Summer Transfer Window

[JacknOry]

2 minutes ago, philipl said:

I'd be injury prone if I were a pro footballer.

I think this is completely over doing it.

I always look for a squad to have five central defenders- Ayala, Lenihan and Williams are seasoned pros at this level and one will be a bench warmer while Carter and Wharton have shown they can do a job.

As you rightly say we have cover through flexibility at right back and the under 23 right back is impressing.

I would focus 100% on quality over quantity. Get a promotion-capable left back. We are short of left footers as well so that would also add to flexibility in the squad.

The "couple more at least" are going to come through the development squad. Buckley and Chapman were easily the class acts on the park on Tuesday night.

I agree the LB certainly has to be of a high standard as he would be coming straight into the first team (you would hope). But for me, a little more strength in depth (competition) at CB and RB would be ideal. I am fairly happy with our depth in midfield and attack - just at the back it worries me. 

[tomphil]

54 minutes ago, alex l said:

I'm sure some of the add ons were reported as based on competitive international appearances, which looked a shoe in at the time, but he's not played many competitive games for England. 

Aye that'll have gone for good now i think.

[Mike E]

The plan at left back should, imo, be to get in an experienced left back (Douglas, Cunningham etc) that can pass the torch to Lewis Thompson.

Bell should strictly be a backup at this point, albeit he's played better by virtue of the goalkeeper acting as a 3rd centre back, freeing the full backs to push up to 'defend in midfield' rather than focus on defense.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

14 minutes ago, philipl said:

I'd be injury prone if I were a pro footballer.

I think this is completely over doing it.

I always look for a squad to have five central defenders- Ayala, Lenihan and Williams are seasoned pros at this level and one will be a bench warmer while Carter and Wharton have shown they can do a job.

As you rightly say we have cover through flexibility at right back and the under 23 right back is impressing.

I would focus 100% on quality over quantity. Get a promotion-capable left back. We are short of left footers as well so that would also add to flexibility in the squad.

The "couple more at least" are going to come through the development squad. Buckley and Chapman were easily the class acts on the park on Tuesday night.

Mowbray wanted 2 x CB,LB,GK,CM a few weeks ago - he's got a 1 x CB so far. The squad is thin in certain areas, namely defence and GK. An injury to Johnson/Holtby and we look short in CM too. Those are the areas, especially defence, where you don't want to be relying on kids who have yet to prove themselves beyond youth team football. 

Edited September 30, 2020 by Hoochie Bloochie Mama

[roversfan99]

31 minutes ago, JoeH said:

It's frustrating as teams like Manchester United, who've spent years in divisions below us at that level, and currently sit bottom of the PL2 table, can keep producing McTominay's and Williams for their first team. JRC, Trav, Bucko and our lot are just as good, just as promising and it's nice to finally see these lads get the game time they've earned.

There's nothing stopping our academy except perception. The first reaction to any young, promising player is that he won't be ready. Dolan got it, Buckley gets it. Just give these lads time, like these Premier League clubs do.

Thats an incredibly big claim to say that its all about perception. Did McTominay even play much for their under 23s at United? Travis might be a very good player at our level but he certainly isnt on McTominays level, never mind Buckley. I remember you making a similar comparison between Hudson Odoi and Rankin Costello, but theres no way that the latter makes a big impact for England and Chelsea. The under 23s league is essentially a tool, for example McTominay will be coming up against top class midfielders in training every day. League tables at that level of course are of some relevance but different clubs will use it differently. Another tool is to loan players out and play real football like Wharton has done.

Not saying that we shouldnt be placing importance in the kids but at the end of the day the under 23s league isnt geared as a competitive gauge in the same way that a normal league is and indeed sometimes young lads will essentialy bypass age groups. Its hard to assume that our young lads are better or worse based on the under 23 league table. They dont need to be I suppose either. Also worth factoring in that some of our young lads were let go by bigger teams which is a good tactic.

Edited September 30, 2020 by roversfan99

[Blue blood]

46 minutes ago, philipl said:

Sorry to pick on a random post but I simply do not buy this argument our squad is wafer thin.

