Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, phili said:

It would explain TM denying all knowledge of Pickering and Crewe saying they have rejected a bid.

 

The communication is never ideal, it's hard to tell if anything is different really. It doesn't seem like it from the outside 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I’m sorry Paul, but it really has bewildered me that running Blackburn Rovers sensibly has been made to look as arduous as sewing in sparring mitts, but that is how it has been presented throughout th

The trouble is, this is a well-trodden route in the Copybook of Tony Mowbray. A week back, prior to Cardiff and following the utterly woeful and woebegone showings against Wigan and Barnsley, we neede

Anyone of a sensitive disposition should look away now...   I’ll preface what I’m about to say by saying that Buckley’s goal was a fantastic moment, and the most I’ve celebrated at Ewood for

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, phili said:

It appears TM over ruled the data team who were suggesting Goode and Pickering in the summer and instead went for Kipre and another left back. When these fell through they were then left desperately trying to find replacements in Douglas and Ayala who the data team were vehemently opposed to.

Venky's now believe what was the point in investing in scouting and data if you are going to over rule them and make silly decisions. They have seen the success of Brentford and want a more scientific approach with rovers recruitment, which they understand, instead of how it has been in the past few seasons..

Sounds positive, but it also makes me suspicious that the Venkys would have that level of idea what goes on with transfers, which I don't believe they do. I would believe Mowbray would over rule them alright though, stubborn man. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, phili said:

It appears TM over ruled the data team who were suggesting Goode and Pickering in the summer and instead went for Kipre and another left back. When these fell through they were then left desperately trying to find replacements in Douglas and Ayala who the data team were vehemently opposed to.

Venky's now believe what was the point in investing in scouting and data if you are going to over rule them and make silly decisions. They have seen the success of Brentford and want a more scientific approach with rovers recruitment, which they understand, instead of how it has been in the past few seasons..

was the other left back Brad Smith who went to the USA instead of signing here? 

Pickering should have been sign in the summer. We should still sign him now. Its a no brainer for me. 

On Goode, Only seen him twice for Northampton with Wharton. 

If the owners are going to commit to keep funding this scouting and Data analysis which Mowbray wanted in place aswell if my memory serves we right. I believe we need to more clever and smart with our signings. Some good young players out there. why Did Mowbray over rule his data team? 

Do you see Rovers going down the Sporting Director and head coach structure after Mowbray leaves Rovers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Chelsea sack Lampard.

Well done Abramovich.

He's backed Lampard to the hilt in the market and clearly decided results aren't good enough and he has not seen sufficient progress and has therefore acted decisively.

It’s a results business and Lampard can't complain - apart from an early flourish, Chelsea have looked far from convincing.

And this leads us to Mowbray.  IMO, results aren't good enough, there are no tangible signs of progress and we are unconvincing.  Our owners need to act decisively and sack Mowbray - there is no room for sentiment in either sport or business as Abramovich has shown. 

Edited by Mercer
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, phili said:

It appears TM over ruled the data team who were suggesting Goode and Pickering in the summer and instead went for Kipre and another left back. When these fell through they were then left desperately trying to find replacements in Douglas and Ayala who the data team were vehemently opposed to.

Venky's now believe what was the point in investing in scouting and data if you are going to over rule them and make silly decisions. They have seen the success of Brentford and want a more scientific approach with rovers recruitment, which they understand, instead of how it has been in the past few seasons..

First plausible explanation that ties everything together. Maybe the data/scouting investment wasn’t anything to do with TM. This is exactly the sort of stuff the consultants would’ve recommended: best practice. Then we had two systems working in parallel: the analysts found Kaminski and the young keeper, TM does his Boro mates a favour with Pears. Analysts find young defenders, TM does his Boro mates a favour with Ayala. Results don’t go as planned, TM in the frame. Venkys work around him while talks start on who to replace him with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

was the other left back Brad Smith who went to the USA instead of signing here? 

Pickering should have been sign in the summer. We should still sign him now. Its a no brainer for me. 

On Goode, Only seen him twice for Northampton with Wharton. 

