sales/season ticket sales increasing income. More responsible use of budgets and indeed requiring transfer profits if need be, rather than suddenly turning off the taps, making us suddenly uncompetitive. Anyway, back to transfers. A reasonable summer would have been the avoidance of an embargo which was not impossible as mentioned above, a change of manager prior to the end of last season, selling Armstrong by now, giving the new manager a small fraction of that amount to sign a replacement, and then allowing him to sign 2-4 players on free transfers at a fraction of the wage budget of the outgoing players. Just as a random question, why did we spend over half a million on Pickering in January? Surely that was ill advised with a potential embargo, and is not consistent with the cut backs? Not a reflection on the individual, but it was money that we clearly didnt have. As it is, we are seemingly only shopping in the market of begging big clubs for untested kids, so it is impossible to get excited about that. It is going to be a long season. Also, Coyle did not have a decent budget, he was and is an appalling manager who puts no importance on coaching, shape or nutrition as we all know. But lets not recreate history.

I don't doubt that Mowbray is the protagonist for the squad being in the state that it is, which is a big reason why I want him out. I just think that it is only fair to acknowledge the difficulties that he has had to face this summer, that any manager would have found problematic. I feel like doing so makes me feel like I am defending Mowbray still being our manager, I certainly am not and still am very sure that he needs to be removed. Venkys have been and always will be the root cause. They seem to have managed without trying to ensure throughout their reign really that there is always someone closer to home that can take the blame whilst they are seen as almost an innocent party (not by yourself specifically to clarify) pumping money in yet are being let down. I could not put it any better than your last sentence though. "Funding the club" is a bit disingenuous, our losses are self inflicted because of their incompetence and negligence, whereas funding the club implies that they are chucking in money out of a desire to be successful, which is blatantly untrue. We failed to initially meet FFP requirements, hence the embargo. We can all list huge lists of kids, but too many together will lead to poor results/inconsistency due to a lack of experience. I presume that we will be paying something (wages and/or a fee) for kids, if it came to it, I would have preferred 2 or 3 freebies with experience over 4 or 5 loanees without experience, although even if that was an option, the embargo would have damaged such a plan. This is not the first time that this sort of summer has happened, it is at least the third under their reign, whereby funding is just totally stopped in a non constructive manner. The first time led to a massive backwards step and slide down the league with a couple of managers as collateral damage, the second time it ended in relegation and I fear that the third time will also end in relegation. Trybull is dog shit, why loan a player, then sign him again after he has proven himself not to be good enough? Mowbray said that the players we are waiting for are young kids who are playing in pre season whilst players who played internationally over the summer are on holiday. So they will be players with minimal first team experience, the opposite of what we need.

I agree, I have been a regular critic of the squad and how it has been assembled over the last few years, and I feel like Mowbray should have long since gone. We should be in a better position than we are entering this summer of turbulence. That being said, it is only fair to at least acknowledge that this summer in isolation is an unnecessarily difficult one based on factors above his head, such as the embargo and the total unwillingness to give the manger even a small % of savings made in the budget to remain competitive. We didn't spend much last season, with only Kaminski and Pears costing fees totalling less than a million. Over his tenure, he has had reasonable resources, but more importantly plenty of time. He should have done better, he should have built better, and most importantly last season, we noticeably regressed. I dont really have any sympathy because if the owners gave a shit and indeed had the competence to avoid these restraints, ie by abiding by sustainability regulations to avoid an unnecessary embargo, and by encouraging savings by offering at least a proportion of funds raised through fees and wage savings to keep the squad competitive, then Mowbray wouldn't be in a job, he only is because of Venkys. But I can still acknowledge those difficulties. I feel like because everyone is in agreement about Mowbray needing to go, that he is also being blamed for things without any willingness by people to appreciate specific limitations that he has specific to this summer. The embargo was an issue, as is having to rely on kids on loan despite clearing so much of the wage bill.

I have repeatedly said that Mowbray should have been sacked a while ago, is out of his depth and have criticised the squad that he has assembled. I hardly think that I have a place in the Tony Mowbray fan club. Fact of the matter is that being subject to a transfer embargo for much of the summer, being limited to only borrowing kids on loan deals when a considerable chunk of the wage bill has been cleared at the expiry of the contracts of various experienced players, and to not be guaranteed even a small proportion of any sale proceeds that Armstrong will bring in would handicap any manager, not just Mowbray. Venkys have created the prolonged crisis ever since they bought us. The fact that Mowbray is still here is again on Venkys, its not just a mere oversight.

To be fair, he did tend to play slightly ahead of the holding midfielder last season but he never seemed to get fully up to match fitness. But I agree that positional discipline isnt his strong suit hence why I don't think he suits being the most defensive midfielder. With such a young squad, you would think that we would utilise the energy and athleticism in the team and try to really press.