Summer Transfer Window

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Or you can just rely on what you see and use your own judgement.   My judgement is that Hughton is a better manager 

Yes agreed

[Bbrovers2288]

Just now, JoeH said:

True but I think the labels of positive and negative camps are perhaps generalised

I’m against mowbray but I wouldn’t say I’m negative, I just don’t think he is good enough to take us to the next level. 
I don’t really see how you can argue that hughton has not got a better reputation. Mowbray has literally had one success and quite a few bombs, hughton has never had any nightmares and quite a bit of success 

[RevidgeBlue]

1 minute ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

There is those that won’t be swayed with regards to mowbray- good or bad, is my point 

Not sure that's entirely true, I don't rate him at all currently but I'd have to hold my hands up if he got us promoted. Similarly it might be easier to judge his tenure as a whole  if he took us back to League 1.

The grey area will come if he leaves in 5 years time and at no point have we made the play offs. I'd regard that as abject failure but I'll bet there would be some still arguing ihe'd done well having to deal with Venky's and (allegedly) limited budgets etc etc.

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Not sure that's entirely true, I don't rate him at all currently but I'd have to hold my hands up if he got us promoted. Similarly it might be easier to judge his tenure as a whole  if he took us back to League 1.

The grey area will come if he leaves in 5 years time and at no point have we made the play offs. I'd regard that as abject failure but I'll bet there would be some still arguing ihe'd done well having to deal with Venky's and (allegedly) limited budgets etc etc.

 

If we didn’t make the play-offs this year, how many more years after do you think is fair to give him before pressure starts to be applied?

[Bbrovers2288]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Not sure that's entirely true, I don't rate him at all currently but I'd have to hold my hands up if he got us promoted. Similarly it might be easier to judge his tenure as a whole  if he took us back to League 1.

The grey area will come if he leaves in 5 years time and at no point have we made the play offs. I'd regard that as abject failure but I'll bet there would be some still arguing ihe'd done well having to deal with Venky's and (allegedly) limited budgets etc etc.

 

Pretty much what I said in my post, I just don’t think currently folk will be swayed one way or another. There is the bowyer type camp that say he is doing brilliantly to work with the monsters that are venkys and keeping us mod table in the champ and there are those like bowyer detractors who say that with our squad we should be achieving more. I’m happy to praise him should he get us promoted or even close to, but his failings are amateurish to me at the moment. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

I’m against mowbray but I wouldn’t say I’m negative, I just don’t think he is good enough to take us to the next level. 
I don’t really see how you can argue that hughton has not got a better reputation. Mowbray has literally had one success and quite a few bombs, hughton has never had any nightmares and quite a bit of success 

I’m not really arguing that TM is a better manager than Hughton, I’m just saying it’s a very hard thing to prove. Every job is different, look at Gary Bowyer.

You could take Bowyer’s time at Rovers and say wow he did well, nice league finish, some good cup runs. But then you look at the team he had to work with and realise it was bang average.

People talk about Hughton and some of his successes, but it’s impossible to fairly compare Brighton or Norwich’s squads and budgets with Blackburn’s or Celtics, because every club and situation is different. 

Would Hughton have succeeded at Rovers with Rhodes and Gestede, we’ll never know? Does Tony Mowbray’s failings as a Premier League manager in one stint make him a poor manager, or could he have done well with another crack? We’ll never know. It’s all circumstance, chance and budget. For me, if you’re managerless and you need one in, that’s when you compare them, and say Manager X is better than Manager Y because. But TM’s not going anywhere, so to compare him to other managers and say he’s not as good is just a bit pointless

Edited October 7, 2020 by JoeH

[Bbrovers2288]

1 minute ago, JoeH said:

I’m not really arguing that TM is a better manager than Hughton, I’m just saying it’s a very hard thing to prove. Every job is different, look at Gary Bowyer.

You could take Bowyer’s time at Rovers and say wow he did well, nice league finish, some good cup runs. But then you look at the team he had to work with and realise it was bang average.