If the owners are going to commit to keep funding this scouting and Data analysis which Mowbray wanted in place aswell if my memory serves we right. I believe we need to more clever and smart with our signings. Some good young players out there. why Did Mowbray over rule his data team? 

Do you see Rovers going down the Sporting Director and head coach structure after Mowbray leaves Rovers?

They'd never played for the 'Boro.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the rumour is true that there is trouble based on Mowbray choosing players ahead of those recommended to him based on data then it further strengthens my belief that such a system can prove to be more trouble than its worth. If players are signed despite Mowbray not wanting them then I would like to think that he is enough of a man to resign and he would probably win any claims against the club as we have seen elsewhere before.

Not sure on Pickering (all I have seen is "data" and videos that can make anyone good) but Goode has barely played for Brentford.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If the rumour is true that there is trouble based on Mowbray choosing players ahead of those recommended to him based on data then it further strengthens my belief that such a system can prove to be more trouble than its worth. If players are signed despite Mowbray not wanting them then I would like to think that he is enough of a man to resign and he would probably win any claims against the club as we have seen elsewhere before.

Not sure on Pickering (all I have seen is "data" and videos that can make anyone good) but Goode has barely played for Brentford.

TM yesterday;

“He’s a brilliant human being as well, the calmest man in the building.

“I’m just delighted that the recruitment department came up with Thomas Kaminski because he is a joy to work with every day.

“Him making saves like he does really doesn’t surprise me."

To me it just seems like a normal club finally - a recruitment department for the management to utilise if they see fit.

Signing Ayala and Pears - again, like any normal manager using old experience / contacts/ relationships to develop his team,  not “sorting his mates out”

If he is being criticised for signing players from clubs he knew - why isn’t Armstrong included since he took him to Cov twice before bringing him here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The club needs to decide what it is then. Are we now going down the ‘data’ route - easier said then done, I imagine Brentford are going to be oft imitated without much reward, or are we going to remain at the whim of one man, who if he leaves takes a load of the club infrastructure with him.

If it’s a halfway house with competing little empires there’s only going to be one loser.

Edited by Mattyblue
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still convinced Brereton was foisted on Mowbray due to certain criteria that were being followed at the time. He didn't resign over that and I don't think he will now - even if there is some substance in these rumours. 

Mowbray is stubborn and if he feels there is interference from above he may just dig his heels in further. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If the rumour is true that there is trouble based on Mowbray choosing players ahead of those recommended to him based on data then it further strengthens my belief that such a system can prove to be more trouble than its worth. If players are signed despite Mowbray not wanting them then I would like to think that he is enough of a man to resign and he would probably win any claims against the club as we have seen elsewhere before.

Not sure on Pickering (all I have seen is "data" and videos that can make anyone good) but Goode has barely played for Brentford.

What system? 

Having a proper recruitment, scouting and data analysis department? 

That department found Kaminski from using scouting him extensively.

What a bargain hes been

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JBiz said:

TM yesterday;

“He’s a brilliant human being as well, the calmest man in the building.

“I’m just delighted that the recruitment department came up with Thomas Kaminski because he is a joy to work with every day.

“Him making saves like he does really doesn’t surprise me."

To me it just seems like a normal club finally - a recruitment department for the management to utilise if they see fit.

Signing Ayala and Pears - again, like any normal manager using old experience / contacts/ relationships to develop his team,  not “sorting his mates out”

If he is being criticised for signing players from clubs he knew - why isn’t Armstrong included since he took him to Cov twice before bringing him here?

Probably because 

1) Pears isn't very good. 

2) Ayala is a crock adding to a list of other defensive crocks - not what was needed. 

3) We paid a fee for a second choice keeper when we already had a second choice and haven't spent a fee on a permanent defender since 1066. 

4) Despite ability and fitness doubts respectively they got overly long contracts, 4 and 3 years respectively. Overly generous is an overly generous way of describing such details. 

 

No issues with managers using contacts they have Hughes with Savage and Bellamy, Souness with Tugay and Friedel. The issue is when they aren't up to standard or the details of the deal seem questionable then it's unsurprising that people start to grumble and ask questions. As it is for the reasons above the deals seem at best unwise and at worse negligent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JBiz said:

TM yesterday;

“He’s a brilliant human being as well, the calmest man in the building.

