Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

A year since Mogga left


Recommended Posts

 

It's a year since Mogga left. In that time we've made 17 signings (including loan players). That kind of turnover of players isn't indicative of either a good squad or good foundations, regardless of what spin people try to put on it. It's also a bit strange for him to be getting credit for leaving players behind that he didn't even sign. Does Moyes get credit for leaving Rooney and Van Persie for Van Gaal?

 

There's no question he made some good signings, you would expect at least that from any manager but at the start of this season we were left with no adequate right back, one left back and a set of forwards that all had to be replaced. That's not a minor amount of work needed however you want to look at it. None of that includes the general strengthening of the squad that was needed as well.

 

Last summer we signed 6 players and 3 of those have already left the club, one of them having his contract torn up. I think it's a fair bet that at least two of the remainder will leave next summer. Other than the obvious few names, the bulk of the team are players newly signed and the other players that Mowbray signed who are still here are squad players at best that will only be getting in the first team on odd occasions.

 

When people talk about his time here it's made out that he was working with one hand tied behind his back as we operated on a shoe string. The wage bill he had, which was made up of a lot more than just Scott McDonald and Nicky Bailey, was higher than the majority of teams in this division. Incidentally, those two players only seemed to become rubbish when we became rubbish. When we were winning and playing well those two were key players and I don't remember a lot of people saying those things. There's no question that they were overpaid but when they left we didn't improve so lets stop using this ridiculous excuse shall we?

 

We weren't in a good place when Mowbray joined us that's safe to say. I don't think we were in as bad a position as it seemed but Strachan wasn't working out at all and had to go. There can be no question that Mowbray turned that situation around. It can also be said that we had one reasonable run at the play offs and one half run before we imploded as spectacularly as we did to the point where I believe we lost more games in 2012/13 than we have in any season in our history. Going back to my earlier point I'd argue that is also not a sign of a good foundation.

 

The above isn't meant to be an essay on how rubbish Mowbray was because I don't think he was rubbish. It's more about trying to put things into context. Mowbray didn't get the backing that Strachan did and he didn't get the backing that Karanka has had so far. In that respect he has been hard done by. But I think it's a stretch to say he put us in a good position for the next manager. The wage bill was mostly reduced because player contracts ended, not because of anything Mowbray did. He can be commended for keeping us in the division whilst this was going on if you want to say so but the squad we had was easily up to that so it's not something I would go along with. Finishing 7th was a reasonable season, as was the 12th place finish after he took over. The final full season started well enough but ended up being awful really with a record number of defeats. Overall his time here had some good and bad but I wish him nothing but good luck and I hope he gets back into the game asap.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    4

  •  

    4

  •  

    4

Top Posters In This Topic

When i refer to the foundations of the club, I'm not referring to the squad. When Mowbray took over there was no scouting network. He implemented one. There was no major sports science at the club. He changed that. The wage bill was astronomical for a club in our position and full to the brim of deadwood. He rescued us from relegation. He had little to no money to spend doing this. He brought in some quality players and some poor buys, but then again you have to take risks when money is tight. Financially the club was in a healthy position when he left. To the point where his successor no longer needed to make any drastic cuts.

 

Nobody is saying his results were fantastic, but he DID lay the foundations for Karanka that is beyond question.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably time to bring this one to a close now as we are probably in danger of falling into the old pro/anti Mogga camps

 

One final point though is that foundations aren't the finished house , they are just the basis on which to build a house. A large part of this was down to Mogga but Karanka is showing himself to be the better builder and the finished house will hopefully be of premiership quality!

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

When i refer to the foundations of the club, I'm not referring to the squad. When Mowbray took over there was no scouting network. He implemented one. There was no major sports science at the club. He changed that. The wage bill was astronomical for a club in our position and full to the brim of deadwood. He rescued us from relegation. He had little to no money to spend doing this. He brought in some quality players and some poor buys, but then again you have to take risks when money is tight. Financially the club was in a healthy position when he left. To the point where his successor no longer needed to make any drastic cuts.

 

Nobody is saying his results were fantastic, but he DID lay the foundations for Karanka that is beyond question.

 

The finances of the club had NOTHING to do with him, nothing at all. Can people please stop using this to give him credit. The wage bill reduced naturally over time as contracts expired or in some cases were paid up. As I said in my first post, if you want to give him credit for keeping us in the division and even finishing 7th whilst this was going on then fine but that's as far as it can go. To suggest otherwise shows a complete lack of understanding of how business works and what has taken place at Boro over the last couple of years. The club also isn't in a healthy financial position at all so where people get this from I have no idea? We're still making sizeable losses, we'll make another one this financial year and we are totally dependent on Gibson.

 

The scouting network stuff is something that is often mentioned. Some managers have them and others don't. The reason we didn't have one was because Strachan chose not to as a manager and went by players he knew and those that were recommended to him. I'm not sure how important it is and given some of the players we signed during his time here and also afterwards I would say the jury is still out.

 

The sports science section of the club was reduced prior to him being appointed because of the financial issues the club had. It being developed is entirely down to the money being found. He isn't the one finding it though so I fail to see how he gets the credit other than by presumably pushing for it to be invested in. Unless it produces results on the pitch however then what's the benefit exactly?

