1 hour ago, Stuart said:

The bit you are possibly missing is the scars that many of us carry through this period of Venkys misrule.

To hear people posting “chin up everyone and look to the positives” is just a bit patronising and more than a little Keanesque.

Some of us are waiting to see what actually happens rather than trusting only the talk. As it stands, we’ve added reinforcements to a good L1 squad. If we bring in a couple of million pound plus (not big money by today’s standards) players - which is what Mowbray himself has implies (“seven figure deals”) then it would suggest improvements on existing players (not ex-loanee replacements). I’d be very happy with that.

Where you might say I’m a ‘doommonger’ is that I don’t believe it will happen. The reason it gets frustrating is that if (when) it doesn’t happen there will be a number of posters telling us that it is either a good thing or that anyone thinking we were ever going to (“easy to say in hindsight”).

And we’ve had years of this stuff!

Here’s hoping for (but not expecting) a great end to the window and my lack of faith being proven wrong!!

(Btw, it’s the same here, it’s not personal either)

I carry the same scars Stuart. In fact, bearing in mind the friendships I have with people who were directly involved with Rovers at the time I can honestly say it was worse than people imagined at times. The treatment of players / staff via the ‘third party’ was deplorable at times.

Im waiting too for the end of the window. But I’m not sure we’ve had any of those lies since TM began so I I’m prepared to have faith in him.

Agree to disagree I guess. But ultimately we want the same things ??

7 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Well a week tomorrow all will be clear.

4 players and some significant cash buys is a lot to get done in that time. 

Mowbray has my support and so I'll reserve judgment until the window shuts and I hope to be pleasantly surprised.

Given how this summer has progressed to date and given the owners history I think my reservations are justified. 

If the window shuts and we're still short and the talk is then about using the loan market to our advantage instead I'll be disappointed but not surprised.

100%

3 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

TM keeps mentioning targets that have since gone for huge fees int he Championship - does this mean we were trying to bring in Bamford?

Reading between the lines I think we had a permenant deal for Gallagher lined up them Bamford went for £7m and Southampton suddenly thought Gallagher must be worth that...

3 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Fans who have been following the club 40+ years and spent thousands upon thousands of pound following the club the love saying let’s wait and see what actually happens rather than buy the rhetoric = doommonger

Mowbray been here just over a season working for Venkys (who have let us down time and time again) = complete trust

Meh.

Mate, I’ve been a Rovers fan all my life too. Iv gone through all the emotions you have. I’ve spent probably more than most during that time. But that doesn’t mean I choose to be cynical about everything. 

Just imagine for one moment if you stopped looking at the worst scenario and actually became excited at what TM is saying....wouldn’t you feel better in general? That’s me. I’m not naive, I run a relatively successful company and employ a lot of people. I know I can still be disappointed at the end of this transfer window.

But I choose to be positive. All I was doing was pointing out to Chaddy that he can’t change peoples outlooks.

Its genuinely nothing personal. We all care about the club.

Just now, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Talk is cheap. I'll be jumping up and down when we actually make some significant signings.

Good for you buddy. I trust TM so I’m now going to be excited until the window closes. 

If it doesn’t work out, at least I’ve had a spring in my step for two weeks. Glass half full and all that ??

3 minutes ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

Also, with his world cup reference and criteria for spending on young players with potential, sound like he is after players from the premier league fringes.  Probably ones into the last year of their contract.

On a side note.  Very surprised that no one has taken a punt on Maddison from Posh yet.

Yeah I agree but also insistent on championship experience and goals...intriguing!! You can’t get those types of players for less than seven figures  can you? 

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Mowbray holding out for Rovers long term targets

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/16389449.mowbray-holding-out-for-rovers-long-term-targets/

Fantastic. Bring it on Tony lad!!

I think we will sign an out and out striker, an attacker / winger and a CB before the deadline with a possibility of one or two loans before the end of August.

9 minutes ago, Pedro said:

Happy Rovers fans?? I've heard it all now ?

