Summer Transfer Window

[Leonard Venkhater]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

The most frustrating part about this summer is not the predictable fact that we clearly arent going to be spending much. Thats probably quite common. Its that we dont have a set up whereby Mowbray could have found that out after the Milwall game and been more proactive, even if it was sithout being armed with transfer fees because with coronavirus that has become a very saturated market. If only we had a normally run club by owners with any interest in what is happening.

The problem is that we had big gaps left by loan players. We need a goalkeeper and a centre back, and obviously a left back too. Players like Morgan Fox, Grant Hall, James Chester, they are nothing special but they are decent Championship players for free.

I would love to be proven wrong and see us spend a bit of money sensibly and get better players that those that I have mentioned, because they arent groundbreaking or promotion winning players so it is possible. But I have no confidence and little hope.

The need to bring in new players this summer has been apparent for at least 12 months.

And you didn't need to be Nostradamus to know that all the loan players would be going back and that Graham, Smallwood and Samuel would be out.

I wish we were a normal club with normal processes and accountability....  (sighed he, once again)

[Mike E]

2 minutes ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

The need to bring in new players this summer has been apparent for at least 12 months.

And you didn't need to be Nostradamus to know that all the loan players would be going back and that Graham, Smallwood and Samuel would be out.

I wish we were a normal club with normal processes and accountability....  (sighed he, once again)

Once upon a time, we were the Gold Standard

[Stuart]

Question:

If it meant having to play Fisher (1) and Hilton (2), would we be better off than if we had to sell one of Armstrong, Dack or Lenihan in order to buy a new keeper?

[markhayhurst]

Just now, Stuart said:

Question:

If it meant having to play Fisher (1) and Hilton (2), would we be better off than if we had to sell one of Armstrong, Dack or Lenihan in order to buy a new keeper?

Seriously ? with our defence 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

3 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Question:

If it meant having to play Fisher (1) and Hilton (2), would we be better off than if we had to sell one of Armstrong, Dack or Lenihan in order to buy a new keeper?

We'd need a keeper, CB and left back and have a lot of cash left over.

Lenihan is probably the last person we should be selling.

[DeeCee]

Just now, markhayhurst said:

Seriously ? with our defence 

We have a defence? We have 2 of the 5 components

[Russ]

26 minutes ago, markhayhurst said:

I agree we really shouldn’t have released Richie Smallwood our super keeper 

Genuine question anyone - does Smallwood have more league minutes in goal than Fisher and Hilton? Has Fisher ever made a league appearance?

[Stuart]

2 minutes ago, markhayhurst said:

Seriously ? with our defence 

 

Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

We'd need a keeper, CB and left back and have a lot of cash left over.

Lenihan is probably the last person we should be selling.

Sorry but neither of those answer the question.

Would any players Mowbray could bring in, free or loans be better than existing players? Would it be worth sacrificing one of our big three for a new keeper?

Penniless Rovers First XI

Penniless Rovers Second XI

Standby players - Butterworth, Vale and Magloire

 

[PeteJD13]

12 hours ago, Kamy100 said:

There is very little money to spend.  I have heard that Venky's will continue to fund the club (to meet current liabilities) but they want to reduce overheads as much as they can with money spent on transfers being one of the key cost reduction areas, even if we sell players, some of that money will be used to reduce overheads.  

This has been coming for a few years, there had to come a time when the Venky's made the decision to reduce spending, the hope is that they can transition to this new model of working in a controlled way but I very much doubt that will happen as I have little or no faith in the executive structure at Ewood to be able to successfully manage such a transition.

I'm surprised this has been this long in coming we haemorrhage cash and very little is done by the club to enhance revenue streams the waggott tax was indicative of this rinse the match going support, rather then be innovative and get people coming back. As for this window i suspect we don't as it stands have any cash maybe a little bit of wages spare for freebies. I don't see any cash buys coming in unless we offload 2/3 players for money some of our fans are deluded thinking we are now well run and have money to spend. 

[Paul Mani]

Just now, Stuart said:

 

Sorry but neither of those answer the question.

