JANUARY TRANSFER WINDOW

[RevidgeBlue]

14 minutes ago, Biz said:

Good for you, I’m proud of you. I’d expect you to disagree with everything I’ve ever said if you genuinely believe the only two possible plausible reasons for Brererton not starting yet are;

1. Dodgy finance on loan AKA team impacted by financial choice not just manager

or

2. Brererton forced on manager and he’s binning him off to make a point...

In reply to your reasoning; Assumption he is on low wages though, I would call any figure an assumption since it’s not published. Doesn’t take a genius to understand why players with premier league experience or higher get paid more though does it?

Armstrong is being given the same chance as last season, just because you’d play a different setup means little to the facts. 

The last point to make is you seemingly think it’s a simple! As if, we needed to replace Graham or at least have good quality cover... It’s not simple as googling the necessities.. it’s not ordering through CPC! 

 

We might disagree but no need to be disagreeable.

If you're guessing at BB's wages then that makes your argument in that respect somewhat redundant.

As for Armstrong my understanding was that the player himself had expressed a clear preference for playing more centrally and my recollection from last season was that he was used a lot more centrally and looked much more dangerous using his pace from that position.

[JBiz]

12 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Couldnt agree more. Makes this place totally pointless for one.

As long as they are the opinions of a professional manager or coach?

@JacknOry responds to these points in excellent detail.

There is a myth circulating that Rovers fans are expecting loads from Brereton already and its blatantly not true.

There is also a myth that it is ok for him to be solely a project, as if hes an untested kid. Hes got plenty of game time under his belt at Forest at this level. Point 1 defunct.

The reason point 2 is moot is because Mowbray wont consider Brereton to be a striker, one of the key elements of the whole debate.

Armstrong doesnt play up front either. Thats point 3.

Understand that he will take a bit of time to acclimatise but hes part of the squad and again going back to the myth, just  having him as a second choice striker with Graham ahead of him is hardly expecting loads.

The Palmer and Dack experiment, and the Dack up top experiment simply didnt work. Surely testing the waters with a young, talented striker with Championship experience made more sense. Surely you cant really defend them choices.

Not expecting loads? Every match thread has a prediction for him to score. How about he starts first?

You argue as if he is a stalwart proven championship striker. He isn’t. He’s played a few games, in the squad as third choice to Assombolonga and others. Injury thrust him into it, not readiness to usurp those around him.

You might gloss over it - but our system is more important to any “usage of our forwards debate” than any condescending “This “Mowbray doesn’t consider him a striker”...

I mean you truly have to be arrogant to think you know what the detailed thoughts of the manager are on a player- what he sees him as, his strengths, his weaknesses. Might be key element to you in this, but to me seems irrelevant what position he wants to use B.B. in, long term.

I personally don’t think 3 months of being in the squad, on the bench and then coming on as a wide forward means TM thinks he’s no striker. That’s just me. By the same idea, you must think TM rates AA as a winger then? Even though he’s said on numerous occasions he sees Armstrong leading the line, and it’s his best position.

Finally - I’m not defending TM. I’m saying what I think, my opinion. I think the idea that the appearances are reduced due to finance is laughable, or the idea that he is a “marquee” “clanger” already, basically just trolling. The idea that TM didn’t choose the signing is also a joke in my eyes, not least because I’ve listened to the man explain why he wanted him.

To conclude - many, not sure if you included, say Palmer has been wasted because he hasn’t been used as a number 10. Well, on the occasion we had no Graham- we went with Palmer behind an un-droppable Dack. The same Palmer who played in that role for a promoted Huddersfield? Whilst a failed experiment it might be, painted as “indefensible” is way OTTIMO

 

[JBiz]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

We might disagree but no need to be disagreeable.

If you're guessing at BB's wages then that makes your argument in that respect somewhat redundant.

As for Armstrong my understanding was that the player himself had expressed a clear preference for playing more centrally and my recollection from last season was that he was used a lot more centrally and looked much more dangerous using his pace from that position.

