Jump to content
Stuart

Summer Transfer Window

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Not correct. 73 seasons in the top division, 44 seasons in the second division and only 6 in the third division.

But let's not forget that of those 73 seasons in the top division some 44 seasons were between 1888 and 1936.  Since football restarted after the war the majority of our time has been spent outside the top flight.  The Jack Walker/Walker Trust era was very much a golden period in our modern history.  I remember John Williams saying at the time of Big Sam's appointment, that if we got relegated it would be very difficult to get back.  Many of us remember the 25 years in exile after the 1965-66 relegation season.  I would agree that we are not a Third Division club but modern history suggests we are a club that spends long periods in the second tier.

59 minutes ago, unsall said:

Looking at Venkys figures and they like other firms been hit hard. The share price in 12 months has gone from a high of 1942 inr to a low in April of  580 inr, but has come back to 1052 inr last week, so let’s hope they have a few quid in their back pockets for us.

I think that is a point that is being missed in any transfer talk.  This virus has impacted all global businesses and Venkys are no exception.  With their Charitable Foundation to support - which is of vital importance to the people of Pune and its surrounding areas - I suspect that Blackburn Rovers is even further down the agenda than normal.

I think Mowbray was quoted a few weeks ago talking about loans, freebies and promoting youth players to cover gaps of any players we have to sell.  I suspect this is the reality of where we are at.  Hopefully, I'll be pleasantly surprised but being realistic I not expecting any earth shattering moves in the transfer market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If he’d have said ‘post War Rovers’, then that’s a true statement (though we still spent large parts of the 1960s, 1990s and 2000s in the top flight) and arguably more relevant, but the facts are we have spent most seasons of our history as a top flight club.

Edited by Mattyblue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Tugayisgod said:

Not a cat in hells chance Rovers could sign him even if we had the money. 

He'll have his choice of any number of top flight teams. Let's get realistic 

If we had adopted this approach throughout our history then we wouldn't have seen any of the world class players that have graced Ewood over the years, it's more proof that venkys have beaten down our fanbase so much.

Just now, Parsonblue said:

But let's not forget that of those 73 seasons in the top division some 44 seasons were between 1888 and 1936.  Since football restarted after the war the majority of our time has been spent outside the top flight.  The Jack Walker/Walker Trust era was very much a golden period in our modern history.  I remember John Williams saying at the time of Big Sam's appointment, that if we got relegated it would be very difficult to get back.  Many of us remember the 25 years in exile after the 1965-66 relegation season.  I would agree that we are not a Third Division club but modern history suggests we are a club that spends long periods in the second tier.

I think that is a point that is being missed in any transfer talk.  This virus has impacted all global businesses and Venkys are no exception.  With their Charitable Foundation to support - which is of vital importance to the people of Pune and its surrounding areas - I suspect that Blackburn Rovers is even further down the agenda than normal.

I think Mowbray was quoted a few weeks ago talking about loans, freebies and promoting youth players to cover gaps of any players we have to sell.  I suspect this is the reality of where we are at.  Hopefully, I'll be pleasantly surprised but being realistic I not expecting any earth shattering moves in the transfer market.

Don't these seasons count anymore then?!

Share this post


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

https://bnn.de/nachrichten/sport/ksc/transfergeruechte-um-ksc-torjaeger-hofmann-erste-liga-england-oder-weiter-in-karlsruhe

This german paper is linking us to Philipp Hofmann. The article just does say that we are one of many interested clubs.

Was one of the signings Brentford made that didnt come off. Just come off his best season however. 17 goals in 33 games is not too shabby at all.

Share this post


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

I’d rather spend my £2-3m on players we’re going to own (seemingly as we seem set to do more of this season) than waste money on players who never bring any value to the clubs assets list, and don’t get us promoted. 

Kasey Palmer
Greg Cunningham
Christian Walton
Tosin Adarabioyo
Harrison Reed

I’d estimate over £4m has been spent on those guys, and now, in August 2020, what do we have to show for it? A minus figure in the books.

Whilst I don’t necessarily trust the club to spend £4m well, it would be nicer to have some permanent players to show for such a large sum, rather than another mid table finish having spent high figures on PL youngsters.

