roversfan99

We can yeah, only for the last week though. And seems that no one is close to signing.

Could you please answer the question from @Ewood Ace What on earth makes you think that we should be top 6? And indeed from my point of view, do you genuinely think that, factoring in everything, potential signings you think we could and would like to make, the manager too, that we have a chance? In regards to "stop listening to other fans opinions" quite simply, no I won't. It is up to us to choose what we want to believe about players who sign or we are linked with, I personally put a lot of stock into what people who watch them week in week out thing, of course this doesn't guarantee how they would do here, they might do better or worse for various reasons, a big one being what position they play, but you don't have to factor that into your own personal judgement. Conversely, I don't put much stock into most of the data analysis, so you may be interested in crosses per game, progressive runs per game, expected goals, expected assists etc, I am not but wouldn't ask you to ignore it. Brereton being "bang in form" for Chile is a bit of an overreaction, he scored one goal in 4. It is ok saying that they need to step up to the plate but logic and historical evidence does not suggest that they are likely too. They may, or one of them may, but I doubt it. Armstrong had previously scored plenty of goals especially in one season although his goal returns in the last couple of years have been superb and to be honest, well past my expectation of him. So it could happen, but Armstrong is the exception to the rule and even then, there was more there to expect more goals from him compared to Brereton, Gallagher and Rothwell. Does it matter that we haven't been linked to players? Of course not. What matters is that we haven't signed any yet with pre-season underway, don't seem close to signing any, have missed out on targets, have the same poor manager and many players including our best one who seems destined to leave with only a year left on their deals. Grim.

I do understand that the targets shouldnt be changed just because the manager is poorer, a logical club would sack the manager if that was the case. What I dont get is how you genuinely seem to think that we could get into or challenge for the top 6 with the same manager that you want out. Same manager plus potentially the loss of a 28 goal striker yet you think there is even a slight chance that we make up a 21 point and 9 place deficit from last season? Surely you agree that having Mowbray in charge makes any play off hopes beyond us, barring an unexpected and sudden twist? I havent written off Obafemi, I dont think that we will sign him anyway but my point is that we will be weaker without Armstrong. Specifically about Obafemi, I said that he is very raw and untested, obviously talented and I also acknowledged that we probably will need to take some form of gamble on a replacement because as a bottom half Championship club on a tight budget, we cant attract or indeed afford an equal replacement. We have barely been linked with anyone because we havent been able to sign anyone, not that you would know with the lack of communication from the club. Kids on loan who have never kicked a ball in senior football like Leshabela and Clarkson? No thanks, we need experience. Johansen was linked, I think he would be a good addition. Reach is a predictable link, potentially a useful free but not well liked at his previous club. Obafemi, cant say I have ever seen much of him considering his very limited senior experience. So unsure, perhaps a similar stance to you who was "far from convinced." I suspect no one will sign for a good while yet. I also think that it is illogical to expect the rest of the team to suddenly start scoring loads more to fill any void left by Armstrong. Brereton, Gallagher, Rothwell etc, none have any real history of scoring lots of goals. Will miss Elliott too.

It is strange how some seem desperate to paint situations as negative and depressive, as if they are unnecessarily so. Keeping an underperforming, incompetent manager is not positive, selling your best player is not positive and being unable to sign players due to an embargo leaving a skeletal squad is again not positive. Unsure it if has been mentioned, but we have been linked to Pelly Ruddock who recently left Luton. Rich Sharpe just seems to be an echo chamber for rumours elsewhere rather than doing any investigative work himself, but it seems again that we are behind other teams, in this case Boro: https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19434658.blackburn-rovers-midfield-transfer-need-free-agent-linked/ The thing is that you are so keen not to acknowledge the managerial situation that you don't factor it into your expectations. I am sure that we should feel like we can challenge for the play offs, but with a manager that you yourself want out, surely you accept that the chances of achieving such a target are slim to nil and that an underperforming manager will negatively affect our chances of that? Also on Obafemi, I haven't "written him off" anymore than you. My mindset is more based on Armstrong and how any replacement is not going to be as prolific and thus is likely to be inferior, therefore our squad becomes weaker. I doubt that we will even sign Obafemi, the source is a very dodgy one. My point is that we would be replacing a proven goal scorer with someone unproven. And no, I don't have any names in mind to replace him. We supposedly have a revamped scouting network to find someone, my comparative knowledge is obviously going to be very limited.

As you say, it is unlikely (very) that we would replace the goal tally that Armstrong gave us, so a Tony Mowbray managed Rovers without its main goalscorer doesnt bode well. I very much think even if we had a chunk of the Armstrong money that the calibre of players we would be looking at and able to attract are ones that are unproven in some way so maybe Obafemi would be as good as we could get. What is there to be positive about selling your best player?! Why would that be a positive thing, especially under the same manager? You yourself said that you was far from convinced about Obafemi didnt you?