I might be getting old but I don’t think we’ve varied the setup or formation for 12 months. He hasn’t played as well this season - that’s something we can agree on

[Paul Mani]

31 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Couldnt agree more. Makes this place totally pointless for one. It only makes it impossible if you can’t accept that sometimes people know more than you do.

As long as they are the opinions of a professional manager or coach? I haven’t shot anyone down or been abusive. All I’ve done is gone against the grain in here and the reaction is the same every single time. 

@JacknOry responds to these points in excellent detail.

There is a myth circulating that Rovers fans are expecting loads from Brereton already and its blatantly not true.

There is also a myth that it is ok for him to be solely a project, as if hes an untested kid. Hes got plenty of game time under his belt at Forest at this level. Point 1 defunct.

The reason point 2 is moot is because Mowbray wont consider Brereton to be a striker, one of the key elements of the whole debate.

Armstrong doesnt play up front either. Thats point 3.

Understand that he will take a bit of time to acclimatise but hes part of the squad and again going back to the myth, just  having him as a second choice striker with Graham ahead of him is hardly expecting loads.

The Palmer and Dack experiment, and the Dack up top experiment simply didnt work. Surely testing the waters with a young, talented striker with Championship experience made more sense. Surely you cant really defend them choices.

This isn’t black and white. BB is 19yrs Old and 3 months into a new career at a new club. For anyone to whittle the reason for not playing to be either (a) or (b) is asking for criticism.

As for the rest of it. It’s pure conjecture but for anyone to suggest that Mowbrays transfer business is 5/10 is again proof that they don’t understand football. He signed players in League 1 to get out of that division and that’s what happened. Only Whittingham played no part in that success.

This season he’s signed players to make us competitive and the likes of Reed, Palmer, Rothwell, Brereton have scored goals and had assists so have contributed to a good start to the season. Rodwell has been decent too and Davenport has been injured. 

 

[Paul Mani]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I don't actually agree at all with any of your points there.

1) He's not concentrating on the player by not giving him a chance is he? It seems to me that paying a huge fee for the lad then refusing to hand him a start or play him in his natural position is the best way to destroy his confidence. Assumption

2) If he wanted to carry on playing that system, all the more reason why the main summer signing needed to be someone capable of coming in and replacing Graham. Agreed

3) Armstrong isn't being given a chance in his preferred position either and is suffering accordingly. He’s had a couple of chances actually both starting and in game and struggled. He’s the signing I’m most worried about.

4) Good players can adapt instantly WOW just WOW!! You having a laugh?

5) Don't understand this point. We chose to pay £7m for him,  whether he was first choice or 5th choice is completely irrelevant. For that price he has to be ready. Why? What qualifies you to make that statement without knowing the player, the manager or any context?

My main gripe with your argument though is this assumption that BB will be on low wages. Do we KNOW for a fact that this is the case or is it simply something you've invented to suit your argument? His wages are interesting but largely irrelevant to anyone other than him and the people paying him. I reckon he’s on a good whack considering several Prem clubs had been sniffing. I know that Spurs, Pool, Leicester and West Ham we’re interested last Christmas. He was formally recommended to Craig Shakespeare before he was sacked. I got this from the man who was scouting BB for Leicester. He’s now got a league managers job and was blown away when he realised we had managed to sign BB. 100% believes BB will be a megastar and knows how highly TM and Veno rate him.

If I was BB's agent I'd want him to be on top whack if I was negotiating a deal of that magnitude. Exactly right. Thankfully your last name isn’t Rao so whilst it’s cool to ponder it doesn’t really concern any of us ??

 

[roversfan99]

@Paul Mani theres an undercurrent of cryptic arrogance throughout your post. Firstly, please can you state what your job is in football? Apologies if ive missed it but its the elephant in the room in every one of your posts, you clearly want people to know.

I find your angle really strange. You come onto an internet messageboard, which is a vessel for fans to discuss their opinions. You arent doing that, you are just saying Mowbray knows more than us all as if that is a valid way to shoot down your posts. Did you join the forum expecting posts to consist of people just echoing Mowbrays decisions and saying I agree because he knows more than us? No one is claiming to be a better potential manager than Mowbray.

