
JHRover
Members-
Posts
13862 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
208
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Uncouth Garb - The BRFCS Store
Everything posted by JHRover
-
Neither do 75% of other clubs.
-
Difference between being highly rated in someone's academy and being able to hit the ground running in the Championship. We should know that given recent experience. I'm not writing anyone off but being a prospect used to playing reserve team football to playing every week under Championship expectation is a big jump.
-
I suspect that a decision has been reached that when signing forwards they are either too expensive or too much of a gamble. When paying money out cash a centre half or full back represents better value or more affordability. The position we need to strengthen is an expensive and tough one to get right, I don't think it's a coincidence that for the last 3 seasons we've addressed that area by recruiting loans en masse. Much easier, cheaper and lower risk, but people then act surprised when we can't get people in until the lastminute and always start the season slowly, I think the reason for that is quite obvious.
-
No indication that we're looking at signing players from abroad or the lower leagues to address our lack of forwards, two areas we should be looking at if we're short on funds. All the talk around loans up top with a permanent move for a back up cb.
-
If the XI that started v Everton remain fit and in form for 46 games then they should be able to compete. However that hasn't really been the concern this summer. The concern is what else we have by way of options and depth that WILL be called upon sooner or later. People will also lose form. Foolish to believe what we have is enough just because our strongest side played well against Everton.
-
Seems we're following the 2013-14 template, whatever that is. Home shirt with pale blue, dark blue socks/trim and the halves the opposite way round. Away shirt featuring the weird crest. It could be worse but very similar to the kit we had when relegated under Kean, not much thought gone into it.
-
I think we've two things running side by side and this has been the way of it since the boardroom cull and Cheston stepping up, perhaps even before that. On one side we have the club business - headed by Waggott, previously Cheston - who to a limited extent manages the operation on a day to day basis and is judged on his ability to balance the books. He'll head up payroll and daily expenditure on things like the maintenance and bills and he has to try and squeeze out as much as possible from sponsorship etc. On the other side we have the first team operation headed by Mowbray and his transfer fund is dealt with separately and is directly authorised by the owners in India. If the club was being left to wash its own face then we wouldn't even be able to stump up the £500k or whatever for Davenport and Rothwell. That cash must at least be approved by the owners as extra spending above and beyond the daily requirements. Completely agree that the black sponsor badge probably put an extra few quid on the deal. Not sure on the blue on the shirts. I expect that Umbro just lazily come up with something using colours from elsewhere and we just take whatever they give us. I'd almost be impressed if such thought had gone into the colour scheme but I think it is just laziness and taking whatever Umbro come up with. Wouldn't surprise me if our kits and Man City's kits were made in the same factory and it was cheaper for us to use the same colour as them rather than a different one. I've actually no major gripe with the sky blue, provided it is only done once every 10 years. But the dark blue socks and numbers and black sponsor wreck it. It seems that Waggott's primary duty here is to squeeze the pennies out. Fair enough as we need to do that but you've to be careful as to how much of that is centred on the existing supporters who already have had their patience and wallets tested heavily these last few years.
-
It just seems everything has to be left until the last minute. No need for it. New shirts - left until as late as possible when pre-season is underway, away shirt still not out and won't be until next week just a couple of days before kick off at Ipswich. New sponsor - last minute Season ticket info out later than most clubs. Season tickets still not sent out in the post with 2 weeks until the season starts at home. New digital ad boards still haven't appeared only 2 weeks until the season starts at home. Amateurish and little wonder we lag behind on revenues and income. Easy option is to blame crowds and catchment areas but I expect more effort.