What makes you say incredible? The best of a bad situation perhaps, but we are losing a proven, prolific goalscorer off the back of a 28 goal season to potentially replace with a raw and unproven replacement.

I actually think that Mowbray is right to have a grievance as to the incompetence above him that had caused us to be under a totally avoidable transfer embargo. As it is, said incompetence from our handsomely paid CEO and of course the continued negligence of our owners helps to keep him in a job that he no longer merits, so I suppose it is swings and roundabouts in that if the owners and the running of the club were proactive and effective, then he wouldn't be here. The Obafemi rumour seems like a Nixon special, there is "a lot to do on the deal" ie it is unlikely to materialise but cannot be proven wrong. As it is, a swap could be a very useful method of getting in a replacement, although I am unsure if Obafemi would be valued to ensure that Newcastle are not short changed by a loop hole on any deal. As it is, Obafemi is a very raw kid who no one can claim to really have seen much of, very little senior experience and 4 career goals, plus a serious muscular injury last season. Him replacing a 28 goal striker might well be the best that we can get, assuming it is a permanent deal rather than a loan which would be a no go 100%. But it would be hard to view the deal as anything other than a massive downgrade, replacing a proven goalscorer with a raw talent, on the back of losing Elliott, it all doesnt really bode well but with Armstrong having only a year left, what else can we do?!

Equally, what is the point in suggesting and discussing rumoured transfer targets? It has equal relevance (none) to what will happen, but people are just discussing it on a forum. Fact of the matter is that he is a hindrance that cant be swept under the carpet until he either is finally sacked, leaves or creates a sudden and remarkably unexpected resurgence. And his existence in his current role is of massive relevance both to recruitment and indeed how our season is likely to unfold. So yes, people will continue to "moan" about him as long as he is playing the role of underperforming manager.

I think that we are a long way away from worrying about having 25 senior players, isnt it over the age of 21?

I didn't suggest that we take risks, I said quite the opposite and that was not the suggestion or point that I was making, indeed what I was saying was a point that has clearly evaded you. Johnson injured his hamstring according to Mowbray.

Because you are focusing on quantity rather than quality. Davenport and Buckley are both in a combined 5 seasons (Davenport has been here for 3, Buckley in the first team squad properly for 2) yet to convince and really establish themselves as first team players, even when they have played. I think 2 new established players (either in a 3 or even one defensive and one number 10) along with Travis would improve an area that I have not been convinced with for a while. That would then leave Rothwell, Johnson (who is injured now and I really think needs phasing out) along with Davenport and Buckley to compete with them. 4 gone from the wage bill and 2 replacements so we would still be leaner than last season. I have looked at Rich Sharpe's twitter and couldnt see anything like you mentioned, hence why I asked.

I said that precautions are understandable, but just that I found it a little alarming that as many as 6 players were unable to either participate today or indeed in Johnson's case came off early, on the back of the training camp.

Firstly on the owners, losses are common place and tend to be propped up by the owners, whether it is via share issues or even loans, that is not an advantage. Take Preston, run far more efficiently and proactively, but still make losses which are funded by Trevor Hemmings. The manager is a key variable that isnt changing so surely underachievement is likely to continue? I would agree that Armstrong would be an enviable asset for every time in the league, not just most. His future is critical, his goal record is tremendous and would likely always keep our heads above water. Sadly, I just cannot see him staying, unlikely to sign a new deal so otherwise we will lose him for free. Easy to get caught up in Chile mania but Brereton could make himself a decent Championship attacker but at this moment in time he wouldn't get in that many teams. Other teams may be struggling but we have lost a hell of a lot too, even putting aside the Armstrong situation and the practical impossibility of an equally prolific replacement. Elliott is a huge loss, a big source of goals and also assists and creativity, I would be amazed if we can replace him equally either. You mention Reach, not looked at fondly by Sheffield Wednesday fans, does score and assist to a lesser degree, but if you also had him as second choice left back, he is a Pickering injury or loss of form (looks good on paper but yet to play at this level) away from being taken away from the attacking void to which he would be expected to fill. We have lost Williams from the first half of the season and Harwood Bellis from the second. There is no evidence that Ayala will suddenly be able to play much and indeed he was already unable to play today. With Wharton missing the start of the season, we have to sign a first team centre back as well as a left back in my opinion. In the midfield, I think Ewood Ace hit the nail on the head as quoted. Johansen to be fair would be a clever addition but I think we need more. We have lost Holtby, Evans, Downing and Trybull, 4 experienced options, none of which I would necessarily want again, but all 4 at the moment are better performers than the likes of Buckley and Davenport have proven to be. I think we need at least 2 proven players in there, I am more wary of signing untested kids on loan because we already have a very young squad, and have lost so much experience in there, the likes of Hannibal and Leshebela would be far too risky unless they were on top of 2 proven and experienced players. The hope would be that if we signed at least 2, then Davenport and Buckley could still in theory have so much scope to push through but only should they merit it, rather than being too dependant on them. Just sounds like I am being miserable and I appreciate that but I just cannot see much to get excited about at the moment. Where are the quotes about the embargo stopping us from signing players that we would have liked? Firstly, I go back to my point, no excuse whatsoever for the club never come out and actually say that we were in and are subsequently no longer in an embargo. Piss poor communication and lack of transparency, again. Also, really poor full stop to give ourselves an avoidable disadvantage. Sounds like nothing is anything like close, so another excuse too. Can't argue with that analysis at all. There are so many assumptions of players breaking through, Buckley will establish himself as a starter, Dolan will establish himself as a starter, Rankin Costello will establish himself as a starter, Chapman will kick on, Carter will kick on, Davenport will kick on, Pike, McBride, Vale and Butterworth will all be regular parts of the squad, in reality there is a balance to be had with youngsters, expecting them all or indeed most to take the first team by storm together is one hell of a dangerous game.

