roversfan99

Where is this from?

Pickering clearly isnt our biggest liability. He will be a loss especially as Chrisene looked far less competent.

He should have been given a new contract, but that decision didnt prove to be terminal in protecting the asset. We could have still sold him for a substantial fee but Venkys wouldnt entertain the idea.

Excellent post. The now legendary £20m a year investment is almost mentioned as if its a sign of ambition to push the club on. Im sure @RevidgeBlue once suggested that Mowbray had blown £100m of the owners over 5 years in not getting promoted during that time as if it was splashed out on a team of Championship all stars. Many Championship clubs not supported by parachute payments make 8 figure losses every season because the revenue is dwarved by expenditure. A company that pays out more than it receives has to offset that personally (often by loans or raising share capital) because of a lack of retained earnings, merely to continue as a going concern. Its bizarre how that can be levelled as praise. Since we bought Gallagher in 2019, a summer in which we actually spent a net amount of between 1 and 1.5 million, I dont think we have spent over the 2m on one player that Szmodics cost since then.

You are suggesting that the fault of this window lies with Waggott and co and that they are making excuses for not getting signings in. Surely the issue lies with the issues in India, not Waggott and co? I dont think we would have spent much if anything anyway. For a start, before these cuts came in Tomasson mentioned it was a summer of frees and loans. In the last 4 summers, we spent about 4m last season which was reasonable but they prevented the further reinvestment of potentially selling Brereton. (and Rothwell 6 montbs prior. The summer before, we sold Armstrong for loads of money and they allowed only a nominal fee for Edun. The summer before, we barely spent anything, about 500k on Kaminski. You like to make out as if they spend 20m a summer as a competitive advantage, when they do what basically all championship owners have to do and offset losses simply because Championship clubs spend more than they generate. The current squad is not just so thin based on cuts for this season, money hasnt been spent on the team in a while.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/20671027.blackburn-rovers-reject-ogc-nice-bid-ben-brereton-diaz/ 10m euros. To a team playing in European competition. Ultimately had we accepted and he said no, different question. But they wouldnt even consider it. Therefore the blame lies solely on the owners in this instance. Should he have been given a new contract in that season during covid when he went from useless to decent? Quite possibly. Was this the main block and a terminal blow to us receiving a substantial fee? No, thats on the owners which I have no doubt you will not concede.

Is the main issue stopping us signing players not that each deal needs ratifying through the budget slashing owners amidst these supposed government issues? Will the blame still lie closer to home for you?

Theres no reason to suggest that he wouldnt have accepted a bigger contract at a club in a better league. You just cant and wont accept that the owners directly prevented us from potentially getting a big fee because blame has to be diverted elsewhere. It was a foolish decision without hindsight to not take the money. We essentially loaned a player for 8m.

We received a bid of 8m in the summer prior to his departure. A lot of money for us. The owners themselves refused to accept it. Not a lot they could do though.

Would make little sense for such a conspiracy to be true.

Another Sunday of Nixon shite. Obviously we are not going to sign Rajovic for 4m, he probably knows that so our supposed interest has the perfect excuse for when the deal obviously doesnt happen. Plus why would they sell him so soon. Watford fans dont rate him at all, hes slow, cant hold the ball up and is useless outside the penalty box. But he does score goals. Not that it matters from a Rovers perspective.

What was most confusing about the decision which I am amazed people havent made more of, Sigurdsson as essentially a left wing back and Rankin Costello as a third centre back. A decision up there with Gallagher playing RB for 5-10 minutes between changes and Matteo in midfield. Is that it wasnt even a case whereby there was no reasonable alternative. Brittain could have gone to left back and Rankin Costello to right back with Sigurdsson in his usual position on tbe wing. It was especially perplexing when Moran came on shortly after as we could have just gone to the 4231 that we usually play.

It would have been well spent had the owners not blocked the potential sale last summer. Had we brought in 8 million or whatever it was, it would have meant that we had brought in a profit on the three as well as having loads of goals in the process. Brereton had 2 awful seasons, one decent one and then 2 in which he scored a combined 37 goals in 2 seasons, making him far and away our top scorer and right up there with Championship goalscorers across those 2 years. Armstrong obviously also scored lots of goals for us and made a big profit, his fee covering the 3 fees combined before Newcastles cut. And no team gets recruitment bang on, but if you are bringing in 20m+ for 2 of the 3, which we would without moronic owners as you say, you can afford to swallow up the third who wasnt as successful. And its not like Gallagher has been a total waste of time who scored 1 or 2 goals, he has contributed in his time albeit certainly not for the value of the fee paid. Couldnt agree more on the owners being moronic. Ultimately if they had cashed in on Brereton, which they had to, and also had stuck to a model of buying, selling at profit after the individuals did a good job for us and then reinvesting, then they would have been well in line with such a model. As it is, they have a model of sometimes interfering and stopping the income entirely, or just not reinvesting sales at all even when they do come in. End result, the mess we are in today.