Just trying to spread some love pal ???

2 minutes ago, DE. said:

The problem is that if Mowbray was referring to Chapman and Armstrong as "D" signings, then it's going to make it a bit underwhelming if we do end up signing them as the thought will now be that we could have gotten better but for whatever reason didn't. It might also make it harder to sign either Chapman or Armstrong if they don't think Mowbray rates them and know they'd be coming in as "last resort" signings. Not sure it's necessary to put stuff like this out in public, unless Mowbray is very confident we will get better.

If we signed Armstrong and Chapman I’d suggest most Rovers fans would be happy.

So them being our D options means that either way we should end up being very happy by Aug 9th

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Pretty darned depressing reading when the so called "D" targets (Armstrong and Chapman) are evidently out of our grasp and TM is trying to dress it up as though we weren't really after them in the first place.  Although I could actually believe that in the case of Chapman as nothing TM has ever said would indicate he particularly rates him.

The player referred to for £7m would appear to be a clear reference to Gallagher who we were only reportedly in for on loan and I don't think he's as good as Armstrong anyway

Eh!!!!!???????

7 minutes ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

Agree with the last bit.  Those would be great as a back up plan lol That said it also indicates missing out on his A list which is what we summised. Hence the lack of incomings.

Yes. Looks like his ‘A’ list was one of Bamford, Gallagher etc which surely means we have £2-3m to spend???

3 minutes ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

Anyway, the only serious question for me is what he could bring to the team.

If Rangers could sign Mo Johnson after all his sign of the cross celebrations in front of their fans, when he scored for Celtic, perhaps I could forgive a mere chicken dance...

???

I’d take Garner in a heartbeat. Reminds me of a Dickov type. Snapping into defenders. I like him.

1 minute ago, DE. said:

Free transfers are generally free for a reason, especially if they're 30 or under, so chances are only a couple of Bolton's signings are likely to make much of an impact.

Looks to me like they’re making the best of a very limited budget to pad out their squad. Loads of my mates are strongly associated to Bolton. I can’t wait to hammer them!! 

Just now, rovers11 said:

Interesting comments from TM, clearly he’s targeting some more proven players at this level, which can’t be a bad thing. I still think Armstrong may end up here but I’m not sure he feels he can rely on chapman with his injury record. 

Presumably he has some ambitious targets in mind. 

That’s exactly what I read! Interesting

1 hour ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

I enjoy reading you posts Mani - often written from a perspective of being more involved within the game than I.  

The buying the best value - be it loans or permanent - I get.  I get the all encompassing budget and picking battles etc.  However, surely any formulated plan/approach to procuring players with this budget, would start with the weakest area.  By TM's admission, this has been top end of the pitch.  The first 2 signings (which we have spent a chunk of our budget on) haven't addressed the weakness as we had players in those positions -not great but not the biggest weakness. The widely talked about keeper at the beginning of the close  season - not a priority.  The CB target that has rumbled on - not  a priority (I think we need one but not essential - or wasn't until we loaned out Wharton!).  

So I would have thought we would have addressed the forward options before looking at any of these others.  Spent what was needed/we could afford (even if loans) then move on to the 'lesser' positions.  The longer the window goes on, the less we look like we have any kind of plan.  Especially given he  had a list of targets drawn up at the end of last season that were just awaiting budget clearance from Venkys.

I understand the window has not closed and hope I will be pleasantly surprised - (along with the circa 1000 extra  ST holders that Waggot believes our exciting  signings will attract).

But I just can't escape the feeling that somewhere over the last couple of months, this window/budget/list of targets/plan has gone tits up.

Perhaps, as others have mentioned, we needed to offload a few and that hasn't happened?

 

Likewise mate. I like the fact that whilst we both often come at things from a diffeeent angle your points are logical and balanced...

in terms of the timing of the deals, they just get done when they get done. It takes so much to come together and this is especially difficult when the buying club isn’t prepared to pay over the odds. So ideally I’m sure TM would’ve loved to get his forward options over the line sooner but it just wasn’t doable.

