Why advertise in the first place? I agree that a manager shouldn't interview 87 candidates but it seemed pointless to even advertise if they already had someone in mind, and the fact that it strengthens the position of a rubbish manager is infuriating. Not sure the preparation is particularly going very well to be honest anyway. Mowbray in charge, no signings, and in the only game so far it was essentially a Rovers under 23 side, only Nyambe, Pickering, Travis, Rothwell, Johnson (who got injured) and at a push as fringe players Buckley and Davenport you would think would be in the squad on the opening day.

It seems that people are split in their attitude on Mowbray at this moment in time. Half want to bury their head in the sands, call a fresh start from the start of the season and put people down for "not getting behind the team, COYB!" I sort of get it and maybe wish that I had such willingness to do the same, but it makes no logical and rational sense. Talking about signings being made, none of which have and with no urgency to do so may I add, we are reliant on the recruitment of a manager who has a poor record in the market. Tactics and formations, again we rely on Mowbray-ball and his wide striker and false 9 rubbish. So it is impossible to rationally look ahead to the season without considering the manager. I am not one to go into calling him corrupt etc, I just think that he is incompetent and well out of his depth. I have no evidence that he was being cunning behind the scenes and indeed even surrounding himself with people he knows is very common, the worry is that it only strengthens his position and shows how trusted he is, not that he is doing it deceitfully. But I cannot fathom how people can just start afresh because a manager is critical to the success or failure of a football club. And to clarify, I am definitely aware that the problems are and have always been the cunts over in India, but Mowbray is a huge, horrid symptom of that as a failing manager taking us backwards. Seems like a re-hash of the Daily Mail article, which in itself seemed to be based on the Sun at the weekend. Either way, we need to get our arse in gear at getting players in.

Cant argue with any of that. But on Joe Bennett, he is a left back of real proven quality, not over the hill at 31, would give us real experience that we sorely lack and would I expect be first choice over Pickering who is obviously yet to prove himself at this level. Well all that would be true if it wasnt for the fact that he injured his knee ligaments in March and wont be fit for at least a couple of months into the new season which is why Cardiff released him. Signing him would be totally senseless so expect a 3 year deal any day now.

The difference is that Souness surrounding himself with familiarity and strengthening his own position was not a problem in that he was a successful manager. Mowbray shouldnt be in the job so surrounding himself and helping to vet a further familiar face isnt a good sign.

If you would like to be unnecessarily patronising, at least count correctly.

That is grotesque!

Both sides seem to be run proactively but I am not convinced by Luton, any side that signs Amarii Bell is always going to raise question marks and in general their recruitment is a little peculiar, Cameron Jerome and even Henri Lansbury seem to have long since had their day, Burke in defence, Campbell in midfield and the trio of Gomes, Muskwe and Onyedimna are a little more interesting but not sure that they have enough to really overachieve. QPR on the other hand seemed to be really strong in the second half of last season once they made signings that bar Johansen they have made permanent. Never been totally convinced by Warburton but they do seem to be putting something together there. You would expect the relegated 3 and Bournemouth having retained much of their crown jewels and added Marcondes to all be up there, less convinced by Barnsley having had their manager and captain nabbed and Swansea without Ayew, Woodman, Guehi etc so maybe there are 2 spaces left. The front runners aside from maybe QPR for the top 6 would have to be Cardiff, Boro and Stoke for me, all managed by good managers and ssemingly improving on the pitch. Warnock always leans on experience but seems to be set to spice it up with a South American binge, McCarthy at Cardiff improved them so much last season and has added some more options so I think they will be up there and Stoke will miss Collins but Wilmot, Vrancic and Doughty look like decent additions and with the likes of Fletcher, Campbell and Fox to return to fitness they might be up there too.

Is this true that we have 19? The rules are that you can have 25, these 25 include loanees but exclude those who are permanent and are under 21, presumably that this season will be those born after the 1st January 2000: https://www.efl.com/clubs-and-competitions/sky-bet-championship/championship-squad-list/ From our 25 man squad last season, we have lost Bell, Bennett, Branthwaite, Douglas, Downing, Elliott, Evans, Harwood-Bellis, Holtby, Lyons, Trybull, Williams, plus there is no need to register Magloire and Armstrong is obviously set to depart. So that is 14 more spaces available. Pickering will take one of those, Chapman will take one of those, Carter will (by 2 weeks) as will Butterworth, lets for now assume that we keep those 2 around the squad. As will Buckley and Brereton who didnt last season. So that is 6, leaving 8 spaces for my calculations. 9 if you assume that Pears is loaned out and we bring in alternative back up in goal.

It surely only further strengthens Mowbray's position, that is I suspect peoples issue with it.