 

As B86 said it's obvious where this thread was going to head from the start so it's probably a waste of time. However, my issue is less with Mowbray and more with people painting a different picture of reality because it suits them to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When i refer to the foundations of the club, I'm not referring to the squad. When Mowbray took over there was no scouting network. He implemented one. There was no major sports science at the club. He changed that. The wage bill was astronomical for a club in our position and full to the brim of deadwood. He rescued us from relegation. He had little to no money to spend doing this. He brought in some quality players and some poor buys, but then again you have to take risks when money is tight. Financially the club was in a healthy position when he left. To the point where his successor no longer needed to make any drastic cuts.

 

Nobody is saying his results were fantastic, but he DID lay the foundations for Karanka that is beyond question.

 

The logic displayed above is indisputable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When i refer to the foundations of the club, I'm not referring to the squad. When Mowbray took over there was no scouting network. He implemented one. There was no major sports science at the club. He changed that. The wage bill was astronomical for a club in our position and full to the brim of deadwood. He rescued us from relegation. He had little to no money to spend doing this. He brought in some quality players and some poor buys, but then again you have to take risks when money is tight. Financially the club was in a healthy position when he left. To the point where his successor no longer needed to make any drastic cuts.

 

Nobody is saying his results were fantastic, but he DID lay the foundations for Karanka that is beyond question.

 

The finances of the club had NOTHING to do with him, nothing at all. Can people please stop using this to give him credit.

 

What a bizarre statement to make. You're saying the manager of a football has no input or say in the finances of the club he's running?! I quite obviously don't agree. I've said my piece in here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

What a bizarre statement to make. You're saying the manager of a football has no input or say in the finances of the club he's running?! I quite obviously don't agree. I've said my piece in here.

 

That is exactly what I'm saying and it's 100% correct. He has no say in, control over, influence on or however else you'd like to put it, the finances of the club because he has absolutely nothing to do with it. The financial state of MFC, good or bad, is entirely down to Steve Gibson because he is the owner, he is the financier, he is the person in control. Mowbray could ask him for more money for a transfer, or a bigger wage budget or money directed into sports science but the only person that makes those decisions is Gibson. I'm more than a little bemused that you think otherwise unless we're talking about different things here perhaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What a bizarre statement to make. You're saying the manager of a football has no input or say in the finances of the club he's running?! I quite obviously don't agree. I've said my piece in here.

 

That is exactly what I'm saying and it's 100% correct. He has no say in, control over, influence on or however else you'd like to put it, the finances of the club because he has absolutely nothing to do with it. The financial state of MFC, good or bad, is entirely down to Steve Gibson because he is the owner, he is the financier, he is the person in control. Mowbray could ask him for more money for a transfer, or a bigger wage budget or money directed into sports science but the only person that makes those decisions is Gibson. I'm more than a little bemused that you think otherwise unless we're talking about different things here perhaps?

 

Your partly right but Gibson will only direct his personnel in implementing his will. Do you really believe he concentrates on Middlesbrough FC 24/7, were aren't delusional here are we? Who chooses which players stays and which go in an attempt to a line with the FFP? Not Gibson. Who is the one that goes out to scout and bring in players that can compete on a minimal wage / transfer budget? Not Gibson.

 

The state of the club was dire when Mowbray took charge and as such he was asked to reverse the trend which consequently laid a foundation for others to build upon. You cannot dispute that Mowbray did this and to do so would be 100% incorrect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

Your partly right but Gibson will only direct his personnel in implementing his will. Do you really believe he concentrates on Middlesbrough FC 24/7, were aren't delusional here are we? Who chooses which players stays and which go in an attempt to a line with the FFP? Not Gibson. Who is the one that goes out to scout and bring in players that can compete on a minimal wage / transfer budget? Not Gibson.

 

The state of the club was dire when Mowbray took charge and as such he was asked to reverse the trend which consequently laid a foundation for others to build upon. You cannot dispute that Mowbray did this and to do so would be 100% incorrect.

 

I'm not sure what point your making here? I don't believe I said that Gibson scouted players but yes he ultimately decides who stay and who goes, of course he does, not in the sense of each individual player but in the overall sense of the budget he gives the manager to work with. Gibson is the person funding the business. In fact, he is the sole reason we're able to keep trading as we are. So when it comes to budgets/ffp compliance or whatever else then yes it is all down to him. Now, any manager can choose to sign or sell player X but only within the framework Gibson gives them. That goes for Karanka, Mowbray, Southgate, McClaren, Robson or Lawrence. Do you think these guys just do what they like and send him the bill?

 

If we can't afford to keep a player or give him a new contract then that's it he has to leave and yes it's Gibson that decides who we can or can't afford. The reason that McDonald left was because Gibson paid up his contract. This has nothing to do with Mowbray and yet apparently he gets credit for lowering the wage bill. How does that work exactly?

 

I already said that if you want to give him credit for remaining competitive whilst being asked to reduce the wage bill then that's fair enough and it's not something I'd dispute. Well, perhaps not for his entire time here but for a reasonable amount of it certainly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...