We have just beaten one of the ante-post favourites 4-0 away and we had these players unavailable:

Ayala

Travis 

Evans

Dack

Gallagher

Butterworth

Vale

and had JRC go off injured

...all of whom ordinarily would be in contention for the match day 18.

And three days later the under-23s beat Leicester 4-0 and even got stronger when the subs came on. And the Under 23s are 4th in Division 1 of Premier League 2 with a game in hand on the three clubs above them.

 

This most certainly is not what a thin squad looks like.

It is though, a squad that needs strengthening in two very specific areas if we are to turn a promising start into a promising first ten games, then a promising first half to the season and ultimately a successful promotion campaign

- a first choice senior left back and a back-up Keeper, both of whom are outstanding and not merely time proven Championship journeymen

Hi no problems with you quoting my post or disagreeing in parts. That said we both hugely agree about the left back and keeper issues. 

The disagreement centres on a couple of positions. I don't think anyone is saying the squad is wafer thin but needing strengthening in a couple of areas. Bit of a difference. 

Personally I think the two areas mentioned do need strengthening. You list who is out, and therein lies the problem. Travis is out for a while, months. Evans is out regularly. Therefore there is a significant thinness to the central midfield options. Their being injured supports the point I was making! Especially when you factor in Holtby and Johnson's fitness records. I will admit it's an availability rather than a numbers issue, but the effect is the same - we need another body in there. 

Of the players you mention I don't know about Butterworth and Vale but neither have really played so perhaps wouldn't be relying on them. The bigger thing for me is how few of those injured, certainly those proven in the squad, can play wide in attack (properly!) Again this suggests that we are thin out wide in attack. 

I'm not saying there's no depth, that a whole revamp is needed, but rather that certain positions look thin,  either due to numbers or the reliability of those to be available. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Thats an incredibly big claim to say that its all about perception. Did McTominay even play much for their under 23s at United? Travis might be a very good player at our level but he certainly isnt on McTominays level, never mind Buckley. I remember you making a similar comparison between Hudson Odoi and Rankin Costello, but theres no way that the latter makes a big impact for England and Chelsea. The under 23s league is essentially a tool, for example McTominay will be coming up against top class midfielders in training every day. League tables at that level of course are of some relevance but different clubs will use it differently. Another tool is to loan players out and play real football like Wharton has done.

Not saying that we shouldnt be placing importance in the kids but at the end of the day the under 23s league isnt geared as a competitive gauge in the same way that a normal league is and indeed sometimes young lads will essentialy bypass age groups. 

"Travis might be a very good player at our level but he certainly isnt on McTominays level". I don't think you've any way of proving or disproving this either way. My point was that it's not as black and white as, United youth players good, Rovers youth players not as good.

"Another tool is to loan players out and play real football like Wharton has done.". Take Brandon Williams. Youth left back who's progressed at United. Hasn't gone on loan anywhere, simply given the backing and a chance. Yet their youth team consistently under performs when compared to Rovers. If Manchester United Under 23's aren't as good as Rovers Under 23's, then it's fairly simple to see why it's not a big claim to say our youth players are as good as theirs.

Your argument would make sense if the players I'd used as examples had actually gone out on loans. What you're implying is that the reason Manchester United Under 23's always finish below Rovers Under 23's is because their better youth players are out on loan, but that's genuinely just not the case. When you look at the amount of youth players out on loan there compared to here, we're completely on par, if not further ahead. 

So if Rovers Under 23's are better than Manchester United Under 23's, it's far from a "incredibly bold claim" to say our youth players are better than theirs.

Edited September 30, 2020 by JoeH

[roversfan99]

Just now, JoeH said:

"Travis might be a very good player at our level but he certainly isnt on McTominays level". I don't think you've any way of proving or disproving this either way. My point was that it's not as black and white as, United youth players good, Rovers youth players not as good.

"Another tool is to loan players out and play real football like Wharton has done.". Take Brandon Williams. Youth left back who's progressed at United. Hasn't gone on loan anywhere, simply given the backing and a chance. Yet their youth team consistently under performs when compared to Rovers. If Manchester United Under 23's aren't as good as Rovers Under 23's, then it's fairly simple to see why it's not a big claim to say our youth players are as good as theirs.