People talk about Hughton and some of his successes, but it’s impossible to fairly compare Brighton or Norwich’s squads and budgets with Blackburn’s or Celtics, because every club and situation is different.

What your saying is we can’t compare managers at all because every club and scenario is different so steve evans might be as good a manager as klopp. Doesn’t wash with me. Managers who are successful prove they are better managers by said success. Mowbray had a great budget at Celtic and is wholly looked at with disgust by Celtic fans on his time there. He has yet to win me over as Blackburn manager and doubt he will 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

What your saying is we can’t compare managers at all because every club and scenario is different so steve evans might be as good a manager as klopp. Doesn’t wash with me. Managers who are successful prove they are better managers by said success. Mowbray had a great budget at Celtic and is wholly looked at with disgust by Celtic fans on his time there. He has yet to win me over as Blackburn manager and doubt he will 

Maybe not Steve Evans and Juergen Klopp, but I think when managers are evidently cut from a similar cloth in terms of the types of levels they’ve worked at. Such as Arteta and Lampard or Klopp and Guardiola, or in this instance Mowbray and Hughton, I think it’s very difficult to explain the reasoning for “Manager X is better than Manager Y” other than pure personal *feeling*.

[RevidgeBlue]

10 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I’m not really arguing that TM is a better manager than Hughton, I’m just saying it’s a very hard thing to prove. Every job is different, look at Gary Bowyer.

You could take Bowyer’s time at Rovers and say wow he did well, nice league finish, some good cup runs. But then you look at the team he had to work with and realise it was bang average.

People talk about Hughton and some of his successes, but it’s impossible to fairly compare Brighton or Norwich’s squads and budgets with Blackburn’s or Celtics, because every club and situation is different. 

Would Hughton have succeeded at Rovers with Rhodes and Gestede, we’ll never know? Does Tony Mowbray’s failings as a Premier League manager in one stint make him a poor manager, or could he have done well with another crack? We’ll never know. It’s all circumstance, chance and budget. For me, if you’re managerless and you need one in, that’s when you compare them, and say Manager X is better than Manager Y because. But TM’s not going anywhere, so to compare him to other managers and say he’s not as good is just a bit pointless

Generally though, if  manager A has a better record of success at the same level over a lengthy period of time than manager B, then that would tend to indicate manager A is superior regardless of the individual foibles of the Club's they've been at.

That's what you seem to be arguing against.

Edited October 7, 2020 by RevidgeBlue

[Bbrovers2288]

4 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Maybe not Steve Evans and Juergen Klopp, but I think when managers are evidently cut from a similar cloth in terms of the types of levels they’ve worked at. Such as Arteta and Lampard or Klopp and Guardiola, or in this instance Mowbray and Hughton, I think it’s very difficult to explain the reasoning for “Manager X is better than Manager Y” other than pure personal *feeling*.

Hughton has been manager at top levels a lot more than mowbray - does that satisfy your criteria enough?

[bluebruce]

11 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

 But overall , are we stronger squad wise than last season? We have a glaring weakness at left back that not been addressed. We have two strikers that have yet to get going, armstrong goes down then we are done for. 
we have had a decent start but old annoyances have already been seen, losing opener when we were the stronger team, not being able to break down a Cardiff side that came to defend and a fairly poor result after gaining some momentum.

Wycombe was pleasing but they are the whipping boys. Sadly because I like ainsworth. Derby again, well dispatched but played them at the right time. 
think a few have got ahead of themselves. Mowbray gets us consistent and steadily in top 6 il tip my hat 

You ask that, but then you've cited factors that were present last season. You correctly show those areas haven't strengthened at this point, but I don't think this is the way to answer your question, as you've asked if we are stronger, not if we have fixed all our problems.

The way to answer it is to first compare the players we have lost to the players we have gained. Obviously to a degree this is impossible and would be nearly every window, as they were mostly unknowns to us, and it's early. But so far I'd say:

Kaminski looks better than Walton. The Greek kid sounds and looks higher calibre than the Canadian.

