People at Sky and other media outlets generally have very little idea. They look on from afar, see a team that doesn't get much attention, see that it was midtable most of last season, see that it hasn't lost anyone significant and has added a couple of quite well known players and suddenly we are dark horses. Those who watch us regularly.see the finer details of a team leaking goals which has done very little to address that and is likely to be kicking off on Saturday with the same defence as struggled last season. You don't get out of this league without a solid defence that doesn't give goals away. The nearest team to doing so was Fulham but they had an outstanding collection of attacking talent to cover it.

I think we actually agree here so not sure what the issue is. No player no matter who should be 'guaranteed' a certain number of games. It should depend entirely on how they play and perform on matchday and in training. So the talk about us not being able to promise Bauer or the City lad a set number of games I think Is probably nonsense and just an excuse for us failing to get them. As if Preston have promised Bauer a certain number of appearances. But if we are looking at players to sit behind Mulgrew and Williams and fill in when needed with no serious intention of playing them regularly then it is no surprise we are missing out on targets. Anyone we try to get should be with a view to them being better than those here.

Yet none in the problem area.

Twas ever the case. For some reason we go after people then tell them they won't be playing. No wonder we can't sign anyone!

So are we going to be seeing Premier League level of recruitment as a result of this 'multi million' spend? Looking forward to it.

I still don't get this frequently floated about concept of promising people game time and us backing out of deals on that basis. Any defender we bring in should be expecting or expected to establish themselves as regulars in the team. Why are we going after people we don't think are going to be playing? The inference then is that Mulgrew or William's will be playing regularly, which suggests we aren't serious about progressing. Same thing happened with Bauer. Apparently Preston 'promised' him more game time than we would. Eh?

I do wonder about some of these figures and whether they are being inflated portray the owners in a positive light. 1) the £3 million going into the academy I understand isnt a voluntary donation. It is a requirement of Category A academies. If it isnt spent the academy is downgraded. 2) I find it hard to believe that analysis booths and software for scouts has cost millions of pounds. We could build a new training ground for that sort of money.

Looks like the sarcasm was lost in translation. Quite clearly conversations take place at the start of the process. My response was to someone suggesting we suddenly discovered that City wanted a set number of games, which isnt the way it works. Those sort of requirements become clear at the start, not 2 weeks in.

No, it was relaid as per every summer, but don't think it went much further than that. Waggott's comments about £300,000 investment in the pitch were made out to be some substantial upgrade but when divided up across 3 sites isnt that much and reflects annual maintenance costs.

I wonder what the terms of these PFA loans to Bolton are.... I'm still struggling to see how Bolton are realistically going to be able to start the season in any sort of shape. At the last count they had 7 contracted players and several of those had handed in their notice. Whilst they might be able to bring in trialists presumably those have to be registered as Bolton players by this time Friday or they won't be eligible for Saturday. Certainly appears there is more determination to ensure Bolton keep going than Bury.

The lack of games in Europe also comes from this, IMO. Clearly organising matches against decent European opponents and allowing fans on to watch requires a pitch, facilities, stewards, all of which cost money. Much easier and cheaper to jump on the bus to Bury or Rochdale. The problem with this is clear - we can't test ourselves against decent teams nor increase the clubs profile abroad or build links with European sides. The Liverpool and Everton friendlies last season were an attempt by Waggott to fill Ewood and make money, yet they weren't as popular as expected and personally I didn't enjoy them being surrounded by locals only there to take photos of Liverpool players.

Remained unbeaten. Having locked horns with non league Barrow, 4th division Mansfield, bankrupt Bury and Rochdale on our training ground. Mowbray won't be playing the youth. He wants them out on loan.

How many other clubs have started pre season games with a defence made up entirely of midfielders and in February had no fit CBs?