If he signed players in League 1 solely to guarantee promotion, may I ask why such a short term objective has been totally flipped on his head, going from signing players solely for the upcoming season, to signing players solely for the future, not expected to contribute anything at first? 

I also disagree with the notion that we signed players solely with a short term aim in mind anyway, supported with quotes below:

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/15565159.i-think-the-signs-are-there-that-it-will-be-a-good-combination-tony-mowbray-on-rovers-duo-bradley-dack-and-dominic-samuel/

“I was very aware of not trying to burden two 23-year-old boys to fire us out of this league."

“But I do think that Samuel and Dack were brought here for some money that we had to spend and in the long-term help this club progress back up the leagues."

Your comment that only Whittingham didnt contribute is nonsense too. Whittingham contributed far more than quite a few players, notably Hart, Leutweiler and Gladwin.

Mowbray knows far more than me, but I signed up on here before he even joined, solely for the purpose of giving my own personal opinions, under no illusions that I am not qualified to actually become the manager. 

I also stand by my criticisms on the summer business we did too, and the lack of impact most have had so far. But hey, I dont know as much about football as you.

 

[Paul Mani]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

@Paul Mani theres an undercurrent of cryptic arrogance throughout your post. Firstly, please can you state what your job is in football? Apologies if ive missed it but its the elephant in the room in every one of your posts, you clearly want people to know. I don’t work in football, never have. But I’ve been around football and footballers at differing levels to have a good understanding of how things work. 

I find your angle really strange. You come onto an internet messageboard, which is a vessel for fans to discuss their opinions. You arent doing that, you are just saying Mowbray knows more than us all as if that is a valid way to shoot down your posts. Did you join the forum expecting posts to consist of people just echoing Mowbrays decisions and saying I agree because he knows more than us? No one is claiming to be a better potential manager than Mowbray. Check every single post I’ve made. I usually start with in my opinion or my view is. The problem here is that it’s usually not the same as the masses and so you lot kick off, every. Single. Time.

If he signed players in League 1 solely to guarantee promotion, may I ask why such a short term objective has been totally flipped on his head, going from signing players solely for the upcoming season, to signing players solely for the future, not expected to contribute anything at first? This isn’t difficult. He had to get out of that league and most of the players he bought helped to do exactly that. Ergo he achieved his goal.

I also disagree with the notion that we signed players solely with a short term aim in mind anyway, supported with quotes below:

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/15565159.i-think-the-signs-are-there-that-it-will-be-a-good-combination-tony-mowbray-on-rovers-duo-bradley-dack-and-dominic-samuel/

“I was very aware of not trying to burden two 23-year-old boys to fire us out of this league."

“But I do think that Samuel and Dack were brought here for some money that we had to spend and in the long-term help this club progress back up the leagues." I haven’t said he deployed a short term view. I said he signed the players to get out of that league. Some have made the jump, others are struggling but ultimately he had a budget and spent it wisely....because we went up!!

Your comment that only Whittingham didnt contribute is nonsense too. Whittingham contributed far more than quite a few players, notably Hart, Leutweiler and Gladwin. My bad. 

Mowbray knows far more than me, but I signed up on here before he even joined, solely for the purpose of giving my own personal opinions, under no illusions that I am not qualified to actually become the manager. You’re free to have your opinions but also expect to be criticised when you start overreacting and making things fit your narrative. I respect your opinion, but I don’t have to agree.

I also stand by my criticisms on the summer business we did too, and the lack of impact most have had so far. But hey, I dont know as much about football as you. Correct. (IMHO)

 

 

[roversfan99]

@Paul Mani I totally agree that Mowbray did very well to get promoted, hes done a good job in general, and hes got the fanbase united beind him. Hes done more right than wrong. But not everything he has done is right. Nor can we expect it to be. But we can point it out. Alex Ferguson is as good a manager as there has ever been. He signed Eric Djemba and Bebe.

Ive no idea if you are claiming superior knowledge in a ironic sense, or it is genuine arrogance but either way you surely appreciate that constantly going round teling people that whilst shooting any constructive criticism down on the sole notion that Mowbray knows better than us and thats that, is going to rub people up the wrong way.