Surely one of the advantages of loans is, for cases like Palmer or Walton, we didn't spend a transfer fee and sign them to a lucrative long-term contract. We were able to cancel the deal with Palmer midway and Walton's gone after a middling year. I doubt anyone would be pleased if we still had them on the books for 2-3 years.

Cunningham was looking good, but imagine we had signed him to a long-term deal + transfer fee and were now fretting whether he could come back from injury to justify that outlay?

Reed was largely good for us. Was that a waste of wages/loan fees (and potential development of other young players he kept out of the lineup?), or did Reed help keep us out of a relegation scrap that year? It also potentially gives you a look at signing the player permanently later if he's a good fit, likes the club setup, and doesn't appear to have a place in his original club. See Tom Cairney, for example. That didn't work out for Reed, but you'd have to assume he'd be on the radar for a permanent deal if we did somehow get promoted that year, as Fulham may be doing now.

Tosin's gone now, but he's a huge reason we were ever on the cusp on the playoffs, and obviously was always well out of our price range (and also a case where he wasn't taking game time from a younger CB ready for the Championship). Sounds like he was expensive as loan signings go, but our financial commitment ended at the end of the year, and theoretically the budget for his loan fee is now available for reallocation this year.

I'm not at all saying loans should be excessively relied upon, but it keeps being framed as an 'either/or' argument, when a smattering of well-targeted, high-quality loans is often a sensible way to improve your competitiveness for a season with limited financial commitment, and we've also seen some recent examples of squads getting promoted with a significant number of loans.

Share this post


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

Oh dear, have a look at the history of BRFC think you’ll find the majority of our time has been spent in the second tier of English football, nothing wrong with that, as long as you strive to get to the top tier, but you have to do it in budget and hopefully money available.

 

I'm sorry but I'm genuinely so confused as to where I said we should be unhappy with being a second tier club... I quite seriously don't know what you're talking about? We're discussing the merits of loan signings... is this just a straw man argument to knock down? 

Share this post


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

Are you arguing with yourself? :) 

No, just a glitch in system, someone else said that, not me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeH said:

And I'm not saying you *can't* loan players, I'm saying it clearly hasn't worked for us, two years running, so why not just invest in our own players?

Reed worked as a loan, Gallagher and Brereton are our players, how is that going? 

Share this post


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

Too say Cunningham wasn’t an excellent signing because he only played 10 games, when probably most Rovers fans knew he was, tells me you can’t see a decent player, would love him to come back as we was a very decent acquisition.

To say a player is an EXCELLENT signing after seeing him play for just 10 apps tells me you are desperate to see a decent player?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rigger said:

Reed worked as a loan, Gallagher and Brereton are our players, how is that going? 

It depends. I don't think Reed, Palmer, Cunningham, Tosin and Walton have "worked" considering we're still sat in the Championship. If we're going to spend such high amounts of money over two seasons, I'd rather it be on permanent players - especially if neither route leads to promotion.

Share this post


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

Reed worked as a loan, Gallagher and Brereton are our players, how is that going? 

Reed was played out of position the whole season and I don't think he made loads of appearances. So I'd disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Route A: Loan three-four players and finish 11th. Spending however much.

Route B: Sign three-four players and finish 14th. Spending the same amount as above.

I'd take Route B. As route B adds potential value to our finances and Route A doesn't. Whilst neither route provides promotion.

Edited by JoeH

Share this post


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

I’d rather spend my £2-3m on players we’re going to own (seemingly as we seem set to do more of this season) than waste money on players who never bring any value to the clubs assets list, and don’t get us promoted. 

Kasey Palmer
Greg Cunningham
Christian Walton
Tosin Adarabioyo
Harrison Reed

I’d estimate over £4m has been spent on those guys, and now, in August 2020, what do we have to show for it? A minus figure in the books.

Whilst I don’t necessarily trust the club to spend £4m well, it would be nicer to have some permanent players to show for such a large sum, rather than another mid table finish having spent high figures on PL youngsters.

