
JHRover
Members-
Posts
13855 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
208
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Uncouth Garb - The BRFCS Store
Everything posted by JHRover
-
Or again alternatively lets take the focus away from the player and turn it towards our owners - if they think they can get a few million for a player that cost them £700k this time last year will that tempt them? It has done in the past...
-
Just remembered that Sam Hart will be back after his loan at Rochdale with another 12 months still to go....
-
There's probably a 10% that Bielsa will be a masterstoke and a 90% chance it will go horribly wrong and he won't last the season. Big question marks - his stock has fallen massively, questions about his methods, he seems to fall out with every club he works at, very strange goings on particularly at Lazio, yet no denying he's a big name and a bit of a coup for a mid-table Championship side, and I doubt he'll come cheap. Half looks to me like Leeds are trying to make a statement by appointing a high profile manager but again are doing a complete about turn going down a very different path with a huge gamble when there are much safer options out there. I don't think I'd want him at Rovers and I'd be more comfortable with Mowbray or most other Championship managers at the helm making decisions. A combination of Bielsa's reputation, turnover in jobs and Leeds' rate of managers suggests he'll do very well to last the season.
-
I think Dack has been as clear as he could ever possibly be that he's happy here and looking forward to the Championship challenge. I've seen no indication from him that he has any intention of moving to another Championship club. Given that he has spent his career to date in League One/Two, most of it at Gillingham, I doubt he's going to be demanding mega money or silly figures to stay. We would have given him an increase on Gillingham and another increase on that to reflect his importance to the club would be appropriate. He can hardly turn around and demand £30k a week given he's never kicked a ball in the Championship. Of course there is an alternative theory - that either Rovers haven't got round to offering him a new deal yet or that whatever offer has been made is nowhere near what it should be for a player of his importance. Of course negotiations ought to have commenced the day after the Doncaster win to get him tied down to a long term Championship standard contract, same for Lenihan, but with Venkys at the helm I can't see it. To some extent I can understand a reluctance on Rovers' part given Dack is completely untested at Championship level but that won't help if other clubs come knocking. Sooner or later you have to be bold and brave and give him the contract rather than allow risk or uncertainty to develop. Losing him would be a crushing blow in a number of ways.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/jun/14/fa-talks-home-nations-uk-wide-bid-host-2030-world-cup?CMP=share_btn_tw Talk of a 'Home Nations' bid for the 2030 World Cup. Perhaps the most interesting part is the final paragraph: As part of the FA’s effort to improve its image on the world stage Gareth Southgate will introduce himself in the future as being from the “English FA”. The manager and other executives believe it will help remove any perception of English football as arrogant. In 2015 Glenn said the Football Association’s name was the “ultimate expression of arrogance”. I know the FA are arrogant, but I'm not sure that's got anything to do with their name. Further erosion of the traditions of English football. Once upon a time it was THE Football League and THE Football Association, soon to be preceded by 'English' to lump it in with the rest around the world. Wouldn't really surprise me if FIFA weren't requesting this before considering a bid from the FA. Won't be long before they come up with some horrific abbreviated brand name and logo like the Football League did.
-
I'm not actually proposing anything. It's up to Venkys what we do. All I'm doing is pointing out that there are ways and means of doing it consistently and getting away with it, as other clubs are proving, and I don't subscribe to the theory that it is because they get a few more on watching games than we do. Whether that be Forest spending £13 million on one player, Derby, Wolves, Wednesday avoiding sanctions or Birmingham's owners sponsoring their training ground, there are ways of investing and not putting the club on course for disaster. It frustrates me when our directors mention it in every interview as though it is a serious obstacle when it clearly isn't for everyone else.
