roversfan99

Has anyone suggested that we "blow the budget on knee jerk signings?" There is a middle ground between writing off the season and spending wildly and inefficiently. I can't abide an attitude of essentially writing off a season either, the Championship especially is not an environment to build up whereby seasons are written off because squad turnover is so high, players seem to let their deals run down more and there is such reliance on the loan market. Re-invest a decent chunk of the inevitable Brereton money and there is no reason not to strive for improvement on last season, that was the reason for the new manager. Would you have taken mid table obscurity on the back of 8th place had Mowbray stayed? I suspect not. But Wharton has only ever played against kids or in friendlies, so it is impossible to compare either way, that is my point. But why can't we improve on Johnson, why is the benchmark only ever to equal the outgoing players? I felt that we were short in midfield last season in terms of depth. I have never implied that Phillips should replace Lenihan, as long as we get a really good Championship centre back then we should be fine, him next to Wharton, with Ayala and Carter as the main 2 in reserve. No expectations on Phillips yet, any contribution should be a bonus. I don't think the comparisons are fair because Zouma and Jones are being judged historically having played senior football and Phillips hasn't. I think we should recruit without assuming that the majority of these youngsters are up to it, because many may not be yet and we can't leave ourselves short. You made out that I am dismissing them all but I am sure that a couple/few will break through, whenever that is, but not all will and it is just about timing and treating their breakthrough in any upcoming season as a bonus as to not leave ourselves short. So for example with Carter, we have proof that he can do well in League 1, so I am comfortable with him being a squad player pushing for a spot. In midfield, we have lost 3 but I felt we were weak there anyway, and we don't know if Buckley will be as effective deeper, so we need at least 2 who will play loads of games between them. Midfield is key so Travis plus 2 with Buckley flexible between there and further forward and at a push Edun, and then have one (as you have said, I have not seen them like others so which is beyond me) maybe on the fringes pushing for a place, and the other out on loan. With Vale, could go either way, I see the value in him going and playing in League 1 or 2, lets see if he can score goals at senior level, failing that, on the fringes but again we need a new senior striker because Brereton will go, Gallagher is not good enough to be first choice so have him pushing a new guy for that place with Vale pushing them 2, especially now we have 5 subs.

Im not sure they would if that was a direct replacement for either a captain or a player of the season. As a 3rd or 4th choice behind Wharton and a new ready made centre back, then that would make much more sense. I have never said that Vale isnt a "good un." The point is that youth football is obviously not a reliable barometer for 2nd tier Championship football and I have never said x or y isnt good enough or that they shouldnt get chances where appropriate, just that expecting a number to all step up even as squad members at the same time in the absence of enough senior recruits is really risky. It is also totally impossible to compare Zouma/Jones and Phillips, no matter how highly rated the latter is.

By straight in, do you mean to start or within the squad? Davenport was one of 3 central midfielders that departed. If we signed 2 proven midfielders and then Garrett was seen as the 5th choice, then that would make sense. I don't agree with this idea that when holes need filling, that academy players step up. It should be the other way round. Players demonstrate enough either as individuals on the fringes or even on loan to justify more game time, not just because we don't have the resources or competence to fill any vacancies properly. Even if it was a case of 2 central midfielders or centre backs being out at once, you'd be naming a rookie partnership. Point being we need a number of senior players in ASAP.

Maybe one or two at a time yes, but if you throw multiple in together then you are setting yourself up for a fall. Giving maybe one a debut amidst a normal team with experience (more than we currently have which is fairly minimal) and then you get a true picture, if we ever fielded a league team anywhere close to our 2nd team that played at Dundee, we would likely get battered.

But the problem is relying on a large influx at once not because they are all simultaneously demanding places but because of incompetence in the transfer market, through lack of funds or otherwise. Buckley broke through not in the absence of signing midfielders but because he was good enough regardless. We are already very much "using what it produces" but you have to be realistic as to what we can expect to come through and how often. The only alternative to a "Man City one player per 5 years" policy is not numerous players every season as that is unrealistic. It should also be continuous so that when one is loaned out, which won't apply to everyone. That they come back and at that point can justifiably demand a squad place. Take Carter, you can maybe sign one less CB considering that we have lost 2 and take Carter as somewhat proven.

They have spent the money they have brought in this summer on 6 or 7 signings and they are in talks with a striker from France according to reports.

Kids football.

One of the main drawbacks of this director of football model is the added layer which may cause delays which a risk heightened in a club like ours that with dysfunctional owners tends to take longer to make decisions anyway. It is a fair concern to suggest that this is or at least could be playing out or about to play out. We are looking horribly unprepared for the season ahead so the need for signings becomes more and more urgent. Sadly it seems like we couldnt be further away.

Where is that from? The key is always to judge on money spent on players signed and not on reported bids. Im not optimistic that much will be spent.

Brereton was linked tenuously with Leeds but seems like they are going to France for their main striking target: https://insidefutbol.com/2022/07/14/leeds-united-intensifying-efforts-to-land-ligue-1-star/567953/

Quite right but that leaves us with the bare truths, no one through the door yet and a lot of holes to fill.

