20 minutes ago, rigger said:

Or take a punt on Adam Wharton in the midfield 3. Loads of energy (although you wouldn't think it to look at him ), reads the game really well and picks simple, correct passes.

I don't watch the U23s, so I'll bow to your view on whether he's ready, but that's a big punt indeed for such an important area of the pitch. 

I went for Farke (voted before the multiple options became available!) but there are lots on there that I'd have as acceptable. Certainly makes for better reading than the early betting markets did, and on the off chance Nixon's list of Farke, Ainsworth, Hughton & Carvahal is right, I'd be pretty happy with any of those (maybe the most reservations about Carvahal).

If Farke wants the job, I really don't see the point of going for a more left field option to be honest, but some (such as Carrick) would be intriguing, albeit a big risk. I think most of the really unacceptable names aren't on that list, but I hope the likes of Woodgate, Lennon and Cocu don't get a look in. 

Very technically gifted player is Bannan, but really not what we need in my view. Bearing in mind that our midfield next year is already going to be including Buckley and possibly Dack, we need someone with the physicality to get about the pitch better than Bannan at this stage in his career. 

1 hour ago, jim mk2 said:

Hughton's past his sell-by date, surely? And he failed miserably at Forest last time out

Check. He's perfect for Rovers

Had a top CV at this level before the Forest job. Repeated success at multiple clubs. Wouldn't be at the top of my list if we could get Farke, but a bad 6 months doesn't make him a bad manager.

9 minutes ago, JBiz said:

Especially when you consider the amount of players who have improved in those years.

Surely, at some point, the player has to take some level of responsibility?

My lasting memory of Nyambe will probably be the last kick of the Coventry game.

Unless he signs a new deal, which I genuinely hope he does!

I'm sure Nyambe is very diligent and is working hard every day to try and improve that side of his game. Sometimes, though, there are certain aspects of the game which some players will struggle to get better at. I hope this isn't the case with Nyambe, but on this season's evidence you can't really say there's been any development at all in his attacking quality. 

32 minutes ago, Mellor Rover said:

Tom Barkhuizen anyone?

Don't like his goal record one bit, but then again that includes spells at being played out wide and even as a wing back. 

We need numbers across the park, so i) if he's completely injury free, and ii) asking for sensible wages then I wouldn't be against taking him as a squaddie. Under no circumstances can we be signing him with expectations of him being a key goal threat. 

8 minutes ago, DE. said:

Mowbray has been working with Nyambe for nearly 5 years - surely it's on him and his coaching team if Ryan is still deficient in such crucial areas of his game? Then I remembered this is a man who never takes responsibility for anything. 

Possibly, but it could also be that Nyambe doesn't have it in him to improve that side of his game. Every player has their ceiling. It's not as though Mowbray hasn't been banging on about improving that side of his game for years either.

6 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

This again shows the problem with Mowbray recently deciding he is a “development coach”.

Results when Nyambe has been in the side have been consistently and significantly better than when he isn’t for years.

Mowbray doesn’t seem to care about that and is more interested in encouraging individual players to do things that they aren’t naturally good at and are supplementary to their roles.

Wants Nyambe to be better at attacking, doesn’t seem to mind Pickering can’t defend very well. Persists with Gallagher out wide even though he’s a complete fish out of water. More bothered about his keepers commanding their area than saving shots… he’d have hated Brad Friedel. All this lends itself to costly decisions like playing Johnson/Holtby/Buckley/Clarkson as false 9, Rodwell as a centre back, JRC (by the way, his career is in danger of falling off a cliff) as a wing back. 

I don't disagree with some of those examples, but to be fair almost all managers expect full backs to have at least some attacking threat as a minimum these days. Playing like Alexander-Arnold is obviously never going to be him, so I agree there's an element of not asking him to go too far away from his natural game, but at the same time I'd expect our next manager to treat improving that side of his game as a priority. That's if he stays, of course!

