roversfan99

Mowbray said this in his interview: “It’s a bit of a drip down scenario for us, the clubs we’re talking to, some big clubs in the north west." I hope we stay well away from Branthwaite at Everton. Was shocking.

He doesn't deserve the flak for things that arent his fault or things that are out of his control though, including this car crash of a summer. He also has brought youngsters through. Transfers, tactics, results, yes.

But Mowbray is not in control of his own budget, presumably those extensions fell within his budget. It is down to people above Mowbray to ensure that we dont exceed FFP regulations. The embargo was not his fault nor the change in transfer policy to loaning kids only, something he said today he wasnt aware of at the start of the summer. Like I said, Mowbray shouldnt be the manager and isnt the man to utilise his resources as efficiently as need someone to.

@davulsukur that team I agree with picks itself, perhaps an illogical tactical tweak like Dolan up front aside. A bench of Stergiakis, Carter, Chapman, Buckley, Garrett, Butterworth and McBride? Would that be our weakest bench in recent memory?

Mowbray shouldn't be in a job but how Venkys have not got the wrath for this summer is beyond me. Mowbray is clearly not the man to utilise a limited budget effectively, but being in an embargo for example was a limitation above his head. Being only allowed to sign kids on loan, something the manager wasnt aware of when we released our remaining experience was again not his fault. And allowing players to run down their deals, clearly something Mowbray isnt confortable with is bonkers. FFP is the latest reason for everything, and of course we need to abide by it. But it is counter productive to allow potential sellable assets to run out of contract to avoid FFP regulations! They have no logic and no plan.

Do you think that, on the assumptions based on Mowbrays interview, that Armstrong goes, we sign 5 kids with minimal first team experience on loan and no permanent signings or further experience, that we would stay up? I don't doubt that the manager who I reiterate shouldnt be here has not spent money totally efficiently. But Mowbray specifically said that he is conscious of contracts expiring and assets and clearly isnt comfortable with allowing their deals to expire, how is that specifically his fault that we arent offering them now? Even if it is a money saving tactic, its a senseless one, because selling assets and running at a transfer profit is a great way to stay within the rules. You can say FFP requirements until you are blue in the face but nothing that I have suggested is expecting mass investment, just logic and a constructive plan. We lose so much because of the owners. Had the summer plan been to sell Armstrong, allow a replacement on a permanent deal (either a swap or even a 1-2m signing) with focus on extending current contracts (maybe even sell and replace Rothwell/Nyambe if they dont want to renew, raising further fees) and bringing in 2 or 3 loans and a couple of experienced heads on frees whilst still making a wage saving on the dozen that left, I would have accepted that. Allowing contracts of assets to run down is not something that fits with FFP, a key way to avoid huge losses is selling assets, something Venkys have never mastered. Even when we sold Cairney, Gestede etc, it was when we had to and for minimal fees. I dont get how your reaction to that article is anger towards the manager. Surely the fact that Mowbray is saying that he didnt anticipate relying solely on loans this summer when numerous players were released, and is quite clearly not happy, saying that its not how he wants to work. He shouldnt be here and is not competent for his job, but this summer is all down on Venkys and they will be happy that Mowbray takes the flak even for things that he isnt to blame for. That first paragraph is spot on, there just seems to be a lack of clarity, moving the goalposts, suddenly its a loans only policy which wasnt Mowbrays understanding when the players we let go were released, allowing players to run contracts down when a slight pay rise could lead to a few million in at a later date, its a joke. I am quite open minded on loans, if they are better than what we have then 100% get them in. But only loans and 5 of them is far too many. Also, we do need a permanent replacement for Armstrong as you say. Even if we make a 10m profit overall with a cheap replacement, then hope to polish him up, then repeat the process.

Sounds like there is minimal chance of any replacements for Armstrong or new deals for all of the others whose contract is running down. That is nothing to do with saving money because allowing assets to run their contracts down is not financially wise. Those bastards in India just dont give a shit.

To be fair, his current injury was a broken bone in a game after an international break.

He has been training daily and playing in the friendlies as normal to be fair, he hasnt refused to play. I suppose like anyone with such a huge question mark over their future, it is going to subconsciously play on your mind somewhat, if he refuses to play then that would be different.

Do you think that Idah will be on so much considering that he has never established himself fully as a first teamer, presuming that would be £20-30k+? Isn't ticket income only a fraction of overall income though? And indeed with Covid, surely that would affect them more than us? Still not fit after his injury at Wycombe last season. Having him, Johnson, Ayala and Davenport all so injury prone within such a small senior squad is really ominous.

We ae going into a league game on Saturday, starting a season in which as things stand we could be in a fight for every point down at the bottom, and we dont have a squad full of senior players. Yet everything is so passive.

Does every fanbase not contain a "hardcore" and then a considerable proportion who will attend more fleetingly and dependant on various factors, success included?

The article says twice that we just want cash, it is very contradictory and this is the third swap deal that Nixon has dreamt up, the LT says that any deal for Idah would likely be a loan anyway. There is no way that we cant even spend a small fraction of that money on a permanent signing. We are surely not 13m (20m take Newcastles cut) over FFP rules, we need a permanent replacement and it will be dreadful if we dont get one. Its impossible to see anything other than a dog fight with a team full of kids and loanees this season.

If we replace Armstrong with Idah on loan as per the LT, a striker with 6 league goals in his career, on the back of the summer so far and who we have as manager, we are asking for relegation. Such a depressing situation, I dont see why people are getting excited about a bidding war, its immaterial if at least a small proportion isnt reinvested on permanent players. We cant afford to hold off until January to start signing players, we could be cut adrift by then or at least be in a position similar to the season in which we went down. There is no reason that we shouldnt have a list of players ready and waiting for this expected eventuality so I dont understand why we would wait. As it is, I suspect that it will still be loans only and then the money will never be seen. If that is the case, can you see us staying up?