It's one of them though I guess, there is no such thing as an excessive value put on a player unless no buyer agrees to it, if they get that £4m then its realistic. That Bosnian went for a similar fee without having the reputation as a proven quality Championship defender at this level. Davies is also good on the ball which suits the modern obsession of playing it out from the back, he is left footed and at a good age so I guess I can understand why he will get interest.

I do indeed attend matches and even with Brereton for example when the narrative was that he was treated horribly by our nasty, negative fans, that simply was not the case. Lots of fair criticisms there, no? No signings and lots of gaps in the squad. Ticketing policies again off the mark. The ground showing huge signs of not being looked after. Venkys, nothing else needs saying on them. Fans on the terraces saying they don't rate x and y, people go to football and give their opinions to each other, was it audible to the players? How about we discard the negative narrative and instead all have constructive discussions whereby positive/negative has no bearing on the validity of an opinion?

He also said this last night, 2 hours before Steve Bruce confirmed that Kipre has agreed to join a team in Wales.

You think Rovers fans specifically are negative compared to other teams and their supporters? And even if you do, considering the last 12 years as Mercer says, do you blame people?! I hate this negative shaming fad as it is done in the absence of constructive debate. At games, this "negative" fanbase that you speak of doesn't seem to really exist. "We don't need it" implies that it has had a negative impact on the team that people are sharing what you perceive to be negative opinions on places like on here. If that is your implication, and if not then fair enough, then it is bollocks.

I actually have been a little underwhelmed by him going forward, he technically is a good player so the ball stays tight to his feet (the polar opposite of Bell who was so loose with the ball) but his set pieces are no better than ok and he is not a constant attacking threat. Defensively I think his general awareness and reading of the game is pretty good, which reduces the impact that his obvious lack of pace has. Edun is a bit faster but he looks all over the place positionally.

A left footed winger is definitely not a priority with Markanday and Hedges already here. Poveda had a mixed time, outstanding v Sheff United, a few other flashes and a few cameos in which he was anonymous. Not the woeful player you make out but not one we should bring back. Pickering wouldn't be comparable to having Rankin Costello on the other side to be fair, and he is also a big step up from Edun and also is much better than Bell. His form prior to injury was very good, he never replicated it afterwards though. Agree with your general analysis in the main though. Some people don't seem to see it as an issue as long as its before the deadline, but you can't dismiss the importance of 21 potential points.

Leeds haven't taken Poveda and a few others on tour to Australia with a few of finding moves elsewhere. Not saying we want or indeed should want him back here but worth mentioning as a player who was here last season. Suppose he is a proven quality defender at this level and no longer is running close to the end of a contract.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ben-davies-liverpool-transfer-breaking-24485607 The Lancs Live article is just this regurgitated.

He was really poor when he played there in the League last season, I remember him always being a weak link and constantly being out of position when he played. Pickering isn't perfect but he is a lot steadier and more reliable than Edun.

I don't see how one poster on an internet messageboard sharing the opinion of another supporter who was at the game on aforementioned messageboard is "not needed" as if it makes a difference to the team.

Would be a big loss and a surprising one. Leeds need a left back with Firpo who himself struggled last season now injured, maybe he will go back there although their fans might not welcome him back.

You argued against my suggestion that we are "playing catch up" in the market profusely the other week! Now Tomasson has said it, you agree... The same account has Armstrong down as going to QPR. I would file that under another saddo in his bedroom wanting to be ITK. Agree on the point about him as a wing back although I wouldn't play wing backs anyway. But I have seen a few people say that right centre back is Nyambe's position but it is certainly a potential theory in the absence of any evidence aside from one or two games. I still think his best position is right full back, a very good one on one defender which is more important than attacking in a back 4. He isn't very good in the air and he might be expected to bring the ball out so not sure that right centre back would suit him. I suspect that there is more than enough evidence of what Gallagher would be like as that focal point unfortunately! Can't hold it up well, can't link play, struggles to direct flick ons and knock downs, lacks a strikers instinct, poor first touch. I think there may be disappointment when Gallagher does inevitably play centrally and doesn't thrive to the extent that many predict.

https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/bradley-dack-injury-blackburn-rovers-24483990 I find these quotes really worrying about Dack and the potential for continuing injury and fitness issues. The problem with the "U23's with a few U18's" tag is that in the absence of recruits which may or may not arrive before the season, it was also a display featuring our second choice players who could be needed at the start of the season if we get any knocks. It perhaps suggests that these players are not ready to be squad players if the attitude around them is one of very low expectations due to their age, Not factoring in that it was seemingly a second string Dundee side with a few trialists. What is this recent "negativity shaming about?" A poster admittedly with a track record of hyperbolic nonsense shared a phone call he had with a Rovers fan on an internet messageboard. What does "we really don't need right now" even mean. It's so frustrating and it is becoming more and more common sadly.

Do we have that much? Not sure we do. A core of good players and then mainly kids beyond, barring the odd straggler.