Would any players Mowbray could bring in, free or loans be better than existing players? Would it be worth sacrificing one of our big three for a new keeper?

Penniless Rovers First XI

Penniless Rovers Second XI

Standby players - Butterworth, Vale and Magloire

 

I never thought I’d say this Stuart but you’ve just made me feel MUCH better. I think our ‘penniless’ XI would finish comfortably between 11th and 15th.

Thamks!

[simongarnerisgod]

that second XI has got me reaching for the gin bottle ?

[DeeCee]

8 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

I never thought I’d say this Stuart but you’ve just made me feel MUCH better. I think our ‘penniless’ XI would finish comfortably between 11th and 15th.

Thamks!

Sarcasm at its best ?

[markhayhurst]

5 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

I never thought I’d say this Stuart but you’ve just made me feel MUCH better. I think our ‘penniless’ XI would finish comfortably between 11th and 15th.

Thamks!

From previous posts the suggestion is that a player will have to be sold to cover wages/help balance the books so more likely your team minus either Dack or/and Armstrong is the mire likely scenario with a potential goal keeper Loan. 
to answer your question no I’d prefer a solid goal keeper/defence to Dack I’m afraid or even Armstrong we managed half of last season with them not featuring for periods but leaking 5-6 goals is not something they can shore up. Recent example Messi/Barcelona ?? ( aside let’s not forget we once beat Barcelona in a friendly)

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

27 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Sorry but neither of those answer the question.

Depends how good Fisher/Hilton is. Until we know that it's impossible to answer

[Stuart]

13 minutes ago, markhayhurst said:

From previous posts the suggestion is that a player will have to be sold to cover wages/help balance the books so more likely your team minus either Dack or/and Armstrong is the mire likely scenario with a potential goal keeper Loan. 
to answer your question no I’d prefer a solid goal keeper/defence to Dack I’m afraid or even Armstrong we managed half of last season with them not featuring for periods but leaking 5-6 goals is not something they can shore up. Recent example Messi/Barcelona ?? ( aside let’s not forget we once beat Barcelona in a friendly)

For what it’s worth, I agree with you.

I think we did miss Dack but I’ve a feeling we’ll miss Adarabioyo more. I also think we do need an experience number one and a centre back minimum.

That said, if (and it’s a big if) Wharton could step up then I think selling Dack for a cut-price £10m and re-invest some of that in a keeper then our Penniless XI (now ‘Net Minus XI’) could have a shot.

But (and it’s a big but) Gallagher and Brereton need to chip in with goals along with Armstrong.

And @Paul Mani if you’re happy I’m happy. ?

[tomphil]

58 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Question:

If it meant having to play Fisher (1) and Hilton (2), would we be better off than if we had to sell one of Armstrong, Dack or Lenihan in order to buy a new keeper?

Great question.

From the way they do things here and the lack of real investment in defense over the last 4 years or so you'd have to assume if they have the option they'll plump for a rookie in the sticks and keep the rest.

Personally i'd hope they could cut some more chaff away and find a taker for Mulgrew then use that to take a decentish loan keeper with Fisher no 2.

[Stuart]

33 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

I never thought I’d say this Stuart but you’ve just made me feel MUCH better. I think our ‘penniless’ XI would finish comfortably between 11th and 15th.

Thamks!

The only thing we need now is a manager who will play Gallagher and/or Brezza as centre forrads instead of out wide.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, Stuart said:

The only thing we need now is a manager who will play Gallagher and/or Brezza as centre forrads instead of out wide.

We've more chance of getting Dino Zoff between the sticks.

[Blue blood]

1 hour ago, Stuart said:

Question:

If it meant having to play Fisher (1) and Hilton (2), would we be better off than if we had to sell one of Armstrong, Dack or Lenihan in order to buy a new keeper?

Good question.

Depends on which one were sold and whether more than one player could be brought in. 