-
So if its so simple for Forest to do then why can't we do it on a smaller scale? Say spend £6 million and spread it over 4 years? You refer to net sales by Forest which enabled them to escape sanctions and given them headroom moving forward. They haven't sold anywhere near as much as we have over the last 4-5 years. You say Wednesday are 'getting close' to trouble - 'getting close' means nothing - we were slapped with an embargo which lasted for several years so we were made to suffer despite slashing our wage bill and expenditure. No evidence that any of these other clubs are going to be made to suffer. I know administration is a separate issue to FFP. I mentioned administration in the case of Villa because some newspapers have thrown it out there as a potential consequence of their failure this season, I was merely saying i'll believe that when I see it. I'm confident that won't happen. I'm not proposing any particular amounts to spend. All I'm doing is pointing out that for all the references to FFP rules etc. 2 things stand out: 1) That nobody has been punished from it recently and 2) clubs e.g. Forest with no parachute cash are still able to spend massive amounts. That tells me that if Rovers wanted to spend serious money (several million rather than loans and frees and a few hundred grand) then FFP rules would not prevent that.
-
Cardiff employed a manager we messed about and turned down. Their ability to appoint him or his ability in getting them promoted last season was nothing to do with them being based in a big city. Their attendances even last season were rarely any bigger than ours were when Bowyer was manager, and with the exception of the Madine signing in January they didn't spend much, so I'm not sure why we can't compete with them. Cardiff might be a big city, so is London, that doesn't make Brentford and Barnet bigger than us. I'd hazard a guess that Villa, Derby, Wolves, Wednesday, Middlesbrough, Newcastle, probably Brighton, have all spent upwards of £20 million on new players over a 2-4 year period. Some were successful, some had parachute money, but not all. Are Villa in serious financial trouble? Lets wait and see. I've read plenty of rumours and horror stories in the papers but last time I checked they still had a very good squad and manager and weren't under any sanctions. I'm not sure why spending a few bob on new players suddenly means that the club is being badly run or is going to end up in a mess or revert back to the agency days. We keep hearing about Mowbray's new recruitment department and his honesty and sense in what he does so why would spending a few million change that? Lots of clubs are 'run properly' but spend considerable amounts on improving themselves or trying to. I just think that there's a degree of Rovers hiding behind FFP rules here as an excuse to not invest more money. I'm not advocating being silly like Forest but sensible investment in line with other clubs. What those big spenders demonstrate though is it can be done without suffering sanctions.
-
'Ceramic' is the description on the website. I think it points towards a yellow away shirt. Looking at the stuff available there seems to be a slightly bigger selection than previously, but as usual it is extremely expensive for what amounts to a tracksuit with a Rovers badge on. I usually buy a few items but will easily cost £100+ for a jacket, t shirt and jumper.
-
Pretty much every interview I've seen from Mike Cheston and Steve Waggott refers to FFP constraints. A lot of people on this forum frequently refer to them as a reason why we cannot spend money on new players. I'm not the only person going on about it. Which clubs have been sanctioned in the last 3 years for breaching the rules? Aston Villa rumoured to be in trouble, QPR fined but haven't paid a penny. Why do I want Venkys to invest? Because realistically that is the best chance we have of getting promoted. I can't believe anyone is comfortable with the idea of a future where we spend nothing and our rivals spend millions. This talk about the club washing its own face and not needing long term funding is all nice and romantic but realistically isn't going to happen unless we get to the Premier League and access the cash there. Even if we spend nothing on new players we will still make a loss in the Championship, as every club does. We aren't comparable to Cardiff? Seriously? I think I've already accepted that Leeds, Derby and Forest etc. get bigger crowds than us and that obviously increases their revenues in comparison, and yes that means they can pay more wages if running on their own steam and not owners, my point was that no number of additional fans turning up will account for a potential £15-20 million difference in transfer fees paid by them compared to us. How much do you think their fans are paying for tickets if it enables them to spend £20 million on new players?
