Blackburn Rovers expect to sign Luke Varney on permanent deal

Luke Varney

Luke Varney

First published in Football
Last updated
Lancashire Telegraph: Photograph of the Author by , Blackburn Rovers reporter

BLACKBURN Rovers expect to complete the permanent signing of Luke Varney after Leeds United confirmed they would be releasing the striker.

The well travelled and versatile frontman spent the final three months of the season on loan at Rovers from Championship rivals Leeds.

But the fantastic form of Rudy Gestede meant he was restricted to just three starts and nine substitute appearances from the bench. Varney, who failed to score in any of the 12 matches in which he featured, admitted he was unable to make his mark at Ewood Park.

But his attitude and application, plus his ability to play out wide, impressed Gary Bowyer and his coaching staff.

And that is why Rovers are set to snap the 31-year-old up on a free transfer once his contract with Leeds runs out next month.

“Luke was desperate to play and we saw that from his attitude and his performances when he did play for us,” said Rovers boss Bowyer.

“I remember Reading away, he was playing like a centre half at the death. They were chucking balls at us and he was there heading and kicking them away.

“He’s such a lively character and he’s got the experience that I think we have needed. He did not play enough in his own mind because of the form of the front two.

“But he worked his socks off every day in training and he was so supportive of the front two.

“He also has the ability to play out wide as well, so he was fantastic for us even though he didn’t feature as much as he would have liked.”

Varney was due to sign for Rovers on January transfer deadline day but new Leeds owner Massimo Cellino pulled the plug on the deal at the last minute.

That left Varney in limbo but after the loan window for signings reopened one week later Cellino sanctioned a temporary move to Rovers with a view to making it permanent in the summer.

The move will also allow Bowyer to concentrate on the other positions he intends to strengthen. A right back sits at the top of his shopping list, but he also wants cover at centre back.

Bowyer has been meeting Rovers owner’s Venky’s in India to thrash out his budget for next season.

Leeds, meanwhile, have also released former Rovers striker El Hadji Diouf.

Comments (74)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:09am Mon 19 May 14

william14 says...

I would say 75% of fans will not get 'over-excited' by this move but in mind Varney will be a decent addition for his experience & versatility which will be so important next season. Last season Leicester signed Gary Taylor Fletcher who is a similar style player to Varney and he played a massive role in helping Leicester win promotion so hopefully Varney will have a similar effect (fingers crossed). As for the meeting in Pune hopefully we have a sufficient budget to go and purchase a new RB & back up CB.
I would say 75% of fans will not get 'over-excited' by this move but in mind Varney will be a decent addition for his experience & versatility which will be so important next season. Last season Leicester signed Gary Taylor Fletcher who is a similar style player to Varney and he played a massive role in helping Leicester win promotion so hopefully Varney will have a similar effect (fingers crossed). As for the meeting in Pune hopefully we have a sufficient budget to go and purchase a new RB & back up CB. william14
  • Score: 28

9:15am Mon 19 May 14

PhilipMc says...

william14 wrote:
I would say 75% of fans will not get 'over-excited' by this move but in mind Varney will be a decent addition for his experience & versatility which will be so important next season. Last season Leicester signed Gary Taylor Fletcher who is a similar style player to Varney and he played a massive role in helping Leicester win promotion so hopefully Varney will have a similar effect (fingers crossed). As for the meeting in Pune hopefully we have a sufficient budget to go and purchase a new RB & back up CB.
i agree, he is not being signed to excite people. Reading this it sounds like he worked hard behind closed doors, provided bits of advice to younger players and covered when needed. He isn't a moaner or someone to break up the dressing room. I don't think we will see many exciting players come in we don't really need any.
[quote][p][bold]william14[/bold] wrote: I would say 75% of fans will not get 'over-excited' by this move but in mind Varney will be a decent addition for his experience & versatility which will be so important next season. Last season Leicester signed Gary Taylor Fletcher who is a similar style player to Varney and he played a massive role in helping Leicester win promotion so hopefully Varney will have a similar effect (fingers crossed). As for the meeting in Pune hopefully we have a sufficient budget to go and purchase a new RB & back up CB.[/p][/quote]i agree, he is not being signed to excite people. Reading this it sounds like he worked hard behind closed doors, provided bits of advice to younger players and covered when needed. He isn't a moaner or someone to break up the dressing room. I don't think we will see many exciting players come in we don't really need any. PhilipMc
  • Score: 17

9:34am Mon 19 May 14

owd nick says...

I don't have a problem with this at all, he is experienced at this level, always gives 100% and wants to play for us.
I don't have a problem with this at all, he is experienced at this level, always gives 100% and wants to play for us. owd nick
  • Score: 18

9:35am Mon 19 May 14

owd nick says...

Just for the dingle troll.

https://twitter.com/
sportingintel/status
/467747153541353472/
photo/1
Just for the dingle troll. https://twitter.com/ sportingintel/status /467747153541353472/ photo/1 owd nick
  • Score: 4

9:43am Mon 19 May 14

French Rover says...

A few older and more experienced heads may be needed next season, so a decent squad signing by GB.
A few older and more experienced heads may be needed next season, so a decent squad signing by GB. French Rover
  • Score: 9

9:46am Mon 19 May 14

Steven Seagull says...

No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do. Steven Seagull
  • Score: -22

9:48am Mon 19 May 14

BRFC75 says...

Nowt to do with Varney , but I read both David James and Chris Suttonhave both declared bankruptcy , what is with these guys ? They all say bad financial advice , then go onto explain like the boys from Take That, the advice was all about not paying taxes, they are greedy ,they simply don't want to pay their fair share of taxes and look for schemes to avoid it , and like most of these particularly professional footballers don't think the rules apply to them.
No doubt they will owe various people vast amounts of money , and these people will not get their money owed, and like Colin Hendry , Sutton and James will be allowed to keep two or three million pounds in their pension fund as Hendry did ,still at least Sutton and James unlike Hendry never went about lying to borrow money from friends knowing they were heading to Bankruptcy.
Nowt to do with Varney , but I read both David James and Chris Suttonhave both declared bankruptcy , what is with these guys ? They all say bad financial advice , then go onto explain like the boys from Take That, the advice was all about not paying taxes, they are greedy ,they simply don't want to pay their fair share of taxes and look for schemes to avoid it , and like most of these particularly professional footballers don't think the rules apply to them. No doubt they will owe various people vast amounts of money , and these people will not get their money owed, and like Colin Hendry , Sutton and James will be allowed to keep two or three million pounds in their pension fund as Hendry did ,still at least Sutton and James unlike Hendry never went about lying to borrow money from friends knowing they were heading to Bankruptcy. BRFC75
  • Score: 10

9:58am Mon 19 May 14

jim 2012 says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
not half as much as i fear for burnley
to coin a phrase be careful what you wish for !!
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]not half as much as i fear for burnley to coin a phrase be careful what you wish for !! jim 2012
  • Score: 6

10:00am Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

Rhodes permanent replacement.

A sign of things to come as FFP forces Blackburn Rovers to finally scale back and live within their means. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks. Squeaky bum time.
Rhodes permanent replacement. A sign of things to come as FFP forces Blackburn Rovers to finally scale back and live within their means. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks. Squeaky bum time. Super_Clarets
  • Score: -19

10:05am Mon 19 May 14

owd nick says...

jim 2012 wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
not half as much as i fear for burnley
to coin a phrase be careful what you wish for !!
I wouldn't worry about that lot if I were you, all betting is off against them being PL champions for the next 10 years, their reserves winning the FA cup and their Hay team winning the League cup over the same period.

They are just so brilliant don'tcha know! :-)

Wonder when the dingle fans will get their first wake-up call?
[quote][p][bold]jim 2012[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]not half as much as i fear for burnley to coin a phrase be careful what you wish for !![/p][/quote]I wouldn't worry about that lot if I were you, all betting is off against them being PL champions for the next 10 years, their reserves winning the FA cup and their Hay team winning the League cup over the same period. They are just so brilliant don'tcha know! :-) Wonder when the dingle fans will get their first wake-up call? owd nick
  • Score: 3

10:17am Mon 19 May 14

Crow27 says...

Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB. Crow27
  • Score: -1

10:18am Mon 19 May 14

HoghtonRover123 says...

Rhodes
Gestede
Varney
Rittenberg
Rochina

Those 5 together all have their own attributes and qualities. Meaning Bowyer can use different formations and tactics to utilise each player.

Getting Rid of Best, Goodwillie & Campbell is the priority. They seriously offer nothing over the 5 I have put at the top.

And it will probably save us up to 100k per week, Crazy!
Rhodes Gestede Varney Rittenberg Rochina Those 5 together all have their own attributes and qualities. Meaning Bowyer can use different formations and tactics to utilise each player. Getting Rid of Best, Goodwillie & Campbell is the priority. They seriously offer nothing over the 5 I have put at the top. And it will probably save us up to 100k per week, Crazy! HoghtonRover123
  • Score: 16

10:28am Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans. Super_Clarets
  • Score: -13

10:45am Mon 19 May 14

baldie says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet? baldie
  • Score: 4

10:49am Mon 19 May 14

J.C - Rishton says...

Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team.

He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him.

We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would.

He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now.

GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category.

Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this!
Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team. He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him. We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would. He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now. GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category. Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this! J.C - Rishton
  • Score: 9

10:54am Mon 19 May 14

baldie says...

jim 2012 wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
not half as much as i fear for burnley
to coin a phrase be careful what you wish for !!
The star striker with NO intention of signing.
The other in dock till next year.
Brendan hold of the purse strings.
And he fears for us.
[quote][p][bold]jim 2012[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]not half as much as i fear for burnley to coin a phrase be careful what you wish for !![/p][/quote]The star striker with NO intention of signing. The other in dock till next year. Brendan hold of the purse strings. And he fears for us. baldie
  • Score: 3

10:56am Mon 19 May 14

Ewood_Mark says...