4 minutes ago, Tricky said:

dont know why they just dont sell up...

EG Group (Issa brothers), Blackburn based, must be pretty loaded, wonder if they've ever considered investing...

Liverpool fans I believe. 

10 hours ago, Exiled in Toronto said:

Not too much weeping and wailing about Joe Rothwell having played his last game for us then.

Never much of a fan myself: I stopped getting up off my seat about three years ago as his runs so rarely resulted in anything, mainly I felt because he was a lot better at accelerating than he was at decelerating while keeping the ball under control once he got near the box. Only very rarely would he be able to score or set up a decent chance once the defenders started closing in. As a centre-mid he was just too inconsistent as a threat and too rubbish defensively.

Running down a contract once could be due to any number of reasons, doing it twice is symptomatic of calculating greed.

Will soon be forgotten.

I might be splitting hairs a bit, but calculating greed is probably a bit strong. Looking after number 1, certainly. 

Agree with your assessment of him as a player though. Seemed to have a bit of bad luck at first when it came to hitting the post and narrowly missing chances, but the numbers don't lie over his time here - for a supposedly attacking player with his talent he just hasn't been anywhere near productive enough. 

One thing that we'll miss though is his ability to get us up the park quickly. He definitely is premier league quality when it comes to breaking with the ball at pace, and we've relied on him doing that from deep quite a lot this year. His overall contribution won't be missed that much for me, but there are aspects to his game that will need replacing. 

1 hour ago, joey_big_nose said:

Rothwells best games were probably marginally better than Buckley's so far, but Buckley does look to me like he will be far more consistent when he hits stride.

We will need two more quality centre mids who can tackle and get forward. I'm skeptical like others are on Edun. May grow over time, but not ready for next season. Also quite lightweight for a mid (though we did say that about Buckley and he sorted it).

Reckon we need 2 centre mids, 2 centre backs, a left back, right back, GK, two strikers and a winger, at least half of them starters, and the other half near starter qualityy. Hell of a shopping list. 10 players! Assuming we get 4 good loans that's six buys.

How many quality players have we managed to buy outright a season? I think we've averaged about one or two who haven't been loans over the last three seasons. Last year it was only Pickering who went straight in. Hedges started to come through but he needed 3 months to settle. Hmm.

Agree that the midfield is lacking power if Buckley comes straight in. Trav is an excellent player at this level but he can't be the legs for the whole midfield. What we wouldn't give for a pre-injury Steven Reid now!

It's a pretty daunting shopping list. Hopefully good news on the Lenihan and Nyambe contracts will take a little bit of the pressure off.

At the same time, whilst we'll need numbers all over the park, I think the one thing which is really essential is that we bring in enough goal threat to replace Brereton, assuming he gets sold. Other positions depend more on what system the new manager will want to play - i.e. if we play with a back four we probably won't need two new centre halves with Carter coming back - but the one thing which really worries me about next year is that we won't have enough quality up front. 

25 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

He might well do, but it also might just be his style ala allardyce , I think it’s too big a risk to find out. As Iv said before this appointment might well be the biggest in the clubs history , it’s a real make or break moment , get it wrong and the fans will just never return and we will slowly tumble down the leagues , we need some kind of name to get fans returning. Ainsworth just isn’t it for me 

I agree that it's a big risk. Equally, I don't know what else he could have possibly done at a club of that size to show that he deserves a shot at something bigger and better. 

53 minutes ago, riverholmes said:

I must credit Mowbray on persevering with Buckley. He's probably mismanaged him by moving him around to unfamiliar and, frankly, unsuitable positions, including false 9 and right back but he kept picking him, at least. I believe Mowbray brought Zoltan Gera and Robert Koren into English football, whilst at WBA, and, even though Mowbray, to my mind, has lost his way in keeping up with the tactical evolution in the game, he's at least doggedly stuck by the principle of fielding technically gifted midfielders (if not always in midfield).

