34 minutes ago, Mike E said:

He was a bang average manager. Not great, not bad. Bang average.

However, the moment he turned on fans, he should’ve been off. ‘They need to understand that Shearer and Sutton aren’t here anymore’.

Fuck off you twat, there are at least two generations of fans that don’t even remember them playing for us (starting with mine).

Isn’t that pretty much what JDT said in March? “They’ve never had it so good”?

Personally find (not you Mike) the conspiracy stuff still floating about with Mowbray on this thread incredibly strange.

The guys gone, just move on.

11 hours ago, Dan said:

By law they are to be sold only to adults. They aren’t toys, they are successful way to give up harmful tobacco and have saved many many lives. 

They are used to help people stop an addiction that caused physical health problems. Nicotine in itself is quite harmless, caffeine is quite possibly more harmful. 

Any science that it’s bad for you? 

The kids would most likely smoke cigarettes, if not e-cigarettes. They aren’t specifically being targeted by vape companies. 

Again, any science to back this up? Maybe you’ve been brain washed by American propaganda? 
 

Like cigarettes and tobacco - they’re always going to be something kids will likely see adults doing and try, I do get that but cigarettes aren’t even legal to advertise because of the damage they do, and how addictive they are.

We don’t know everything about long term vapour inhalation, other than it’s less damaging than smoking. That doesn’t mean they should be sold in sweet flavours and colourful boxes though - that’s the marketing to children part, look at Totally Wickeds branding for Christ sake, couldn’t be anymore  alluring for young teenagers.

11 hours ago, Dan said:

 

I find the anti-vaping view on here very strange. They save lives. Maybe the sponsorship could help people make the switch from the 100% deadly tobacco?

I don’t want them to be sold to kids and I think disposable devices should be banned(for an environmental view point). 

The second part of this is exactly the point - they’re being put into view of every single young rover.

It’s bad for them and the environment. It’s bad for our brand too.
 

10 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

we aren't going to agree aren't we? 

No

Sheesh, why do I bother.

1 minute ago, Ossydave said:

I think people who vape look like twats, almost like adult dummies hanging out their mouth.

Do we really think having a vaping company on our shirt is going to inspire kids to take up the rotten habit though? Is it hell, they'd do it anyway.

Good point but we should try to protect education and opportunities, as well as stopping bad influences. (I could write a dissertation on what TikTok is doing)

Whilst it may be a small issue compared to wider problems, I just don’t think it should be all over our brand.

@Mattyblue a bit of nuance on our “commercial side” 😛 

2 minutes ago, imy9 said:

Yet I found 60+ in school lockers the other day. You have your opinion Chaddy but vaping is a massive issue for kids atm and I don’t feel comfortable with us advertising them on the front of our shirts.

As a secondary school teacher I couldn’t agree anymore unequivocally.

Weve managed to make nicotine more appealing to kids, for short term gain and long term health and environmental damage…

and people like Chaddy think this is fine to advertise…

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

yet again that your opinion. 
 

Yea and yours is just ignoring it.

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

most things in life are bad for you like drinking alcohol or eating cakes or Mcdonalds/KFC but the vast majority of us do it don't we?  
 

You’re once again (classic style) moving the goalposts.

Were not advertising those things, because of “morals” yet these addictive things are ok?

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

same old line posted by people cos people don't agree with them. 

that is different debate and not one I am interested in debating either. 
 

Because you know that there is no positive side to this - you either ignore reality and accept whatever the club does “as the best it could’ve” or you ask the question, “why are we helping advertise this shit?” 
 

If it was any of those examples, beer, betting etc - you’d say exactly the same “it’s probably the best the could’ve got” with no evidence.

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Your streets might be littered with them but not where I live but yet again I don't look out for them when I walk to the shop in car park at the supermarket. 
 

Nice attempt at taking the piss there btw, I’m sure in the castle you live in, the nearby town is full of the detritus this crap creates.

Just because you don’t care, doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter!

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

well that's your opinion and your focus. 

It’s not, it’s called reality.

If you asked a decorator to paint your landing, and they wrote FUCK OFF in the centre of it, would you thank and congratulate them for professional cutting in?

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

they don't. You have to be 18 years to buy them legally and use them. 

well if you find it tacky and badly designed logo then don't buy it then. very simple answer. 