I don't think I said I want Bolton or Bury to be expelled from the league. I would never wish such a fate on anyone. I said it is getting to the stage now where the League are probably going to have to start looking at that as the only way of drawing a line under this sorry saga and moving on. At what point does an attempt to do the 'right thing' by Bolton or Bury become a problem for the integrity and honesty of the competition? When you've the real prospect of Bolton failing to fulfill their fixture obligations not for the first time this year how many more times can that be allowed to happen? There are many clubs in non-league who would love the opportunity to have a place in League One who would fulfill their fixtures, pay their bills and not jeopardize the competition. That is what is ultimately going to happen here - if Saturday is 'suspended' then what happens? If you were a Wycombe fan, missing out on your first game of the season, a home banker and chance to tick off a game against a recent Championship side with 3 points, how would you feel? How about if the game is replayed after Bolton have been taken over and have managed to recruit a dozen half decent free agents and put together a competent side that then beats Wycombe and they miss out on promotion? The ramifications go way beyond doing the 'right thing' by Bolton - it affects the integrity of a multi-million pound competition and the hopes/aspirations of football fans across League One and below. As for us going the same way that depends on a wide range of variables that at this point none of us have any real idea about. Of course they could bankrupt us. Alternatively they could wipe their debt clean and find more suitable fit and proper owners to repair their mistakes. Many clubs have been taken over at this level and only a small number have run into serious financial trouble as a result. Not saying it wouldn't happen, it might, but then there's Wigan, Bournemouth, Birmingham, Barnsley, Leicester, Watford and co. who weren't bankrupted.

I'm disappointed with our business because, in my opinion, we have Failed with a capital F to address our defensive weaknesses of last season. I believed our manager in March or whenever it was when he made his comments that he 'got it' and would be moving quickly and decisively to address it. Here we are and it hasn't been addressed. The latest botch job in the process has been failing to land a kid on loan after losing out to PNE in a 12 month long pursuit of a free agent from Charlton. I'm disappointed with pre-season because I think it has been poor. With the exception of Rangers I don't see any sign of our players being properly tested and it irritates me to see rival clubs lining up against continental top division opposition all summer whilst we turn up against a team of Bury trialists. I think it is badly organised, unimaginative and just another sign of the small scale, provincial, low cost approach we operate with these days. The alternative optimist appoach to the lack of signings is to pin hopes on Mowbray promoting the youth and them doing the job or suddenly things improving with the existing back line. Neither are likely to happen, IMO. Mowbray has shown no desire to promote the youth, the best of them (Nyambe) has lost his place to Elliott Bennett whilst the others (Costello, Grayson, Hart) I don't think are ready for Championship football. Mowbray will persist with the same personnel because they are the big hitters in the dressing room who he has had in his corner since the day he arrived. You're an optimist Chris but even you must be starting to have doubts about things now?

Sadly I'm getting flashbacks now of the last couple of transfer windows and in particular January. We had all similar stuff about 'we've got x days left' 'other clubs aren't doing much' 'plenty of time to go' and numerous 'links' to decent players with Mowbray and Sharpe saying it was going to happen. Then it didn't. It all comes across as quite amateurish and pub league standard down at Rovers these days when compared to rival clubs. All well and good pointing at Leeds or whoever and that they haven't been throwing money around signing players but those clubs have structures in place with on the ball owners, chairmen, sporting directors who can act quickly and decisively to get targets in at the last minute. It appears we've now got Mowbray's assistant handling transfer negotiations and then god knows how long of a delay whilst India decide whether or not to approve it.

So going after a loan player, getting the deal almost done, then discovering at the 11th hour that the lending club, as is their right, are making appearance demands to protect their player and investment, and those demands are too much for us to agree to so the deal falls through. 2 weeks wasted. Do you not think the vast majority of clubs loaning players out will want to ensure their player gets game time? Otherwise why bother loaning him out? Only have to look at how Harper, Palmer and Reed went on here to see why clubs might be reluctant to give Mowbray freedom to do as he wishes and might want to put apperance demands into the deal. First question that gets asked. How much is it going to cost and are there any clauses/stipulations attached. If we can't or won't do it then it goes no further and we move on. Must be amateur hour.

