But he has played consistently as a 10 for us, brilliantly, constantly scoring and assisting goals. Why change what was never broken? And logically, moving him further away from goal could limit his main strength. He didnt say he would prefer to play there, Bennett always publically said that he was happy to play right back, doesnt mean that he would personally have picked there,

As others have pointed out, our stats are skewed within the pre Mowbray years, whilst not including 2 of the 3 summers Mowbray has had in the Championship due to accounts not being published. Net spend of minus £30m prior to his arrival, £8m net spend in his first season after spending a couple of million in League 1. They also miss out the most recent years when Mowbray has continued to spend because the accounts have yet to be published for those years when we have a net spend of another 3 or 4 million. They dont factor in that he has had more time to build than any of those other managers, that is key, even if other teams have spent more specifically in the last couple of years, which isnt shown, it may have been by more than one manager. He also has a very competitive wage budget, he following that graphic has signed Gallagher, Holtby, Johnson, Downing, Kaminski, Ayala, Douglas, Trybull, Elliott etc, our wage bill will be massively increased you would suspect but that is not considered. Even if Mowbray has done a good job, and I would argue he has, it doesnt mean that he is a "victim of his own success" or that he is the manager to take us forward. We seem to be unable to push past inconsistent middle of the road results regardless of tangible improvements made to the squad, Kaminski and Elliott the obvious 2. If we "have a squad that can compete at the top of the division" which is a very subjective comment lacking any evidence until we actually do that, surely he is underachieving? Surely that only validates the opinion of those who feel that we need a change, if we have a side that should be competing at the top and never has done.

Mainly because Dack has been consistently brilliant for us as a number 10. Regardless of the glory years at Gillingham. His numbers are so high and being a number 10 allows him to make an impact as he does in the final third. He is not someone who controls games and when he drops deep he tends to render himself ineffective. Its not as if the change of formation has improved our results and cannot be changed, 4-3-3 has not seen us pick up more points and the effectiveness of Holtby and Rothwell is far less than Dack when he is fit to start. It makes sense to build around our best players, Dack is a 10, Armstrong thrives centrally, Elliott is best on the right and Brereton the left. Have them in a 4-2-3-1 and then Travis can come back in alongside Johnson in CM.

Great news and unexpected to hear that Dack has signed a longer contract. I do fear that he will be squeezed into a midfield 3 which doesnt suit him but I cannot wait to see him back as soon as possible. He is a goalscorer so the number 10 role is perfect, and ultimately he shouldn't be compromised to benefit inferior players.

Has he stopped? Even in the first half of the reserves when watching last night, a couple of times he tried step overs, more often than not he does numerous step overs without getting anywhere so its a sign of how raw his game is which is to be expected, an area that requires refinement and to be used more efficiently. Tricks are obviously a part of his game though so its getting the balance right between encouraging him to be positive and discouraging him from over-doing it, but I havent really noticed any signs that he has been "Mowbrayed."

Thats your theory, not evidence.

Even if people want him sacked, lets be honest, there is no real scope for getting behind anyone at the moment now we cannot attend, and even if we could go, people wouldnt be giving him any stick, so no doubts there.

Mowbray even when needing a goal is unwilling to change the system and even if he is having a poor game, youd never take off Armstrong for Gallagher because the former is always more likely to score. If Gallagher asked to be a striker and a striker only he would be massively reducing any chance of game time and im sure hed rather play out of position rather than not at all. He should only be considered as a striker and very much 2nd choice but I can understand why he doesnt insist on being a striker only.

.

Even if it was agreed that we "are where we should be," which is an incredibly flawed statement in that Mowbray has had more time than any other manager in the league, (bar Ainsworth) the luxury of no key player sales, a competitive budget and there is also the fact that results havent improved in spite of obvious tangible personnel improvements to the playing squad. Being where we should be is of little use. Even if you considered the top 6 to be overachievement, which again makes the publically agreed objective of a top 6 finish not only this season but last season bizarre, then overachievement is what we need. In a league that I think lacks quality in the main to be honest, the scope for improvement from where we are to the top 6 and the reward that brings is much less of a gap compared to the amount we would need to fall to be in serious danger amidst the crap at the bottom. People will point to the previous relegation but that was not long after an embargo, with a skeleton squad and with a manager who was particularly poor to the point that he had no interest in tactics and team shape.

Seems to be left in the three but he becomes less effective when he starts coming deep, hes not that type of player. When he is fully fit we should revert to playing him as a 10.

Dack looks very rusty and off the pace as you expect. When he returns I do hope he isnt played where he is playing tonight as hes not the type to run a game.

My mistake, I meant a 6, was a mistype!

He has had a year of consistent goalscoring to be fair with his biggest dry spell being 3 games since he has played up front. To be fair even if Gallagher said I only want to be a striker, Armstrong is still the main striker so I suspect it is either play wide or be on the bench. Hed probably rather play out of position rather than not at all.

Kaminski - Very shrewd addition from left field. Huge upgrade - 9/10 Pears - Doesnt seem like competent back up and for a fee too, questionable - 4/10 Ayala - Undoubtedly a very good Championship defender on his day but as a sole addition at CB, with his injury proneness, a disappointment so far. Not convinced the style we play is beneficial to him - 5/10 Douglas - A huge disappointment so far. A second attempt at putting a plaster over a long term weakness with Bell not a viable alternative - 4/10 Trybull - Ok, nothing special, squad player - 5/10 Downing - Possibly gets into our best 11 but Mowbray seems to think that he isnt in contention to start games, plus he was signed after the main games in which we missed a few players, so he was signed after the main time in which he was needed - 4/10 Dolan - I still am unconvinced that he is at first team level, beyond raw, but made a couple of crucial contributions early in the season, on a free and perhaps thrust in quicker than expected - 6/10 Elliott - Inspired loan signing and pleasure to watch - 9/10 The squad is stronger but we are achieving essentially identical results.

