They can bang on about long term projects, philosophies, styles etc but its easy to obsess over stuff like that, as important as they are. If Chelsea struggle and finish 6th or 7th this season, will Potter be allowed to continue that plan if the signs on the pitch aren't showing that plan starting to come together? No.

Seems like the common theme and can't disagree with most. Any central defender would struggle to dislodge those 2 when fit, perhaps only a signing like Ahmedhodzic would stand out amidst those 2. Hyam is one of the signings that I am happier with though and am happy with 2 of those 3 at any point if possible. Don't agree with a 3 because we have Dack as a number 10, as well as our biggest summer signing. With him and Brittain, they tick the boxes 100% of what we needed and the justification of spending money. We did need an out and out striker and another attacking player albeit I would have gone for someone with more flexibility than Szmodics.

I love that you keep saying that he has said that he is happy and taking it as gospel. Can you possibly imagine him coming out and saying "well I didn't want these players particularly but they will have to do?!" I'm not saying that he isn't happy with the signings but come on, don't be naive, we will never know either way. Regarding a plan, it was a general point. As it happens, lately I have seen very little signs of a plan starting to piece together, with regularly changing teams, a worrying focus on playing it out from the back, a clear lack of experience and physicality, no real signs of the "front 4 fluidity" or even pressing and us looking dodgy at the back and not posing much threat up front. But across the 8 games, with 12 points on the board, definitely enough thus far to crack on. Point being, if say (we won't) in the next 10 games we win 1, draw 2, lose 7 and performance levels remain poor, would you expect everyone to still say, right, don't judge until next season, time and patience etc? I'm not saying that he isn't happy with Hyam and I think he seems one of the better bits of business at this early stage but he will always make him see I am sure that he has had an impact but I think that he would much prefer his first choice for example in Ahmedhodzic. After signing Szmodics, he mentioned his experience in the media. Szmodics has had one season at Championship level where he played with any regularity.

A problem with the manager not picking the players or at least having full control of recruitment is that it is harder to attach responsibility. I suppose Tomasson could have requested more experience but he hasnt got it.

Aubameyang was surely his at least. A manager should always have the main say on recruitment.

I think it is impossible to put a time on it, no matter what any manager it says it should be just an ongoing thing. Patience and time awarded should performances and results show signs of improvement and encouragement, rather than give it until x date then judge.

Usual manager spiel I guess. Obviously it makes sense for any manager to try and buy as much time as possible.

I haven't seen many comments regarding his comments although we have seen with Mowbray (and even before) that when results go against us, people start to pick apart post match interviews/touchline demeanour much more. The start points wise possibly flatters us if that is possible, but is a very reasonable return nonetheless. That being said, it can't be a case of praise when we win and call for time when we lose. People as with any manager will pass comment as we go, after the first 3 games you couldn't move for compliments, in the last 5 games the results and level of performance have been really poor, so there will naturally be questioned asked. I'm sure that Tomasson will get time but only if there are signs on the pitch of a plan coming together, not blindly.

Chelsea have regularly been lambasted for the relatively short time that they tend to give managers for some reason yet they have consistently picked up trophies throughout that time, justifying those decisions. On a much smaller scale, its the same at Watford. Regarding JDT, people don't need to be patronised into understanding anything. If we get good results, he will get praised, if we get shit results, he will get criticised.

To be fair, Brown also looked well off the standard albeit in one appearance at Birmingham. I think we needed to sign 2 right backs really.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/20901004.joe-rankin-costello-faces-difficult-task-blackburn-rovers/ Brutal is harsh, but pretty conclusive that he isn't in his plans. (Which based on his ability is a good thing for Rovers)

If he got the Chelsea job then I doubt he would take the England job. The England job and indeed all international jobs in the main don't compare to top club roles. He would either be a success at Chelsea and see the part time nature of international football to be a huge step down, or be damaged goods if it goes pear shaped.

Which of Ayala and Wharton would you not play in favour of Hyam? Hyam impressed me at Blackpool and came well regarded, but to break past them 2 when fit is difficult, maybe our first choice supposed target Ahmedhodzic would have done so, Hyam, not sure at this stage. Mola seemingly has signed as a centre back according to the LT today. I would put him in midfield at the weekend next to Travis assuming at least one of Wharton and Ayala are back. Hirst seems quite a similar player to Gallagher from that hour at the weekend, powerful runner in the channels but poor first touch and unable to link play. Yeah I would agree that Hirst didn't impress. Very early so plenty of scope to grow into things but his limitations at being a focal point like Gallagher were stark.