-
3m in legal fees has been brought on themselves by challenging it and dragging it out over a number of years. They were trying to argue any fine was illegal. No doubt if they had tried to reach a settlement earlier with the league they would have been able to do so without all those legal costs. They will have known that those costs were coming and will have known for a long time now that a fine of some level was coming. They're probably celebrating that what could have been a £40 million+ fine which may have had to have been paid immediately has suddenly been reduced to £17 million spread over a decade. Not a bad outcome for the rule breakers! They might struggle, they might not, but in exchange for their Premier League promotion and tv money bonanza they're having to pay £1.7 million a year for 10 years. This £21 million equity figure is a load of nonsense. Infact I seem to remember their owners had been converting debt into equity a while ago in a ploy to avoid sanctions. That money has already been 'invested' as has Venkys 'debt' the money is spent regardless of how it is labelled on a balance sheet.
-
How much do you get from 1 season in the Premier League? It was 100 million+ last time I checked. I don't see how this punishment will change their preparations for the season. They've a mediocre squad and manager that is expected to struggle with or without a fine/embargo. No suggestion yet they can or will have to sell anyone to pay this fine. Notice that this fine is exempt from future calculations so their owner can pay it off in instalments and it won't count towards future FFP.
-
It's not 41 million in total. That's a cop out from the League included to try and hoodwink readers into thinking it is a fine of 41 million. Its a fine of 17 million, spread over a number of years to make payments manageable and not cause hardship to the club. The other 21 million is 'loaned' money that their owners have agreed to turn into capital/write off. Like Venky's having to 'pay' 20 million by turning 1/6 of their 'debt' into capital. Makes little/no material difference to anyone as that money is gone for them anyway. I'm not painting it as a pointless sanction, just that once again the League have stepped back and handed out a weaker and diluted down punishment rather than throwing the book at them. When I get time I'll go back through my posts from a couple of years ago and I predicted this - a much reduced fine spread over many years with minimal impact. If QPR struggle this year it will be more to do with their poor recruitment and mediocre manager than a January embargo or recent fine.
-
Legal costs would have been stuck on regardless of how much the fine was. If they were fined £40 million they would still have had to pay legal costs on top of that so it is less than half of what it should have been had the rules been applied to the letter. They've been punished, but only after about 4 years of wrangling and the punishment is less than what is should be. They've had the benefit of hundreds of millions in tv revenues since then from promotion. An embargo isn't actually an embargo either. They can still sign players provided they fall below a certain wage and certain criteria. The rules have been in place for several years and yet we've still seen Wolves, Forest, Sheffield Wednesday, Bournemouth, Leicester and QPR ignoring them and spending vast sums of money. No indication of them thinking twice. QPR would have got away with it too had they managed to survive like Bournemouth and Leicester did.
-
The only reason QPR have ended up like this is because they spent outrageously in the Premier League, got relegated with a massive squad on huge money, kept a lot of that squad with Redknapp as manager, unfairly won promotion whilst blatantly breaking the rules, then failed to survive and came straight back down again. Their punishment for doing all of that, including 2 seasons of Premier League cash and a promotion, Is £17 million. They've probably had 10x that in revenues, tv money etc. since they did it. Small price to pay and considerably less than it should be. The other cheats - Leicester, Bournemouth etc. have had to pay nominal amounts of £3 million(ish) whilst surviving in the Premier League.
-
A £17 million fine is serious, but not as serious as it should be. Why have the league accepted a punishment of less than half what it should be? A £40 million fine may well have crippled them for years. A £17 million fine is probably the equivalent to less than 12 months of losses. All a January ban achieves is stopping them from adding to their squad mid-season, when most clubs don't do it anyway. Conveniently for them they still have a couple of weeks to do some business to prepare themselves for that. So once again a club has got away lightly. Also worth noting that this fine is going to be spread over a number of years to enable them to pay it back in convenient instalments rather than being forced into a fire sale to generate funds.
-
https://www.qpr.co.uk/news/club-news/qpr-settle-ffp-dispute-with-efl/ Absolutely disgraceful. So the '£40 million' fine people have been clinging to is actually only going to be £17 million (less than 50% of what the rules say it should be) and they've an embargo for the January window (when few clubs do serious business anyway. Once again a club getting off lightly.
-
Where are Rovers old grounds?