Well with the quality signing of Varney I'm sure the likes of Fulham and Cardiff will be quaking in their boots. Rather than signing young exciting players we shall continue to sign old nobodies happy to pick up their last few wages. 15th place here we come!!
Well with the quality signing of Varney I'm sure the likes of Fulham and Cardiff will be quaking in their boots. Rather than signing young exciting players we shall continue to sign old nobodies happy to pick up their last few wages. 15th place here we come!! Ewood_Mark
  • Score: -7

11:02am Mon 19 May 14

J.C - Rishton says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order. J.C - Rishton
  • Score: 0

11:05am Mon 19 May 14

john byrom says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
Rhodes permanent replacement.

A sign of things to come as FFP forces Blackburn Rovers to finally scale back and live within their means. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks. Squeaky bum time.
I wondered when the IDIOT would be out of bed. Worry about your little club. and the £100 fee to get season ticket. Highway robbers.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: Rhodes permanent replacement. A sign of things to come as FFP forces Blackburn Rovers to finally scale back and live within their means. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks. Squeaky bum time.[/p][/quote]I wondered when the IDIOT would be out of bed. Worry about your little club. and the £100 fee to get season ticket. Highway robbers. john byrom
  • Score: 4

11:07am Mon 19 May 14

john byrom says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
SAD SAD BORING DINGLE NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THNK IDIOT
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]SAD SAD BORING DINGLE NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THNK IDIOT john byrom
  • Score: 8

11:13am Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team.

He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him.

We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would.

He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now.

GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category.

Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this!
"We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finishing at least in the top 6"

Sorry but.... LOL! Please explain what you base this theory on?

You finished this season in 8th place, your highest place all season. Next season you will be a much weaker proposition due to the replacement of your players of value with free transfer alternatives as you aim to reduce the horrific outgoings causing your non-compliance to FFP.

There is far greater strength in the Championship next season given the three relegated Premier League sides will all come down with strong squads and £60million in parachute payments to strengthen for an immediate return. There is also the quality of the teams who have narrowly missed out. Then there is your additional £8million drop in parachute payments to account for, and of course the small matter of your pending transfer ban commencing in January.

I see no reason whatsoever for Blackburn Rovers to believe they have the quality to compete anywhere near the top 6, and you will only understand this when the cost savings get into full swing and you realise just how far away you really are. You have neither the talent nor the money to compete at this level.

Next season is going to be an uncomfortable one in many way for Blackburn Rovers, to think otherwise is just deluding yourself.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team. He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him. We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would. He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now. GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category. Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this![/p][/quote]"We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finishing at least in the top 6" Sorry but.... LOL! Please explain what you base this theory on? You finished this season in 8th place, your highest place all season. Next season you will be a much weaker proposition due to the replacement of your players of value with free transfer alternatives as you aim to reduce the horrific outgoings causing your non-compliance to FFP. There is far greater strength in the Championship next season given the three relegated Premier League sides will all come down with strong squads and £60million in parachute payments to strengthen for an immediate return. There is also the quality of the teams who have narrowly missed out. Then there is your additional £8million drop in parachute payments to account for, and of course the small matter of your pending transfer ban commencing in January. I see no reason whatsoever for Blackburn Rovers to believe they have the quality to compete anywhere near the top 6, and you will only understand this when the cost savings get into full swing and you realise just how far away you really are. You have neither the talent nor the money to compete at this level. Next season is going to be an uncomfortable one in many way for Blackburn Rovers, to think otherwise is just deluding yourself. Super_Clarets
  • Score: -5

11:16am Mon 19 May 14

French Rover says...

Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
[quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division. French Rover
  • Score: 5

11:34am Mon 19 May 14

Phoenix From The Ashes says...

We should of gone for Chucks Aneke!

This is what I would call the quintessential "underwhelming signing". While we may be restricted what with FFP brings surely the wages should of gone on someone who could make more of an on-field impact. We need to offload DJ, Best, Goodwillie, Williamson, Etuhu etc and get the squad refreshed. That would free up some space and some money but the problem is whose gonna take 'em? Best on £32k a week!
Rittenberg & Rochina should get a chance next season.
We should of gone for Chucks Aneke! This is what I would call the quintessential "underwhelming signing". While we may be restricted what with FFP brings surely the wages should of gone on someone who could make more of an on-field impact. We need to offload DJ, Best, Goodwillie, Williamson, Etuhu etc and get the squad refreshed. That would free up some space and some money but the problem is whose gonna take 'em? Best on £32k a week! Rittenberg & Rochina should get a chance next season. Phoenix From The Ashes
  • Score: 7

11:35am Mon 19 May 14

J.C - Rishton says...

French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap

FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that).

Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about.

Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us.

If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".
[quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that). Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about. Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us. If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him". J.C - Rishton
  • Score: 7

11:35am Mon 19 May 14

Harwoodstblue says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters. Harwoodstblue
  • Score: 9

11:40am Mon 19 May 14

fitz808 says...

HoghtonRover123 wrote:
Rhodes
Gestede
Varney
Rittenberg
Rochina

Those 5 together all have their own attributes and qualities. Meaning Bowyer can use different formations and tactics to utilise each player.

Getting Rid of Best, Goodwillie & Campbell is the priority. They seriously offer nothing over the 5 I have put at the top.

And it will probably save us up to 100k per week, Crazy!
do you think rittenberg will be ready this season? might be a year too early, i reckon.
maybe if we don't get rochina back in, it might make sense, but as the 5th of that group i dont think he'd get many opportunities to develop because of a lack of game time
[quote][p][bold]HoghtonRover123[/bold] wrote: Rhodes Gestede Varney Rittenberg Rochina Those 5 together all have their own attributes and qualities. Meaning Bowyer can use different formations and tactics to utilise each player. Getting Rid of Best, Goodwillie & Campbell is the priority. They seriously offer nothing over the 5 I have put at the top. And it will probably save us up to 100k per week, Crazy![/p][/quote]do you think rittenberg will be ready this season? might be a year too early, i reckon. maybe if we don't get rochina back in, it might make sense, but as the 5th of that group i dont think he'd get many opportunities to develop because of a lack of game time fitz808
  • Score: 2

11:47am Mon 19 May 14

fitz808 says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
but you literally just said/typed that we should be buying better players than varney...?
FFP will work out as it does. it waits to be seen whether we do get hit with anything, and should that happen, it will be deserved. i would imagine other clubs will be in very much the same boat.
but it would be better if we didn't react badly to signings like varney the moment they are speculated on. free transfer and most likely affordable wages for someone the manager considers to be a good addition to the squad.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]but you literally just said/typed that we should be buying better players than varney...? FFP will work out as it does. it waits to be seen whether we do get hit with anything, and should that happen, it will be deserved. i would imagine other clubs will be in very much the same boat. but it would be better if we didn't react badly to signings like varney the moment they are speculated on. free transfer and most likely affordable wages for someone the manager considers to be a good addition to the squad. fitz808
  • Score: 3

11:56am Mon 19 May 14

Steven Seagull says...

baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
[quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon. Steven Seagull
  • Score: -1

11:57am Mon 19 May 14

French Rover says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap

FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that).

Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about.

Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us.

If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".
Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC.

You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that). Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about. Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us. If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".[/p][/quote]Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC. You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon... French Rover
  • Score: 2

12:17pm Mon 19 May 14

Bazzer says...

French Rover wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that). Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about. Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us. If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".
Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC. You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...
Yes, but he has several good points, and he does see the bigger picture.
[quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that). Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about. Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us. If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".[/p][/quote]Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC. You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...[/p][/quote]Yes, but he has several good points, and he does see the bigger picture. Bazzer
  • Score: 5

12:19pm Mon 19 May 14

Bazzer says...

Ewood_Mark wrote:
Well with the quality signing of Varney I'm sure the likes of Fulham and Cardiff will be quaking in their boots. Rather than signing young exciting players we shall continue to sign old nobodies happy to pick up their last few wages. 15th place here we come!!
That is what always happens, and worse, whenever we have finished eighth.
[quote][p][bold]Ewood_Mark[/bold] wrote: Well with the quality signing of Varney I'm sure the likes of Fulham and Cardiff will be quaking in their boots. Rather than signing young exciting players we shall continue to sign old nobodies happy to pick up their last few wages. 15th place here we come!![/p][/quote]That is what always happens, and worse, whenever we have finished eighth. Bazzer
  • Score: -1

12:31pm Mon 19 May 14

jim 2012 says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
UEFA's financial fair play regulations are in line with European Union State aid policy.
The ffp rules give UEFA sweeping powers, including exclusion from the lucrative Champions League, to punish financially recalcitrant clubs MANCHESTER CITY PSG to name but two pay the fine or you'r out
the the fair play rules cannot be overturned yet A judgement is not expected from the corts till February 2015
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]UEFA's financial fair play regulations are in line with European Union State aid policy. The ffp rules give UEFA sweeping powers, including exclusion from the lucrative Champions League, to punish financially recalcitrant clubs MANCHESTER CITY PSG to name but two pay the fine or you'r out the the fair play rules cannot be overturned yet A judgement is not expected from the corts till February 2015 jim 2012
  • Score: -3

12:32pm Mon 19 May 14

J.C - Rishton says...

French Rover wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap

FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that).

Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about.

Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us.

If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".
Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC.

You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...
Sorry if I upset you with my "negativity" but unlike you I can use my own brain and not just accept something because Gary Bowyer says it.

Gary Bowyer has done really well in the transfer market but he dosent get it 100% correct (Cambell and Marrow to name but 2) and in this case I don't think Varney is a good signing.

