Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

Summer transfer window 2021.


Recommended Posts

I think the Telegraph are doing the clubs bidding here. 

An almost daily reference to Armstrong, now they've started with the 'bids' in but rejected.

I don't believe them.

It is in Rovers' interests to keep this in the limelight for as long as possible.

Zero information in that article beyond what we already knew.

They're trying to bring interested parties out into the open.

Normal clubs would be pressing ahead with recruitment and planning for improvement next season, the focus here is on cashing in.

Shameless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I think the Telegraph are doing the clubs bidding here. 

An almost daily reference to Armstrong, now they've started with the 'bids' in but rejected.

I don't believe them.

It is in Rovers' interests to keep this in the limelight for as long as possible.

Zero information in that article beyond what we already knew.

They're trying to bring interested parties out into the open.

Normal clubs would be pressing ahead with recruitment and planning for improvement next season, the focus here is on cashing in.

Shameless. 

Not sure why the LT would lie.  Not sure anything in this makes much sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JHRover said:

I think the Telegraph are doing the clubs bidding here. 

An almost daily reference to Armstrong, now they've started with the 'bids' in but rejected.

I don't believe them.

It is in Rovers' interests to keep this in the limelight for as long as possible.

Zero information in that article beyond what we already knew.

They're trying to bring interested parties out into the open.

Normal clubs would be pressing ahead with recruitment and planning for improvement next season, the focus here is on cashing in.

Shameless. 

I doubt it mate. AA's agent will be telling all and sundry if there is a bid. It won't need the LT doing the agent's work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Paul Mellelieu said:

Not sure why the LT would lie.  Not sure anything in this makes much sense.

Where did I say they were lying?

I don't think they've the capability to lie. More that whoever is drip feeding them stuff from the Club is playing them.

Why? Because Mowbray and Waggott clearly want Armstrong sold, but also want to cover their own arses when he is by telling everyone that there's a contract extension sat there unsigned thereby shifting culpability away from the people running the club and onto the player for refusing an offer.

They're very good at this sort of thing. They don't like blame heading their way or landing on the owners doorstep. So it's all about the player having his head turned and not about Rovers failing to secure star players down to appropriate contracts.

The club have been unable or unwilling to extend contracts of any senior players over the last 18 months (other than the 12 month Johnson extension). They've been dormant and inactive for months, unable to even do the most basic or simple of things such as communicate or sort tickets out.

I'm supposed to believe there's a reasonable offer on the table for Armstrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JHRover said:

The club have been unable or unwilling to extend contracts of any senior players over the last 18 months (other than the 12 month Johnson extension). They've been dormant and inactive for months, unable to even do the most basic or simple of things such as communicate or sort tickets out.

I'm supposed to believe there's a reasonable offer on the table for Armstrong?

Why would you not believe it? A bid from another club has nothing to do with how Rovers operate. Well, actually it does. There's more likely to be a bid from another club for a player that's just finished leading scorer but who's club have allowed his contract to run down because they are idiots. 

Some will see AA as a bargain. 

I believe it. I'm just intrigued to how much they've taken the piss with their bid amount. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Where did I say they were lying?

I don't think they've the capability to lie. More that whoever is drip feeding them stuff from the Club is playing them.

Why? Because Mowbray and Waggott clearly want Armstrong sold, but also want to cover their own arses when he is by telling everyone that there's a contract extension sat there unsigned thereby shifting culpability away from the people running the club and onto the player for refusing an offer.

They're very good at this sort of thing. They don't like blame heading their way or landing on the owners doorstep. So it's all about the player having his head turned and not about Rovers failing to secure star players down to appropriate contracts.

The club have been unable or unwilling to extend contracts of any senior players over the last 18 months (other than the 12 month Johnson extension). They've been dormant and inactive for months, unable to even do the most basic or simple of things such as communicate or sort tickets out.

I'm supposed to believe there's a reasonable offer on the table for Armstrong?

Do you really believe the club would have to use the local media to drum up interest in Armstrong??

He is young, English,just finished 2nd top scorer in the championship with 28 goals and has a year left on his deal.

Surely wether he is sold or kept it will reflect badly on the manager and Waggott as any fee we are likely to receive will be much lower than we should be getting so why would they be happy to see him leave in those circumstances.

Yeah the owners sanctioned the Cairney sale years ago but in recent times  we have sold only Raya.