 

On a point of accountancy principle....I know, sorry.......😳

Loan players cost you wages & loan fees...
If you buy players they cost you wages & depreciation...

Use v Ownership is the conundrum....the policy should be to bring in the best players that you can afford holistically, whether as purchases or loans, to achieve the objective of winning promotion.

“...but we lose loan players at the end of every season...” yes, that is true & potentially disruptive, but equally, if Rovers sign someone decent & we get an offer in that’s deemed acceptable 12 months later, we can easily lose an owned player as well and not always at a massive profit if there is a release clause e.g. Craig Bellamy.

In summary, it’s not always “good to buy” & “bad to loan”. It depends...if you sign players that don’t perform, their value falls. If they are loan players then it’s not your risk or detriment. The moral here is....sign good players...

“This statement of the blindingly obvious is brought to you by BRFCS...” 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

But let's not forget that of those 73 seasons in the top division some 44 seasons were between 1888 and 1936.  Since football restarted after the war the majority of our time has been spent outside the top flight.  The Jack Walker/Walker Trust era was very much a golden period in our modern history.  I remember John Williams saying at the time of Big Sam's appointment, that if we got relegated it would be very difficult to get back.  Many of us remember the 25 years in exile after the 1965-66 relegation season.  I would agree that we are not a Third Division club but modern history suggests we are a club that spends long periods in the second tier.

All true but if we are discounting or diluting seasons or achievements pre WW2 then we must do so across the board. 

We can also apply similar approaches to so-called Big clubs outside the top division at the moment. 

Such as Forest. We can say that they had a golden era during the late 70s and 80s but apart from that nothing since way back when.

The point I suppose is whilst I agree we aren't entitled to a place in the top division, we should certainly not feel any less deserving or worthy than anyone else because from what I can see our pedigree both pre WW2 and post WW2 is as impressive as anyone else's around this division. Sheff Wed similar in having the majority of their success way back. I dont think it is any more or less relevant than say Wolves being good in the 50s or Leeds in the 60s. 

Even if it were true that we spent most of our time in the 2nd division that still puts us in a bracket above most at this level who have been regulars in the 3rd and 4th divisions. So even if we accept that we are a regular 2nd tier club that still puts us top end in this league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor
1 minute ago, JoeH said:

It depends. I don't think Reed, Palmer, Cunningham, Tosin and Walton have "worked" considering we're still sat in the Championship. If we're going to spend such high amounts of money over two seasons, I'd rather it be on permanent players - especially if neither route leads to promotion.

I’d rather the money went on players who improve the team, whatever terms they are on.

Share this post


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

I'm not at all saying loans should be excessively relied upon, but it keeps being framed as an 'either/or' argument, when a smattering of well-targeted, high-quality loans is often a sensible way to improve your competitiveness for a season with limited financial commitment, and we've also seen some recent examples of squads getting promoted with a significant number of loans.

Agreed. It certainly shouldn't be seen as either or, but this notion that we have progressed from 2018 to now is a little silly to me. It's a "fake" progression when the backbone of your team, starting GK and CB both leave the club at the end of the season.

I'd say right now, with no additions at the moment, we're weaker than where we were in 2018/19. The progress we have made has all now gone again due to the loss of loan players back to their permanent homes.

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

On a point of accountancy principle....I know, sorry.......😳

Loan players cost you wages & loan fees...
If you buy players they cost you wages & depreciation...

Use v Ownership is the conundrum....the policy should be to bring in the best players that you can afford holistically, whether as purchases or loans, to achieve the objective of winning promotion.

“...but we lose loan players at the end of every season...” yes, that is true & potentially disruptive, but equally, if Rovers sign someone decent & we get an offer in that’s deemed acceptable 12 months later, we can easily lose an owned player as well and not always at a massive profit if there is a release clause e.g. Craig Bellamy.

In summary, it’s not always “good to buy” & “bad to loan”. It depends...if you sign players that don’t perform, their value falls. If they are loan players then it’s not your risk or detriment. The moral here is....sign good players...

“This statement of the blindingly obvious is brought to you by BRFCS...” 🙂

Loan players are here for one year, and if like we have for two years now, you don't get promoted, you have wasted those wages away.