I have never seen signs that there "is a player in there." People often focus on his position but what attributes does he have to thrive in any position at this role? He is slow, he is technically pretty poor, not particularly good on the ball, not aggressive, not physically robust enough, I don't see what he has that makes people think he could be a good player. Interesting how brutal Tomasson was in the press. I do agree that he shouldn't be in the team, but there was little to no scope for a return. I wonder how he and indeed his team mates have read it?

How many of the 6 summer signings would people put in our first 11 if everyone was fit? Brittain is an obvious one, we have no other right backs. Beside that, and of course at a very, very early stage. Would Hyam start over Wharton or Ayala? Szmodics over Dack? Hirst over Gallagher? And Mola and Morton look like squad players.

Injured.

If the target genuinely is to improve on last season and push for the top 6, armed by our goalscorer who we declined to cash in on for short term gain. Then Tony Mowbray managing a side promoted last season is surely less of a threat than Wilder with a Boro side that did better than us last season and with plenty of new recruits, including our captain on big money.

That is blatantly untrue. Travis went on to start the following 7 games, and the Sheffield United game was one of 19 starts across the remaining 22 games. Those 3 players left at the same time as Mowbray, one to a higher division and one with a huge pay rise. And Tomasson also plays Gallagher out wide. Mowbray had his limitations and I am glad that he has gone but there isn't half some nonsense talked about him.

These dreamt up valuations are totally meaningless because of his contractual situation. Let's use the valuation of £10m, again I would argue that if our stance wasn't so rigid, either meet a massive, massive price tag otherwise he isn't going, then it might eventually lead to a bid higher than that, but lets go with it. We have a decision then, is £10m (say £7m on a replacement on a 4 or 5 year deal and the rest pocketed) more or less valuable than us compared to one solitary season of Brereton? It 100% is more valuable, imagine if we signed a striker for £10m on a season long loan, it is no different to that. We keep hearing about the journey and this being a transitional season, I don't fully agree but if so, the decision made is even more at odds with that. The fact that the money potentially wouldn't be invested is another stick to beat the owners with, and another reason why we cannot thrive with them owning us. Talk of a Brentford model is laughable under them. It should be a process, sell with targets ready to push the button on knowing Brereton was to be sold. Thoughts of public image, not appearing to be bullied, talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

We did yeah, my point was countering the mention that maybe things will change specifically under Broughton's watch. Until Venkys stop interfering, at times against the wishes of those they have employed to make such decisions, then it will always remain as it is. Even under previous staff members, some people renewed and some didn't. If you swallow the nonsensical logic that it is better to allow such a valuable asset to leave for free than "be bullied" into selling an asset even if it makes financial sense, then there is little hope. I quite clearly have said previously that we couldn't accept on the last day. This whole rigid "he won't be sold unless someone bids exactly x" was totally inappropriate, we should have gone into the summer knowing he had to be sold and encouraged it somewhat, not putting people off with a vastly inflated fee. Even if the highest fee ended up being £10m, we can't flippantly turn that down for an extra year. Take it, spend £7m on a replacement on a multi year deal.

That is the only sign really thus far, outweighed by a more valuable asset being kept at a huge opportunity cost. That being said, until whichever staff members are given full autonomy and are not overruled by the owners stubbornness, then any potential structure will be inpossible to efficiently flourish.

Allowing more assets to run their contracts down isn't a sustainable way for a Championship club with our resources to develop and grow.

There were definitely options aside from Travis playing there. Mola was on the bench, a centre back that we signed under Tomasson which could have allowed Carter to move to right back. I get that perhaps it isnt ideal so soon after signing to play him but he trained from the same point as Hirst so it doesnt really wash with me that he couldnt and had Mowbray mentioned the settling in rhetoric he would have been lynched. Even beyond that, Phillips was on the bench too.

Are any of the below criticisms valid? Travis shouldn't have played at right back. Travis should have been moved at the latest by half time. The subs at half time were wrong. The midfield 2 were so weak and easily beaten, and it wasn't changed. Having Vale involved over Markanday was wrong, the former couldn't score in non league last season. Mola should have featured considering that he could have freed Carter to go at right back. Or even Phillips. You can keep trotting out the cliches, for what its worth 12 points in 8 games is IMO a reasonable return. But I have not seen any big signs of his supposed style of play and I would argue that our points haul slightly flatters us as our general performance level has been poor. There is occasional pressing but certainly nothing sustained. The front 4 is NOT at all fluid. We don't create many good chances. We have issues defensively. I haven't got a clue what his favourite 11 would be. Subs have often been needed earlier than would be ideal if the original gameplan had worked, and have certainly not always helped us. Set piece routines have been terrible. I don't see which of the above is unwarranted, but calls for patience aside, supporters will want to see signs of progression. If they don't and if our poor recent form persists, then patience will deplete.

The ref went over to the monitor, watched it giving him a better view of the incident, and then changed his mind. The blame is on the official, not VAR.