Not sure if you’ve seen Rich Sharpes article this evening but I read a lot into that. Basically saying that Armstrong and Chapman are way down the pecking order as they have not got the experience or goals in the Championship. Suggested that they were on his ‘D’ list and he was hoping to choose from his ‘’B’ list. I don’t know about you but if Arma and Chapman are on our D list then I’m bloody excited to see who’s on our B!!! ?

5 hours ago, JHRover said:

Unfortunately in Chelsea's case there are lots and lots of other Todd Kanes. Players who will have been lured to Chelsea as kids, moulded in Chelsea's academy and then spend their careers being farmed out all over the place. Kane will be 25 by the time he leaves Hull at the end of his loan and will have never kicked a ball in anger for Chelsea whilst moving round countless loan clubs.

As there are big drawbacks to ourselves relying on loan players, there are drawbacks to these sort of players who waste their careers with a nomadic existence when if they had put down roots at a decent Championship club or lower Premier League club there is every chance that over a few years they would develop into first team players.

The drawback to Rovers on relying upon loans is we have a nomadic existence ourselves where we cannot properly plan or develop a squad or identity because each and every summer we are waiting until the 11th hour until we discover who, if anyone, we are able to borrow, rather than seizing control of our destiny by owning our players.

Tammy Abraham - now 20 - last 2 years on loan at Swansea and Bristol City, 2 appearances for Chelsea

Ola Aina - now 21 - 3 appearances in 3 years at Chelsea, last season on loan at Hull

Lewis Baker - now 23 - never kicked a ball for Chelsea, last 3 years out on loan at Sheff Weds, MK Dons, Vitesse, Middlesbrough and now Leeds

Jeremie Boga - 1 appearance in 3 years at Chelsea - 3 years on loan at Rennes, Granada and Birmingham

Fankaty Dabo - 0 appearances - loans at Swindon and Vitesse

Michael Hector - 0 appearances - loans at Reading, Frankfurt and Hull

Tomas Kalas - now 25 - 2 appearances - loans at Vitesse, Cologne, Middlesbrough x 2 and Fulham x 2

Todd Kane - 24 - 0 appearances - loans at PNE, Rovers, Bristol City, Forest, Nijmegen, Groningen, Oxford and Hull

Kasey Palmer - 0 appearances - loans at Huddersfield x 2, Derby and Rovers

Plenty of others on the list.

Yes mate, but your initial point wasn’t about Chelsea. It was about ‘Todd Kane’ and whilst it’s happened at Chelsea as you have pointed out, that is more about Chelsea’s business model rather than the players.

5 hours ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

I understand about the idea of quality we can't afford and agree to the logic to some extent.  For me though, this comes back to the club being honest about the situation.  As others mentioned, There have been attacking players out there that have gone for reasonable money.  What do you class as 'forwards' as we seem reluctant to buy wingers/strikers. Or anyone that can't play midfield or defence.

Last year (and this close season) we were told there is always the opportunity to pursue these players when the loan finishes (or words to that effect). Effectively, you are saying we could never afford them - in which case those statements are untrue.

Following this point, if the manager/directors claim to be happy with the budget (it's competitive etc) thrn surely that  budget should allow for the purchase of a permanent,  contracted forward as well as any loans? 

You would also think, that whilst attacking players are more expensive to buy, the rewards financially are much greater in terms of resale. The owners will have seen this through Gestede, Rhodes, Cairney and Dack's current value. You told us that Venkys have always been willing to spend.  So surely our model should be to pick up some of these higher value players along the way permanently?  - by this, I don't mean players over £5 million but good value -like Armstrong.  

Ultimately, there is still a lack of transparency at the club.  If we can't afford forwards, just say so.  No need to spin it or cover up what is becoming increasingly obvious.  Likewise you can't say the owners are willing to spend, as clearly there is a (low) limit on that.