Ayala, the most known quantity, is a better defender than Tosin, but less technically gifted. I'd call that one equal, maybe a slight win since conceding was our main problem, and Kaminski's distribution may make up for Tosin's loss to a degree.

Dolan brings more to our attack, under the new system, than DG (at his end) was able to. Potentially a lot lot more, especially as DG wouldn't have suited this system the same, but we will see over time as with all of them.

That's about as like-for-like as I can go with the 'replacements' (not that Dolan was meant to be one). I think in terms of players in for players gone, we are better off from what we can tell so far, but obviously that view could change over time.

On top of that though, we are down Cunningham who only lasted a few games, Samuel for extra attacking cover, Downing who was a regular for us all season and some thought possibly our best player. And Smallwood and Hart who had become complete non-entities. There's been an argument that Downing slowed our play down, and I can see it, especially with the current approach. He was versatile though and a tidy, reliable player in a few roles. He's a miss for our squad options for sure, although JRC has replaced him and Bennett as the chief utility player. JRC doesn't have that experience though and will make youthful mistakes. We also had JRC last season...

Which brings me onto my last point in answering that question. We have a very young squad and they're all a year older than they were last year. In theory this probably makes them better, since very few are passing their peak years yet. I reckon that compensates for the slight loss of squad depth after the new guys vs old guys comparison I started with. As well as new players potentially emerging from a very promising academy. The ones in the first team could be a bigger boon though - Travis' injury is a big blow mind. But we now have the possibility of a red-hot Arma all season instead of just the start of it. Dack stands to be injured for less of the season than last, but that's not guaranteed and regaining form could take time. Rothwell and the older head of Holtby are looking more like they've found their roles too, but it's early.

Overall I do think our squad looks stronger in quality than last season. However, it probably has a bit less depth, which could be exposed by injuries. The system looks better, too.

Frankly if we sign the left back and he's decent I'll be reasonably pleased with how we stand relative to last season, and hopeful of a playoff push as long as Arma stays fit, which you're right, could cripple us if he doesn't. It would have if it had happened in January last time too though. Could do with a quality loan til January to fill the Travis hole, mind, but finances may not allow.

[Bethnal]

It’s a bit tetchy in here, lads.

Been lurking the last few weeks on this thread and some of the matchdays.

While I can see where the tangents started, gotta say that it’s incredibly impressive how far off course the transfer thread will go each window.

Contributing further to that, with all understanding of the irony in doing so, I feel it’s prudent to point out that we’re 6th and have the highest goal difference in the league. Four games in, you say? Aye, maybe there’s something in that. But I’ll reserve judgment ‘til ten games. Then 15. 20 games and so on.

It’s the surprising signings that we’ll only be able to hold out for and predictions are somewhat moot at this stage. Dolan was a surprise, in that he became an immediate first team player. Maybe McBride makes the leap. Maybe Butterworth builds on his promise after injury. Maybe the Norwegian left back joins. Maybe the defence gels and finds its feet.

The point is, we don’t know. And when you don’t know and - crucially - you can’t do anything about it, there comes a point where you need to accept it.

There’s always room for healthy debate but it becomes a much nicer place to spend time when the forum is just that little bit less dramatic and hostile. You’ll all have a much better time embracing the short term enjoyment than agonising over the long term unknowns.

For now, we’ve signed a handful of development prospects that could turn into more than that, are seeing our youngsters kick on a bit and could potentially have solved two major weak points by mid October. By the end of October we could be nearer the promotion spots.

There’s plenty to be concerned about if that’s your bag, but I reckon you’ll have a better time looking up rather than down.

[Bbrovers2288]

3 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

You ask that, but then you've cited factors that were present last season. You correctly show those areas haven't strengthened at this point, but I don't think this is the way to answer your question, as you've asked if we are stronger, not if we have fixed all our problems.