He is a striker who is at best an average Championship striker, at best he will creep into double figures as he did in his best season to date here. He also doesnt have any particularly strong attributes that make him important beyond his goal tally, he is fairly quick but not rapid, he doesnt bring others into play, a random example would be Jutkweicz who again wouldnt get into our team but his use to Birmingham is beyond a not particularly prolific goal record. Gallagher is not a striker that will give you the goals that will get you into the top 6. The key has to be to avoid the temptation that Mowbray struggles to avoid, to try and crow bar him in anyway. I get that there is a big price tag but it is counter productive to play him out of position against the balance of the team. He could maybe grow into a useful player off the bench if we needed a goal or a deputy to Armstrong. Armstrong is our main striker and theres no way that he is anything but first choice. His goal record is competitive with players like Pukki, Toney etc at the top of the league so Gallagher cant grumble at not playing at Armstrongs expense but he could ideally become a competent second choice.

He is a striker who is at best an average Championship striker, at best he will creep into double figures as he did in his best season to date here. He also doesnt have any particularly strong attributes that make him important beyond his goal tally, he is fairly quick but not rapid, he doesnt bring others into play, a random example would be Jutkweicz who again wouldnt get into our team but his use to Birmingham is beyond a not particularly prolific goal record. Gallagher is not a striker that will give you the goals that will get you into the top 6. The key has to be to avoid the temptation that Mowbray struggles to avoid, to try and crow bar him in anyway. I get that there is a big price tag but it is counter productive to play him out of position against the balance of the team. He could maybe grow into a useful player off the bench if we needed a goal or a deputy to Armstrong. Armstrong is our main striker and theres no way that he is anything but first choice. His goal record is competitive with players like Pukki, Toney etc at the top of the league so Gallagher cant grumble at not playing at Armstrongs expense but he could ideally become a competent second choice.

Definitely, the fact that the owners appointed Coyle as the manager before Mowbray, who whilst not having the corrupt undertones that Kean had was as bad in every way a choice as they could have made, seemingly done amidst turmoil with a late change from a very good manager in Warnock to a cheap option who couldnt be more unpopular, there is always scope for that to happen again. I just personally cannot embrace keeping the status quo purely out of fear of impending disaster, for one if that is to happen isnt it delaying the inevitable anyway? Its blind faith but of course any idea to sack Mowbray is coupled with replacing him with an upgrade. Likelihood? No idea! But I genuinely do appreciate the fear with these owners for whom many may have forgotten or prematurely forgiven a little too much.

Of course, they are incomparable undoubtedly. Kean is in a word of his own in regards to both competence and integrity. It just doesnt sit right with me that anyone, either self inflicted upon themselves or especially trying to quash other peoples opinions based on the notion that Mowbray is a professional and we arent. To use a less corrupt example, Coyle was a professional but should we have reserved opinion on his ineptitude? No one on here in their right minds thinks they are credible options to become the next Rovers manager, but there is no need to sanitise anyone's right to have an opinion, and to share those on here. Mowbray is a professional and there are most aspects to his role that no one on here could possibly do. But he still will make mistakes, he will do things that we dont agree with and he is in a position whereby he is in a position to receive criticism which he will accept I am sure. Even those who want to change managers would want to put in a more suitable (in their mind, at this point in time) professional.

Very fair points @JBiz Kean is incomparable to Mowbray and all who are sane would agree with that. A stain on the history of this club. I am keen however not to allow Keans era to become a benchmark, in the same way that players being praised merely for trying their hardest even if not up to the job, or the owners not allowing us to cease to exist is not worthy of praise. We can set higher standards than that without fearing being deemed unrealistic. Something you touch upon by suggesting that should we finish mid table that Mowbray should go. I am unconvinced it would be productive to even give him that long to be honest, based on what I have seen I think Mowbray having done a good job may have gone as far as he can but either way there is a standard there that ensures that merely not being Steve Kean is not a good enough standard.

I think the point that if you are refusing yourself and others an opinion on the principle that the manager has been a professional for many years then surely Kean would fall into the same category is a very fair one. Making such a point was clearly purely to provoke and wind up otherwise they wouldnt have seeked out a fan opinion forum to make it if their mindset was so black and white.

Did so well for us in his loan spell? He did ok, nothing more really. Definitely should only be considered central as second choice to Armstrong but I think his first spell here is overplayed.

He scored 2 in those games, one at Preston and one at Stoke which was off the bench. There were plenty of games especially in the first half of the season before Armstrong was considered a central player that Gallagher played there and was ineffective more often than not. I presume as someone who is adamant that Armstrong is a number 9 and understandably so, that you also see Gallagher as a back up in that position, unless you see something in him playing wide that only Mowbray does.

He definitely shouldnt play wide but even central which he has played numerous times mainly last season, he was ineffective more often than not. Our current striker is one player within our team to which you cannot doubt his effectiveness. Dack should be back soon so I would suggest playing Dack off Armstrong. Gallagher should be no more than sub striker as far as I am concerned.

"Trusting the professionals" isnt something that should be done at the expense of personal opinion. No one is suggesting that they take over as manager. All teams in the league have professionals, the question is whether the professional in charge at the moment is our best bet to achieve or even surpass expectations.