Your argument would make sense if the players I'd used as examples had actually gone out on loans. What you're implying is that the reason Manchester United Under 23's always finish below Rovers Under 23's is because their better youth players are out on loan, but that's genuinely just not the case. When you look at the amount of youth players out on loan there compared to here, we're completely on par, if not further ahead. 

My point is more that the league table for the under 23s is not that meaningful. The purpose of the league is development, not finishing as well as possible, obviously thats a bonus.

Of course, the first statement is an opinion. I dont think that Lewis Travis gets close to Man United team, thats not a slight on him because we arent at that standard, none of our players get close to it.

There is also Rashford and Greenwood to consider, special talents who broke through very quickly.

I think its dangerous to label a whole clutch of young players as better, worse or indeed equal based on performance in the under 23s league, thats my point. Indeed all youth players need to be judged individually for a start, Travis shouldnt be judged in the same batch as say Magloire as if they are on par, because they arent. That is something you touch on, dismissing our younger players compared to United, but conversely you cant do similar based on their under 23 league position, because as mentioned earlier, the under 23 league is just one of many tools that clubs have to develop their players, not a perfect gauge of how good a clubs younger players are.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

14 minutes ago, JoeH said:

So if Rovers Under 23's are better than Manchester United Under 23's, it's far from a "incredibly bold claim" to say our youth players are better than theirs.

Manure's U23's tend to go on loan to the Eredivisie. Ours go to Barrow. 

Manure's U23's squad is made up of young lads anyway, most of whom won't play for their first team. Their U23 team is hardly a reflection of the actual players they have that are under 23. Some of our best U23's are the ones we've got from the 'big' NW clubs, who they released. 

That said, our Academy is in fantastic shape at the moment and long may it continue.

Edited September 30, 2020 by Hoochie Bloochie Mama

[Ewood Ace]

10 minutes ago, JoeH said:

So if Rovers Under 23's are better than Manchester United Under 23's, it's far from a "incredibly bold claim" to say our youth players are better than theirs.

Man United could put out an under 23's teams including Henderson, Williams, Rashford, Greenwood, Fosu-Mensah, McTominay and Tuanzebe if they wanted to. Even the biggest Rovers fan would have admit that a team including those players is comfortably superior to a team of our under 23 players. We have a good group of young lads most whom are good enough for the Championship and two or three of them may well go on to be good enough for the Premiership, but let's not go over top saying that we are producing better players than Man United.

[Oldgregg86]

57 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

It might not be wafer thin but there are some areas that need further strengthening in an ideal world. On top of the LB and backup goalie we could do with a couple more at least.

All 3 of our CBs are injury-prone (that includes Ayala), we then just have Wharton and some untested kids. Nyambe is injury-prone, we have Bennett and JRC (already injured) backing him up and they are not even RBs. Get a couple of injuries in these positions at the same time and we could be in trouble. 

I agree but I think every club in this division is in the same boat. No teams can get the injuries we have and replace like for like. It is what it is really

[islander200]

46 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

Mowbray wanted 2 x CB,LB,GK,CM a few weeks ago - he's got a 1 x CB so far. The squad is thin in certain areas, namely defence and GK. An injury to Johnson/Holtby and we look short in CM too. Those are the areas, especially defence, where you don't want to be relying on kids who have yet to prove themselves beyond youth team football. 

He wanted 2 centre backs on the provision Williams was leaving tho?Now he looks like staying I doubt we will bring in another centre back.

Yeah in an ideal world we would have the money to strengthen another couple of areas but money is clearly tight,we ain't going to get quality in in every position we could do with cover.

Imo no point signing squad fillers who ain't going to be promotion quality.We should spend what little we have on trying to improve the first 11 (left back) and a sub goalkeeper.

Look to the youth Buckley, Davenport etc to cover when we have injuries to the likes of Holtby and Johnson.Still have Evans to come back and Dack who can play as one of the 3 in midfield if need be 

[West Yorks Rover]

1 hour ago, alex l said:

I'm sure some of the add ons were reported as based on competitive international appearances, which looked a shoe in at the time, but he's not played many competitive games for England. 