You may take GBs opinion on the player - thats fair enough but I look at the facts then make my own judgement.

The facts are -

1 - He has a poor career goal scoring record.
2 - He is a "jouneyman"
3 - He has no pace
4 - He failed at his last club, a club that finished below us in the table.
5 - By his own admission he had a poor 3 months at Rovers.

I don't understand why we take players on "trial" and then sign them after they have been very poor.
[quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that). Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about. Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us. If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".[/p][/quote]Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC. You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...[/p][/quote]Sorry if I upset you with my "negativity" but unlike you I can use my own brain and not just accept something because Gary Bowyer says it. Gary Bowyer has done really well in the transfer market but he dosent get it 100% correct (Cambell and Marrow to name but 2) and in this case I don't think Varney is a good signing. You may take GBs opinion on the player - thats fair enough but I look at the facts then make my own judgement. The facts are - 1 - He has a poor career goal scoring record. 2 - He is a "jouneyman" 3 - He has no pace 4 - He failed at his last club, a club that finished below us in the table. 5 - By his own admission he had a poor 3 months at Rovers. I don't understand why we take players on "trial" and then sign them after they have been very poor. J.C - Rishton
  • Score: 7

12:41pm Mon 19 May 14

J.C - Rishton says...

Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
Harwoodstblue - you are often one of the best posters on here but you have me seriously worried with this post.

"Do Venkys know something we don't, I won't panic until they do" - havent you worked it out yet - Venkys know **** all about football.

They are the worst owners we have every had, why would you put any faith in their decisions - they havent got a single major decision right since they took over the club (our ave loss in the 5 years before Venkys took control as around £3m per year. Since they bought the club the losses have been around £30m per year) WHY would you or anyone else put faith in anyone with such a terrible record?

As far as we know, at this moment in time EVERY other club chairman in western Europe, the Premier league, the Football League, UEFA and FIFA beleive in and are comitted to enforcing FFP and transfer embargos on clubs who's owners are too irresposible to run their club properly.

Are you seriously suggesting that Venkys know more about running a football club and FFP than all these bodies and all these other chairmen and owners put together?
[quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]Harwoodstblue - you are often one of the best posters on here but you have me seriously worried with this post. "Do Venkys know something we don't, I won't panic until they do" - havent you worked it out yet - Venkys know **** all about football. They are the worst owners we have every had, why would you put any faith in their decisions - they havent got a single major decision right since they took over the club (our ave loss in the 5 years before Venkys took control as around £3m per year. Since they bought the club the losses have been around £30m per year) WHY would you or anyone else put faith in anyone with such a terrible record? As far as we know, at this moment in time EVERY other club chairman in western Europe, the Premier league, the Football League, UEFA and FIFA beleive in and are comitted to enforcing FFP and transfer embargos on clubs who's owners are too irresposible to run their club properly. Are you seriously suggesting that Venkys know more about running a football club and FFP than all these bodies and all these other chairmen and owners put together? J.C - Rishton
  • Score: 2

12:42pm Mon 19 May 14

Tatts says...

Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
Why are the Dingles celebrating FFP so much? The next time they go 4 years without being in the Premier League, they too will be caught up by the rules. And at that stage, Kilby and Flood won't be able to prop the club up as they have in the past.

FFP will ONLY benefit the big city clubs with large fan bases in the long run.

Also, the effect of the Dingles' recent 50% season ticket price hikes will have depleted their fan base for when that time comes.

I still can't believe that they've upped the price so much. A few of my mates are Dingles and all of them are fuming about it - 50% price hikes for 4 fewer games, watching your team defending for 90 minutes, in a stadium littered with empty seats.

It has to be said that the Burnley board have made some wise decisions over the years, mainly around managerial decisions, but this one is an absolute stinker - talk about a club shooting themselves in the foot.
[quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]Why are the Dingles celebrating FFP so much? The next time they go 4 years without being in the Premier League, they too will be caught up by the rules. And at that stage, Kilby and Flood won't be able to prop the club up as they have in the past. FFP will ONLY benefit the big city clubs with large fan bases in the long run. Also, the effect of the Dingles' recent 50% season ticket price hikes will have depleted their fan base for when that time comes. I still can't believe that they've upped the price so much. A few of my mates are Dingles and all of them are fuming about it - 50% price hikes for 4 fewer games, watching your team defending for 90 minutes, in a stadium littered with empty seats. It has to be said that the Burnley board have made some wise decisions over the years, mainly around managerial decisions, but this one is an absolute stinker - talk about a club shooting themselves in the foot. Tatts
  • Score: 5

1:05pm Mon 19 May 14

Ronaldpetercooper says...

French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Frenchie this guy has never performed to a standard suitable for a team hoping to gain promotion to the top table. In fact he has failed to score in 12 games. Surely we have enough midfielders who don't score without signing yet anther strike who does not know where the opposition onion bag is located.
Yet another average player to join up with a number of other average players will only keep the bench warm and prevent any of the youngsters managing to gain any experience at all. Our future depends on our youngsters breaking though and this sort of signing will not help in any way whatsoever.
[quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Frenchie this guy has never performed to a standard suitable for a team hoping to gain promotion to the top table. In fact he has failed to score in 12 games. Surely we have enough midfielders who don't score without signing yet anther strike who does not know where the opposition onion bag is located. Yet another average player to join up with a number of other average players will only keep the bench warm and prevent any of the youngsters managing to gain any experience at all. Our future depends on our youngsters breaking though and this sort of signing will not help in any way whatsoever. Ronaldpetercooper
  • Score: 3

1:19pm Mon 19 May 14

Not_A_Loon_From_Pune says...

Sorry Gary, I don't care how enthusiastic he is or how good his attitude is, the fact of the matter is that he can't stick the ball in the onion bag! He is clearly nowhere near Premiership standard and that is what we should be aiming for if we want to have a realistic chance at promotion next season. I would much rather we pursued some promising young player from the lower leagues than a 31 year old "never has been". A total waste of money!
Sorry Gary, I don't care how enthusiastic he is or how good his attitude is, the fact of the matter is that he can't stick the ball in the onion bag! He is clearly nowhere near Premiership standard and that is what we should be aiming for if we want to have a realistic chance at promotion next season. I would much rather we pursued some promising young player from the lower leagues than a 31 year old "never has been". A total waste of money! Not_A_Loon_From_Pune
  • Score: 6

1:24pm Mon 19 May 14

noddy57 says...

Gary bowyer can see the qualities of Varney and when you have aspirations of promotion you need committed professionals who will fight for the cause l think Varney comes in to that category .
Gary bowyer can see the qualities of Varney and when you have aspirations of promotion you need committed professionals who will fight for the cause l think Varney comes in to that category . noddy57
  • Score: -1

1:29pm Mon 19 May 14

French Rover says...

Ronaldpetercooper wrote:
French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Frenchie this guy has never performed to a standard suitable for a team hoping to gain promotion to the top table. In fact he has failed to score in 12 games. Surely we have enough midfielders who don't score without signing yet anther strike who does not know where the opposition onion bag is located.
Yet another average player to join up with a number of other average players will only keep the bench warm and prevent any of the youngsters managing to gain any experience at all. Our future depends on our youngsters breaking though and this sort of signing will not help in any way whatsoever.
Hi RPC - I think everyone is being a bit harsh on GB and his (probable) decision to sign Varney on a free. The lad only started 3 games for us last season (sub 9 times) so not sure thats enough to judge him on?
Bowyer sees him day in and day out and if he thinks Varney will be a good addition as a squad member then thats good enough for me.

BTW - hope your shingles cleared up now?
[quote][p][bold]Ronaldpetercooper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Frenchie this guy has never performed to a standard suitable for a team hoping to gain promotion to the top table. In fact he has failed to score in 12 games. Surely we have enough midfielders who don't score without signing yet anther strike who does not know where the opposition onion bag is located. Yet another average player to join up with a number of other average players will only keep the bench warm and prevent any of the youngsters managing to gain any experience at all. Our future depends on our youngsters breaking though and this sort of signing will not help in any way whatsoever.[/p][/quote]Hi RPC - I think everyone is being a bit harsh on GB and his (probable) decision to sign Varney on a free. The lad only started 3 games for us last season (sub 9 times) so not sure thats enough to judge him on? Bowyer sees him day in and day out and if he thinks Varney will be a good addition as a squad member then thats good enough for me. BTW - hope your shingles cleared up now? French Rover
  • Score: 2

1:34pm Mon 19 May 14

garyintandem says...

Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
[quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out. garyintandem
  • Score: 3

1:41pm Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

Tatts wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
Why are the Dingles celebrating FFP so much? The next time they go 4 years without being in the Premier League, they too will be caught up by the rules. And at that stage, Kilby and Flood won't be able to prop the club up as they have in the past.

FFP will ONLY benefit the big city clubs with large fan bases in the long run.

Also, the effect of the Dingles' recent 50% season ticket price hikes will have depleted their fan base for when that time comes.

I still can't believe that they've upped the price so much. A few of my mates are Dingles and all of them are fuming about it - 50% price hikes for 4 fewer games, watching your team defending for 90 minutes, in a stadium littered with empty seats.

It has to be said that the Burnley board have made some wise decisions over the years, mainly around managerial decisions, but this one is an absolute stinker - talk about a club shooting themselves in the foot.
No one is celebrating FFP at all, it is simply a necessity given the abysmal financial state of the game. Clubs are folding with a frightening regularity and the situation will only worsen as the years go by leading inevitably to a European league and our top clubs breaking away, a situation no real football fan could ever want.

FFP is here to ensure that all clubs live within their means and within a few years become fully self-sufficient. It will encourage the development of young English players and give those players far more opportunity to break through at their respective clubs as money can no longer be spent at will experimenting with foreigners on large contracts.