The way to answer it is to first compare the players we have lost to the players we have gained. Obviously to a degree this is impossible and would be nearly every window, as they were mostly unknowns to us, and it's early. But so far I'd say:

Kaminski looks better than Walton. The Greek kid sounds and looks higher calibre than the Canadian.

Ayala, the most known quantity, is a better defender than Tosin, but less technically gifted. I'd call that one equal, maybe a slight win since conceding was our main problem, and Kaminski's distribution may make up for Tosin's loss to a degree.

Dolan brings more to our attack, under the new system, than DG (at his end) was able to. Potentially a lot lot more, especially as DG wouldn't have suited this system the same, but we will see over time as with all of them.

That's about as like-for-like as I can go with the 'replacements' (not that Dolan was meant to be one). I think in terms of players in for players gone, we are better off from what we can tell so far, but obviously that view could change over time.

On top of that though, we are down Cunningham who only lasted a few games, Samuel for extra attacking cover, Downing who was a regular for us all season and some thought possibly our best player. And Smallwood and Hart who had become complete non-entities. There's been an argument that Downing slowed our play down, and I can see it, especially with the current approach. He was versatile though and a tidy, reliable player in a few roles. He's a miss for our squad options for sure, although JRC has replaced him and Bennett as the chief utility player. JRC doesn't have that experience though and will make youthful mistakes. We also had JRC last season...

Which brings me onto my last point in answering that question. We have a very young squad and they're all a year older than they were last year. In theory this probably makes them better, since very few are passing their peak years yet. I reckon that compensates for the slight loss of squad depth after the new guys vs old guys comparison I started with. As well as new players potentially emerging from a very promising academy. The ones in the first team could be a bigger boon though - Travis' injury is a big blow mind. But we now have the possibility of a red-hot Arma all season instead of just the start of it. Dack stands to be injured for less of the season than last, but that's not guaranteed and regaining form could take time. Rothwell and the older head of Holtby are looking more like they've found their roles too, but it's early.

Overall I do think our squad looks stronger in quality than last season. However, it probably has a bit less depth, which could be exposed by injuries. The system looks better, too.

Frankly if we sign the left back and he's decent I'll be reasonably pleased with how we stand relative to last season, and hopeful of a playoff push as long as Arma stays fit, which you're right, could cripple us if he doesn't. It would have if it had happened in January last time too though. Could do with a quality loan til January to fill the Travis hole, mind, but finances may not allow.

Fair enough, I can see your viewpoint. 
from mine at the end of last season I thought we needed x, y and z. And so far , we have made 2 real first team signings (Dolan was a complete bonus and not meant for first team), nowhere near enough for me to be happy. I think we are a few injuries- loss of form from being a losing streak at the wrong time. 

Some players such as Williams have came back from the dead and some fans seem to take him as a new signing. 
there is still time of course but currently, I don’t think we have done enough business 
 

[RevidgeBlue]

6 minutes ago, Bethnal said:

It’s a bit tetchy in here, lads.

Been lurking the last few weeks on this thread and some of the matchdays.

While I can see where the tangents started, gotta say that it’s incredibly impressive how far off course the transfer thread will go each window.

Contributing further to that, with all understanding of the irony in doing so, I feel it’s prudent to point out that we’re 6th and have the highest goal difference in the league. Four games in, you say? Aye, maybe there’s something in that. But I’ll reserve judgment ‘til ten games. Then 15. 20 games and so on.

It’s the surprising signings that we’ll only be able to hold out for and predictions are somewhat moot at this stage. Dolan was a surprise, in that he became an immediate first team player. Maybe McBride makes the leap. Maybe Butterworth builds on his promise after injury. Maybe the Norwegian left back joins. Maybe the defence gels and finds its feet.

The point is, we don’t know. And when you don’t know and - crucially - you can’t do anything about it, there comes a point where you need to accept it.