27 England caps, no idea how many were competitive games, lets say 18, that's £1.8 m at the reported £100k per appearance.

If indeed it was based on competitive games only ?

[rigger]

Have we signed anyone?

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, rigger said:

Have we signed anyone?

No. Although Callum Paterson has left Cardiff today so one less threat to worry about at the weekend.

 

[Mercer]

6 hours ago, Paul Mani said:

I still think a deal for Manning might happen. The guy isn’t even appearing on their bench at the moment...

Agree re the European scouting network and feel the best chance of utilising it again this window is for another keeper. Although, having watched Kaminski four times now, he looks better than Raya and Walton combined and is worth the set up on his own!

Sign one player per window at that age and level and you’re going in the right direction! 

I think you might be giving our Euro scouting set-up more credit than is due.

I think it's more likely Kaminski fell into our lap following a seemingly fall out between club / player in much the same way as we saw Mulgrew 'sent to Wigan' just hours before last summer's window closed.

Are we really scouting for players in Belgian's First Division who are regulars for their leading clubs (playing in Europe)?  Would seem out of our budget (Kaminski price arguably low due to circumstances).

My theory seems borne out by the fact that we don't appear to be able to find a left back anywhere in Europe (within our budgets) better than Bell!

 

[Paul Mani]

3 minutes ago, Mercer said:

I think you might be giving our Euro scouting set-up more credit than is due.

I think it's more likely Kaminski fell into our lap following a seemingly fall out between club / player in much the same way as we saw Mulgrew 'sent to Wigan' just hours before last summer's window closed.

Are we really scouting for players in Belgian's First Division who are regulars for their leading clubs (playing in Europe)?  Would seem out of our budget (Kaminski price arguably low due to circumstances).

My theory seems borne out by the fact that we don't appear to be able to find a left back anywhere in Europe (within our budgets) better than Bell!

 

Hahahah - so let me get this right....we DONT sign anyone from the European network, then the manager and club are useless...we DO sign someone from the European network and it obviously must’ve fallen into our lap!? ?

Your theory about left backs and Bell is a stab in the dark at best!

You couldn’t write it...

[G Somerset Rover]

Manning in and a back up GK and this would represent a very decent window. Come on Tony and the V’s. Let’s make it happen.

[Mercer]

16 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Hahahah - so let me get this right....we DONT sign anyone from the European network, then the manager and club are useless...we DO sign someone from the European network and it obviously must’ve fallen into our lap!? ?

Your theory about left backs and Bell is a stab in the dark at best!

You couldn’t write it...

IMO, if we were scouting Kaminski BEFORE the alleged club / player bust up, presumably our scouts are rocking up at the likes of PSG, Barcelona, Juve. Bayern and Ajax!!!!

You need to be serious - the fans aren't as naive and gullible as, IMO, Waggott, Mowbray and yourself think.

[chaddyrovers]

 

 

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, Mercer said:

IMO, if we were scouting Kaminski BEFORE the alleged club / player bust up, presumably our scouts are rocking up at the likes of PSG, Barcelona, Juve. Bayern and Ajax!!!!

You need to be serious - the fans aren't as naive and gullible as, IMO, Waggott, Mowbray and yourself think.

We were scouting him for months before hand.

 

[Sparks Rover]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

We were scouting him for months before hand.

 

How do you know that?

[Madon]

52 minutes ago, rigger said:

Have we signed anyone?

Thanks for bringing this thread back on topic.

Just spent a good ten minutes hiding comments from this thread with a 'Is Rovers academy better than Uniteds argument?' 

Please keep it on topic, even if there isn't much transfer news to talk about. 

If you want to discuss our academy, there is a thread for it. ☺️

[islander200]

9 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

How do you know that?

Mowbray said he was a long term target 

[chaddyrovers]

37 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Mowbray said he was a long term target 

He did. Here Mowbray on Kaminski 

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/18688278.tony-mowbray-happy-see-european-scouting-pay-off-thomas-kaminski/

Edited September 30, 2020 by chaddyrovers