Jump to content

BRFCS

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

Summer transfer window 2021.


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Maybe the money will be used to get others signed up to new deals .

It's a terrible situation, but there is absolutely no guarantee that Armstrong will be as prolific next season.In the short term we are obviously a way worse off without Armstrong but I really do not see how we can let him go for nothing in 12 months time when the books are telling us we need substantial cash brought in 

I agree but some of the money absolutely has to be reinvested in the squad.

We have 1 fit senior centre back and only Gallagher and BB upfront, who won't score as many as AA did between them.

The money is likely to fall into a black hole and we'll be just chucking some U23 players in. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crystal Palace, Watford, Norwich or Southampton...... what a choice. For supporters of a certain age they're just rubbish third division southern clubs that we used to look down on in disdain.

I feel sorry for Armstrong. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

3) What happens when said loanees get injured or are recalled by their parent clubs? Do we then change to yet another style?

The guy is embarassing.

Agree the guy humiliates us. Mind you he is in good company with the owners and CEO on that score. 

There were a host of other issues with the comment I didn't go into (I felt 1 covered it) but a whopping 4th could be what about a style that suits the other 15-20 in the squad? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Sounds like there is minimal chance of any replacements for Armstrong or new deals for all of the others whose contract is running down. That is nothing to do with saving money because allowing assets to run their contracts down is not financially wise. 

Yes we have to save money and reduce the wage bill whilst meeting FFP requirements otherwise its another embargo for us. Is that what you want? We are losing around 20 million per season can we afford to keep doing this every season? 

Yes I would love to millions on Armstrong's replacement but we can't. Still think our best bet is a player plus cash deal but we will see what happens in the coming days. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes we have to save money and reduce the wage bill whilst meeting FFP requirements otherwise its another embargo for us. Is that what you want? We are losing around 20 million per season can we afford to keep doing this every season? 

 

You can't keep mentioning FFP as a source of problems and then not be desperate to secure our best players to long term contracts.

You can't use FFP as an excuse for not getting players on long term contracts 

What difference would an embargo make right now? Any?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Why not consider loaning older, more experienced players? 

Because their parent clubs would expect us to pay the going rate rather than gift them to us for development purposes.

We are nothing but a charity case to be used by the top clubs. We're becoming a B team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

PALACE IN ADVANCED TALKS WITH ARMSTRONG

Crystal Palace are in advanced talks with Blackburn to sign striker Adam Armstrong.

The Eagles have made an offer that was not accepted but remain strongly interested in getting a deal done for the former England U21.

Southampton, who are looking to replace Danny Ings, have also had an offer rejected and remain interested but are currently looking into alternative options.

Rovers owners Venkys are looking for £20m for Armstrong, who scored 30 goals last season; bettered only in the Championship by Brentford’s Ivan Toney.

It is understood both the offers from Palace and Saints fell short of this £20m valuation.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, JHRover said:

You can't keep mentioning FFP as a source of problems and then not be desperate to secure our best players to long term contracts.

You can't use FFP as an excuse for not getting players on long term contracts 

What difference would an embargo make right now? Any?

hasn't @philialready outlined it for you what the affects are on the club

here is his answer again

When you are in an embargo, the maximum you can offer for a weekly wage is £10k for a new signing as well as a contract renewal.

You also have rules on signings and existing players not going above a certain Wage to Turnover ratio.

So if we do end up in another embargo soon you can kiss goodbye to every player whose contract comes to an end next summer. Also we won't have any assets to sell to get out of the embargo.

 

Edited by chaddyrovers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

This thing of 5 loans coming in after the season starts. It's just a bullshit way of doing things. Disruptive 

Oh it's pretty stupid if it happens before the season start too. No long term planning, no assets, no experience and stunts our own players' growth. Whilst not adverse to loans in principle in our situation loading up on young loanees is a terrible way to go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Deary me.

I have had plenty of suggestions for replacements for Mowbray, most of which have been snapped up by rival clubs. You are welcome to go back and trawl through my posts if you want to see who but there's little point in me repeating them now they are employed at better clubs and Mowbray is clearly unsackable.

I'd say there was little evidence to suggest either Mowbray or Waggott were competent enough to get this club back to the PL. He deserved a shot after League One, but by mid 2019/20 season it was clear we were going nowhere and a club with serious ambition and management monitoring performances and results would have taken pre-emptive action before the sh!t hit the fan and we wasted more time and money.

I'm not interested in what is deemed 'reasonable' this club is more important and bigger than Mowbray and his feelings/opinion. If an improvement in management was seen as beneficial it should have happened. Sadly we've a reactive setup here who allow problems to build and unfold and then it is too late to do anything about it. Armstrong is the latest one, Coyle's season another.