Your days of handing out £40,000 a week 4 year contracts are now long gone. The days of free-transfers and youth development are here once more for Blackburn Rovers. It would be as well to adjust to that fact sooner rather than later.

The price rises at Burnley have little to no effect on the overall financial position given that we are in receipt of a minimum £63million from TV revenue alone, not to mention Premier League prize money, and the increased sponsorship and commercial revenue that comes with being a member of the elite 20 clubs in one of the best leagues in the world. Add to this a fall-back position that provides us with a further guaranteed £60million in parachute payments should we require them. It's certainly not a bad position to be in.

Offering a reward to loyal supporters and charging Premier League money to "Premier League" supporters is a thoroughly good idea. For those who take advantage of the early bird offer a season ticket for next season could be as low as £249. Doesn't really look like shooting oneself in the foot to me.

What you also fail to realise is that this promotion and the associated financial jackpot will enable the club to strengthen not only the playing staff but also the infrastructure off the field thereby increasing future revenue streams organically by enabling Burnley FC to be promoted as a Premier League club.

More supporters will be attracted, more sponsorship deals will be agreed, club merchandise and commercial income will be increased, with the result being that Burnley FC are a completely different animal to that prior to promotion, ultimately head and shoulders above the likes of penniless Blackburn Rovers on and off the field.

And as hard as this is to understand for some of you, we have done it all the right way. We have built this club up from the very bottom to become a well-run, well-respected, honest, decent and proper family football club that has earned the right to play at the top level. An immense achievement.
[quote][p][bold]Tatts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]Why are the Dingles celebrating FFP so much? The next time they go 4 years without being in the Premier League, they too will be caught up by the rules. And at that stage, Kilby and Flood won't be able to prop the club up as they have in the past. FFP will ONLY benefit the big city clubs with large fan bases in the long run. Also, the effect of the Dingles' recent 50% season ticket price hikes will have depleted their fan base for when that time comes. I still can't believe that they've upped the price so much. A few of my mates are Dingles and all of them are fuming about it - 50% price hikes for 4 fewer games, watching your team defending for 90 minutes, in a stadium littered with empty seats. It has to be said that the Burnley board have made some wise decisions over the years, mainly around managerial decisions, but this one is an absolute stinker - talk about a club shooting themselves in the foot.[/p][/quote]No one is celebrating FFP at all, it is simply a necessity given the abysmal financial state of the game. Clubs are folding with a frightening regularity and the situation will only worsen as the years go by leading inevitably to a European league and our top clubs breaking away, a situation no real football fan could ever want. FFP is here to ensure that all clubs live within their means and within a few years become fully self-sufficient. It will encourage the development of young English players and give those players far more opportunity to break through at their respective clubs as money can no longer be spent at will experimenting with foreigners on large contracts. Your days of handing out £40,000 a week 4 year contracts are now long gone. The days of free-transfers and youth development are here once more for Blackburn Rovers. It would be as well to adjust to that fact sooner rather than later. The price rises at Burnley have little to no effect on the overall financial position given that we are in receipt of a minimum £63million from TV revenue alone, not to mention Premier League prize money, and the increased sponsorship and commercial revenue that comes with being a member of the elite 20 clubs in one of the best leagues in the world. Add to this a fall-back position that provides us with a further guaranteed £60million in parachute payments should we require them. It's certainly not a bad position to be in. Offering a reward to loyal supporters and charging Premier League money to "Premier League" supporters is a thoroughly good idea. For those who take advantage of the early bird offer a season ticket for next season could be as low as £249. Doesn't really look like shooting oneself in the foot to me. What you also fail to realise is that this promotion and the associated financial jackpot will enable the club to strengthen not only the playing staff but also the infrastructure off the field thereby increasing future revenue streams organically by enabling Burnley FC to be promoted as a Premier League club. More supporters will be attracted, more sponsorship deals will be agreed, club merchandise and commercial income will be increased, with the result being that Burnley FC are a completely different animal to that prior to promotion, ultimately head and shoulders above the likes of penniless Blackburn Rovers on and off the field. And as hard as this is to understand for some of you, we have done it all the right way. We have built this club up from the very bottom to become a well-run, well-respected, honest, decent and proper family football club that has earned the right to play at the top level. An immense achievement. Super_Clarets
  • Score: 0

1:50pm Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets. says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x Super_Clarets.
  • Score: 5

1:54pm Mon 19 May 14

J.C - Rishton says...

garyintandem wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
Hi Gary
Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules.

Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts.

You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this.

Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into.

We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm.

At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.
[quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.[/p][/quote]Hi Gary Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules. Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts. You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation. Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this. Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into. We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm. At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be. J.C - Rishton
  • Score: 3

1:55pm Mon 19 May 14

Harwoodstblue says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
Harwoodstblue - you are often one of the best posters on here but you have me seriously worried with this post.

"Do Venkys know something we don't, I won't panic until they do" - havent you worked it out yet - Venkys know **** all about football.

They are the worst owners we have every had, why would you put any faith in their decisions - they havent got a single major decision right since they took over the club (our ave loss in the 5 years before Venkys took control as around £3m per year. Since they bought the club the losses have been around £30m per year) WHY would you or anyone else put faith in anyone with such a terrible record?

As far as we know, at this moment in time EVERY other club chairman in western Europe, the Premier league, the Football League, UEFA and FIFA beleive in and are comitted to enforcing FFP and transfer embargos on clubs who's owners are too irresposible to run their club properly.

Are you seriously suggesting that Venkys know more about running a football club and FFP than all these bodies and all these other chairmen and owners put together?
I prefer to wait and see JC. As we know Venkys tell us nothing so we know little about the their plans / ideas for the club. They do however seem to be working towards getting costs down and there's no sign of us having to sell the 'family silver' yet.
I do though share your concerns about their footballing knowledge which is zero. Hopefully their business acumen is better. Let's wait and see till Bowyer gets back from India and we'll should know a little bettr where we stand.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]Harwoodstblue - you are often one of the best posters on here but you have me seriously worried with this post. "Do Venkys know something we don't, I won't panic until they do" - havent you worked it out yet - Venkys know **** all about football. They are the worst owners we have every had, why would you put any faith in their decisions - they havent got a single major decision right since they took over the club (our ave loss in the 5 years before Venkys took control as around £3m per year. Since they bought the club the losses have been around £30m per year) WHY would you or anyone else put faith in anyone with such a terrible record? As far as we know, at this moment in time EVERY other club chairman in western Europe, the Premier league, the Football League, UEFA and FIFA beleive in and are comitted to enforcing FFP and transfer embargos on clubs who's owners are too irresposible to run their club properly. Are you seriously suggesting that Venkys know more about running a football club and FFP than all these bodies and all these other chairmen and owners put together?[/p][/quote]I prefer to wait and see JC. As we know Venkys tell us nothing so we know little about the their plans / ideas for the club. They do however seem to be working towards getting costs down and there's no sign of us having to sell the 'family silver' yet. I do though share your concerns about their footballing knowledge which is zero. Hopefully their business acumen is better. Let's wait and see till Bowyer gets back from India and we'll should know a little bettr where we stand. Harwoodstblue
  • Score: 0

1:56pm Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

garyintandem wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
Please explain how Venky's "converting debt to equity" can possibly bring down your annual losses from £36.5million to £5million?

Your debt is your debt.

Your losses are calculated on what the club loses over a given 12 month period; wages, signing on fee's, transfer fee's, bonuses, general club running costs, etc. This is offset by what it gains, transfer fee's, club commercial revenue, merchandise sales, season ticket sales, etc.

All Venky's can do is affect the level of debt your club carries, they cannot put in anymore than £5million equity this season reducing to £3million as of the 2015/16 season. So aside from the loss issue, You have to ask yourself, are Venky's reducing your debt in any way? I don't think they are.

Which means that unfortunately you are some considerable distance away from your "problem being sorted".

Your losses will have to be reduced from approx. £30million to £5million this season, which I see as being a cost saving requirement of £25million.

A saving of £25million in the Championship by a team that finished 8th. That's not a joke, that's the reality of the situation.

It does not look good.
[quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.[/p][/quote]Please explain how Venky's "converting debt to equity" can possibly bring down your annual losses from £36.5million to £5million? Your debt is your debt. Your losses are calculated on what the club loses over a given 12 month period; wages, signing on fee's, transfer fee's, bonuses, general club running costs, etc. This is offset by what it gains, transfer fee's, club commercial revenue, merchandise sales, season ticket sales, etc. All Venky's can do is affect the level of debt your club carries, they cannot put in anymore than £5million equity this season reducing to £3million as of the 2015/16 season. So aside from the loss issue, You have to ask yourself, are Venky's reducing your debt in any way? I don't think they are. Which means that unfortunately you are some considerable distance away from your "problem being sorted". Your losses will have to be reduced from approx. £30million to £5million this season, which I see as being a cost saving requirement of £25million. A saving of £25million in the Championship by a team that finished 8th. That's not a joke, that's the reality of the situation. It does not look good. Super_Clarets
  • Score: 0

2:06pm Mon 19 May 14

garyintandem says...

off their books before the spelling teachers get on here :)
off their books before the spelling teachers get on here :) garyintandem
  • Score: 2

2:08pm Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

Super_Clarets. wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x
Must try harder no-dad.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x[/p][/quote]Must try harder no-dad. Super_Clarets
  • Score: -2

2:15pm Mon 19 May 14

wilddog says...

Varney for Rhodes? Looks like it!
Varney for Rhodes? Looks like it! wilddog
  • Score: -2

2:29pm Mon 19 May 14

French Rover says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
French Rover wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap

FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that).

Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about.

Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us.

If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".
Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC.