If Derrick Williams played over Tosin and Leutwiler played over Walton, we'd have probably finished about 18th.

We'd be in the exact same position we are now, but we wouldn't have spent however many millions to get there?

Share this post


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

I am not sure we have the cash yet to do any signings at the moment even if we want to.

We have £0 season ticket income which we would normally have had £3-4m by now, First batch of TV cash arrives 2 weeks before the season starts so that will be September and not August. We have pretty much the £4m Venky's injected in June to get us through to the TV cash arriving in September. Of that £4m, at least £2.5m will have been spent on wages for June and July.

At the moment we must be living on empty waiting for the next Venky cash injection, so there is absolutely no way we can do any player purchases until that happens, we simply have no available funds in the club to pay for any signing on bonuses etc.

In other words there's no change! We'll be running around like madmen with 5 minutes before the window closes.

Mowbray "we did everything we could but we weren't able to get the deal through in time".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rigger said:

I’d rather the money went on players who improve the team, whatever terms they are on.

But they don't improve the team at all. We now don't have them. Unless they improve the team so much in the season they're here that we achieve something financially valuable like promotion, then they haven't improved us. We're now in a worse position than we was in 2 years ago... with no first team goalkeeper and one Championship quality centre-back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JoeH said:

Agreed. It certainly shouldn't be seen as either or, but this notion that we have progressed from 2018 to now is a little silly to me. It's a "fake" progression when the backbone of your team, starting GK and CB both leave the club at the end of the season.

I'd say right now, with no additions at the moment, we're weaker than where we were in 2018/19. The progress we have made has all now gone again due to the loss of loan players back to their permanent homes.

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

Very much agree with this.

Share this post


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

Reed was played out of position the whole season and I don't think he made loads of appearances. So I'd disagree.

The fact he was played out of position is not Reeds fault. To me he impressed in nearly all the games he played, dispute being played out of position.You don’t endear yourself to the crowd the way he did without showing something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JoeH said:

Loan players are here for one year, and if like we have for two years now, you don't get promoted, you have wasted those wages away.

 

Players are paid wages whether loan or permy....no difference there. The difference is Use v Ownership....you want to own an asset if you think it will appreciate. Sometimes you can’t afford to buy assets that will appreciate, but you can loan them. It may be that some loans enhance your team/prospects e.g. Reed, Adarabioyo  & without them, you might be susceptible to a lower placed finish.

its not the case that loan = bad, buy = good...it’s more nuanced than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Herbie6590 said:

Players are paid wages whether loan or permy....no difference there. The difference is Use v Ownership....you want to own an asset if you think it will appreciate. Sometimes you can’t afford to buy assets that will appreciate, but you can loan them. It may be that some loans enhance your team/prospects e.g. Reed, Adarabioyo  & without them, you might be susceptible to a lower placed finish.

its not the case that loan = bad, buy = good...it’s more nuanced than that.

Loan players leave at the end of a season and have no financial sale value to a club. They only "improve" us if they a) sign permanently or b) help us get promoted.

18th or 7th we're a Championship team in 2020/21, and if we could've achieved that with or without spending however many million on Tosin, Walton and Cunningham, why wouldn't you do that, it makes business sense.

Share this post


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

If you don't try, you don't get.

There's also being realistic and recognising when you would be wasting your time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rigger said:

The fact he was played out of position is not Reeds fault. To me he impressed in nearly all the games he played, dispute being played out of position.You don’t endear yourself to the crowd the way he did without showing something.

Very true. I won't deny Harrison Reed his special place in Rovers fans heart. A player with great tenacity and one I'd love to have here. But the simple fact remains, he isn't our player, he didn't help get us promoted, and we could've achieved what we did (survival in the CH) without wasting a chunk of money on him.

From a simply business only sense, Harrison Reed and Kasey Palmer were effectively pointless for us. We'd have stayed up without them, so it was basically just a loss of funds for the sake of extra bodies. Obviously from a footballing sense I think Reed brought a lot to the table, but at the end of the season we achieved what we achieved, and I think we could've easily done the same without him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

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.