Now do you see the problem with loans? Being told by the parent club how often he should play or the deal ends up falling through. Not that I believe that is the issue. We ought to have discovered City's demands right back at the start. Not the sort of thing they are likely to suddenly spring upon us at the last minute. Personally I'm bored rigid with the whole thing now. I'm disappointed with pre season and disappointed with our business. I'm certainly not going to get upset that a 2 week pursuit of a loan looks like ending in failure. Such a shame as this summer with £5 million available and no pressure to sell anyone we could have made a lot of progress. Instead here we are no better off, arguably worse, than last season from a defensive point of view.

Both Bolton and Bury have until 5pm today to satisfy the League on outstanding 'issues' or their weekend games will be suspended. Getting to the stage now where expelling both from the League is something that should be looked at. As unpleasant as that might be for the clubs and their staff/fans this farce can't continue. Anywhere else and a failure to fulfil fixtures leads to expulsion. Going to make the League even more of a laughing stock if clubs are having games suspended until they've sorted themselves out. Is this fair on Wycombe or MK Don's? Both will be looking forward to the season starting and probably a good win to start off against clubs in disarray. Why should they have to wait for them to strengthen and face a tougher fixture down the line? Still, pats on the back all round because Villa and Leeds get lots of fans on and Carabao have signed a big sponsorship deal.

Reed will end up going the same way as Gallagher if he wants to get his career moving. He'll have to find himself a Championship club and accept a reduced wage. The sad thing is if he wanted he could probably spend the remainder of his career hanging around the fringes of Southampton's bench getting very well paid for it but never playing, such is the level of cash about and the attraction of having a few British home grown players on the books. I doubt we will see him back here given how we used him and the nature of his departure. Real shame because other than Dack I think he's been Mowbray's best signing. Not only that but he delivers the 'versatility' that Mowbray loves but actually can play to a good level in numerous positions rather than 'can do a job' there.

I don't understand why there has been such a difference between the Bolton and Bury situations from the Football League. They've said next to nothing about Bolton all summer long, whereas they've released several statements recently about Bury threatening to suspend their fixtures and even kick them out of the league if they don't provide answers by a set deadline. I still think Bolton will come out of this ok. The league seem to want to do their bit to look after them so will bend over backwards to accommodate them. They've already said they will rush through a takeover if needed, still no news on further points deductions (i'm guessing they're waiting for the takeover to go through and then wipe the slate clean). Even with hardly any players Bolton will still be able to quickly bring in free agents as soon as their takeover is done. They'll be able to attract decent enough League One players when you consider they'll be competing with the likes of Stanley and should be able to outspend them even in their current state.

Goalposts moving again. Virtually every outlet to have reported on that signing has referred to £5 million. Just like Brereton was reported as £7 million. Maybe not all paid up front. Even if it was only £2 million it was still not a priority area and the funds should have gone to the defence first.

I know we've not spent a penny on the defence, like we didn't in the last two windows, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if we didn't do in the next 11 days. I know who I will be holding accountable if we don't and it won't be other clubs/managers or 'the market' and i couldn't care less if other clubs havent signed many people.

Classic blame deflection tactics in play. All gearing up for the inevitable 'we tried our best but couldn't get the deals over the line'. Try to convince people that Rovers and its owners/staff aren't responsible it's external people and other clubs. Spent £5 million on Gallagher, claim to still have the Raya money available yet can't get a CB to improve on what we have. Starting pre season games with 4 midfielders in defence.

Wish people would stop trying to convince themselves that the reason we haven't strengthened at the back is because we don't have the money or other clubs aren't prepared to sell. We do have the money having spent more than £10 million net over the last 2 years. For some reason, as yet unknown, our owners/manager have decided to not use those funds to improve the defence. Selling Dack to raise money with a view to spending some on a quality CB is ludicrous, because our manager or owners don't want to spend on a CB.