[bluebruce]

7 hours ago, Biz said:

Apologies, I’ll reply instead;

The idea we are limiting his appearances for financial reasons is laughable. 

Is it though? It's something we have done as a club under Venkys before - Salgado and (possibly) Nelsen.

I have started to wonder whether there might be something in this conspiracy theory. The situation is so bizarre without it that there just might be something in it. I can't see why his starts would be weighted more in terms of cost during the loan period than after it becomes permanent, but I wonder if we pay a set fee after X number of starts and TM has been instructed to limit his starts for now so that the payment required coincides with the next due Venkys cash investment. TM tending to introduce players slowly anyway might not object to waiting until January to start him in the league.

Could equally easily be cobblers, but something about this whole thing doesn't seem quite right so far.

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, Paul Mani said:

I don’t work in football, never have. But I’ve been around football and footballers at differing levels to have a good understanding of how things work. 

Shebby?

Edited December 11, 2018 by blueboy3333

[JBiz]

6 hours ago, bluebruce said:

Is it though? It's something we have done as a club under Venkys before - Salgado and (possibly) Nelsen.

I have started to wonder whether there might be something in this conspiracy theory. The situation is so bizarre without it that there just might be something in it. I can't see why his starts would be weighted more in terms of cost during the loan period than after it becomes permanent, but I wonder if we pay a set fee after X number of starts and TM has been instructed to limit his starts for now so that the payment required coincides with the next due Venkys cash investment. TM tending to introduce players slowly anyway might not object to waiting until January to start him in the league.

Could equally easily be cobblers, but something about this whole thing doesn't seem quite right so far.

Cannot agree, and I simply cannot accept the “it’s happened to us before” argument.

The climate is different these days at the club and signing (to quote the manager) a “19 year old boy” but not thrusting him into the team is not “bizarre”

Even if you suggest the “huge” fee makes this more concerning, I personally don’t think 7m will go very far for young championship experienced players.

For example; How much would you sell Nyambe, Lenihan and Raya for?

Finally - if there is any loan deal that we’ve signed that includes some sort of fee for the way he’s used - I’d suggest the most likely one of those is Palmer. I’d also suggest Chelsea have been on the blower a few times saying “why is he not playing”? There is an interview with the Peterborough chairman from earlier in the year (could’nt find) that talks about Liverpool including a sanction for NOT playing Ben Woodburn when he went to Sheff United.

The reason for that was the demand for the player and Liverpool’s concern about stifling a talent.

[Paul Mani]

6 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

@Paul Mani I totally agree that Mowbray did very well to get promoted, hes done a good job in general, and hes got the fanbase united beind him. Hes done more right than wrong. But not everything he has done is right. Nor can we expect it to be. But we can point it out. Alex Ferguson is as good a manager as there has ever been. He signed Eric Djemba and Bebe.

Ive no idea if you are claiming superior knowledge in a ironic sense, or it is genuine arrogance but either way you surely appreciate that constantly going round teling people that whilst shooting any constructive criticism down on the sole notion that Mowbray knows better than us and thats that, is going to rub people up the wrong way.

You’re completely overthinking this mate. All I have done is disagreed with a few on here with regards to what I believe are inaccurate assumptions. History tells us that every time that happens on here it causes mayhem but I don’t see why that should stop me giving my opinion. 

Of course TM has made mistakes. But you are talking here about him being poor (5/10) in the transfer market plus the notion that there is something cynical about why BB isn’t playing which imo is ludicrous. Especially when we’ve been so successful during that time and the manager is so open. Add to this that I do actually have some insight, makes me feel compelled to give my opinion. If you don’t like it then put me on ignore.

Have you or the boys ever stopped to wonder whether people want to read your constant moaning and cynicism about everything no matter how well things are going? Probably not because it’s a messageboard and a messageboard is about opinions right? Well you have yours and I have mine!

 

[Paul Mani]

6 hours ago, bluebruce said:

Is it though? It's something we have done as a club under Venkys before - Salgado and (possibly) Nelsen.