And why 5? 5 is not enough.

Usual replies.

Yeah the season will definitely be decimated by isolation and positive tests. Most players may not have had 2 or even 1 vaccine either.

The issue is not that the manager has had a hand in selecting the head of recruitment. The issue is who the manager is, and indeed how allowing him to help to surround himself with familiar faces suggests that the job is his for a long time and only strengthens his grip on the job.

There is a lot of rubbish in this league. Sadly, the formula of a squad lacking its prolific goalscorer and main creator, with the same incompetent manager and with an increased dependant on too many untested kids isnt a positive one.

Neil Etheridge (Birmingham goalkeeper) is in hospital with covid. I saw that Ipswich had issues with friendlies due to Covid and also on here the rumour that our game v Gateshead was cancelled due to Covid. I wonder how many games will be cancelled this season due to isolation/positive tests and if the players have been vaccinated yet?

Is there absolutely any evidence of what I have put in bold? We have absolutely no idea what it was, there was a rumour of that on here and also a rumour that he was offered a pitiful wage. Is 22 close to retirement age? Carter has plenty of time, he is very, very young for a centre back. I suspect that you will be right and we will become overly reliant on kids, mainly because I don't think we will sign many players. But it is a risky strategy. By all means give the young players a chance, which with a squad of Nyambe, Pickering, Brereton, Armstrong (if he stays which he wont sadly), Wharton, Rankin Costello, Buckley, Davenport, Chapman and Dolan all in it, we will have plenty of youth either way. But we need more experience and more proven quality on top of that, which is sorely lacking. Rankin Costello is seen as a left winger anyway, not a right winger, according to Mowbray. If we do become too reliant on kids, it doesn't bode well for as and when we get embroiled in a dog fight at the bottom, we don't have the characters and the experience to cope.

Firstly, of course I very much wish Appleton well in his fight with illness and hope to see a full recovery. But I find it hard to understand why anyone would have a fond memory of him as a manager here, admittedly there were mitigating circumstances throughout the season but he was very much (a bit like Lambert) a "good talker" but we regressed in his short time in charge, he served up the most drab football of a generally woeful season and that Millwall game will always be remembered for the wrong reasons.

Do any teams have so many in pre season?

I would agree in that I have wondered myself why we are having a 2 week gap between our first 2 friendlies. I did wonder if there is a game behind closed doors, and if @JHRover is correct in saying that we have a game behind closed doors at the weekend v Wigan, then that would make sense from a fitness perspective and indeed it wouldn't be "awful prep" that "shows the state of the club" after all, 5 friendlies seems perfectly normal. Saying that, Wigan are playing Oldham at the weekend so I do wonder when any game with them is, although after the first game in pre-season, having 2 games on the same day is very common with the first team squad split into 2. But either way, if we are having any fixtures behind closed doors this weekend, in terms of preparation, then that completes the pre-season as I did find the gap a little curious. Addressing your point about revenue, thats a more genuine point but even then, we tend to only play Premier League clubs at Ewood in pre-season, it would be very rare for us to host a lower league team in the second match of pre-season at Ewood, so would that be our decision? So then you look at the likely revenue of a friendly against testing costs etc, and maybe it has not been deemed worthwhile on our opponents behalf to open the game to the public just prior to "freedom day." Wigan v Oldham is being played behind closed doors for example.

There are many aspects of the club that you could argue are in disarray. A "Rovers 11" fixture being cancelled is not really one of those, not a first team friendly. Unsure why a game v Wigan is behind closed doors though if that is true. When will Leeds tickets information be released?