Is it not a worry that so many first teamers either weren't fit enough to participate or indeed came off? Kaminski, Brereton and Lenihan are all explained, but no Armstrong, Dolan, Gallagher, Pears or Ayala, as well as Johnson limping off, so half a dozen that went to Scotland are already not right. Totally on board with taking precautions in pre-season, but why are so many unfit? Also, Mowbray is already coming across as crabby and miserable post match. Maybe he is fed up with things above his head, all pointing towards a long slog of a season.

Not at all. A mixture of kids on loan, freebies and the likes of Davenport and Chapman again "being like new signings."

And so it begins, the whole "support the team" rhetoric. How is the atmosphere according to anyone there? For what its worth, I dont agree with anyone not attending trying to lecture those who do attend either way. Ive not attended today and would never tell those who have to either give stick or dont.

Is he? Sort of get Kaminski, but with Ayala, Lenihan, Dolan, Armstrong and one or two others not playing, doesn't seem logical not to get 45 minutes under their belts. Maybe we are keeping away any risk of Armstrong jeopardising a transfer away by pulling up. Maybe we wont sign anyone until he goes.

No idea to the first and third questions. All I know is we do need to sign some players. Surely this revamped scouting network should be paying for itself. No I wouldn't have and you know I wouldn't have, but they still need replacing. Johnson and Chapman should have been released too, the former injured already. Some considerable wages shifted but a paper thin squad.

Says on the official site that this is the team for the second half: Rovers (second half): Stergiakis, Nyambe, Saadi, Annesley, Whitehall, Davenport, Travis (c), Butterworth, Vale, McBride, Durrant. Maybe Armstrong is off and Ayala has another injury?

As expected, essentially a youth team. Wonder if Mowbray will be questioned on how he has allowed the squad to become so thin after the game?

Where would you expect such a squad to finish under Mowbray, out of interest? Surely with a weaker squad we will be lower in the table? Assuming that they are similar to Harvey Elliott and Taylor Harwod-Bellis, which is a high standard of loanee, one that has quality that we couldn't normally afford, then that is all well and good, on the top of a squad with the required levels of experience. When you lose the experience that we have done through Holtby, Evans, Bennett etc, correctly so, but call up academy graduates to replace them then start signing loanees who havent played much if any senior football, it seems a recipe for disaster to me especially if we are scrapping at the wrong end of the table. Reach has been mentioned a lot but he is obviously a downgrade on Elliott, and if Armstrong inevitably goes and we do not bring in a 28 goal striker to replace him, obviously a nigh on impossible task, the whole picture changes. Who is competing to play at left back in your squad?

I think we need a new manager first and foremost and that cant be forgotten. But then a left back to challenge (not be back up) to Pickering, a centre back, a right back, at least one defensive midfielder, an attacking midfielder, and at least one winger. Then of course a good striker to replace Armstrong, in which case we may need an additional further attacking player. If we are counting players like Wharton, Pickering, Brereton and Travis as experienced players then we are in a muddle. Of the 5 youngsters you mention, I would probably loan out 2 or 3. Vale couldnt get near Rochdales team, why is he suddenly good enough to be part of our squad? Butterworth needs some regular game time to see if his body can cope rather than 10 minutes here and there. Carter perhaps keep until January at which point Wharton will be fully fit and maybe a loan spell would suit Carter. The other 2, either loan or in the under 23s but of course supplementing the first team. Are we allowed 7 subs or 9? We cant expect all 5 to be all good enough and more importantly to give them all the game time required.

We may have different views and standards on how much experience we need, how much reliance we can place on our untested youngsters, how high this current crop of players managed by Mowbray can realistically finish and how many recruits we need. But im sure we will both agree that the club needs to pull its finger out and get players in as soon as possible.

Would agree with all of your points, my team was what I expect to see, but in regards to quality, depth and the contractual situation, bang on the money. A further worry is the age/experience being skewed even further towards youth on the back of the release of the experience that we had, and the inevitable loaning of kids. Overseen by Mowbray too! Worrying.

Says who?