It's the wage cap we seem to have preventing us tieing down our better players.Why would Armstrong sign now for a probable max 20k a week when he will get more by either leaving this summer or running his contract down

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So there's a bid but they don't say what it is ?

Sounds like a sure fire way to start an auction without frightening anybody off.  

Get the lines in about wanting 20 million but will leave in a free in 12 months to balance it.  

Ground being prepped.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Do you really believe the club would have to use the local media to drum up interest in Armstrong??

He is young, English,just finished 2nd top scorer in the championship with 28 goals and has a year left on his deal.

Surely wether he is sold or kept it will reflect badly on the manager and Waggott as any fee we are likely to receive will be much lower than we should be getting so why would they be happy to see him leave in those circumstances.

Yeah the owners sanctioned the Cairney sale years ago but in recent times  we have sold only Raya.

It's the wage cap we seem to have preventing us tieing down our better players.Why would Armstrong sign now for a probable max 20k a week when he will get more by either leaving this summer or running his contract down

 

The only way the Telegraph get their information is from the Club. We know that - because the people working there now simply don't have the connections to anyone else for their intel - and we can be pretty confident that the Telegraph wouldn't run with a headline of saying Rovers had rejected a bid unless someone at Rovers had given them the info or go ahead to do it.

Question then becomes why would someone at Rovers pass that information on to the Telegraph? Why not just stay quiet or deny a bid is in?

Answer is because it suits them for the Telegraph to run with it and plaster it all over social media and the paper.

Why does it suit them? Because they want him gone but I suspect have been disappointed at the level of interest so far and numbers on the grapevine.

If the local media runs with this it prepares fans for the sale, gradually reducing expectations on the fee, and also puts other clubs on alert that they might need to put their bids in pronto.

Venkys clearly don't have a clue and as they showed with Cairney and Raya are happy to sell assets at an undervalue. What they won't be happy with is if people think they have offloaded Armstrong because the club is skint. That damages the egos of the billionaires who never refuse a cheque and love the club.

The answer to your last question is that you increase the cap in these sort of circumstances. Speculate to accumulate. Surely there's room on the payroll to do it after offloading 15 and dishing out sympathy deals to Gladwin and Smallwood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

With Newcastle in the usual Ashley/sale/takeover induced turmoil and often seemingly in need of a few quick quid.  It might have been an idea to low ball them 12 months ago with an offer to buy out AAs sell on clause.

Edited by tomphil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we'll take £15m and add-ons for Armstrong.

I'm pretty sure we'll sell him this window. We can't afford to lose him for nothing next summer. 

If he goes to Southampton it doesn't really suit anyone. We lose Armstrong and they replace Ings with Arma, which they won't be happy about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don't believe anyone bid for him either. Greedy, moody little so and so ;) 

Ah no I think I take @JHRover point about the LT though. I mean they seem to know nothing of relevance about anything else to do with the club really, then they just put this up. Even if there is a bid, an LT article is just preparing us for it and also getting word out that we will do business, which I suppose we have to. There could be a bid, but it's definitely the club and LT working together to get the story out. Whereas the gutless cowards tip toed around Mowbrays future last year to toe the line. Pathetic. 

Edited by Bigdoggsteel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

If it wasn't for the LT then I couldn't conceive of the top scorer in the Championship being sold. Especially as he won't sign a new contract.  It would be a total surprise to see him go. Thank you LT for opening my eyes and preparing me for his departure. The shock could have killed me. 🙄

It's just a bit odd the one area of insight , journalism or breaking news to do with the club is this. They are behind the curve on literally everything else. They are definitely too close to the club to do anything worthwhile like hold the manager to account 

Obviously we all know there will be/is interest and he will be sold 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rigger said:

I would keep Armstrong for another season. If he leaves for a free after his contract runs out, so be it. At least we only lose 60% of the potential fee 

Not my money but absolutely.

If we accepted a bid of £10m what would that be clear to us?

60% of any profit over £1.75m according to the LT so 60% of £8.25m  I.e. £6.3m.

Not worth it. The only way I would contemplate a sale is if we were getting at least £10m clear which would require a bid of c £20m AND we had targeted someone within our budget to replace him on a PERMANENT basis.

The notion that AA should be replaced by someone coming in  on loan for a year is absolutely ludicrous and is something else Waggott and Mowbray shouldn't be allowed to get away with if they're here that long. (like Brockhall)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rovers11 said:

I think we'll take £15m and add-ons for Armstrong.

I'm pretty sure we'll sell him this window. We can't afford to lose him for nothing next summer. 