There’s always room for healthy debate but it becomes a much nicer place to spend time when the forum is just that little bit less dramatic and hostile. You’ll all have a much better time embracing the short term enjoyment than agonising over the long term unknowns.

For now, we’ve signed a handful of development prospects that could turn into more than that, are seeing our youngsters kick on a bit and could potentially have solved two major weak points by mid October. By the end of October we could be nearer the promotion spots.

There’s plenty to be concerned about if that’s your bag, but I reckon you’ll have a better time looking up rather than down.

Welcome. 

I wouldn't say it's that tetchy on here, despite differences of opinion, levels of civility are generally good I think.

You're right, things COULD go from strength to strength, on the other hand they may not and for anyone failing to accept things are improving we've  frequently heard in the past   the argument "if we  win five out of the next six we'll be in the mix" etc.

I'd actually argue things have to go from strength to strength anyway, given the number of key players out of contract in the summer, the fact our CEO has managed to somehow reduce our fanbase to sub 2.5k, and the long standing elephant in the room, our overall level of debt.

Good opening contribution from you though, enjoyed that.

[Bethnal]

15 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Welcome. 

I wouldn't say it's that tetchy on here, despite differences of opinion, levels of civility are generally good I think.

You're right, things COULD go from strength to strength, on the other hand they may not and for anyone failing to accept things are improving we've  frequently heard in the past   the argument "if we  win five out of the next six we'll be in the mix" etc.

I'd actually argue things have to go from strength to strength anyway, given the number of key players out of contract in the summer, the fact our CEO has managed to somehow reduce our fanbase to sub 2.5k, and the long standing elephant in the room, our overall level of debt.

Good opening contribution from you though, enjoyed that.

Thanks Revidge, I appreciate that.

I’m a returning poster, although having binned off more email addresses than I can remember, Bundesburn posts no more, hence the rejoin. Anyway, from memory of BRFCS, there’s a certain point on here when it all gets a bit Judaean People’s Front, which I recognise as when people start to argue about who started the argument, but you usually see it coming when someone gets annoyed at chaddy (shoutout to chaddy, fastest googler in the land!)

Look, the ever-present, protracted death rattle of the club is a particularly difficult thing to ignore, agreed and the type of fan base we are - let alone size - means we’re not a reliable revenue source when the world shuts down. Sh*t creek without a paddle is a couple of stops away. I have no direct knowledge of the CEO (I’ve been busy the last couple of years) but if Shebby, Kean (wondering if the swear filter still works for that one), Shaw et al are a measure of corporate recruitment by Venkys, I don’t find it difficult to believe he’s not much use. The Ewood Park thread was a sad sight to behold, as much for the analogue as anything.

I suppose it is the seeming inevitability of the that makes “being positive” (conscious of invoking partisans) the preferred choice. We didn’t know how lucky we were in the 90s (I was born in the late 80s, first memory is 93/94 season). We didn’t know how lucky we were in the 00s, even. We thought we were gonna get lucky in the 2010s and here we are now. If the prospect is something akin to, let’s say, no renewals of key contracts, no more funding of the deficit by Venkys, no prospect of promotion, we’re potentially looking into a much deeper abyss than 10 years of Championship football. Indeed, we may be looking at the 2010s and saying we didn’t know how lucky we were having a club to argue with each other about.

Suffice it to say, I’m happy with the immediate short term, because for whatever reason, watching the news out of the club didn’t fill me with an overwhelming sense of anxiety and dread, which was the first time in a while. Promotion to the Championship was more relief than joy and I guess a start like the one we’ve had - however fleeting it turns out to be - is one to enjoy, whatever comes of it. And when we consider that a drop down the table is the least of our worries, all the more reason to enjoy it when it happens.

I’d probably enjoy being able to follow a Phoenix club, but I’m also the type of hipster kn*bhead that goes/went to see Dulwich Hamlet 10 times a year, so it may not be a widely-shared opinion.