I have started to wonder whether there might be something in this conspiracy theory. The situation is so bizarre without it that there just might be something in it. I can't see why his starts would be weighted more in terms of cost during the loan period than after it becomes permanent, but I wonder if we pay a set fee after X number of starts and TM has been instructed to limit his starts for now so that the payment required coincides with the next due Venkys cash investment. TM tending to introduce players slowly anyway might not object to waiting until January to start him in the league.

Could equally easily be cobblers, but something about this whole thing doesn't seem quite right so far.

It’s really not bizarre mate. He’s 19 and 3 months into his time at Ewood. If it was Bamford Etc then I’d fully understand the confusion. We’ve prob not even paid a fee for him yet and the £7m will likely be spread over his 4/5 year deal. 

The team has done well with no major injuries in those forward positions so he’s been limited to sub appearances etc. If we get to the end of the season then I can see why people would begin to question it. Having said that if we sign another striker (which I believe we need either way) then there’s a chance that we’ve had a great season and still used BB sparingly then I wouldn’t be surprised.

Theyre SOOOO excited about this lad. But that doesn’t mean they have to throw him in now.

[K-Hod]

18 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

You’re completely overthinking this mate. All I have done is disagreed with a few on here with regards to what I believe are inaccurate assumptions. History tells us that every time that happens on here it causes mayhem but I don’t see why that should stop me giving my opinion. 

Of course TM has made mistakes. But you are talking here about him being poor (5/10) in the transfer market plus the notion that there is something cynical about why BB isn’t playing which imo is ludicrous. Especially when we’ve been so successful during that time and the manager is so open. Add to this that I do actually have some insight, makes me feel compelled to give my opinion. If you don’t like it then put me on ignore.

Have you or the boys ever stopped to wonder whether people want to read your constant moaning and cynicism about everything no matter how well things are going? Probably not because it’s a messageboard and a messageboard is about opinions right? Well you have yours and I have mine!

 

Is it moaning and cynicism though? Or is it just an opinion? I’m having a great time in the main this season and last season was one of my favourites in my life so far (I’m 34). 

Just observing what happened and giving my view, as most others are.

Mowbray is great, but he isn’t perfect. So when folk mention him not being perfect, that’s just saying what they see, like at any other club, it’s not moaning.

Just as people praising Mowbray isn’t happy clapping.

As it goes, I’d say 5/10 is quite harsh for the recruitment rating, but only two of Mowbray’s signings start regularly (Reed and Dack), so it won’t be THAT much higher, to be fair....

 

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, Paul Mani said:

Add to this that I do actually have some insight, makes me feel compelled to give my opinion

You don't though, that's your problem. 

 

1 hour ago, Paul Mani said:

Have you or the boys ever stopped to wonder whether people want to read your constant moaning and cynicism about everything no matter how well things are going? Probably not because it’s a messageboard and a messageboard is about opinions right? Well you have yours and I have mine!

I see, so yours is an 'opinion' but others doing the same thing are 'moaning'. Double standards par excellence.

If people don't want to read the 'moaning' they don't have to. You don't need to speak for them. 

Anyway, try this statement so I know which category I fall into:-

I think Mowbray is poor in the transfer market. I think Mowbray is excellent at man-management and getting the players to work as hard for the badge as anyone I can remember.

If you want to start a thread on the latter half of that statement then I'll come and agree with you. You won't though because you're as 'negative' as everybody else and you'll stay in the transfer thread like you always do pretending you have some 'insight' and that the rest of us are just not educated enough in the ways of the beautiful game to understand what is going on.  

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, K-Hod said:

As it goes, I’d say 5/10 is quite harsh for the recruitment rating, but only two of Mowbray’s signings start regularly (Reed and Dack),

There's Smallwood too but he doesn't seem to be rated anymore.

Anyway, after 3 transfer windows and £10m+ spent,  only having 3 in the 1st team is a sad indictment on how many Mogga has got wrong. The fact he's already had to pay two off and he's only been here 18 months speaks volumes. There are extenuating circumstances of course (being played out of position etc) but, put simply, the majority of his signings have underwhelmed.  