Yet again far too many people focus on this instead of this is Blackburn Rovers shirt. 

They don’t …. So you’re saying there isn’t one kid in Blackburn with sweet flavoured nicotine vaporisers from them? Also what about the streets littered with them?

The shirt is ruined by a tacky logo in the middle of it. How on Earth is anyone supposed to look at the shirt without seeing it?

22 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

no surprise that Totally Wicked will be our main sponsor this season. we don't know what others offers were on the table. People might think we should do better but is there no better offer on the table we can't take the offer. 

The totally Wicked logo will not stop buying a Rovers shirt or 2 for the season. I am looking forward to them coming out.  

Rather than just the normal platitudes - why not answer the following;

1. is a company that sells addictive toys to children an appropriate sponsor

2. Do we want a tacky and badly designed logo on the front of our shirts?

On 22/05/2023 at 17:37, JBiz said:

I’m not too fussed either way personally.

Would be a little frustrated at the “starting again” element but would be a test of this new structure, and we’ve been told there are succession lists for all areas (including players, coaches, staff etc)

Wouldn’t miss the tippy tappy goalkeeper to Centre back to goalkeeper bollox either. I’m not suggesting we’d be better off throwing JDT and his style away, but fuck, I could do without the weak as piss defending, bad organisation and laborious build up play.

 

@MarkBRFC

@Sweaty Gussets

@Mattyblue

Just trying to avoid derailing other threads - my thoughts haven’t changed since above post at the end of the season.

To put more “nuance” in - I have faith that we may improve again next year with more time and investment.

If we are similarly laborious, weak as piss and dropping points for fun - I expect the majority will quickly turn on the Dutch dots.

13 minutes ago, goozburger said:

Broughton on JDT: "We’re having conversations every day about players coming in and the plans for the future, so I can only give credit to him for what he’s done here."

It doesn't definitively mean JDT is staying, but it doesn't sound like JDT has had enough. I think it'll just be a classic case of, if a better opportunity comes along, he'd like to take it. Maybe it's not as bad behind the scenes as we think.

Despite the huge fuck ups in January, namely on transfer deadline day, I agree somewhat with the last sentence.

I am fully on board with the DOF idea, even if I’m still referring to Greg as “Broughtnowt” as we currently stand.

He is embarking on an extremely important summer to prove his worth. He deserves a chance.

10 minutes ago, jny said:

Whilst I'm a fan of not everything JDT (although most), who on Earth would we replace him with? Inevitably we'll get slaphead noname with no ambition - with no funds and poor back team management in recent times, we're not an attractive prospect for an incoming manager

I didn’t advocate or suggest JDT last season as I didn’t know his credentials, so I’d stay away  from naming specific people.

Plenty of coaches and managers in our league who’ve got more from the “sum of parts” than JDT managed this year however. He didn’t help my opinion either, with comments akin to “this is the best rovers have been” in years, because of cup runs.

I’m not too fussed either way personally.

Would be a little frustrated at the “starting again” element but would be a test of this new structure, and we’ve been told there are succession lists for all areas (including players, coaches, staff etc)

Wouldn’t miss the tippy tappy goalkeeper to Centre back to goalkeeper bollox either. I’m not suggesting we’d be better off throwing JDT and his style away, but fuck, I could do without the weak as piss defending, bad organisation and laborious build up play.

😭 

On 09/05/2023 at 13:40, Exiled_Rover said:

Radio Lancashire hate Rovers - I've never quite worked out why. I assume either our Comms / PR team are arrogant / difficult to work with, or a lot of the producers / presenters grew up as fans of other teams when Rovers were the big dog in the county and it's scarred them for life. 

My dad an I call it Radio PNE, they bloody love Preston. 

It’s Andy Bayes that.

I don’t dislike his commentary or his general opinions, but he is 100% a preston fan…! When he commentates on our games, you can hear the frustration when we score 😂 

2 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Don’t disagree generally, but BB (without the D) had not outgrown us in late 2020, first half of 2021, just like SG hadn’t last season.

Much easier to convince SG who’s next step is likely downwards! 

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

I can’t see any argument for him not being re-signed in late 2020, first half of 2021. But he wasn’t, so a £7million signing, a fortune for us, a star of the division, will leave for nowt, along with a load of other senior pros over the last 12 months.