If he goes to Southampton it doesn't really suit anyone. We lose Armstrong and they replace Ings with Arma, which they won't be happy about.

I'm feckin sure we would!

Sadly, I doubt we'll see anything like that.

I think we have been screwed again, IMO, by the incompetence of Mowbray and Waggott.

I don't think there are any excuses for this abysmal state of affairs.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JHRover said:

I predict that there will be such a turnover in players (much of it brought on ourselves) and so many new faces to integrate at once that Mowbray will baffle himself and everyone else with all sorts of experiments and theories on how to play.

Sad part is that swathes of the fanbase will buy his BS when he talks about developing a new team or system to move forward with.

He has no idea on a system or what he wants which is why we've had various through his time here and lurched from one to the other. 

We know that when Armstrong departs (which I reckon Mowbray wants) he can then buy himself another 6-12 months of muddling around trying to develop an identity and system without him. He'll talk the talk and the Telegraph will print it every week and the laptop gurus will fantastise about tactics and systems and Mowbray will act like he's Rinus Michels. 

Next one will be that he needs to develop a system of being less reliant on one goalscorer and spreading the goals around the squad more (ignoring that finishing in a relegation battle with a 29 goal striker proves managerial incompetence).

But he'll get away with it.

"It was always going to be a summer of transition after Armstrong was sold"

"What is Mowbray meant to do when we are under FFP restrictions? No manager could do anything other than aim for survival"

"There's been a pandemic. Once that's out of the way we will be fine"

"He's using the younger players and he deserves chance to see them develop" (whilst their contracts run down and they get taken away).

I'm sure that our more naive/provocative/idiotic fans will try and spin as suggested but I don't understand how it is in Mowbray's best interests to be without such a prolific goalscorer.

If Armstrong wasn't here scoring a crazy amount of goals last season, we would not have had an underwhelming, boring season of miserable regression, we would have been in a dog fight at the bottom. Take him out this season and again the outlook is bleak.

Of course, the fact that Mowbray seemingly isn't judged on results means that Armstrong's future is neither here nor there in regards to Mowbray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tomphil said:

With Newcastle in the usual Ashley/sale/takeover induced turmoil and often seemingly in need of a few quick quid.  It might have been an idea to low ball them 12 months ago with an offer to buy out AAs sell on clause.

That is a businessman talking and under normal business circumstances eminently sensible.

Rovers however?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Not my money but absolutely.

If we accepted a bid of £10m what would that be clear to us?

60% of any profit over £1.75m according to the LT so 60% of £8.25m  I.e. £6.3m.

Not worth it. The only way I would contemplate a sale is if we were getting at least £10m clear which would require a bid of c £20m AND we had targeted someone within our budget to replace him on a PERMANENT basis.

The notion that AA should be replaced by someone coming in  on loan for a year is absolutely ludicrous and is something else Waggott and Mowbray shouldn't be allowed to get away with if they're here that long. (like Brockhall)

I believe 60% of profit means we also get the £1.75m as whole. i.e in your example 60% of £8.25m = £6.3m + £1.75m = £8.05m.

For £10m net we'd need to sell for £15.5m total. (We get £10m and Newcastle get £5.5m)

Edited by superniko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, superniko said:

I believe 60% of profit means we also get the £1.75m as whole. i.e in your example 60% of £8.25m = £6.3m + £1.75m = £8.05m.

For £10m net we'd need to sell for £15.5m total. (We get £10m and Newcastle get £5.5m)

Personally I would prefer to see the player on the pitch for another season, than the money be stashed away in some untraceable bank account. If he leaves on a free after the season, at least the paying public would have had something for their money. 

Edited by rigger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rigger said:

Personally I would prefer to see the player on the pitch for another season, than the money be stashed away in some untraceable bank account. If he leaves on a free after the season, at least the paying public would have had something for their money. 

I agree to a certain extent, but everyone has a price. The issue for me is that it's criminal that we're back in FFP trouble where we see nothing in terms of reinvestment for our assets. 

We went down to L1, stripped the club of our quality players and rebuilt, but somehow we're back here again haemorrhaging money, in just a few years.

In a parallel universe where we're well-run and managed I'd be delighted at blue-balling some premier league team to get more for Armstrong, knowing we'll invest the £Xmillion shrewdly (ala Brentford for god knows how many season). Like you say, is it even worth it when we'll just pick up a free transfer replacement and our costs vs income still remain in a terrible place. 

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • 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.