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/west-brom-albion-tony-mowbray-12793111

Here are the signings he made at WBA. Pretty underwhelming. 

I don't think the transfer market is Mowbray's strength. 

Edited December 11, 2018 by blueboy3333

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

11 hours ago, Biz said:

Not expecting loads? Every match thread has a prediction for him to score. How about he starts first?

You argue as if he is a stalwart proven championship striker. He isn’t. He’s played a few games, in the squad as third choice to Assombolonga and others. Injury thrust him into it, not readiness to usurp those around him.

You might gloss over it - but our system is more important to any “usage of our forwards debate” than any condescending “This “Mowbray doesn’t consider him a striker”...

I mean you truly have to be arrogant to think you know what the detailed thoughts of the manager are on a player- what he sees him as, his strengths, his weaknesses. Might be key element to you in this, but to me seems irrelevant what position he wants to use B.B. in, long term.

I personally don’t think 3 months of being in the squad, on the bench and then coming on as a wide forward means TM thinks he’s no striker. That’s just me. By the same idea, you must think TM rates AA as a winger then? Even though he’s said on numerous occasions he sees Armstrong leading the line, and it’s his best position.

Finally - I’m not defending TM. I’m saying what I think, my opinion. I think the idea that the appearances are reduced due to finance is laughable, or the idea that he is a “marquee” “clanger” already, basically just trolling. The idea that TM didn’t choose the signing is also a joke in my eyes, not least because I’ve listened to the man explain why he wanted him.

To conclude - many, not sure if you included, say Palmer has been wasted because he hasn’t been used as a number 10. Well, on the occasion we had no Graham- we went with Palmer behind an un-droppable Dack. The same Palmer who played in that role for a promoted Huddersfield? Whilst a failed experiment it might be, painted as “indefensible” is way OTTIMO

 

I'm sorry but Armstrong will never be a " lead the line " type of player as long as he's got a hole in his bum. He lacks the physical presence. He needs a blood transplant from the likes of Dickov or Speedie.

[Paul Mani]

1 hour ago, K-Hod said:

Is it moaning and cynicism though? Or is it just an opinion? I’m having a great time in the main this season and last season was one of my favourites in my life so far (I’m 34). I’d say roughly 50% is opinion and 50% moaning based on the people and their views. Either way they’re just opinions as I said.

Just observing what happened and giving my view, as most others are.

Mowbray is great, but he isn’t perfect. So when folk mention him not being perfect, that’s just saying what they see, like at any other club, it’s not moaning. Iv absolutely no problem in people critiquing TM. He hasn’t got everything right but I am entitled to my opinion if I think people are talking broken biscuits. The problem in here is that if you don’t follow the opinions of the nucleus then you are targeted immediately.

Just as people praising Mowbray isn’t happy clapping.

As it goes, I’d say 5/10 is quite harsh for the recruitment rating, but only two of Mowbray’s signings start regularly (Reed and Dack), so it won’t be THAT much higher, to be fair....I can’t tell you how wrong I think you are here. Just because a player doesn’t play regularly doesn’t mean he’s been a failure. Budget, injuries, tactics, personal matters amongst many others all cloud the issue. Also, the competition of the signings often bring out the best of your current first team. That’s been proven by our results in the championship.

Mowbray was tasked with rebuilding a heap of steaming turd and players at the lowest ebb in their careers in the summer of 2017. He got rid of bad apples and bought others based on developing the ability of the team and morale in order to save a sinking ship. He achieved this goal and the vast majority of his signings impacted that success. He also changed a toxic atmosphere in the dressing room to a positive one. ALL of this is based on ‘Transfer business’. 9/10

This season he’s bought players and in the first three months we’ve over achieved and most of the signings he’s made have contributed. I think he should’ve bought another mainline striker which would have gathered another 5/6 pts by my reckoning so I’m going to place him currently at an 8/10.

But bearing in mind he has another window coming up AND he’s delivered all of this success with a potential £20m+ profit on Dack who’s arguably the best player in the Championship this season is phenomenal. 