-
I expect Villa will make some cuts and probably a sale or two. I'm doubtful they'll be given a FFP punishment, doubt they'll go into administration and doubt they'll end up doing a Sunderland. If they have gambled on promotion and failed yet the worst they get is losing a couple of decent players and reducing the wage bill then that's not bad given the amounts they've spent. With Bruce as manager and even half of their current squad they'll probably be in play-off contention again next season. Of course I might be wrong and their world might come crashing down around their ears. Lets wait and see. Only today Alan Hutton has signed a new deal having been linked with various other clubs. Derby and Sheffield Wednesday are similar. The summer started with rumours of problems at Derby after another missed promotion - supposed FFP trouble and having to make cutbacks - Rowett moving to Stoke appeared to be the start - yet they've appointed Lampard who won't be cheap, are now favourites to sign Jack Marriott from Peterborough who won't be cheap so I see no sign of imminent difficulties there. Sheffield Wednesday spent massive amounts to the extent that they had £10 million Rhodes making up the numbers on their bench last season, failed to go up again after 3 seasons of heavy spending yet no unfolding disaster there yet either. The impression I'm getting is either these FFP rules are very easy to work around, and all these big spending clubs are getting away with it, or that they aren't being enforced properly. Either way nobody has been sanctioned in recent seasons and in the 'EFL' I see a weak organisation unable or unwilling to enforce its own rules.
-
Pretty sure QPR haven't paid a penny as yet. They were given a fine because they broke the rules and won promotion, only they refused to pay up and have since been in a multi-year long legal battle. When they do have to pay up we can be sure it will be considerably less than the £40 million it could have been.
-
I'm advocating that we stop incessantly banging on about FFP rules as a club when another club (not in receipt of parachute money) is on the verge of spending £13 million on one player. 'If we get promoted it doesn't matter' is another myth - there's no evidence of any club being sanctioned even if they miss out - Villa are rumoured to be in trouble but lets see if anything actually happens. Bolton were sanctioned because they failed to produce their accounts because they were going bust - not because they overspent or were found guilty of overspending Cardiff and Fulham had embargoes that lasted a matter of weeks/only impacted on one transfer window and both have since won promotion so it clearly didn't do them much harm. The only others were ourselves, Leeds and Forest, one of which is spending 8 figure sums on players so they clearly haven't learnt much of a lesson from it. The extra revenue that the likes of Forest may have over us does not account for them spending £13 million on one player whilst we deal in loans and frees. Chuck in their January business and other signings this summer and I reckon they'll be pushing £20 million before wages are factored in.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44481033 Here we go. A 'holding company' that owns Birmingham has entered into a sponsorship deal with the club to rename their stadium and training ground. A 'significant' deal which will enable 'improving the playing squad'. Trillion Trophy Asia will 'benefit from increased exposure, and commercial/marketing opportunities' (pretty sure they don't sell anything and their website sheds no light on what they do). Basically just a back door to pumping money into the club which will get them round FFP rules (Birmingham rumoured to be on thin ice last season after the Redknapp spending - yet haven't been sanctioned yet). Once again nothing stopping Venkys from renaming Brockhall as the 'VH training ground' for multi-millions to inject into transfers. At least Venkys are a brand that sells things.
-
Because FFP is nonsense and they know it, and also because their owner wants to get promoted. Just like Wolves, Derby, Sheffield Wednesday and all the others, none of whom have been sanctioned despite tens of millions spent. No doubt some will say 'but poor Rovers only get small crowds and they get bigger crowds than us' as though an extra 5,000 a week turning up in the Championship equates to that sort of money. The only ones incessantly bleating about FFP are those who want to hide behind it and not spend.
-
Interesting conundrum for Rovers to live with. They'll be desperate for these clubs to fill the Darwen End at £25 a head and shift 7000+ tickets yet their track record suggests they'll do what they are told by the cops. If the cops want a 1pm kick off they'll get it, but that could well slash the numbers turning up by a considerable amount. I very much doubt they'll be able to rely upon full houses from PNE and Villa again. Last time it was a big PNE day out for the family having not been to Ewood for years whereas this time the novelty will have wore off and Villa are another lot who if they are struggling and aren't going for promotion won't fill it. https://www.rovers.co.uk/siteassets/pdfs/fans-forum-minutes/14th-march-2016.pdf The police stipulate an early kick off when the whole Darwen End is allocated to the away club. Technically the whole Darwen End is allocated for every away club now home fans are no longer in there. If the club gets it's wish and Villa, PNE, Leeds, Middlesbrough, Stoke, WBA, Sheffield clubs all get the whole stand then they will be lunchtime kick offs. Won't be many Saturday 3pms...