If Lenihen went and if it were just a keeper who could be brought in then no. If so we aren't any better off as with Bell, Williams and Mulgrew in front of them they could be the world's best keeper but that would be undone by the defence. If Armstrong went I'd be seriously worried about our lack of goals and pace and feel this would outweigh the benefits of a somewhat improved defence (remember Lenihen would still have a duff partner and left back). As I said before the only one we could afford to replace with a modicum of talent within the squad is Dack as Holtby and Buckley can do that role. So that swap might be worth it albeit the lack of partner for Lenihen and weakness at lb still means the trade off isn't great. 

I don't think we can afford to lose Lenihen at all or the defence is almost a league 1 embarassment. I don't think we could do a one in for one out with Armstrong either as we will miss too many goals. 

If we could get more than one player out of the trade I would perhaps be willing to let Armstrong go, if it meant keeping Dack and Lenihen. A big lump of a striker in the Graham mould shouldn't be that hard to find even if not as good as him and could be good foil for.our number 10s. Also if Dack could bring in players more that could offset the loss of Armstrong, especially if more of the defence than just the keeper was tightened up and improved. Under no circumstances would Lenihen be sold - there's too much work to do on the defence as it is. 

So a one to one swap - I don't think massively benefits us but could if Dack was sacrificed. A two or three of better than we have if not amazing for one swap probably needs to be done. 

The other thing to factor in is TM isn't that good in the transfer market. This makes gambling on new players all the more risky. Last year he had a 50:50 ratio of success and two of those successes won't be here next year! So maybe better the devil we know given TMs weakness in the transfer market. 

Cripes it's grim supporting Rovers. 

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, Gamst said:

He's done a decent job overall. He's made small gains year on year and brought back some integrity to the office after a string of disasters. Its only fair to mention his transfer successes alongside the money he has wasted. I also think he seems like a nice chap. He has made errors and I think he has taken the team as far as he can, but I can still be a fan of the bloke despite that. Everything doesn't have to be black and white. 

So you're saying you like him as a person and appreciate that he stabilised the club, but fully acknowledge that he needs to go?

[Exiled in Toronto]

I’d never have realised without wading through this thread that a global pandemic, closure of grounds etc might hit the finances of a club that already needed £17m cash injection a year just to function.

It also seems borderline fantasy to me that if £11m hadn’t been committed to (not spent yet by a long way), then there would be £11m sat in the bank to buy better players this summer. Whatever cash has already gone on those two either would never have been sent over, or the other payments would have been reduced by the same amount had they not been signed.

[Richard Oakley]

@Stuart No is my answer to your question. It's an Evans contract year. I'd play Evans over Johnson, when fit. JRC is better than Bell.The issue is whether Armstrong plays too deep in which case we lose him as a goal threat and may as well sell him. I'd still expect a 14th place finish.

A more riskier formation would put Armstrong up alongside Gallagher.JRC instead of Holtby and Chapman or Mols in the wide left slot.That would leave a back 3. Wharton played in one all last season. Nyambe played in one for Namibia. They both know how to play in a back 3. I reckon that team would score more goals.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, Paul Mani said:

I never thought I’d say this Stuart but you’ve just made me feel MUCH better. I think our ‘penniless’ XI would finish comfortably between 11th and 15th.

Thamks!

I was actually thinking that with the exception of Bradley "last pay day" Johnson that first X1 didn't look too bad either but even so, what use is that with us approaching £200m in debt?

[Fraserkirky]

Bradley Johnson was absolutely shocking for most of last season, apart from a couple of games and the second half against Cardiff, when it looked like he came out of the changing rooms on drugs.  Wouldn't have him anywhere near the first team.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

Question:

If it meant having to play Fisher (1) and Hilton (2), would we be better off than if we had to sell one of Armstrong, Dack or Lenihan in order to buy a new keeper?

Great question.

Given we survived last season with a keeper who stopped less shots than my "face in the crowd" would have done, I'd be more inclined to keep the 5 "crown jewels" and take a gamble on either Fisher or Hilton  coming up trumps. Let's face it, they can't do much worse than Walton.

However I don't think we'll have a decent season unless we invest in a decent keeper AND keep the crown jewels. ***

I'd attempt to plug the gaps using the youngsters such as Wharton elsewhere I think.

*** not confident either will happen.