It is what it is, but it must now change (and hopefully it will with GB), as the club can’t carry on hiding behind ‘FFP’ with a straight face with half the team walking out the door for feck all.

There’s an simpler way to see it.

Parachute payment team first year sponsorship money; Roughly 45m

None parachute team sponsorship money; 5m

Forgetting turnover or selling players for a second, how can any non PP team in the division, stop proven top championship players leaving to PP teams?

There is no way to compete with the remuneration.

Also, the gap in skill / ability level between top championship players and bottom half premier league standard isn’t that great.

Rothwell, Armstrong and Brereton Diaz next, all examples of players who’ve financially “outgrown” us.
 

Lenihan and Nyambe, different questions but east to understand when you’re trying to stretch your turnover to a decent squad, when rivals for promotion generally are teams with far more scope for a wage bill.

Trying to beat last seasons relegated teams is akin to playing heads up poker against someone with nearly ten times starting stack.

If only we’d gone for a multi award and trophy winning up and coming manager when we’d been relegated instead of the Cumbernauld C word.

Signed in for the first time in a while to see if there is any transfer rumours beyond the LET and as expected it’s just the same cyclical arguments.

Hence, found myself skimming other threads and a simple answer to your question @Tom from me is “No”.

Still is, and will be one of my favourite pastimes, seeing family and friends. I’m looking forward to an actual home game, on a Saturday at 3pm (first in 3 months), which is also a winnable chance to put us in the 5th round of the FA cup.

It might be an idea for some who’ve become extremely fed up and cynical with Rovers, to take your eyes off this website. This has helped my mental health at least.
 

In terms of becoming bored of football altogether, and sick of the way it’s developed - stupid kick off times, VAR, the ridiculous sponsorship / financial scenarios, wages and transfer fees… I can fully understand that, hence why hardly ever watch Sky matches or any premier league.

1 minute ago, JHRover said:

So having been 2nd in February, top 6 until the last few games, and having got off to a flying start to this season you'd take a midtable finish now?

There's the Venky effect in plain sight.

Something very solid there to build on for a new manager with new ideas and some backing. Hasn't materialised.

Half the players you name as 'additions' to replace the outgoings were already here last season. Vale, Markanday, Carter etc.

They aren't additions, and we don't know yet if they are good enough. They are getting a look in not necessarily because they are better than those who have left, but by virtue of the fact they are cheap and still under contract and it is more cost effective than signing alternatives.

Maybe it was the ownership and management to blame for the shambolic state of recruitment and contracts that now requires this rebuild, and not Mowbray? If so what makes you think anything has changed?

Re that in bold - Do you understand the point of spending 5m or whatever it is a year for an academy? 

Just now, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

We have Ayala. 

How this fella fits our supposed M.O. I have no idea.

Oh, except he's cheap.  

Now if it allows us to make a good young permanent  signing like Van Hecke, then it's a reasonable shout.  

If it's him and the Coventry lad, that's disappointing .

If it ends up just being him, then that's shite.

How another Centreback fits into our MO?

I can’t seriously read past that utter nonsense. Did you see the teamsheet Tuesday?

2 minutes ago, J*B said:

You don’t want his experience around young players!!

Wouldn’t be the first or last to have issues and come back from them. May be a good example.

Youre welcome to write him off mind but as always I’ll happily get splinters. 

2 minutes ago, J*B said:

Caulker is an absolutely terrible signing. Wes Brown 2.0. Quote me on it. 

He’s 30 not 36 and he’s played nearly 100 times in the championship. When you’ve got players like Barnes, Carter and Phillips - surely someone with experience is a good thing? 

43 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

If we sell players and don’t use the proceeds to improve the squad then that tends not to end well….

Captain obviously, but don’t devalue the importance of selling players to fund renewals for any players developing - the Travis, the Buckley’s, the Whartons.

2 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

If we get £15 Million for BBD and we don’t spend it on players, (wages or fees) then it’s not gone back into the playing squad.

That’s about the size of it!

See Ian’s post above - even if they didn’t spend a penny of it on extra players, and the owners just used it to cover losses, it’s STILL going into the squad, because we’re losing millions per season with wages > turnover!

5 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Well, wherever it goes, it won’t be going back into the playing squad, I’m sure we can all see that.

Depends if you class wages as “going into playing squad” since that’s where the bulk of all our money goes, above turnover, and makes up most of the debt to the owners.