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Fair enough, I can see your viewpoint. 
from mine at the end of last season I thought we needed x, y and z. And so far , we have made 2 real first team signings (Dolan was a complete bonus and not meant for first team), nowhere near enough for me to be happy. I think we are a few injuries- loss of form from being a losing streak at the wrong time. 

Some players such as Williams have came back from the dead and some fans seem to take him as a new signing. 
there is still time of course but currently, I don’t think we have done enough business 
 

We aren't there with all the x, y and z I wanted either, but the main thing missing for me is the LB. We get a decent one in there and I'm pretty content. There are still holes in the squad after that, but I don't think there's a club in the league where everyone is happy with their squad and wouldn't improve it, nor is there ever until promotion is secured (then it's onto where needs strengthening in the Prem). A second prolific striker would be nice, but the Rudy n Rhodes days showed 2 of those doesn't guarantee you jack. Hopefully Dack can come back with a bunch of goals too anyway. So I'm wondering what was your x, y and z?

Until Travis got injured I only really wanted a GK, CB, LB, then backup GK and backup CB. I've decided I'm fine with William's and our youngsters to collectively cover the backup CB, partly as I didn't think we would be getting an experienced top end Championship CB in his prime like we have. So all we are shy is the LB. Then my hopes were only ever in 'getting greedy but if we can manage it's territory, for a classy attacker, and Dolan will do for me if he keeps it up. You say he was a bonus and not meant for the first team, true but we have him now regardless of intent and he is mint. The discussion was only about if the squad is stronger, so it wouldn't matter if the government had mandated that he joined us and the club had protested heartily against it.

[Mercer]

10 hours ago, JoeH said:

Calling Hughton an undoubtedly better manager than Tony Mowbray, when in fact there’s very little tangible evidence to that effect, is definitely working to find a negative in my opinion.

News story breaks about a manager joining a new club and the first reaction is, “well he’s better than our manager”. That’s glass half empty and then some.

As tangible as you can get!!! :

Hughton took Newcastle back to PL and had them top ten at Christmas until Ashley, IMO, unfairly sacked him.

In his only season at Brum, they finished fourth in Championship.

Steady if unspectacular at Norwich. 

Took Brighton to PL and kept them up until they sacked him in their second season back in PL.

Mowbray took WBA up to PL but they bombed and came straight back.

Mowbray, IMO, bombed at both Celtic and Coventry.

If you were employing a manager and had to choose, based upon their track record,  between Hughton and Mowbray it would simply be a no brainer.

Edited October 7, 2020 by Mercer

[Mercer]

4 hours ago, JoeH said:

The stats were quite literally to show that data and factual evidence is extremely hard to determine success for managers. As has been explained. You're either purposefully ignoring that, or you haven't read what you're replying to.

In the post you're referring to I said: "How do you compare the two? What makes him better?"

Then proceeded to show examples as to how you COULD compare them. Finishing with and going on to say that you can't compare managers via data, so to say that factually one manager is better than another is plain wrong.

What is plain wrong is to state, as you did I recall, Mowbray has more career wins when he's substantially 'managed' more matches than Hughton!!!!

Churchill once reportedly said that “the only statistics you can trust are the ones you have falsified yourself”!!!

 

[JacknOry]

Among their fans, the common consensus is Fulham still need one if not two new attackers. On of the names on many of their wishlists include Benrahma, Mbueno and Armstrong.

Edited October 7, 2020 by JacknOry

[Ossydave]

5 hours ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

Can somebody explain

A club with slightly crackpot owners, currently bottom of the league, running very close to the FFP limits...and the fans are split between appointing Hughton or Howe!

Yet,  we're a team with slightly crackpot owners, currently top half of the table, running very close to FFP limits....and half the fans believe we would never get anyone decent to replace Mowbray?

It confuses me.

From my perspective, its not that we COULDN'T bring a decent manager to replace Mowbray, we'd still appeal to many. Its the fact the the recruitment team of, presumably swag, WOULDN'T attract a decent manager,  in fact I dread to think what the selection policy would be - presumably just the cheapest option possible.