If you think it is 'irrelevant' that the first team manager appointed or at least recommended the CEO then we can't take this much further. It isn't irrelevant, it isn't normal, it isn't healthy and it isn't acceptable and it is a major, major issue in the dysfunctional setup of this club. A CEO should be able to change or at least recommend a change in manager. That isn't ever going to happen when the CEO got his job thanks to the manager.

I think I agree with you - chumps like Derek Shaw and Waggott aren't fit to be running a club of this size and stature - you asked for a solution and I gave you one - stop employing these sort of people and get better in. It doesn't have to be a Blackburn fan at all. I don't believe that there are unique conditions here - football fans are similar wherever - they just want treating with respect something in short supply here.

Again I don't accept that FFP is a reason not to fire a manager who is failing. That is nonsense. Sheffield Wednesday sacked 2 managers last season whilst under FFP trouble, as did Birmingham and Derby.

Results come first and if they aren't good enough a change is made. It's the way it has always been.

Reactive not proactive. This ownership lends itself to that entire issue.

This is my concern with new faces / bosses below. Won’t make a difference.
 

I guess the difference in the most simple terms, between our view on this - the issues are in India, not Ewood. Or rather the cause is in India for the staff at Ewood.

It would come as a complete surprise to see that change without changing the names on the deeds, and we’ve been talking about that for 10+ years now.

Still - your point about the price of changing, SW have a very similar problem - a clueless owner. Chansiri causes different issues because he’s constantly interfering whereas we’re the result of neglect… fair enough assertion?

10 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

Not really, it’s purely window-dressing; they’ve already put the money in, that’s the evidence that pays the bills. If they started charging interest on it then I’d be concerned. 

Whether the cash has gone into the club as loans or share capital, realistically, they are never going to see it again unless we somehow qualify for the Champions League 5 years in a row…- the hampering comes from India not Ewood.

I think in terms of the fans view of them - if they wrote the cash off and injected the maximum they can, created some sort of “loop hole” sponsor to avoid FFP (see Etihad) and then immediately gave a top proven CEO carte blanche to do as they see fit… maybe that would entice more people in, regardless of the previous results / performances?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Why not consider loaning older, more experienced players? 

Maybe we will like Goode at Brentford who we were linked with before he signed there and someone posted on here a few months ago that the Recruitment department recommend him but Mowbray wanted Ayala

1 minute ago, Bethnal said:

That's Buckley not getting a game, if it happens.

I would say it would be Rothwell who misses out. Still wouldn't surprise me if he was sold before the deadline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Because their parent clubs would expect us to pay the going rate rather than gift them to us for development purposes.

We are nothing but a charity case to be used by the top clubs. We're becoming a B team.

Ya. Pretty much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Maybe we will like Goode at Brentford who we were linked with before he signed there and someone posted on here a few months ago that the Recruitment department recommend him but Mowbray wanted Ayala

I would say it would be Rothwell who misses out. Still wouldn't surprise me if he was sold before the deadline

The manager doesn't even know if he has a budget. The whole thing is pathetic and not at all how a club who plan on doing well would be doing things. 

We will end up with 5 loans in from City and Liverpool. They will take the places of our own highly rated youngsters. 

The work to replace Armstrong on a permanent should be happening as we speak. We both know it's not. 

Edited by Bigdoggsteel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

I would say it would be Rothwell who misses out. Still wouldn't surprise me if he was sold before the deadline

See what you mean, but I was thinking Travis, Davenport and this guy as the three we'll end up playing most often (again, if it comes off). I agree, I think Rothwell more likely to go than stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bethnal said:

See what you mean, but I was thinking Travis, Davenport and this guy as the three we'll end up playing most often (again, if it comes off). I agree, I think Rothwell more likely to go than stay.

I think it will be Travis, Buckley and maybe Doyle if signs here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shout me down as a madman, BRFCS, but hear me out first:

Daniel Sturridge is a free agent and has been for a while. There are all the reasons in the world why he wouldn't come, we shouldn't sign him and why it might totally not work out for anyone.

But as a redemption narrative, somewhere around a "pay per game"/weighted towards appearance fees remuneration and the fact that he seems to have straightened himself out a bit after definitely losing his way. So crazy it just might work..?



(It's not, is it? It's just crazy.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most teams in the league make loan signings.

Swansea made the playoffs this year and year before and had quite a few younger loan players.

If they are of the right quality which Tosin,Harwood Bellis and Elliott were then their age shouldn't be an issue.

It's not my preferred route but we don't have a pot to piss in and the current manager should be gone not allowed to bring in permanent players

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.