Overall transfer business score imo 9/10

 

 

[blueboy3333]

Just now, Paul Mani said:

Overall transfer business score imo 9/10

Nonsense. 

 

Just now, Paul Mani said:

This season he’s bought players and in the first three months we’ve over achieved and most of the signings he’s made have contributed.

Nonsense. 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 hour ago, blueboy3333 said:

There's Smallwood too but he doesn't seem to be rated anymore.

Anyway, after 3 transfer windows and £10m+ spent,  only having 3 in the 1st team is a sad indictment on how many Mogga has got wrong. The fact he's already had to pay two off and he's only been here 18 months speaks volumes. There are extenuating circumstances of course (being played out of position etc) but, put simply, the majority of his signings have underwhelmed.  

Given the circumstances the likes of Downing, Samuel, Smallwood, Bell, Caddis etc were brought to the club with one thing in mind. Get us out of the Division asap. Great,  we did that. It's the nature of the beast that having achieved success they have to be replaced by better players. It's dog eat dog in pro football and most top managers have no room for sentiment.

For some reason we haven't done that.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

5 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

 

I like your style, will you be my agent as well ?

[Paul Mani]

2 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Nonsense. 

 

Nonsense. 

You’re just embarrassing yourself mate. We’ve had to sit and listen to you drone on and on about why it’s been so crap. I offer my opinion and provide reasoning for why I believe it and you answer “nonsense”...so who is stifling the messageboard here? 

Stoo getting so upset, accept that there are people out there who see things different to you and move on ??

[SBlue]

3 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Given the circumstances the likes of Downing, Samuel, Smallwood, Bell, Caddis etc were brought to the club with one thing in mind. Get us out of the Division asap. Great,  we did that. It's the nature of the beast that having achieved success they have be replaced by better players. It's dog eat dog in pro football and most top managers have no room for sentiment.

For some reason we haven't done that.

I'd say it takes time. 

Although 9/10 is pushing it a bit, I'd say he's got more right than wrong. The only obvious mistake is Whittingham and I think we'll all concede that hindsight is 20/20 on that one.

 

Anyone play the ball and not the man in here btw?

[JBiz]

26 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

I think Mowbray is poor in the transfer market. I think Mowbray is excellent at man-management and getting the players to work as hard for the badge as anyone I can remember.

I agree he is an excellent man manager but I think “poor” is a gross overstatement of minor criticisms on transfers;

Exhibit A; The cost of our main business last season - Was it Bell, Dack and Samuel that cost money? (about 1.25m?) Free; Smallwood, Downing, Whittingham, Gladwin, Hart, Leutwiler etc..

Id suggest the target of promotion was achieved because of excellent man management, and a good level of business. Ofcourse a couple have been no shows, but even the Downings, the loans like Chapman, Armstrong and Payne, played at least some part.

Without Dack, we’d probably still be languishing in the third tier potentially, and since that where most of our kitty went - good transfer business complimenting a revival of Graham/Mulgrew/Bennett.

I will be measuring this seasons transfer business against success - and so far we aren’t doing to badly, even if that’s with most of last years team. Lots of season left, if Brereton is still hardly touched by April/May, Rothwell is in the u23s and others like Palmer - recalled, Davenport no impact - I’d start to fall more into the belief we’ve cocked up this years kitty!

Edited December 11, 2018 by Biz

[Paul Mani]

4 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Given the circumstances the likes of Downing, Samuel, Smallwood, Bell, Caddis etc were brought to the club with one thing in mind. Get us out of the Division asap. Great,  we did that. It's the nature of the beast that having achieved success they have be replaced by better players. It's dog eat dog in pro football and most top managers have no room for sentiment.

For some reason we haven't done that.

Downing is now 5th place defender.

Samuel was replaced by £7m BB

Smallwood - We signed Reed and Davenport (who’s been injured) and tbf to Smallwood he’s fighting hard to keep his place.

Bell is young and was bought to develop into a championship player.

Caddis has gone.

You make a great point initially but those players are and will be removed through the season. He’s openly said that the players are under no illusion as to what standard they need to be at to stay in the team. Even the likes of Bennett and Mulgrew.