Also on Hughton, he's already turned down some biggish championship teams, Sheffield Wednesday and Stoke spring to mind. As I've already said he was clearly holding out for a prem job which hasn't materialised so he's lowered expectations. That said its hardly a crappy job at Forest and its a good chance for him to prove his worth.

[Mercer]

5 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

Among their fans, the common consensus is Fulham still need one if not two new attackers. On of the names on many of their wishlists include Benrahma, Mbueno and Armstrong.

Armstrong to Fulham would make a lot of sense for Fulham.

I think Fulham will become a 'yo yo' club and signing players who they know would help fire them back if relegated is not the worse idea.

Not convinced Armstrong is a PL player (IMO, not in same league as Watkins re ability and football intelligence) but I think Rovers are extremely vulnerable to any half decent bid given current financial circumstances.  Anyone thinking we still have a transfer budget having signed 2 goalies and Ayala, and don't need to sell anyone, need to think again as combined transfer fees were probably no more than £500k and we will have big savings on our wage budget given those who've gone and those who've come in. 

[Paul Mani]

7 hours ago, simongarnerisgod said:

iv`e watched mowbrays teams since the start of his tenure,i don`t think this "entertainment" is going to last,i don`t think other fans do either,don`t know about you but i prefer realism

It’s not realism though because none of anything being said is fact. You have a choice mate. A choice between being positive or negative, between feeling happiness or sadness...you can actually choose!!

The point I’m making is that maybe by Christmas the dream will be over. Who really knows? But today, 7th October 2020, we as Rovers fans have a lot to feel happy about in terms of the way things have gone this summer and the early part of this season. Let’s enjoy it!! Even for a short while! Kinell we’ve waited long enough!? 

[Stuart]

11 hours ago, JoeH said:

Seems an odd/unprovoked reaction to Forest announcing a new manager. How do you compare the two? What makes him better?

Mowbray has 256 career wins
Hughton has 167 career wins
Both managers have won one major honor
Mowbray's win % is 52%
Hughton's win % is 43%

Maybe you mean their transfer records/pulling ability, but all the same I don't understand how this conclusion can be so easily come to.

Do you work for the government in their Coronavirus reporting team because they are some very selective stats.

Mowbray has taken 700 games to reach those wins - including at Celtic where it’s the easiest job in the world (yet he failed) and L1 with the biggest budget.

Let’s compare their records in this division.

Hughton. 108 wins out of 206 games. 52% Overall 1.86 PPG.

Mowbray. 131 wins out of 328 games. 40%. Overall 1.46 PPG.

These two big wins are going to buy Mowbray a heck of a lot of time.

[Paul Mani]

7 hours ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

I think we're all enjoying it. That's got nothing to do with Hughton having a better record than Mowbray, or the tea lady having to sign Dolan because Mowbray didn't know who he was????

I think you are enjoying it.

Im just flabbergasted that people are coming onto the transfer to bang on about how shit the manager is and comparing him at a time like this...

The Dolan point is completely moot too. The manager set up the recruitment team and pathways. He installed the staff in there too. The signings, good and bad on his watch belong to him. Managers do not go out and scout potential players they put trusted teams in to report back to them and they trust those opinions. They’ll likely watch a first team target but will be happy not to watch an 18yr old.

[Lancs Rover]

46 minutes ago, Mercer said:

What is plain wrong is to state, as you did I recall, Mowbray has more career wins when he's substantially 'managed' more matches than Hughton!!!!

Churchill once reportedly said that “the only statistics you can trust are the ones you have falsified yourself”!!!

 

Maybe it's not just about the manager - Mowbray vs Hughton etc. - maybe it's more about the players at their disposal - which also comes down to the upper echelons.

You are only as good as your weakest player etc.

Then again, rolling the dice with Gallagher, on the wing?

Yeah, maybe it is more about the manager. ?