6 career goals then. Im not saying he should have scored more in his limited game time, my whole point is that he has barely any senior experience and thus it would be a gamble with him yet to prove that he can score consistently. Not saying that he would be bad, I am saying that nobody really knows. No, I have no idea who we should sign up front. No idea who is available either in the UK or beyond using our supposed scouting network which seems to have disintegrated. And yes, I am aware of the new regulations.

His goalscoring pedigree was at Coventry in League 1 wasnt it? And he struggled at Bolton as a winger.

I think/fear that it will be Brereton left, Gallagher right, Dolan central.

From what Mowbray said last week, it seems that a permanent replacement isn't even guaranteed. Idah is a similar one to Obafemi, he may prove to be a worthwhile calculated gamble in the absence of us being able to attract, find or indeed afford anyone more proven. I saw him a couple of times for Norwich last season and he looked fairly bright but he has 3 league goals ever, so it is a huge risk. His appearances for Ireland are not something to overly focus on really, I am not meaning to be snide but looking at the latest squad that was named, the strikers were Parrott who is again on loan in League 1 and has 2 senior goals ever, Ogbene who is not a regular at Rotherham and James Collins who is going to likely be back up to Moore at Cardiff, the standard is particularly low. I know that there were absent but even players like Maguire and Burke I have seen at Preston (the latter has left) and arent decent Championship players and Long is long since past it. He has yet to score internationally. Pre-season form is meaningless, that shouldn't affect our decisions, games whereby the result is fairly meaningless.

He would if its permanent, at the moment he is relatively untested although has shown glimpses as Pukki's back up. Playing for Ireland is not really an achievement these days!

Idah would be a similar situation to Obafemi, a young and largely unproven striker who on a permanent deal could be a decent investment, but on loan would be no good. Armstrong leaving will leave us in a terrible place as his goal record is superb but we cannot allow him to leave for free.

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/exclusive-southampton-closing-in-on-deal-for-blackburn-man-as-danny-ings-replacement/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/football/portsmouth-fc/transfer-gossip-portsmouth-close-in-on-loan-deal-for-ps800000-former-arsenal-midfielder-who-has-been-linked-with-swansea-and-blackburn-this-summer-3331999 A rumoured loan target going to League 1.

Out of interest, was you told specifically that Reach was the in and Rothwell was the out? Do you still believe that "all you need to do is ask" Venkys even now? Just seems crazy and contrary to the last 10 years. In regards to your comments suggesting that NOBODY shares ITK information to "willy wag," I would disagree, not aimed at anyone in particular but some seem to get a power from having a supposed inside source. At the end of the day, if people say something and it doesnt materialise, it will be judged as being incorrect, whether something changed along the way and it was at one stage correct, whether it was based on assumptions and second guesses, whether it was a random social media whisper or whether it was quite simply made up. That doesnt mean that people should be discouraged from posting when they hear things, this is absolutely the place for it, but they shouldnt be above a bit of ribbing if it doesnt happen. It is such a worry that we are dealing solely in this market. I disagree with the notion shared by @RoversClitheroe that we should avoid loans, if players ae better than what we have, then it makes no sense to dismiss them. The key is to moderate usage of them, maybe a couple at most a season, and get the balance with your own assets and experience around it, which is where we will go wrong. These players may be talented but it is very much dipping our toes into unknown waters because there is no evidence of what they are like in senior football, kids football is no barometer. Roberts is the exception but he comes off the back of a string of failed loans at this level. I do remember watching that Nkounkou against Fleetwood and he was very impressive. But why would Everton loan him when he would likely be back up here?

I dont have any issues with prioritising clean sheets, but I just dont think that the Ireland comparison is in any way a valid one, just because of how different the situations are. Ireland have for the last 10 years plus had a void of any attacking flair and creativity, but plenty of workmanlike, experienced players. Being resolute and hard to beat was always going to be the only way really that they can play. With Rovers, I feel like inviting pressure is much riskier, the team is far less suited to sitting in great numbers, we lack the experience and concentration that Ireland had, neither side is technically very good but we do have alot more energy and pace in forward areas. Plus there is also the competition that both sides have faced, at international football you go from one extreme to another, half of the group will be international minnows, some of whom are full of part timers in which one goal and youve basically won, and some have a far superior group of individuals than Ireland had so the key was to play the percentages, set pieces etc and rely on organisation and experience. The Championship is far more balanced, there arent the extremes of either side. If you play 3 centre backs, they are likely to have more of the ball, and ours are all really poor on it. I dont agree with us playing from the back in general really, we should really be trying to turn teams around much quicker than we do. I also think that even if we are to play 2 centre backs, we are lacking in numbers badly. Lenihan is a given, Ayala is made of glass, we dont know when Wharton will be back fully at it, and then beyond that, big question marks on Carter who had a good loan spell but was out of his depth initially, maybe he has grown but he doesnt look good on the ball, and Magloire is even further back. I also dont think that Nyambe is better at wing back, I think his one on one defending is good and I prefer him as a full back. Unsure on Pickering without seeing him competitively. Obviously its impossible to take too many conclusions from friendlies, hence why the part in bold is a massive statement. But do you think that we have the quality and depth at centre back to play with 3, and do you think that they are suited to playing in that formation? How do you feel about constantly changing formation as Mowbray likes to do?

5 at the back doesnt seem to suit the current players, our centre backs are not comfortable on the ball, and we are already short at centre back so to play a second of 2 untested kids instead of someone like Rothwell seems illogical to me. The fixture on paper is as favourable as most will be so it seems unnecessarily negative to play such a defensive formation.