“I’m just delighted that the recruitment department came up with Thomas Kaminski because he is a joy to work with every day.

“Him making saves like he does really doesn’t surprise me."

To me it just seems like a normal club finally - a recruitment department for the management to utilise if they see fit.

Signing Ayala and Pears - again, like any normal manager using old experience / contacts/ relationships to develop his team,  not “sorting his mates out”

If he is being criticised for signing players from clubs he knew - why isn’t Armstrong included since he took him to Cov twice before bringing him here?

 

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

What system? 

Having a proper recruitment, scouting and data analysis department? 

That department found Kaminski from using scouting him extensively.

What a bargain hes been

The rumour was that Mowbray had lost communication with the owners after choosing his own signings over the ones recommended.

I never assumed that the rumour was true, I was just saying that if it is, I do not feel comfortable with people potentially putting players on Mowbray against his will, and have always been insistent that the manager should get the final pick of players. I am very skeptical of this rumour at this point.

I have always worked on the assumption that Mowbray has had final say on signings, nothing he has said has suggested otherwise and indeed the supposedly revamped scouting network only allows him further scope to sign different players.

I also havent necessarily criticised the players specifically from being signed from old clubs, it is not uncommon as you say. I try and judge the signings on their individual merits. Kaminski for example is a very shrewd addition thus far, Pears has not impressed and seems miles away, and Ayala was a signing that excited me but various factors, ie his injury proneness which seemingly went undetected in medical checks, the duration of his contract, the way we play which I feel exposes him physically and him being a sole addition at CB has made the signing a rather poor one so far. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

The rumour was that Mowbray had lost communication with the owners after choosing his own signings over the ones recommended.

I never assumed that the rumour was true, I was just saying that if it is, I do not feel comfortable with people potentially putting players on Mowbray against his will, and have always been insistent that the manager should get the final pick of players. I am very skeptical of this rumour at this point.

I have always worked on the assumption that Mowbray has had final say on signings, nothing he has said has suggested otherwise and indeed the supposedly revamped scouting network only allows him further scope to sign different players.

I also havent necessarily criticised the players specifically from being signed from old clubs, it is not uncommon as you say. I try and judge the signings on their individual merits. Kaminski for example is a very shrewd addition thus far, Pears has not impressed and seems miles away, and Ayala was a signing that excited me but various factors, ie his injury proneness which seemingly went undetected in medical checks, the duration of his contract, the way we play which I feel exposes him physically and him being a sole addition at CB has made the signing a rather poor one so far. 

I cant see Pasha being in the UK currently given the travel restrictions in both countries. 

I think Mowbray has always had the final say on signings like yourself. 

Ayala is injury prone but seems to pick injuries but would this been pick up in a routine football medical? 

Pears has come in as number 2 but he is young. He needs games and experience of games. Not going to get that with Kaminski around. 

Ayala was the sole centre back addition in the summer cos we already had 3 centre backs at club. Swansea never bid for Williams..

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, phili said:

It appears TM over ruled the data team who were suggesting Goode and Pickering in the summer and instead went for Kipre and another left back. When these fell through they were then left desperately trying to find replacements in Douglas and Ayala who the data team were vehemently opposed to.

Venky's now believe what was the point in investing in scouting and data if you are going to over rule them and make silly decisions. They have seen the success of Brentford and want a more scientific approach with rovers recruitment, which they understand, instead of how it has been in the past few seasons..

Not calling you a liar or anything like that I'm sure you are only passing on what you have been told but to be fair most summer you were saying no money would be spent and we had to sell players?

Apologies if i have you mixed up with another poster

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

Probably because 

1) Pears isn't very good. 

2) Ayala is a crock adding to a list of other defensive crocks - not what was needed. 

3) We paid a fee for a second choice keeper when we already had a second choice and haven't spent a fee on a permanent defender since 1066. 

4) Despite ability and fitness doubts respectively they got overly long contracts, 4 and 3 years respectively. Overly generous is an overly generous way of describing such details. 

