Summer Transfer Window 2019

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, K-Hod said:

To be fair, if anyone says 'I don't think anyone has actually said that', then there are plenty of people that spend enough time on here to trawl through the thread and find a post to prove their point.....

Generally I just couldn't be bothered looking for where it was said. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, K-Hod said:

He was injured for most of last season on loan and also I found this after a 30 second Google search: 

'However, in November 2016 he picked up an injury that would lead him to the end of his loan spell with the Blades in January 2017. It was agreed on 31 January 2017 that his loan spell would be renewed and he would rejoin the Blades upon his rehabilitation.'

I was talking about Davenport,obviously. 

I can use Google too 

Edited July 18, 2019 by Bigdoggsteel

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Generally I just couldn't be bothered looking for where it was said. 

PMSL

[BlackburnEnd75]

Just now, Paul Mani said:

Or it could be a 433 without a Target man so that they are interchangeable (like Liverpool). This is perfectly feasible so long as you aren’t going direct into the likes of DG which is what Mowbray spoke about.

The only question about 433 is how does it suit Dack? Other than that, I like it.

This is how I am choosing to interpret what Tony said.

Mainly because it makes the most sense

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, OJRovers said:

If it is 4-4-2 then we'd better start signing some wingers pretty quickly.

There's only Chapman (untested in the Championship and injury prone) and Downing (35) as proper wingers at the club.

 

 

 

You know you don't have to be an actual winger to play there under Mowbray

Rothwell and Buckley started on the wings yesterday. 

I suppose Bennett could play there too. Maybe Armstrong too. 

There are rumours we might sign one on loan as well on twitter 

[FGS5635]

Just now, Paul Mani said:

Or it could be a 433 without a Target man so that they are interchangeable (like Liverpool). This is perfectly feasible so long as you aren’t going direct into the likes of DG which is what Mowbray spoke about.

The only question about 433 is how does it suit Dack? Other than that, I like it.

I think it suits Dack bigtime. He is good enough to play any of the 3 and chage about at will.

The question is how would it suit DG. He doesnt have the legs or pace to drift out wide and interchange much

[OJRovers]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

You know you don't have to be an actual winger to play there under Mowbray

Rothwell and Buckley started on the wings yesterday. 

I suppose Bennett could play there too. Maybe Armstrong too. 

There are rumours we might sign one on loan as well on twitter 

If we're starting games 4-4-2 with 2 wingers that aren't proper wingers then Mowbray is rightly going to get criticised if it doesn't work.

Time will tell.

 

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, Paul Mani said:

Or it could be a 433 without a Target man so that they are interchangeable (like Liverpool). This is perfectly feasible so long as you aren’t going direct into the likes of DG which is what Mowbray spoke about.

The only question about 433 is how does it suit Dack? Other than that, I like it.

Thats a big question, it would be crazy to play a formation without a number 10 considering our best player plays in that position.

We will see, theres bound to be a bit of skepticism because Mowbrays previous tactical experiments (3 at the back, Dack/Palmer as a false 9, strikers playing as wingers) havent worked and indeed hes found that simplicity is key at times.

1 hour ago, Biz said:

This could be taken a few ways. To me it just says “less knock downs from DG” but I’m quite convinced that if we need to do that to pick points up, we will. 

Surely (like the transfer window), the judgement of any new formation or style comes during and after performances?

Rather than having any emotional response to a line of dialogue from someone interviewed several times a week, sometimes numerous times of day?

 

 

Theres very little to talk about. This quote is something to talk about because its a guide to how we may play. Obviously people will judge after performances, goes without saying, people can question/hypothesise/suggest things in advance.

[Blueandwhitemike]

10 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Exactly. We have played 4-4-2 in pre-season and this would fit what he said. 

It's gas the wild conclusions and criticism about his comments. The funniest thing is some will now become fact. We will start to see posters reference some of these mad formations as reality and another reason to critisice. If indeed it is 4-4-2, you actually couldn't get more practical or back to basics. 

 

I thought last night it was said we played 4-3-3.  If TM meant two up front why would he say nobody through the middle?  TM has mentioned Liverpool before and also tried Dack in the false 9 position before (to little effect).  It's hardly a mad formation or wild conclusion and more like than 4-4-2 unless you count Dack as a striker.

It's quite possible we will have Downing Johnson Travis in the midfield and Armstrong Gallagher wide forwards a Dack a la Firminho.

Given we looked poor when Dack was played there before and mostly only good as a 10 or second striker then it's understandable people might be concerned.  

If we do try it I hope we've really thought it out as we don't really have the full backs but we aren't necessarily trying to exactly replicate Liverpool's so hopefully they have found a way to make it work.

[JBiz]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Thats a big question, it would be crazy to play a formation without a number 10 considering our best player plays in that position.

We will see, theres bound to be a bit of skepticism because Mowbrays previous tactical experiments (3 at the back, Dack/Palmer as a false 9, strikers playing as wingers) havent worked and indeed hes found that simplicity is key at times.

Theres very little to talk about. This quote is something to talk about because its a guide to how we may play. Obviously people will judge after performances, goes without saying, people can question/hypothesise/suggest things in advance.

Yea of course, just like I could suggest the immediate response of worry seems a weird reaction

Especially if it’s based on one line of an interview.

Double especially if that man is known to “wax lyrical” and is interviewed every day of the week.

 

[SBlue]

Remember lads, you'll be able to give all the credit to Damien Johnson anyway so win-win.

[Mattyblue]

Every day of the week? No the LT just stretch out his quotes so it seems like it...