-
Rovers might play at home whilst Burnley are at home. The police have set a precedent with their decision last season with both clubs playing at home on the same night, so why couldn't/wouldn't we both be at home next season? Likewise brace yourselves for plenty of lunchtime kick offs on Ewood. In our last Championship season the club said that when allocating the entire Darwen End to away fans that games had to kick off early on police grounds. Waggott has said that the Darwen End has closed to home fans to accommodate bigger away followings and allow them the whole Darwen End so I can only presume that means all those games will be early kick offs?
-
The role of linesman is being diluted even further. Now being instructed to not raise their flag for close call offsides and instead pass the buck to 'VAR' to make the decision. So short of giving the obvious and easy decisions is there actually that much need for a linesman any more? Technology can supposedly do his job on the tough decisions. Might as well get rid of them altogether.
-
There aren't many, if any, clubs in the Championship that are a 'step up' in size or stature. There are some like Leeds, Wednesday and Forest that get more fans than we do but have regularly been also-rans in the Championship. Mid-table/top half sides these days are PNE, Brentford, Sheff Utd, Millwall, Bristol City - frankly I'd be horrified but not surprised to see those clubs sniffing around. The only ones really are the likes of Stoke, Middlesbrough and Villa by virtue of parachute cash and somehow being able to spend tens of millions on players, but that's about it. I'm confident he won't get a Premier League club. You'd like to think we'd be in a position to resist those clubs as we are or at least should be expecting to be in a similar or better position than those sort of clubs but we've all got memories of the last few seasons and players moving on to rivals. Rovers should be moving heaven and earth to get him nailed down to a healthy, long term deal, but I'm not confident such things will be done.
-
Depends what the club's ambition is doesn't it? Serious about progressing and building something - then offer him a new deal on good money. He's been here for years and if he gets made an attractive offer at a club he sees is going places then he'll stay. Not serious about it then allow him to be poached by a rival club as we have with countless others of our best players in recent years whilst coming up with cock and bull sob stories about FFP etc. Comparisons to Hurst at Shrewsbury are different - Hurst has taken a major step up both in leagues, finances, club size in moving to Ipswich - a genuine step up in every respect - whereas we know deep down that when/if Darragh leaves here it won't be to a bigger or better club than Rovers, just one prepared to spend more money in pursuit of success. Think Sheffield United or Birmingham and that's the sort of club who will be interested.
-
New 1 year deal for Conway confirmed https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/june/craig-nets-new-contract/
-
I believe that Morocco would have been a more authentic World Cup. A single host rather than 3 countries is preferable. Having multiple hosts takes away some of the prestige and novelty of a single nation hosting the event, a formula that has worked since day one. Morocco a much smaller country is easier to travel around for fans than jetting over the North American continent, Morocco is well located on Europe's doorstep all in one time zone. Then there's the 'advantage' of them being in Africa which FIFA are keen on. For a relatively small country like Morocco the prestige of hosting the World Cup would be massive and really put them on the map. Is it going to benefit the US? They already have superb stadia and facilities, and have already had a recent World Cup, along with many other major sporting events.
-
Get them spending I say. Every penny they spend on inflated transfer fees and increased wages is a penny less they can save away for the future or for infrastructure improvements. Even better when those inflated fees are being paid for players relegated last season.
-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/06/13/nottingham-forest-smash-transfer-record-signing-joao-carvalho/ But FFP? Perhaps Waggott and Venkys could go and have a word with them at Forest and find out how to do it.
-
Wonder if they'll persuade Del Bosque to come out of retirement for the tournament. With his experience of the national team and most of the players it could be a sensible move to put him on a plane to Russia.