Good post.

But the budget isn’t presented like £5m for fees and £5m on wages. It’s broken down but effectively the budget is is one number that is agreed and encompasses player contracts, transfer fees, Wages and associated costs.

The one theme that I’m trying to get across is that you are always trying to get the best for the cash you have. Never at anytime has TM said he has big money fees. He said he was happy with the budget. I don’t think you can say he’s lied there. 

In terms of being able to afford forwards, it’s surely more about value for money. If you can get the right price for the right calibre of player then you buy. If you want a higher level of player for less money you loan. Managers pick their battles.

Whether players are ‘good value’ or not is a matter for the manager and the club. Either way, the window isnt yet shut so who’s to say we won’t have spent a couple of million?

32 minutes ago, meadows said:

Chelsea had 38 players out on loan last season. Off the top of my head I could have named about 5. Anyone who knows what the rule, or the exception to it, is must be pretty well researched. 

Sorry? You mentioned Todd Kane and I stated that Todd Kane (ie a player who has been with a club for 8yrs as a pro but has never made a first team appearance for them and been loaned out the whole time) - Is the exception to any rule. Surely?

9 minutes ago, meadows said:

Falls down a bit on item 1. Two words. Todd Kane. 

The exception, not the rule...

6 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Indeed meadows, Chelsea churn out and hoard dozens upon dozens of players for up to a decade for no discernible reason that I can see - as many of them will never make the grade at that level.

Who was the last Chelsea academy player to become a regular - John Terry?

That’s Chelsea’s business model. But it doesn’t mean that every player is happy to settle like Todd Kane. At 21 with England youth honours in his back pocket Palmer must fancy himself to play in the Premiership? That accepted, he has to play well in order to either break into Chelsea’s team or get a move to another premier league team. 

What im saying is that he’s unlikely to want to come and let the world pass him by.

2 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Good post.

Item 3: If we have an average or poor season as a team but individuals perform well, let's use Dack and Lenihan as examples, then they may well move on. If we go down there will be  mass exodus plus the loans.

Huddersfield had a well thought out plan using loans and it worked but only just, helped by Fulham imploding. I don't know but suspect their approach kept them out of the clutches of FFP if the promotion attempt had failed?

I am coming around to having good quality in attacking areas via loans.

Exactly, the focus is on getting as much quality as possible in for your money. Loan or permenant. If you get the right group and the right level of quality then you have a great chance of being successful, and success = money! 

7 hours ago, JacknOry said:

Out of my entire post you picked up on that?

Was just a reply to Paul Mani who believes fans ultimately dont give a toss about the club and would rather we go bust getting the best possible players as long as they are on the pitch.

Wow. wild accusations! 

What I actually believe in is value for money. I want the best possible outcome for the cash that is being spent. If we had £20m to spend of course I’d want us to buy Palmer, Armstrong, Chapman, Bauer etc...but we don’t. 

The options are a) buy lesser quality players for affordable prices or b) buy good players who you CAN afford and loan the good players you CANT afford (Usually forwards).

You aren’t going to go bust with that logic. In fact you’re working with the best possible players for your money. And if your superstar loan forwards get you into a promotion fight at the top of the table, the exposure will likely put millions on the heads of your your permenant players anyway...

6 hours ago, Stuart said:

With “some level of commitment” Warnock would have probably had us promoted instead of relegated.

100% agree.

6 hours ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

On that basis and given how highly you rate Palmer, it's unlikely you will be impressed with any future permanent signing.

Get behind the lads ffs

?

There are some excellent permenant buys out there. Like Davenport for example who has potential after a great upbringing to improve and earn the club money. 

However, these players are usually limited to all positions EXCEPT forwards, who generally come at a premium. A premium that we cannot currently pay. 

There’s a reason why last season we loaned the likes of Antonsson, Armstrong, Chapman and even Payne. We needed their quality for less money. The situation with Palmer is no different.