Niall Ennis

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

3 hours ago, BlackburnEnd75 said:

According to the rovers social media pages. He's scored for the under 21s and gone off injured after 38 mins.

What sort of fitness test did he have ? Here’s some darts son, see if you can get a treble, anywhere you like on the board ?

Edited November 21, 2023 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[arbitro]

It was strange how Ennis just disappeared today. Nobody noticed he had gone off until we saw his replacement on the half way like ready to come on. We didn't see anybody go off and it was only a look at the remaining players that we realised Ennis had gone off. I looked at the technical area - not there, looked to see if he was walking back to the changing room - no sign of him doing that. He just vanished, really strange. Up until him disappearing he was playing quite well and showed some nice touches as well as a well taken goal. Telalovic showed up well too but Harry Leonard played really well. He scored three, held the ball up well and showed some real aggression. The watching Tomasson must have been impressed by him. In the end it was a really comfortable win against a youthful Preston team with some good individual performances.

[bluebruce]

I'm curious why we played every single fit striker at the club in a midweek u21 game 

[cesus]

3 hours ago, bluebruce said:

I'm curious why we played every single fit striker at the club in a midweek u21 game 

Must admit, I was rather puzzled by that too!

[roverblue]

3 hours ago, bluebruce said:

I'm curious why we played every single fit striker at the club in a midweek u21 game 

Probably as he has no intention of playing a striker against Stoke. Who needs a striker when you can have a team full of midfielders passing it on like a hot potato near the box 😂

[arbitro]

3 hours ago, bluebruce said:

I'm curious why we played every single fit striker at the club in a midweek u21 game 

I really expected both of at least one of Telalovic or Leonard to be taken off on the hour mark when I saw their names on the team sheet.

[martonrover]

23 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Just been having a look at his record over the past 5 seasons.

Completed 90 minutes:

19/20 - 9

20/21 - 12

21/22 - 6

22/23 - 4

23/24 - 0

 

 

A journalist should really put those stats to Mr La Dee Dah Gunner Broughton.

A ridiculous signing.

[bluebruce]

23 hours ago, LeftWinger said:

Just been having a look at his record over the past 5 seasons.

Completed 90 minutes:

19/20 - 9

20/21 - 12

21/22 - 6

22/23 - 4

23/24 - 0

 

 

Although worth pointing out that last season when he completed 90 mins just 4 times, he scored 13 goals. If he were at least making cameos he could probably be contributing, but we've barely seen him at all. I hope his wage isn't high.

[jim mk2]

On 21/11/2023 at 10:20, LeftWinger said:

Just been having a look at his record over the past 5 seasons.

Completed 90 minutes:

19/20 - 9

20/21 - 12

21/22 - 6

22/23 - 4

23/24 - 0

 

So the obvious question is, why did we sign him?

It doesn't make any sense, particularly with a small squad, limited finances and every player having to provide some sort of value for money

Edited November 22, 2023 by jim mk2

[Armchair supporter supremo]

1 minute ago, jim mk2 said:

 

So the obvious question is, why did we sign him?

It doesn't make any sense, particularly with a small squad, limited finances and every player having to provide some sort of value for money

Pure desperation

[phili]

5 hours ago, jim mk2 said:

 

So the obvious question is, why did we sign him?

It doesn't make any sense, particularly with a small squad, limited finances and every player having to provide some sort of value for money

He was signed as a development player before the severe budget cuts happened. If Venky's had put the restrictions in place in April he probably wouldn't have been signed.

The 4 year contract was offered as they expected him to take 12 months to sort out his fitness and develop him to championship standard, the following season we would benefit and in 2 years sold on with a profit and 2 years remaining on his contract.

[MarkBRFC]

17 minutes ago, phili said:

He was signed as a development player before the severe budget cuts happened. If Venky's had put the restrictions in place in April he probably wouldn't have been signed.

The 4 year contract was offered as they expected him to take 12 months to sort out his fitness and develop him to championship standard, the following season we would benefit and in 2 years sold on with a profit and 2 years remaining on his contract.

Certainly on course for this bit.

[roversfan99]

24 minutes ago, phili said:

He was signed as a development player before the severe budget cuts happened. If Venky's had put the restrictions in place in April he probably wouldn't have been signed.

The 4 year contract was offered as they expected him to take 12 months to sort out his fitness and develop him to championship standard, the following season we would benefit and in 2 years sold on with a profit and 2 years remaining on his contract.

Everything ultimately does come to the owners slashing the budgets, you are going to struggle find a good Championship striker when you cant pay a fee.

But assuming that you are right that we expected him to take a whole year to get fit, which is a hell of an assumption, that would be total indefensible madness. Even before the mid summer budget slashing, we started the summer knowing we were sell to buy, so even on the original budget, to give a 4 year deal to a player who they didnt expect to be fit for a year would be total madness. I doubt his wages are massive but equally enough to convince him to come here rather than renew.

I suspect its more of a case of with no money on fees, weve taken a punt on a freebie who had done well in League 1 and have taken a big risk on assuming previous injury issues would stop. He struggled to complete 90 minutes last season too often but he did feature far more often than be has here. Either way, it is looking more and more like a waste of a decent chunk of a meagre budget.

We also alledgedly opted for Telalovic over a La Liga forward on loan. Surely the loan whilst Ennis somehow became a beacon of fitness sitting on the bench would have made more sense over another project leaving us with only one senior striker who himself is injury prone in Gallagher.

[wilsdenrover]

14 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Certainly on course for this bit.

I’m not so sure we are.

[tomphil]

36 minutes ago, phili said:

He was signed as a development player before the severe budget cuts happened. If Venky's had put the restrictions in place in April he probably wouldn't have been signed.