The Buckley wonder strike against Birmingham indicated to me just what he's capable of, if he works with the right coaches and, also, develops mentally himself. He beat a man, spread play, across the pitch and then got the return and hit a sweet strike to score.

I feel that sometimes his game is about style over substance, and, just sometimes, the style and the substance are matched, such as in the goal which, it seems, he hit with the outside of his boot, or, at least, not conventionally. I don't mind style, at all, and Buckley has a unique, effortless style on the ball but if he could match that with regular outcomes, he could be a really top player.

I liked the way that he started the move almost as much as the goal itself. Receiving the ball facing his own goal under pressure. Four seconds later he's turned, beat a defender like he wasn't there and pinged a 40 yard pass to a man in space. Lovely.

He still has games where he goes missing, but his development in the last twelve months has been wonderful. If he carries on as he is then he'll be some player. 

3 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

No he wasn’t. He was on the bench for each and every one.

If we're talking about the games at the start of 18/19, he wasn't. He was injured for the Fulham game and didn't make the bench - even though we had some kids there to make up the numbers. Not sure if he was back straight away after that one, but I'm pretty sure I remember Mowbray talking about not risking his hamstrings too soon.

Obviously that doesn't account for the full run, but fitness was an issue. 

36 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Nyambe is the best right back at the club, and although he's not one of the very best in this league or indeed capable of the league above at this stage, he is a very solid full back option at this level, 100%. He has been Mowbray's first choice for the majority of every season under Mowbray which doesn't really fall in line with being treated so badly.

And it's not about "falling for his patter," you seem to have fallen into the trap of being so keen (understandably) to see Mowbray go that every single thing can be turned into a criticism of him.

Like I said, there have been a few very short-lived spells that Nyambe has not played, some of which I disagree with. The longest was around 10 games at the start of our second season up, maybe less, was due to Mowbray wanting to stick his (useless) captain in wherever he could. There has been the occasional other game where Rankin Costello has played a game or 2, and also the odd rest that he's given Nyambe which clearly isnt something that you can stomach. I can't question the team that won 4-1 at Preston nor selecting the exact same one again the week after.

Nyambe was injured for some of those games too. 

3 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Dyche's record and cv are far more impressive than Farke's.  Dyche has shown he can keep a team on limited resources in the PL - Farke failed in this respect at Norwich.  Dyche v Farke would be a no brainer for 99% of Rovers' fans.

I think Mrs D will wake up tomorrow morning and probably recall why she has put an alarm on her phone for Friday AM UK time!   

To be fair, Dyche was relegated first time round. Farke probably would've got Norwich relegated this season, but wasn't given the opportunity. Their records at getting teams promoted, our immediate concern, are very similar so it definitely wouldn't be a no brainer. 

Agree that his Burnley connections are irrelevant though. If anything the fact that it'd wind them up just adds to the appeal. 

15 minutes ago, Mellor Rover said:

Personally, I don't rate Nyambe, but it's additional funds in the budget if he does stay, as we'd only need one right back instead of two.

I've already said that I think he's the most replaceable of the three OOC, but him staying will still be a big boost. 

I'm convinced that he'll never be the ideal wingback if that's what the new manager opts for, but if we play him just as a normal right back then he's as good as most in this league. 

I'm not against the logic of targeting a manager with a track record of working with and improving young players. But surely if that's a thing which we're really prioritising, that's all the more reason to throw everything we can at getting Farke in.

So much of Norwich's success has been working with & improving youngsters, whilst at the same time racking up the wins. Someone should dig out the stories linking Max Aarons with a £50 million move to Barcelona a few years ago and show Venkys. That should do the trick.

1 minute ago, Miller11 said:

I think Bell got a really rough ride here. He wasn’t great but I didn’t think he was anywhere near as bad as he was made out to be.

Granted he did have the occasional horror show, but which defender during that time didn’t. It got to the point where he’d have to be flawless to get a 6/10 in most peoples eyes, and exceptional to get a 7.