Set pieces are always reflective of coaching on the training ground. Those numbers do not reflect well on Tomasson at all.

Why are you so fixated with a transfer from 4 and a half years ago? Mowbray signed 3 strikers in 12 months for a combined 15m. The money overall IMO was well spent, one scored loads and generated a massive profit that wasnt reinvested. Another scored loads and should have generated another big fee but said owners stopped it. The third was undoubtedly overpriced, hardly a total failure as an average Championship striker but not worth that fee. You have ignored my post explaining how they have not funded a reasonable fee for a striker since despite selling Armstrong and blocking the potential for further fees for Brereton and Rothwell that have raised over 10m but should have raised over 20m. We shouldnt (and arent because of that one deal) be hamstrung because a signing we made 5 years ago hasnt been an unqualified success.

Do you have an opinion on my post outlining how Venkys have chosen none of the 3 options of personal investment, reinvestment of considerable Armstrong funds (a Mowbray signing) and the potential reinvestment of Brereton/Rothwell fees that the owners themselves chose to decline in preference of letting them go for free, meaning that (unless I am mistaken) we have not spent more than 2m on a player (Szmodics) across a 5 year period? Its absolute nonsense that you could revert back to the potential restrictive nature of a signing made 4 and a half years ago, for less than half of the Armstrong fee received 2 years after.

Brereton, who we then subsequently turned down an £8m bid for which you fully supported. A decision solely on the owners. He had just sold Armstrong a year prior for 8 figures. We also had Rothwell for whom we turned down £4m for, again down to the owners. How much of this went back into the playing squad? Zilch. And how many of the remaining had we actually paid a fee for? Kaminski who went for a profit. Gallagher, admittedly a poor signing but Armstrong, Gallagher and Brereton for a combined 15m generated a bucket full of conbined goals and had the owners not intervened, it would have been a profit. Pickering, small fee. Most of the others were players that he had brought through from the academy.

Can you explain why they: 1. Havent themselves allowed a fee of over the 2m for Szmodics to be invested on a player across the last 5 years 2. Didnt allow any of the considerable fee received for Armstrong (a striker Mowbray signed) to be reinvested 3. Blocked potential sales of Brereton and Rothwell of a combined 8 figure fee to then allow reinvestment into the club for a new striker/new players

The signing was nearly 5 years ago. Since, we sold another striker Mowbray signed at a massive profit and the money vanished, he wasnt allowed to spend any. We could have sold another striker Mowbray signed, the owners said no and another opportunity for money was gone. The blame for the lack of money invested in the team is on the owners in such a long time. The other strikers we have are a freebie, a player for a nominal fee from the German 4th league and an academy graduate. There is absolutely no way that the fee paid for Gallagher so long ago can in any way be justified as a direct reason to blame Mowbray for this mess. The owners have not themselves invested any money in a striker, reinvested any of the considerable money we have received for a Mowbray striker in that time and actively have blocked potential reinvestment opportunities for other profitable Mowbray signings (especially Brereton) across a considerable time span.

The set up from the start but especially with Sigurdsson as a wing back and Rankin Costello as a third centre back certainly was a manager losing his marbles.

I find it staggering how he even enters your mind after todays game and the current position and run of form considering he left 18 months ago. Why is he still living rent free in your head?

He talked about calming expectations, to me thats just typical manager spiel, trying to lower expectations. Tomasson has been doing it all season. The last January window, Mowbray said he had turned down loans from the Premier League and that he wanted to sell Rothwell as he wanted to spend but he was blocked. In that same window, Revidge claimed he had turned down funds to spend. That was bollocks. But again my point was that hes been gone for 18 months and yet for Revidge he is still getting more blame than the owners somehow. If that money was unspent, why does it then vanish?

The main issue is the owners cutting the budgets etc but this current run isnt acceptable even with the current players. The selection today was bizarre and the shape post substitutions was laughable. Also a better coached side would not be so bad from attacking set pieces and concede so often from defensive ones.

He said he turned down strikers on loan. But either way, my point was more that its such a strange reaction to go down the Mowbray rabbit hole having seen your team limp to a lucky draw at home to a shocking side continuing a woeful run with a poor and thin squad that has been underfunded. All the blame as ever goes everywhere bar to the root cause of all of our problems for RevidgeBlue. Even if we ran with this nonsensical rumour, why did that money never materialise down the line?

Turn down 1m and loan out to a team much closer to us.