JHRover replied to StubbsUK's topic in Blackburn Rovers Fans Messageboard
Brilliant trivia. Can't imagine there's 2 closer together. Roker Park and Stadium of Light are less than a mile apart and I presume both have hosted England games. -
Who is that and what claims has he made that have been proven wrong?
-
I know you're trying to disagree with everything I say. Can we just leave it in simple terms. We are weaker than we were at the end of last season when we were in a weaker division. Agree?
-
We need more than 4. Just because 4 appears to be the number we are hoping to get doesn't mean it is enough. We've 1 week to get signings in before the season begins. Points are won and in our case usually lost in the first month of the season whilst we're still assembling our squad.
-
All 3 were regulars in the 1st team squad. Like them, loathe them or be indifferent about them that's 3 players out of our matchday squad who carried an attacking threat who haven't been replaced in any shape or form. If you had said to me after the Oxford game that our transfer business before Ipswich would consist solely of retaining Armstrong, Payne and Antonsson I'll admit I'd have been disappointed. If you were to offer me that right now I'd take it over what we have. That's how far expectations for this summer have fallen in the last month or so. As you say, lets hope we can salvage it and make something positive happen, but until that happens we can only go off what we have.
-
Yes, the inert Football League sat on the information whilst Leicester romped their way to promotion and then a few years later decided to sanction them by way of a miniscule fine. Pretty much getting away with it. Technically they didn't get away with it because they were found guilty and punished but the punishment was so utterly insignificant and pointless that it might as well not have been handed down. Still it probably kept the League coffers topped up for a year or two. If the consequence of breaking the rules and succeeding in reaching the promised land of £100 million a year tv money is a £3 million one off fine then its a waste of time.
-
So Bolton are about the same stage as us then? I.E. About 6 signings short of where they should be. Not bad for a club on the cusp of financial oblivion in comparison to a club owned by billionaires who never say no to writing cheques. It isn't all about who you sign. It's also about who you lose. We've lost 3 big players from last season in Armstrong, Antonsson and Payne, who between them featured regularly in the team/squad and notched 20 odd goals. To my knowledge the clubs you list haven't lost such numbers and important players. Hull have signed Reece Burke from West Ham, a winger from Genoa in Serie A and a CB from PSV Eindhoven, along with Eric Lihaj from Forest. I'd rather not compare ourselves to Rotherham. Diluting the importance of the players we have lost will not overcome the fact that we have lost them.
-
That's it in a nutshell. The ONLY use to Blackburn Rovers of them owning 99% of shares is that they invest money that the club could not pay on its own steam. If they've no interest in doing so then their time is up and someone else should be brought in to do it. Trying to run this club or any in the Championship off its own steam is futile
-
You came up with the 30 million figure not me. I bet they won't bring in 30 million this summer and they won't receive punishment for not doing so. Villa are starting from a much, much higher level than we are, with a much bigger and more expensive squad. They can afford to sell a few and still have a good side. We can't. It's hardly an achievement on our part that we go through a summer by selling less than they do. They're packed with Championship quality some Premier League quality. We've maybe half a dozen who would be sought after by other Championship clubs. If we had to be crafty by 'renaming' Ewood or a stand in order to facilitate significant investment in the squad yes I'd take it. Birmingham have 'renamed' their ground yet everyone still calls it St Andrews, same as when Newcastle changed their ground name. Its a way round the rules. Sponsorship money isn't the same as owner investment, so if Venkys or one of their numerous companies or associated companies in their vast global empire decided to rename the family stand as the VH Group family stand they could do so and use that to pump in funds that would be discounted from FFP calculations. That's why those other owners do it.
-
Brace yourself for 'there was money available but we decided not to use it as it was a ridiculous market and we have a responsibility to be sensible and not spend for the sake of it' Mowbray said in May that transfer planning had been ongoing since before the end of last season. If we end up with a couple of loans with Rothwell and Davenport it won't go down well.