He’s probably kicked on, but there’s probably a bit of “you don’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone” too. Same with Raya. I expect it will be the same with some of the others too, particularly Nyambe.

He certainly improved over his time here. Defensively he grew to be fairly reliable by the end, which he certainly wasn't to begin with, but his final ball was still appalling. He'll get much more protection the way that Luton way I suppose, so that might have something to do with it.

34 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Do you not remember how awful he was when he played for us? League 1 standard Winger for me 

He was very good indeed against Sheffield United, but other than that I agree. Plus there's the fact that he's recovering from a serious injury to consider.

I wouldn't be dead against it if he came here for buttons as a squaddie on loan - there is some ability there - but I'd hope there would be much better options for us out there. 

9 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Super Ally did quite well at Rangers, I always thought. Albeit in extremely strange circumstances.

A bit unlucky that he got Rangers in the second tier at the same time as very decent Hearts and Hibs teams. Anything less than marching through the leagues was obviously going to be unacceptable for a club as big as Rangers, but they were still slightly unfair expectations given the scale of the rebuild that needed to be done there. 

23 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

As I said I’m not advocating for di matteo but mowbray was also on the football scrap head when he came here. I’m not really one for ainsworth either, I can’t put my finger on it but it just screams failure to me , I think it’s the fact that past players, connections to clubs just never seem to do well, it’s like everyone wants it to work and maybe try too hard but it rarely comes off. Off the top of my head

shearer- newcastle 

solskjaer- Man Utd 

mcoist- rangers 

berg- here 

I think it's more a case of most managerial appointments eventually end in failure anyway. It's just that we remember them more when there's the story of them being a club legend. Add in the fact that the appointment is more likely to be an emotional one rather than being hard headed in appointing the most impressive candidate, it's not surprising that most end up finishing in tears. 

Having said that I think Ainsworth's record is seriously impressive for a club so small, so deserves a chance at a bigger one. I'd see it as too big a risk personally, but there's a logic to it which wouldn't be there for 95% of other candidates who happen to have a Rovers connection. 

6 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I’d have wrung his neck if I’d have been Jack. Same goes for Kiddo, he signed some shite as well. Larry Grayson and that Per Frandsen. Show pony. I saw Grayson playing right back once and he had about 6 attempts to pass the ball up the line, a basic skill for a decent full back, every one went into touch ! Useless.

Everyone's rightly talking about how Everton could possibly end up going down after spending hundreds upon hundreds of millions on their squad. We'd be giving them a good run for their money in the late 90s.

Irony is we get associated with being money-bags Rovers because of our success until '95 - but actually we we were pretty sensible next to our reputation. Blow outs on Shearer and Sutton, but most of the title winning side cost a few hundred grand or less.

It was the late 90s - after Jack initially tried to rein in the spending - when we really started throwing the cash at everyone. 

10 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

That was Roy Boy, he hadn’t got a clue. The only good signing he made was Henchoz, the rest were bobbins. He paid £5.25 million for Christian Bloody Dailly ! What would that be today ?

Eye watering. Didn't help that Kidd was almost as profligate with some of his signings, although as an exception Jansen obviously ended being amazing after Souness got hold of him.

I could be wrong, but I think we paid more for Dailly than Chelsea did for Desailly around the same time! Criminally wasteful. 

5 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

I wouldn’t want cocu, most of the names linked would be a disappointment other than farke but he did do well with psv and derby were on the slide well before he came in, I wouldn’t 100% go on that spell. It’s not a coyle appointment for me 

Must admit I didn't realise that his spell at PSV was as successful as it was.

Sadly, his spell at Derby is far more likely to be an indicator of what can expect if he gets the Rovers job. Also whilst he didn't have a decent budget at Derby, he still massively underperformed with a better group of players than Rooney has worked with. Possibly better than Coyle, but still completely senseless if the likes of Farke are genuinely interested.