You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...
Sorry if I upset you with my "negativity" but unlike you I can use my own brain and not just accept something because Gary Bowyer says it.

Gary Bowyer has done really well in the transfer market but he dosent get it 100% correct (Cambell and Marrow to name but 2) and in this case I don't think Varney is a good signing.

You may take GBs opinion on the player - thats fair enough but I look at the facts then make my own judgement.

The facts are -

1 - He has a poor career goal scoring record.
2 - He is a "jouneyman"
3 - He has no pace
4 - He failed at his last club, a club that finished below us in the table.
5 - By his own admission he had a poor 3 months at Rovers.

I don't understand why we take players on "trial" and then sign them after they have been very poor.
Strange points you try and make JC -
It`s not a case of me `accepting` Bowyers decisons or you `not accepting` them. He is the manager and he makes the decisons - whether you like it or not! And as for Bowyer making a few mistakes on the players he brought in, even the best managers don`t get it right all hte time - Ferguson, Wenger and many others made some really rubbish signings in their time.
Its a squad game these days as you should know, and whilst I think Varney is not good enough to replace anyone in our `best 11` - I do think that he can be a good, experienced squad player for us. It will eb a mix of youth and experience that will see us do well next season. Its all about getting the mix right, lets hope Bowyer can do that.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Usual rubbish spouted by FR - "average wage so no worries about FFP" - what utter claptrap FFP has nothing to do with indivdual players wages - it is to do with the amount of money a club loses in any financial year (its basically as simple as that). Also, 77 goals in 350 appearances is a TERRIBLE strike rate for any striker - it aint something to crow about. Why can't we just be HONEST about Varney - he is a poor one-paced journeyman footballer who failed to impress during his 3 months on loan with us. If he was signing for Bolton today, we'd all be saying, "good, he was crap at Rovers, thank God we havent signed him".[/p][/quote]Well personally I would prefer to go along with Bowyers knowledge on players rather than yours JC. You only ever come on here and rant your bile when there is something to say against the club. There are enough clowns up the M65 quick enough to knock the club without somene pretending to support the Rovers coming on here and slagging them off as you always do. You will be doing the Claret monkeys out of a job soon...[/p][/quote]Sorry if I upset you with my "negativity" but unlike you I can use my own brain and not just accept something because Gary Bowyer says it. Gary Bowyer has done really well in the transfer market but he dosent get it 100% correct (Cambell and Marrow to name but 2) and in this case I don't think Varney is a good signing. You may take GBs opinion on the player - thats fair enough but I look at the facts then make my own judgement. The facts are - 1 - He has a poor career goal scoring record. 2 - He is a "jouneyman" 3 - He has no pace 4 - He failed at his last club, a club that finished below us in the table. 5 - By his own admission he had a poor 3 months at Rovers. I don't understand why we take players on "trial" and then sign them after they have been very poor.[/p][/quote]Strange points you try and make JC - It`s not a case of me `accepting` Bowyers decisons or you `not accepting` them. He is the manager and he makes the decisons - whether you like it or not! And as for Bowyer making a few mistakes on the players he brought in, even the best managers don`t get it right all hte time - Ferguson, Wenger and many others made some really rubbish signings in their time. Its a squad game these days as you should know, and whilst I think Varney is not good enough to replace anyone in our `best 11` - I do think that he can be a good, experienced squad player for us. It will eb a mix of youth and experience that will see us do well next season. Its all about getting the mix right, lets hope Bowyer can do that. French Rover
  • Score: 1

3:33pm Mon 19 May 14

Tatts says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
Tatts wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
Why are the Dingles celebrating FFP so much? The next time they go 4 years without being in the Premier League, they too will be caught up by the rules. And at that stage, Kilby and Flood won't be able to prop the club up as they have in the past.

FFP will ONLY benefit the big city clubs with large fan bases in the long run.

Also, the effect of the Dingles' recent 50% season ticket price hikes will have depleted their fan base for when that time comes.

I still can't believe that they've upped the price so much. A few of my mates are Dingles and all of them are fuming about it - 50% price hikes for 4 fewer games, watching your team defending for 90 minutes, in a stadium littered with empty seats.

It has to be said that the Burnley board have made some wise decisions over the years, mainly around managerial decisions, but this one is an absolute stinker - talk about a club shooting themselves in the foot.
No one is celebrating FFP at all, it is simply a necessity given the abysmal financial state of the game. Clubs are folding with a frightening regularity and the situation will only worsen as the years go by leading inevitably to a European league and our top clubs breaking away, a situation no real football fan could ever want.

FFP is here to ensure that all clubs live within their means and within a few years become fully self-sufficient. It will encourage the development of young English players and give those players far more opportunity to break through at their respective clubs as money can no longer be spent at will experimenting with foreigners on large contracts.

Your days of handing out £40,000 a week 4 year contracts are now long gone. The days of free-transfers and youth development are here once more for Blackburn Rovers. It would be as well to adjust to that fact sooner rather than later.

The price rises at Burnley have little to no effect on the overall financial position given that we are in receipt of a minimum £63million from TV revenue alone, not to mention Premier League prize money, and the increased sponsorship and commercial revenue that comes with being a member of the elite 20 clubs in one of the best leagues in the world. Add to this a fall-back position that provides us with a further guaranteed £60million in parachute payments should we require them. It's certainly not a bad position to be in.

Offering a reward to loyal supporters and charging Premier League money to "Premier League" supporters is a thoroughly good idea. For those who take advantage of the early bird offer a season ticket for next season could be as low as £249. Doesn't really look like shooting oneself in the foot to me.

What you also fail to realise is that this promotion and the associated financial jackpot will enable the club to strengthen not only the playing staff but also the infrastructure off the field thereby increasing future revenue streams organically by enabling Burnley FC to be promoted as a Premier League club.

More supporters will be attracted, more sponsorship deals will be agreed, club merchandise and commercial income will be increased, with the result being that Burnley FC are a completely different animal to that prior to promotion, ultimately head and shoulders above the likes of penniless Blackburn Rovers on and off the field.

And as hard as this is to understand for some of you, we have done it all the right way. We have built this club up from the very bottom to become a well-run, well-respected, honest, decent and proper family football club that has earned the right to play at the top level. An immense achievement.
How laughable! How can you hope for a shred of respectability with this biased clap-trap?

Are you saying that you'll never again have a period of at least 4 years where you aren't in the Premier League, because if you are then you're an even bigger numpty than I thought? Take next season for instance, the bookies have you down as 2/5 to go down.

Yes the Premier League funds are substantial, but you need to remember that you're competing alongside other clubs to stay in the PL, who also have these funds and more. Plus these clubs already have PL infrastructure and PL squads, which you most definitely don't. What exactly do you think your your competitive edge over the rest of the clubs is? The edge that means that you can sustain your PL position, whilst developing your infrastructure and squad? I'd love to hear it!

Also, how do you account for the vast majority of your own fans thinking that the ticket price hikes are an awful decision, even the ones who already have season tickets.

Do you really think that you'll have regular sell-outs next season with your inflated prices? I know more than enough about Burnley folk to know that they can not and will not pay the inflated season ticket prices. You aren't like Arsenal where there's a big enough surrounding population that you can afford to price out the low earners and still manage to fill your ground. If you price out the low earners in Burnley then you're pricing out the vast majority of fans, and the same would go for Blackburn if we hiked our prices by 50%.

Take off your Claret and Blue glasses!
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tatts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]Why are the Dingles celebrating FFP so much? The next time they go 4 years without being in the Premier League, they too will be caught up by the rules. And at that stage, Kilby and Flood won't be able to prop the club up as they have in the past. FFP will ONLY benefit the big city clubs with large fan bases in the long run. Also, the effect of the Dingles' recent 50% season ticket price hikes will have depleted their fan base for when that time comes. I still can't believe that they've upped the price so much. A few of my mates are Dingles and all of them are fuming about it - 50% price hikes for 4 fewer games, watching your team defending for 90 minutes, in a stadium littered with empty seats. It has to be said that the Burnley board have made some wise decisions over the years, mainly around managerial decisions, but this one is an absolute stinker - talk about a club shooting themselves in the foot.[/p][/quote]No one is celebrating FFP at all, it is simply a necessity given the abysmal financial state of the game. Clubs are folding with a frightening regularity and the situation will only worsen as the years go by leading inevitably to a European league and our top clubs breaking away, a situation no real football fan could ever want. FFP is here to ensure that all clubs live within their means and within a few years become fully self-sufficient. It will encourage the development of young English players and give those players far more opportunity to break through at their respective clubs as money can no longer be spent at will experimenting with foreigners on large contracts. Your days of handing out £40,000 a week 4 year contracts are now long gone. The days of free-transfers and youth development are here once more for Blackburn Rovers. It would be as well to adjust to that fact sooner rather than later. The price rises at Burnley have little to no effect on the overall financial position given that we are in receipt of a minimum £63million from TV revenue alone, not to mention Premier League prize money, and the increased sponsorship and commercial revenue that comes with being a member of the elite 20 clubs in one of the best leagues in the world. Add to this a fall-back position that provides us with a further guaranteed £60million in parachute payments should we require them. It's certainly not a bad position to be in. Offering a reward to loyal supporters and charging Premier League money to "Premier League" supporters is a thoroughly good idea. For those who take advantage of the early bird offer a season ticket for next season could be as low as £249. Doesn't really look like shooting oneself in the foot to me. What you also fail to realise is that this promotion and the associated financial jackpot will enable the club to strengthen not only the playing staff but also the infrastructure off the field thereby increasing future revenue streams organically by enabling Burnley FC to be promoted as a Premier League club. More supporters will be attracted, more sponsorship deals will be agreed, club merchandise and commercial income will be increased, with the result being that Burnley FC are a completely different animal to that prior to promotion, ultimately head and shoulders above the likes of penniless Blackburn Rovers on and off the field. And as hard as this is to understand for some of you, we have done it all the right way. We have built this club up from the very bottom to become a well-run, well-respected, honest, decent and proper family football club that has earned the right to play at the top level. An immense achievement.[/p][/quote]How laughable! How can you hope for a shred of respectability with this biased clap-trap? Are you saying that you'll never again have a period of at least 4 years where you aren't in the Premier League, because if you are then you're an even bigger numpty than I thought? Take next season for instance, the bookies have you down as 2/5 to go down. Yes the Premier League funds are substantial, but you need to remember that you're competing alongside other clubs to stay in the PL, who also have these funds and more. Plus these clubs already have PL infrastructure and PL squads, which you most definitely don't. What exactly do you think your your competitive edge over the rest of the clubs is? The edge that means that you can sustain your PL position, whilst developing your infrastructure and squad? I'd love to hear it! Also, how do you account for the vast majority of your own fans thinking that the ticket price hikes are an awful decision, even the ones who already have season tickets. Do you really think that you'll have regular sell-outs next season with your inflated prices? I know more than enough about Burnley folk to know that they can not and will not pay the inflated season ticket prices. You aren't like Arsenal where there's a big enough surrounding population that you can afford to price out the low earners and still manage to fill your ground. If you price out the low earners in Burnley then you're pricing out the vast majority of fans, and the same would go for Blackburn if we hiked our prices by 50%. Take off your Claret and Blue glasses! Tatts
  • Score: 2