I think that you want to become far too dependant on young players, which is so dangerous. With Mowbray in charge and Armstrong potentially leaving, we are likely to be fighting at the wrong end of the table, we need much more experience to accompany our young players, you don't want 2 youngsters fighting for a place, ideally it would be a senior player and a younger player kicking at his heels. For example, you suggest our 2 right attacking players to be Rankin Costello and Dolan. Neither has yet proven themselves to be capable at this level, I would keep both at the club as I said but we need a more senior option above that, Rankin Costello obviously will be needed at right back I presume too, but we need at least 1 if not 2 wide men on top of Brereton who is slightly more proven but still not fully and then Dolan, Chapman and Rankin Costello all of whom are still in the "promising youngster category." I have no idea why a 21 year old centre back is in the last chance saloon in your head. A centre back is less likely to get opportunities in that unlike attacking players, you don't bring on a young defender for 20 minutes at the end. With Ayala made of glass and Wharton set to start the season on the sidelines, the question is, would if necessary you trust Carter to start on the opening day if necessary, my personal preference would be to sign a more proven centre back, and to loan Carter out for one more season. Pike as an individual I see less urgency to loan out, he is 2/3 years younger than Butterworth and hasn't seemingly had major injury problems, so another season playing under 23's but training with the first team and third choice at right back behind Nyambe and Rankin Costello may not be unwise. Your evidence is massively flawed though. You dismiss the success of Wharton who went on loan and looked far more competent and ultimately grown up prior to his injury, Lenihan and Raya also benefitted from successful loan spells. Some players will of course just come straight in like Nyambe and Travis but each case is different and there is no pattern to just say anyone worth his salt we should keep around. For me, the key is balance, you don't want too much reliance or too many youngsters around the first team at once otherwise it doesn't tend to end well. We have the likes of Rankin Costello, Chapman, Dolan, Brereton, Butterworth, Vale and McBride in attacking areas, all seemingly highly rated, and all of whom are 23 and under. It is impossible to keep them all around the first team and give them anything like regular minutes, even off the bench. We need 3 or 4 above the youngsters with more experience, we have the average Gallagher and of course the soon to depart Armstrong, so we need probably 2 or 3 more. A loan spell would also be able to prove that he is physically robust enough to play consecutive games, as well as his ability. But as mentioned above, the key is getting the balance right for me, we have so many young attacking players yet to fully establish themselves to varying degrees. We don't want to keep too many at once without loaning a few, otherwise it will be difficult to give them all the game time needed for their development.

There is a balance in that you dont want to keep hold of too many youngsters whereby they get into each others way. For example, defensively obviously Pickering should stay as our sole left back, at centre back I would personally keep Wharton and loan out Carter. In midfield, I would sign 2, I would probably keep Buckley and Davenport who would both benefit from the loss of 4 or 5 in there although maybe the latter in particular could do with some regular game time elsewhere. In attack, we have Butterworth, Dolan, Rankin Costello and Chapman all of whom need to play game time, with none of them yet fully proven, so it is hard to juggle all of them at once, because we need one or two more experienced and proven options especially now Elliott has gone. I would personally loan out Butterworth who needs game time the most, Dolan himself maybe could do with a loan but I think he should stay for the time being, especially as Rankin Costello needs to cover right back. Even beyond that we have the likes of Pike, McBride and Vale who all probably are best suited getting a loan spell if possible.

Like I said, you are just selecting random examples, Lenihan, Raya and Wharton all benefitted from loans. Loads of the examples you gave who went out on loan are not very good and are at best in League 2. Butterworth should be judged as an individual, you can find positive and negative cases both from former loanees and players who have stayed, both at Rovers and elsewhere. You dont think he has a better chance of regular football at a League 1 or League 2 club? If he cant get that then he wont be good enough for us anyway. But do you see Butterworth as potentially getting regular game time here? Also, would you be against loaning youngsters from other clubs if you feel that our youngsters are best served staying here?

The key is that each case is individual, talent and thus readiness for the first team. Youve just listed loads of poor players who all are nowhere near the standard required. There is no point selecting other individuals because it is a case by case basis, there are loads (not specific to Rovers) of players who have broken through without a loan and succeeded, there are loads who have used loan spells to really ramp up their development, (Armstrong was one of those) there are players who have suffered on the back of not being loaned out and there are players who have been loaned out incorrectly where they havent been played. I just think for Butterworth that he is in dire need for regular football considering his last couple of years in which he has suffered from injuries. If he stays, do you genuinely see him coming straight in and getting regular game time, especially via starts? Like I said with Dolan, much younger, in a position where we at the time had only an unfancied Chapman as an alternative. Travis, Raya, Rankin Costello etc all broke in younger. Raya, Lenihan and Wharton all benefitted from loans. But the key is that Butterworth needs to be judged as an individual, no point comparing other players to him. As a player who has never started a proper game, with the injury issues that hes had, plenty of time left and still young of course, go and prove not only that you have the talent to regularly impact at say League 1 level, but perhaps more questionably are physically robust enough to do so and not break down. He wont prove that playing against kids or for 10/20 minutes here and there.

Each case regarding a loan is individual, you cant take such a small selective sample to prove a point. It depends on a variety of factors, including age, likelihood of game time, position etc. Loads of youngsters have broken through via loans, and loads have done so without. @islander200 you mention Dolan but he was 4 years younger, Butterworth has missed so much of his development due to injury. Dolan was also trying to break through out wide where at the start of last season we were short with Elliott yet to sign, starting 4 of the first 5 and only 6 league games after that. Butterworth wouldnt start even if we made no signings before the season as a number 10 with Rothwell and maybe Buckley ahead of him, although I would not allow the loan until we get some bodies through the door ourselves to be fair.