The 4 year contract was offered as they expected him to take 12 months to sort out his fitness and develop him to championship standard, the following season we would benefit and in 2 years sold on with a profit and 2 years remaining on his contract.

Wishful thinking and a nice spin on it.

Nobody gives an unfit player with a record like his at 24 years old a 4 year contract just so he can take 12 months to prove himself.

Or should i say nobody in their right would take that gamble he was a panic signing with a 4 year deal used as lure to get him up here.

[ruggles1995]

12 hours ago, bluebruce said:

I'm curious why we played every single fit striker at the club in a midweek u21 game 

I agree, and im almost finding it depressingly funny when I see the these type of individuals for the ressies. There forward line looks better than the first teams half the time. It dont half make me laugh, but im confused\frustrated\angry all at the same time 

[ruggles1995]

9 hours ago, roverblue said:

Probably as he has no intention of playing a striker against Stoke. Who needs a striker when you can have a team full of midfielders passing it on like a hot potato near the box 😂

🤣🤣🤣 its so true!

[jim mk2]

1 hour ago, phili said:

He was signed as a development player before the severe budget cuts happened. If Venky's had put the restrictions in place in April he probably wouldn't have been signed.

The 4 year contract was offered as they expected him to take 12 months to sort out his fitness and develop him to championship standard, the following season we would benefit and in 2 years sold on with a profit and 2 years remaining on his contract.

 

Thanks Gregg.

Great PR as usual

[phili]

30 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Wishful thinking and a nice spin on it.

Nobody gives an unfit player with a record like his at 24 years old a 4 year contract just so he can take 12 months to prove himself.

Or should i say nobody in their right would take that gamble he was a panic signing with a 4 year deal used as lure to get him up here.

I didn't say 12 months to sort out fitness, I said 12 months for fitness and develop into a championship standard player. It is very similar to Sammie Szmodics, taking a year to get up to speed and then flourishing the next season. This is the pond we are fishing in now, take rough diamonds and polish into a good player.

I assume as Sammie was signed on a 3 year deal, he'll be sold in the summer for us to maximize his resale potential.

[phili]

15 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

 

Thanks Gregg.

Great PR as usual

At the moment it looks a poor signing, although he was free and probably on 3-4k a week. If he comes good in the next 6 months then you'll then be saying it was a great signing. 

It's the market we are in, we can't afford finished articles on either transfer fee or wages.

The situation in India will be getting worse before it gets better, so can probably see a 20% budget cut again in Jan and a further 25% in the summer as well as raising funds through sales.

So I think we need to prepare ourselves for lots more punts similar to the Ennis deal. Some will work and some won't, we just need to hope more come off than fail.

[tomphil]

38 minutes ago, phili said:

I didn't say 12 months to sort out fitness, I said 12 months for fitness and develop into a championship standard player. It is very similar to Sammie Szmodics, taking a year to get up to speed and then flourishing the next season. This is the pond we are fishing in now, take rough diamonds and polish into a good player.

I assume as Sammie was signed on a 3 year deal, he'll be sold in the summer for us to maximize his resale potential.

So it's not really like the Szmodics deal because he was fit and ready to go when he arrived.  Also he cost decent money and was only given a 3 year contract although i suspect he was on similar money at Posh to what Ennis will have been on at Plymouth.

Sammie fits the model you suggest as does Telalovich but Ennis fits the we have no money so desperate punt model.

JDT has said as much, he was clearly expecting a player he could use and clearly annoyed at what turned up.  The guy even when fit hasn't even been getting cameo's when we need goals.

There is little to no chance of ever making money on this lad even if he occasionally plays and scores. On a 4 year contract the odds are always stacked in favour of us being stuck with him if it doesn't work out or having to pay him off.

This was not a development signing at all it was an attempt at an oven ready signing on the cheap with no fee.

[roversfan99]

Absolutely nothing like the Szmodics deal. Szmodics played within days of signing, there werent huge question marks over his fitness. Ennis cant even seemingly manage half hour cameos and this current injury worry is his third despite never having started a game.

No way is he on as little as 3-4k either considering he chose to come here when Plymouth wanted to keep him.

Further budget cuts of such an amount will lead to relegation.

[jim mk2]

1 hour ago, phili said:

At the moment it looks a poor signing, although he was free and probably on 3-4k a week. If he comes good in the next 6 months then you'll then be saying it was a great signing. 

It's the market we are in, we can't afford finished articles on either transfer fee or wages.

The situation in India will be getting worse before it gets better, so can probably see a 20% budget cut again in Jan and a further 25% in the summer as well as raising funds through sales.

So I think we need to prepare ourselves for lots more punts similar to the Ennis deal. Some will work and some won't, we just need to hope more come off than fail.

This isn't about finished articles or even potential. We shouldn't be "in the market" of buying crocks - full stop.

And if we end up with more "punts" like Ennis, we won't have 11 men on the pitch. 

Signing any injury prone player when things are so tight financially doesn't make sense, especially as he was signed early in the summer and presented as some sort of coup

[Hasta]

3 hours ago, phili said:

He was signed as a development player before the severe budget cuts happened. If Venky's had put the restrictions in place in April he probably wouldn't have been signed.

I thought the budget cuts happened after the Ennis signing - hence the backtracking on the Batth deal.  Ennis was signed in the early part of the transfer window. He was part of Greggy-boys big solution to our striking problem.

Telalovic on the other hand is a desperate result of the budget cuts.

JDT’s actions speak louder than words on his view on them. Ones a crock, ones a flop.

[Mattyblue]

Szmodics didn’t take a full season to get up to speed, after a slow start he hardly missed a minute post January and was a key player in the run in… honestly, the mental gymnastics some engage in on here 😁