3:38pm Mon 19 May 14

Ronaldpetercooper says...

French Rover wrote:
Ronaldpetercooper wrote:
French Rover wrote:
Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level.

No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team.

Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.
Frenchie this guy has never performed to a standard suitable for a team hoping to gain promotion to the top table. In fact he has failed to score in 12 games. Surely we have enough midfielders who don't score without signing yet anther strike who does not know where the opposition onion bag is located.
Yet another average player to join up with a number of other average players will only keep the bench warm and prevent any of the youngsters managing to gain any experience at all. Our future depends on our youngsters breaking though and this sort of signing will not help in any way whatsoever.
Hi RPC - I think everyone is being a bit harsh on GB and his (probable) decision to sign Varney on a free. The lad only started 3 games for us last season (sub 9 times) so not sure thats enough to judge him on?
Bowyer sees him day in and day out and if he thinks Varney will be a good addition as a squad member then thats good enough for me.

BTW - hope your shingles cleared up now?
Hi Frenchie
Yes thank you my shingles have gone at last Don't want them again. I think you are being a little paranoiac about GB and any criticism about the man. You must accept that some of his signings have been more based on a persons attitudes towards hard work and whilst this is commendable it cannot replace that little ingredient called skill. This guy is 31 never been a goal scorer and never PLAYED IN a good team. If he sits on the bench he could prevent a possible young star from gaining valuable experience and a good future with our club. We have just released a dozen or more young players who with more opportunities could have done better. Whilst this is not GB's fault or doing as he has been manager for only 12 months he has got to forget signing people past their sell buy date purely on the basis that they are good guys with a good work ethic. We fast losing the 'we are a young team' tag and we will only make progress with a good youth policy mixed with some GOOD pros. That is where we are and where we must be.
[quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ronaldpetercooper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]French Rover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]350 games (mostly in the Championship) and 77 goals show that GB is trying to sign a very experienced forward player at this level. No transfer fee involved and almost certainly would be on an `average` wage level so no worries about the FPP, plus the lad knows he would have to fight hard to get a place in the team. Sounds like an ideal squad player for a team trying to make it out of a tough division.[/p][/quote]Frenchie this guy has never performed to a standard suitable for a team hoping to gain promotion to the top table. In fact he has failed to score in 12 games. Surely we have enough midfielders who don't score without signing yet anther strike who does not know where the opposition onion bag is located. Yet another average player to join up with a number of other average players will only keep the bench warm and prevent any of the youngsters managing to gain any experience at all. Our future depends on our youngsters breaking though and this sort of signing will not help in any way whatsoever.[/p][/quote]Hi RPC - I think everyone is being a bit harsh on GB and his (probable) decision to sign Varney on a free. The lad only started 3 games for us last season (sub 9 times) so not sure thats enough to judge him on? Bowyer sees him day in and day out and if he thinks Varney will be a good addition as a squad member then thats good enough for me. BTW - hope your shingles cleared up now?[/p][/quote]Hi Frenchie Yes thank you my shingles have gone at last Don't want them again. I think you are being a little paranoiac about GB and any criticism about the man. You must accept that some of his signings have been more based on a persons attitudes towards hard work and whilst this is commendable it cannot replace that little ingredient called skill. This guy is 31 never been a goal scorer and never PLAYED IN a good team. If he sits on the bench he could prevent a possible young star from gaining valuable experience and a good future with our club. We have just released a dozen or more young players who with more opportunities could have done better. Whilst this is not GB's fault or doing as he has been manager for only 12 months he has got to forget signing people past their sell buy date purely on the basis that they are good guys with a good work ethic. We fast losing the 'we are a young team' tag and we will only make progress with a good youth policy mixed with some GOOD pros. That is where we are and where we must be. Ronaldpetercooper
  • Score: 1

3:40pm Mon 19 May 14

azza234 says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
Rhodes permanent replacement. A sign of things to come as FFP forces Blackburn Rovers to finally scale back and live within their means. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks. Squeaky bum time.
Do you read what you type load of crap plus man city is a different thing they spent more then rovers funny you say 2012/14 we didnt spend much the season just gone compared to 2012 so go back to your own pages and write **** over there.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: Rhodes permanent replacement. A sign of things to come as FFP forces Blackburn Rovers to finally scale back and live within their means. Expect more of the same in the coming weeks. Squeaky bum time.[/p][/quote]Do you read what you type load of crap plus man city is a different thing they spent more then rovers funny you say 2012/14 we didnt spend much the season just gone compared to 2012 so go back to your own pages and write **** over there. azza234
  • Score: 1

3:48pm Mon 19 May 14

azza234 says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
J.C bowyer has been cutting the wage of the club down its not like he's not doing anything.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]J.C bowyer has been cutting the wage of the club down its not like he's not doing anything. azza234
  • Score: -1

3:53pm Mon 19 May 14

Steven Seagull says...

Super_Clarets. wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x
Hi Fake SC. Sounds good to me, I'll bring the lube.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x[/p][/quote]Hi Fake SC. Sounds good to me, I'll bring the lube. Steven Seagull
  • Score: 0

3:56pm Mon 19 May 14

azza234 says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote: Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team. He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him. We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would. He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now. GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category. Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this!
"We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finishing at least in the top 6" Sorry but.... LOL! Please explain what you base this theory on? You finished this season in 8th place, your highest place all season. Next season you will be a much weaker proposition due to the replacement of your players of value with free transfer alternatives as you aim to reduce the horrific outgoings causing your non-compliance to FFP. There is far greater strength in the Championship next season given the three relegated Premier League sides will all come down with strong squads and £60million in parachute payments to strengthen for an immediate return. There is also the quality of the teams who have narrowly missed out. Then there is your additional £8million drop in parachute payments to account for, and of course the small matter of your pending transfer ban commencing in January. I see no reason whatsoever for Blackburn Rovers to believe they have the quality to compete anywhere near the top 6, and you will only understand this when the cost savings get into full swing and you realise just how far away you really are. You have neither the talent nor the money to compete at this level. Next season is going to be an uncomfortable one in many way for Blackburn Rovers, to think otherwise is just deluding yourself.
So still doesn't mean all 3 of them will go straight back up plus prem clubs will want to snap up there best players on the cheap like there doing atm with norwich with martin olsson soon to be off to west ham.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team. He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him. We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would. He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now. GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category. Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this![/p][/quote]"We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finishing at least in the top 6" Sorry but.... LOL! Please explain what you base this theory on? You finished this season in 8th place, your highest place all season. Next season you will be a much weaker proposition due to the replacement of your players of value with free transfer alternatives as you aim to reduce the horrific outgoings causing your non-compliance to FFP. There is far greater strength in the Championship next season given the three relegated Premier League sides will all come down with strong squads and £60million in parachute payments to strengthen for an immediate return. There is also the quality of the teams who have narrowly missed out. Then there is your additional £8million drop in parachute payments to account for, and of course the small matter of your pending transfer ban commencing in January. I see no reason whatsoever for Blackburn Rovers to believe they have the quality to compete anywhere near the top 6, and you will only understand this when the cost savings get into full swing and you realise just how far away you really are. You have neither the talent nor the money to compete at this level. Next season is going to be an uncomfortable one in many way for Blackburn Rovers, to think otherwise is just deluding yourself.[/p][/quote]So still doesn't mean all 3 of them will go straight back up plus prem clubs will want to snap up there best players on the cheap like there doing atm with norwich with martin olsson soon to be off to west ham. azza234
  • Score: 1

4:04pm Mon 19 May 14

garyintandem says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
garyintandem wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
Hi Gary
Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules.

Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts.

You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this.

Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into.

We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm.

At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.
The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert.
I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints.
I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse !
Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.[/p][/quote]Hi Gary Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules. Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts. You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation. Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this. Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into. We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm. At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.[/p][/quote]The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert. I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints. I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse ! Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15 garyintandem
  • Score: 2

4:25pm Mon 19 May 14

kfc yummy says...

Super_Clarets. wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.
Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x
Afternoon fake one.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Hiya Steviewevie, do you fancy coming round to mine for a drink? I can't afford to go to the pub but I've bought a 3 litre bottle of White Lightening with my dole money. We could get tipsy together, annoy those Blackburn fans on the internet and make sweet love x[/p][/quote]Afternoon fake one. kfc yummy
  • Score: -2

5:37pm Mon 19 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

garyintandem wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
garyintandem wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
Hi Gary
Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules.

Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts.

You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this.

Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into.

We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm.

At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.
The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert.
I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints.
I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse !
Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15
Burnley: Premier League Champions 2014-15.

Believe me, there IS more chance of that one happening.
[quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.[/p][/quote]Hi Gary Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules. Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts. You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation. Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this. Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into. We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm. At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.[/p][/quote]The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert. I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints. I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse ! Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15[/p][/quote]Burnley: Premier League Champions 2014-15. Believe me, there IS more chance of that one happening. Super_Clarets
  • Score: -2

5:42pm Mon 19 May 14

Alan42 says...

Never sign players who are not as good as the ones you already have. Bringing in poor players to boost the squad got us relegation and if we sign players like Varney there is only one way to go.
Takes up a wage and adds zero to the skills of the squad. An extremely poor signing if it goes ahead.
Never sign players who are not as good as the ones you already have. Bringing in poor players to boost the squad got us relegation and if we sign players like Varney there is only one way to go. Takes up a wage and adds zero to the skills of the squad. An extremely poor signing if it goes ahead. Alan42
  • Score: 1

6:09pm Mon 19 May 14

baldie says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
You've got good eyes i'll give you that.
Ings will be at Burnley next season if-
1/Nobody rates him enough to actually pay a fee,he's on a free in 12 month.
2/He agrees with someone else to sign for free next summer.
3/Burnley make him an offer to compare with other clubs,i'm guessing 20k over 3 years.
My guess would be that the situation itself,through poor management, will twist the Burnley board's hand,and they'll sell at a reduced price,maybe £3-4million.
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon.[/p][/quote]You've got good eyes i'll give you that. Ings will be at Burnley next season if- 1/Nobody rates him enough to actually pay a fee,he's on a free in 12 month. 2/He agrees with someone else to sign for free next summer. 3/Burnley make him an offer to compare with other clubs,i'm guessing 20k over 3 years. My guess would be that the situation itself,through poor management, will twist the Burnley board's hand,and they'll sell at a reduced price,maybe £3-4million. baldie
  • Score: 8

6:24pm Mon 19 May 14

cruzy_cruz says...

WHY. OH WHY ON EARTH

We need to improve the first team not the stiffs
WHY. OH WHY ON EARTH We need to improve the first team not the stiffs cruzy_cruz
  • Score: 0

6:32pm Mon 19 May 14

owd nick says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
Of Saturn, perhaps Jupiter.
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon.[/p][/quote]Of Saturn, perhaps Jupiter. owd nick
  • Score: 2

6:37pm Mon 19 May 14

MattNewcastle says...

Signing Luke Varney

Astonishing

Gobsmacked

what in earth are Team GB doing

He made very little impact when brought on as a sub.

But hey he is a good lad!!!!!

No he knows that it is a very nice lifestyle for a few more years

Last seasons pre season mistakes to follow.
Signing Luke Varney Astonishing Gobsmacked what in earth are Team GB doing He made very little impact when brought on as a sub. But hey he is a good lad!!!!! No he knows that it is a very nice lifestyle for a few more years Last seasons pre season mistakes to follow. MattNewcastle
  • Score: -5

6:48pm Mon 19 May 14

owd nick says...

J.C - Rishton wrote:
Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team.

He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him.

We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would.

He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now.

GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category.

Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this!
Like all managers GB has made poor, indifferent or brilliant signings, why not give him credit for the good players he has signed instead of knocking him with every waking breath?

I reckon he is well in credit with good signings, even the master, Ferguson once said "It's always a gamble signing a player irrespective of experience and reputation, it isn't until you see them on the pitch for the first time that you find out if they are going to fit in".

Players that have turned us into an attractive footballing side that finished the season scoring goals for fun?

We don't know the length of the contract yet but it won't be the idiotic 4 or 5 year contracts that Allardyce was dealing out like confetti, (that's where the bulk of the PL money has gone) or for that matter those of Kean or Shebby Singh that we are still lumbered with.

With Rhodes, Gestede, Conway, King, Marshall, possibly Rittenberg and Rochina we have more attacking options so Varney, a very experienced player is going to have to work hard, and I have no doubt he will.

This drivel about 12 games and no goals is idiotic, he makes more goals than he scores and personally I don't give a flying feck who scores as long as we play good football and someone does.
[quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: Very disappointing signing - he is a poor player that Leeds, a team that finished below us in the table are happy to off-load - why, because he has not played well enough over an extended period for them to think he is worth a place in their team. He has been at Rovers for 3 months and by his own admission has failed to make an impact, yet we signed him. We are 1 of 9 or 10 clubs next season who have a good chance of finshing at least in the top 6 - how many of those other clubs would want Varney in their squads - I don't think any of them would. He is a 31 year old JOURNYMAN who has never impressed throughout his career and will not improve now. GB has made some great signings but he has also made some shockers (Cambell, Marrow etc) and I think this one, unfortunately is definately in the "DJ Cambell" category. Come on Gary - we can sign much better players than this![/p][/quote]Like all managers GB has made poor, indifferent or brilliant signings, why not give him credit for the good players he has signed instead of knocking him with every waking breath? I reckon he is well in credit with good signings, even the master, Ferguson once said "It's always a gamble signing a player irrespective of experience and reputation, it isn't until you see them on the pitch for the first time that you find out if they are going to fit in". Players that have turned us into an attractive footballing side that finished the season scoring goals for fun? We don't know the length of the contract yet but it won't be the idiotic 4 or 5 year contracts that Allardyce was dealing out like confetti, (that's where the bulk of the PL money has gone) or for that matter those of Kean or Shebby Singh that we are still lumbered with. With Rhodes, Gestede, Conway, King, Marshall, possibly Rittenberg and Rochina we have more attacking options so Varney, a very experienced player is going to have to work hard, and I have no doubt he will. This drivel about 12 games and no goals is idiotic, he makes more goals than he scores and personally I don't give a flying feck who scores as long as we play good football and someone does. owd nick
  • Score: 7

7:18pm Mon 19 May 14

dallydally says...

Poor poor signing if its true
Poor poor signing if its true dallydally
  • Score: -2

7:21pm Mon 19 May 14

Incest Each Sunday says...

Whilst I'm not exactly jumping for joy at the prospect of signing Varney, I don't think he played enough football for me to make an informed judgement either. Every Leeds fan I know was gutted to see him leave and felt that McDermott treated him poorly, citing excellent displays on the wing only to be dropped for inferior players.

I think it was J.C. who said that Leeds, a team who finished below us, were happy to offload him. Firstly, they weren't that happy as they blocked the sale initially, and only agreed to the loan move after several discussions with the player. Also, seeing as how Rovers finished above Leeds, surely that shows that Bowyer did his job better than McDermott, and therefore his judgement shouldn't be questioned ahead of that of his opposite number at Elland Road.

Seeing as how he's free and on reasonable wages, I can understand why Bowyer - having spent more time with him than any of us - is happy to put his faith in him. I'm still slightly concerned that we could have another Campbell on our hands, but I'm not going to write him off until I've seen a bit more of him. Anybody mocking his goals-to-game ratio needs to remember that he's spent a good chunk of his career as a winger, not a striker.
Whilst I'm not exactly jumping for joy at the prospect of signing Varney, I don't think he played enough football for me to make an informed judgement either. Every Leeds fan I know was gutted to see him leave and felt that McDermott treated him poorly, citing excellent displays on the wing only to be dropped for inferior players. I think it was J.C. who said that Leeds, a team who finished below us, were happy to offload him. Firstly, they weren't that happy as they blocked the sale initially, and only agreed to the loan move after several discussions with the player. Also, seeing as how Rovers finished above Leeds, surely that shows that Bowyer did his job better than McDermott, and therefore his judgement shouldn't be questioned ahead of that of his opposite number at Elland Road. Seeing as how he's free and on reasonable wages, I can understand why Bowyer - having spent more time with him than any of us - is happy to put his faith in him. I'm still slightly concerned that we could have another Campbell on our hands, but I'm not going to write him off until I've seen a bit more of him. Anybody mocking his goals-to-game ratio needs to remember that he's spent a good chunk of his career as a winger, not a striker. Incest Each Sunday
  • Score: 8

9:20pm Mon 19 May 14

Incest Each Sunday says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
garyintandem wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
garyintandem wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
Hi Gary
Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules.

Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts.

You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this.

Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into.

We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm.

At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.
The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert.
I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints.
I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse !
Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15
Burnley: Premier League Champions 2014-15.

Believe me, there IS more chance of that one happening.
Hahahahahahahaha... No. No there isn't. You really are a prize clown.

Dream on, Bozo.
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.[/p][/quote]Hi Gary Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules. Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts. You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation. Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this. Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into. We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm. At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.[/p][/quote]The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert. I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints. I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse ! Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15[/p][/quote]Burnley: Premier League Champions 2014-15. Believe me, there IS more chance of that one happening.[/p][/quote]Hahahahahahahaha... No. No there isn't. You really are a prize clown. Dream on, Bozo. Incest Each Sunday
  • Score: 6

9:24pm Mon 19 May 14

Maxrus says...

Steven Seagull wrote:
baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.
[quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon.[/p][/quote]On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom. Maxrus
  • Score: 5

9:29pm Mon 19 May 14

roverstid says...

Super_Clarets wrote:
garyintandem wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
garyintandem wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
J.C - Rishton wrote:
Super_Clarets wrote:
With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014.

The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again.

The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing.

There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending.

Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column.

The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million.

Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced.

It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years.

FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it.

A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.
Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made.

We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us.

I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't).

However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league.

Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done).