 

No issues with managers using contacts they have Hughes with Savage and Bellamy, Souness with Tugay and Friedel. The issue is when they aren't up to standard or the details of the deal seem questionable then it's unsurprising that people start to grumble and ask questions. As it is for the reasons above the deals seem at best unwise and at worse negligent. 

Hindsight?

1) only in message board world does a player make it through an youth system, academy, and then play at a professional level - to be described as shit after 3 starts.

2) Ayala has been out too much - but you failed to mention the fact two other centrebacks have also been injured, compounding the issue, regardless of if we’d signed DA.

3) Bell was 250k - and we had two homegrown first team ready defensive players and another on the fringe(scotty). We had no permanent senior keeper last season either - an area that needed investment. Goalposts being moved to complain about this - remember last years goalkeeping department?

4) Ayala I agree but that’s football - if you remember he wanted / was potentially off abroad so maybe that was the key to us signing him? Moaning about pears contract is just a waste of time though. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I cant see Pasha being in the UK currently given the travel restrictions in both countries. 

I think Mowbray has always had the final say on signings like yourself. 

Ayala is injury prone but seems to pick injuries but would this been pick up in a routine football medical? 

Pears has come in as number 2 but he is young. He needs games and experience of games. Not going to get that with Kaminski around. 

Ayala was the sole centre back addition in the summer cos we already had 3 centre backs at club. Swansea never bid for Williams..

Why sign a young goalkeeper as a number 2 when he will spend his time on the bench?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, phili said:

I have heard that there has been a breakdown in communication between Venky's and TM. It seems to be playing out in a similar way to the end of the Bowyer era, they have just stop communicating with him since the end of November.

Also Braithwaite was bought in by the data team, Pasha and Silvester, completely bypassing Waggott, TM and Venus. Hence why TM is busy thanking Venky's for this transfer and his podcast last week. 

I am not sure how accurate the info is but does explain the sudden charm offensive from TM towards Venky's.

I have heard similar. 👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, JBiz said:

Hindsight?

1) only in message board world does a player make it through an youth system, academy, and then play at a professional level - to be described as shit after 3 starts.

2) Ayala has been out too much - but you failed to mention the fact two other centrebacks have also been injured, compounding the issue, regardless of if we’d signed DA.

3) Bell was 250k - and we had two homegrown first team ready defensive players and another on the fringe(scotty). We had no permanent senior keeper last season either - an area that needed investment. Goalposts being moved to complain about this - remember last years goalkeeping department?

4) Ayala I agree but that’s football - if you remember he wanted / was potentially off abroad so maybe that was the key to us signing him? Moaning about pears contract is just a waste of time though. 

 

1) it's also based on reports from Boro fans I work with.as well as 3 poor games, which seems to be in keeping with their reports. Also I said not very good which is less dramatic than your summation. Have to say both on reports from previous and what seems it appears a fair assessment of him. Also given he is a number 2 he isn't going to get huge amounts of games is he. Leuts only made a handful prior to him and Raya leaving but it was enough to see he was poor. 

2) if anything this makes signing him worse. Him being a crock would have been much less a gamble had our other defenders been more robust. In fact it would have probably been a more worthwhile gamble to take in those circumstances. As it is with two other centre backs badly injury prone it was playing with fire. 

3) Not sure the goalposts are being moved. Both the defence AND the keeper situation really needed badly sorting. Yes we needed a couple of keepers, no arguments from me there - I agree with you. We also however really needed to strengthen a depleted and injury prone defence. That the money went on a second keeper when we already had the Greek lad as back up, and we badly needed defensive reinforcements too, seems a poor use of the money. Don't think that's hindsight whatsoever. 

4) Maybe it was key to us signing him, in which case we were had. It's bad business regardless of how much it happens in football as we don't come out well from it. I'm not sure why eyebrows can't be raised at Pears contract. Is a second choice keeper who hasn't really performed really worth a 4 year deal? I would have expected he would have had more to prove to justify being locked down for that long. It's not like a Dack or Armstrong situation of tying down your star players. What I will say though is if it was longer for a lower wage than perhaps that makes sense and I would withdraw that criticism as I could see why you would want that situation. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's roll back time to pre-season, would anyone be calling for Mowbray to go if we said we would be 6 points off the play-offs and be the top scorers in the Championship?  A lot of the antipathy relates to the disappointment following the outstanding start.

The 'Boro game gave me some confidence as it was a scrap all the way through the game but we ground out a 1-0 win.  I also have to say that some of the goals we have scored this season have come from some fantastic football.

The problem that needs addressing is consistency, you can't say that the team don't enjoy playing for Mowbray so that removes one of the common issues 'he's lost the dressing room'.  What may be an issue is the difficulty in adapting a passing game to a poor pitch at Ewood.  That has yet to be shown and our failures against top half teams is also an issue.

The pitch isn't Mowbray's fault but how he chooses to play on it might be.

I'm still firmly in the Tony Mowbray corner, I don't see anything but downsides to getting another manager in.  Plus he's managed to work well with the owners who also deserve some credit for continuing to pump in money.  Shame they made so many mistakes at the start .......

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Roversider said:

Let's roll back time to pre-season, would anyone be calling for Mowbray to go if we said we would be 6 points off the play-offs

 

That would say we have stood still on last season, even though it seemed like we had made some decent acquisitions and didn’t sell any of our top performers.

So I suppose it depends on what your expectations are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Roversider said:

Let's roll back time to pre-season, would anyone be calling for Mowbray to go if we said we would be 6 points off the play-offs and be the top scorers in the Championship?  A lot of the antipathy relates to the disappointment following the outstanding start.

The 'Boro game gave me some confidence as it was a scrap all the way through the game but we ground out a 1-0 win.  I also have to say that some of the goals we have scored this season have come from some fantastic football.

The problem that needs addressing is consistency, you can't say that the team don't enjoy playing for Mowbray so that removes one of the common issues 'he's lost the dressing room'.  What may be an issue is the difficulty in adapting a passing game to a poor pitch at Ewood.  That has yet to be shown and our failures against top half teams is also an issue.

The pitch isn't Mowbray's fault but how he chooses to play on it might be.

I'm still firmly in the Tony Mowbray corner, I don't see anything but downsides to getting another manager in.  Plus he's managed to work well with the owners who also deserve some credit for continuing to pump in money.  Shame they made so many mistakes at the start .......

 

Thats nonsense. The target at the start of LAST season was a top 6 finish, publically declared by manager and players alike. We finished 11th, miles off in the end, a mere 3 points better than the season prior in which we went on a truly awful run with a side the manager admitted were "given a chance" following promotion, and never really were ever in the running for the top 6. Players including the captain acknowledged a failure to meet target, but I think there was a level of understanding in that no one ever expected us to get into the top 6. Whether the improvement was enough was a different matter.

This season, the top 6 aim was really pushed home again in the summer, more signings made, many with promotion experience, no sales, and a lot more belief and expectation. Unfortunately it has been a season not only that has got progressively worse, but another in which we havent really ever been in the running for the top 6, which was our aim. 2 wins away is not particularly close, and it is not based on the expectations of a good start, which itself was brief, but the expectations set out 18 months ago and re-iterated 6 months ago, on the back of further recruitment and no sales.

The fact that we are the top scorers is irrelevant, it is where we are in the league that matters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, islander200 said:

Not calling you a liar or anything like that I'm sure you are only passing on what you have been told but to be fair most summer you were saying no money would be spent and we had to sell players?

Apologies if i have you mixed up with another poster

Limited spending has been allowed following relaxation of the FFP rules for the season as well as TM going for the playoffs. Up until then we had a leeway of £15k.

Venky's have guaranteed an injection into the club this year of £32m to cover this years running costs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Roversider said:

Let's roll back time to pre-season, would anyone be calling for Mowbray to go if we said we would be 6 points off the play-offs and be the top scorers in the Championship? 

 

Mowbray should have said in pre-season:

"We can't complete with the relegated sides financially and we can't compete with the clubs still receiving parachute payments. The minimum expectation is mid table, but we'll push for a play off spot with everything we've got"

The season is working out as expected, keep up the good work Tony, push for the playoffs son. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.