[jim mk2]

14 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I have seen no reports that he had a history of injuries before we signed him.  

At Man City, had fractured ankle and out for 13 weeks with hamstring, among a host of minor injuries

[JBiz]

Just now, S8 & Blue said:

Remember lads, you'll be able to give all the credit to Damien Johnson anyway so win-win.

 

 

[bluebruce]

A lot of talk about tactics and formation...to bring it a bit more on track, a thought just occurred to me.

Why is Butterfield still training with us? Assuming it's true he isn't under consideration for a contract. He isn't a free agent, he is still under contract at Derby. I'm confused that we are still using our resources for him. I assume he isn't paying us for the use of our expensive facilities, staff, canteen food etc. Small change in the world of football, maybe, but I thought we were trying to watch the pennies these days? If we have no plans to sign him, this should all be Derby's responsibility now. I imagine there is also some youngster who could be getting game time in these u-23 friendlies instead of him.

I can see why Adam is still here - we may not 'plan' to sign him, but if our CM situation changed I'm sure he'd be under consideration the way he has played. Well before Butterfield.

[Gary C]

Just now, bluebruce said:

A lot of talk about tactics and formation...to bring it a bit more on track, a thought just occurred to me.

Why is Butterfield still training with us? Assuming it's true he isn't under consideration for a contract. He isn't a free agent, he is still under contract at Derby. I'm confused that we are still using our resources for him. I assume he isn't paying us for the use of our expensive facilities, staff, canteen food etc. Small change in the world of football, maybe, but I thought we were trying to watch the pennies these days? If we have no plans to sign him, this should all be Derby's responsibility now. I imagine there is also some youngster who could be getting game time in these u-23 friendlies instead of him.

I can see why Adam is still here - we may not 'plan' to sign him, but if our CM situation changed I'm sure he'd be under consideration the way he has played. Well before Butterfield.

Totally agree it's a strange one

[Gary C]

http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/993165352?-11198:839

More on potential Carson move

[JHRover]

Just now, bluebruce said:

A lot of talk about tactics and formation...to bring it a bit more on track, a thought just occurred to me.

Why is Butterfield still training with us? Assuming it's true he isn't under consideration for a contract. He isn't a free agent, he is still under contract at Derby. I'm confused that we are still using our resources for him. I assume he isn't paying us for the use of our expensive facilities, staff, canteen food etc. Small change in the world of football, maybe, but I thought we were trying to watch the pennies these days? If we have no plans to sign him, this should all be Derby's responsibility now. I imagine there is also some youngster who could be getting game time in these u-23 friendlies instead of him.

I can see why Adam is still here - we may not 'plan' to sign him, but if our CM situation changed I'm sure he'd be under consideration the way he has played. Well before Butterfield.

I imagine it's an insurance policy. Sell a midfielder or one gets seriously injured and we'll have a vacancy. Keeping him around the place for a few weeks will be loose change if we quickly need someone to step in and he's already here. 

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Just now, JHRover said:

I imagine it's an insurance policy. Sell a midfielder or one gets seriously injured and we'll have a vacancy. Keeping him around the place for a few weeks will be loose change if we quickly need someone to step in and he's already here. 

Rumour in Blackpool - we have bid to sign Adam - as have Blackpool and Reading. Though wages we are offering is less than Reading will still have a chance as his missus doesn't want to move out of area.

[Gary C]

Just now, JHRover said:

I imagine it's an insurance policy. Sell a midfielder or one gets seriously injured and we'll have a vacancy. Keeping him around the place for a few weeks will be loose change if we quickly need someone to step in and he's already here. 

Davenport looks like hes picked up another injury so whether its serious or not could help his case for a deal

[JacknOry]

Just now, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

Rumour in Blackpool - we have bid to sign Adam - as have Blackpool and Reading. Though wages we are offering is less than Reading will still have a chance as his missus doesn't want to move out of area.

These missuses have too much power. 

[Crimpshrine]

Didn't we try 'no one down the middle' at Preston last season?

Usual back 4 + Bennett, Reed, Smallwood, Dack, Palmer, Armstrong.

Maybe Armstrong was nominally down the middle but he drifted wide and Palmer ended up being the furthest forward. Totally toothless in first half

Graham came on at half time and scored with first touch.

Maybe Mowbray saw something I didn't.

[Neal]

Just now, Crimpshrine said:

Didn't we try 'no one down the middle' at Preston last season?

Usual back 4 + Bennett, Reed, Smallwood, Dack, Palmer, Armstrong.

Maybe Armstrong was nominally down the middle but he drifted wide and Palmer ended up being the furthest forward. Totally toothless in first half

Graham came on at half time and scored with first touch.

Maybe Mowbray saw something I didn't.

Yeah we did and that particular game was one that stood out as a complete failure. We had absolutely nothing in the final 3rd and the ball just kept coming back at our pitiful defence. 

[Paul Mani]

8 minutes ago, JHRover said:

I imagine it's an insurance policy. Sell a midfielder or one gets seriously injured and we'll have a vacancy. Keeping him around the place for a few weeks will be loose change if we quickly need someone to step in and he's already here. 

If Davenport injury is serious I’d push Buckley up rather than buy Adam personally

[toogs]

11 minutes ago, Crimpshrine said:

Didn't we try 'no one down the middle' at Preston last season?

Yes, a complete abortion of a match tactically by Mowbray. In front of 5K away fans. Shameful and embarrasing.

Somehow it was even worse in the next match against Wigan.