It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.
Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.
The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.
Hi Gary
Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules.

Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts.

You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this.

Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into.

We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm.

At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.
The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert.
I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints.
I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse !
Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15
Burnley: Premier League Champions 2014-15.

Believe me, there IS more chance of that one happening.
Hahahaha!

WHAT are they putting in the water in the outbacks these days?

Priceless
[quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]garyintandem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]J.C - Rishton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Super_Clarets[/bold] wrote: With Manchester City and PSG accepting their punishments for non-compliance with the Financial Fair Play rules, it's now inevitable that minnows Blackburn Rovers will be saddled with a transfer ban as a result of gross overspending between 2012-2014. The no-dads who have vehemently claimed that FFP would be "overturned or at least amended" to suit their ailing club have now been proved wrong yet again. The desperation of those feeble minded few claiming that European competition laws would prevent its introduction was nothing if not amusing. There is no free ride and all those years of living beyond your means is now about to take a big bite out of your club. Your accounts for the last financial year reported a loss of £36.5million! Exceeding the permitted maximum loss of £8 million represents the point at which sanctions are introduced to curb your spending. Your accounts for the current financial year, given the continuance of those astronomical contracts for poor players, the failure to recoup transfer fee's (Dann sold for a quarter of what you paid for him), and further drop in attendances will see a similar obscene figure in the loss column. The forthcoming season see's a further deficit of £8million from the reduction in parachute payments as you enter a third financially draining season in the second tier, which is predicted by many as being the most competitive ever. In addition to this the scaling of FFP requires that losses are reduced further with the maximum loss now set to £5million. Venky's have to cover the parachute payment loss of £8million with player sales immediately, the transfer ban will come into force on 1 January 2015 and from this point on no players may be brought in to strengthen your squad. Your losses at this point will still need to be reduced by approximately £20million and so further player sales and contract cancellations will be required. A failure to reduce the losses will mean a continuation of the transfer ban until the losses can be reduced. It all adds up to a massive cost cutting exercise for Blackburn Rovers in the coming seasons to present themselves as a compliant club, however this process is likely to take many many years. FFP is not here to destroy your club, its here to restructure your club as a viable business operating within its means with a sustainable future. That is what clubs agreed on at the outset. If that ultimately means Blackburn Rovers operate at League One level then so be it. A true wake up call for all Blackburn Rovers fans.[/p][/quote]Although it goes against the grain I have to agree with you on most of the points you have made. We need to cut our costs MASSIVELY and if we can't (or won't) then the football league have to help us secure the LONGTERM FUTURE of BRFC by imposing a transfer ban upon us. I think too many Rovers fans really don't understand the scale of our losses and the actual amount of cost cutting thats needed to get us on a stable financial footing (they think that not re-signing Ollson and ofloading Best and Goodwillie and a few other "fringe players" will rectify the losses - it won't). However, I will disagree with you on 1 point - just because City and PSG (and 5 other clubs) have agreed penalities with UEFA dosent mean that Rovers will be put into a tranfer embargo on 1st Jan 2015 by the football league. Rovers could get extra time by the football league but that would be extra time to cut our costs not extra time to just carry on as we have been doing (I think we would need to cut our wage bill by at least £25m - which is going to have a massive impact on our ability to compete at the top end of the table but HAS to be done). It would be much better for Rovers and all the other clubs in similar situations if the FL made a statement as to whether we are going to be put into a transfer embargo or whether they will grant us more time to get our financial house in order.[/p][/quote]Venkys dont seem to be panicing, they're still buying. Do they know something we don't know? I won't panic till they do despite all the FFP experts on here trying to sensationalise matters.[/p][/quote]The Venkys will convert some of their debt to equity, get some of the higher non playing wage earners of the books and the problem is sorted. It doesnt need a Dingle to point that out.[/p][/quote]Hi Gary Your post just highlights the general ignorance that most Rovers fans have with the FFP rules. Debt is not really an issue with FFP. FFP is about balancing your annual accounts. You can owe a billion pounds in debt but if your last years accounts are within the boundaries then you will not get into a transfer embargo situation. Also, I don't know what you mean by "convert debt into equity" ?? - do you mean they will write off our debt to them - if they did then that would be a great gesture on their part but they have never given any indication that they will do this. Infact, "Venkys London" is the ONLY Venky company that has debt - no other the other Venky companies have any (it has been a longterm Venky company strategy that investments are made in cash, not debt) - think about that, we are the ONLY Venky owned "company" that they havent just put "cash" into. We need to lose around £25m off the wage bill. Best is the highest wage earner at a reported £35,000 per week (£1,820,000 per year). If we could get him off the books we would save around 7.3% of the cuts we need to make - hopefully this demonstates the HUGE total amount of cuts that the club NEEDS to make inorder to make it a sustainable, balanced financial club that it needs to be inorder to go forward and (hopefully) prosper in the medium/longterm. At the moment we are a financial nut job which cannot be sustained indefinately - the longer we put off seriously tackling our lossess the harder and more painful it will be.[/p][/quote]The losses made are historic and this year should be less because of the action taken by Bowyer. I assume that Shebby will be much lower cost this year and they won't have all the termination costs of previous year which probably totaled at least £5m. I would imagine that if we get rid of DJ, Goodwillie and Best, added to the elimination of Dann's salary, that would save in the region of £8m. If debt's not a problem then it's not a problem but if it is, then I'm sure the Venkys will convert. I don't think the Rovers can do much more because they've managed their affairs impeccably since Appleton and I don't think many Rovers fans will have any complaints. I hope all the studying that GB has done has unearthed a right back and centre half and some in-play technical nouse ! Rovers: Championship Champions 2014-15[/p][/quote]Burnley: Premier League Champions 2014-15. Believe me, there IS more chance of that one happening.[/p][/quote]Hahahaha! WHAT are they putting in the water in the outbacks these days? Priceless roverstid
  • Score: 5

9:33pm Mon 19 May 14

roverstid says...

Maxrus wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.
He has signed its just lost in the post (read waiting for a better offer).
[quote][p][bold]Maxrus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon.[/p][/quote]On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.[/p][/quote]He has signed its just lost in the post (read waiting for a better offer). roverstid
  • Score: 4

7:34am Tue 20 May 14

KYMER says...

roverstid wrote:
Maxrus wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.
He has signed its just lost in the post (read waiting for a better offer).
Does anyone read about FFP,apart from the headlines? Citeh were fined 60 milllion euros with 40 of it it suspended.The turkish teams were fined a few hundred thousand euros and they are getting champions league cash.If championship sides are fined the fines will surely be in line with the fines already served up.
[quote][p][bold]roverstid[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxrus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon.[/p][/quote]On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.[/p][/quote]He has signed its just lost in the post (read waiting for a better offer).[/p][/quote]Does anyone read about FFP,apart from the headlines? Citeh were fined 60 milllion euros with 40 of it it suspended.The turkish teams were fined a few hundred thousand euros and they are getting champions league cash.If championship sides are fined the fines will surely be in line with the fines already served up. KYMER
  • Score: 2

9:24am Tue 20 May 14

Super_Clarets says...

KYMER wrote:
roverstid wrote:
Maxrus wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
baldie wrote:
Steven Seagull wrote:
No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move?

I fear for you lot, I really do.
Has Ingsy signed yet?
It's on the horizon.
On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.
He has signed its just lost in the post (read waiting for a better offer).
Does anyone read about FFP,apart from the headlines? Citeh were fined 60 milllion euros with 40 of it it suspended.The turkish teams were fined a few hundred thousand euros and they are getting champions league cash.If championship sides are fined the fines will surely be in line with the fines already served up.
Championship clubs aren't subject to fines at this stage, your punishment for non-compliance is a transfer embargo until your losses are brought in line with the rules. Your club has to make a saving of approximately £25million this coming season, some would say that's far worse than paying a fine.
[quote][p][bold]KYMER[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roverstid[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxrus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]baldie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Steven Seagull[/bold] wrote: No goals in 12 appearances. He's a striker. And Bowyer thinks thats good enough to earn him a permanent move? I fear for you lot, I really do.[/p][/quote]Has Ingsy signed yet?[/p][/quote]It's on the horizon.[/p][/quote]On the horizon!! Suppose you think it's close to being sorted then, on the same basis you retards still think that the world is flat! No, you'll mess up yet again, just like you did with the other alleged £15m player you had on your books less than 12 months ago - the Marx brothers are alive and well in the Bonlee boardroom.[/p][/quote]He has signed its just lost in the post (read waiting for a better offer).[/p][/quote]Does anyone read about FFP,apart from the headlines? Citeh were fined 60 milllion euros with 40 of it it suspended.The turkish teams were fined a few hundred thousand euros and they are getting champions league cash.If championship sides are fined the fines will surely be in line with the fines already served up.[/p][/quote]Championship clubs aren't subject to fines at this stage, your punishment for non-compliance is a transfer embargo until your losses are brought in line with the rules. Your club has to make a saving of approximately £25million this coming season, some would say that's far worse than paying a fine. Super_Clarets
  • Score: 0

10:33am Tue 20 May 14

RoversNorthEast says...

Total waste of money.

Do not sign third rate..proved he was useless last season!
Total waste of money. Do not sign third rate..proved he was useless last season! RoversNorthEast
  • Score: 0

10:34am Tue 20 May 14

RoversNorthEast says...

Crow27 wrote:
Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.
I agree..this man can not score
[quote][p][bold]Crow27[/bold] wrote: Please no! Work rate, desire etc. are positive attributes but no goals in 12 says it all. I can't think off the top of my head but I think they must be better strikers who can score and put a shift in. An experienced striker who is happy to sit on the bench and provide advice is out there, just not Varney please GB.[/p][/quote]I agree..this man can not score RoversNorthEast
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree