I dont rate Bennett especially as a right back and still feel he is the weakest component of that back 5. That being said, I have to say that I feel like his recent performances have been massively improved and I hope they continue.

If Jones gets anymore time at Stoke hes very lucky, doing a woeful job. 3 wins in 29.

It isnt his fault but of course his price tag should play a part in how we judge him, you are bound to look of the opportunity cost. Coversely, Dack is even more of a good signing due to the low fee we paid. You are right, not all transfers work out as plan, those that dont will be criticised.

@Paul Mani i found this comment a little strange: "Gally £5m and 8 games in a league where Bamfords get traded at 7-10m?" Bamford is a very good, proven Championship striker. He scored goals at Derby, Leeds and Boro where he won player of the year at this level. Gallaghers goal to game ratio in his overall record as a Championship striker is very undewhelming. Not saying we could have afford Bamfords wages or whatever but just found the comparison a strange one considering the difference in quality. Even with Breretons age, the fee does matter as @Blue blood rightly points out. But ultimately, prior to his injury he was not really close to getting a start, he still seems a way off the first team, we cant really spend 7m on someone so far away from making any sort of impact, its a bizarre situation considering how far away he looks when he does feature and how much hed already played for Foresr prior. And crucially is there any justification on what we have seen that Brereton or even Gally will be "banging in PL goals" or even payback their fees? Also, Rodwell was not fit for purpose as a centre back and Samuel scored 5 League goals and none after November. I would suggest that Mowbrays transfer dealings up until now are very mixed. I suspect that this summers business will prove to be his best window, that being said all the question marks for me surround the big money striker again. But we cant make definitive judgements on any yet or rule any as successes or failures. But I am optimistic.

I have seen no one suggest that Dack is anything other than a superb signing. Ultimately it doesnt make very good debate when everyone agrees I suppose. You also say that "transfers arent infallible." No one ever said that they are. Or that Mowbray should have a perfect transfer record. Equally that doesnt mean that his signings cant be criticised which in Breretons case is very justified.

Based on his season in League 1 for us, definitely not.

Would you agree then that during the course of the season, it would be very difficult (IMO impossible) to reach our play off objective without our striker contributing goals along the way?

Walton Bennett Lenihan Williams Cunningham Travis Holtby Armstrong Dack Downing Graham Subs Leutwiler Gallagher Rothwell Chapman Johnson Tosin Evans

12 players?

Neither do I, you are making out as if I am unhappy with a win. Absolutely nothing that I have said warrants you taking the moral high ground. I have merely said that our striker will need to contribute at least some goals in order for us to meet our objectives.

But you were implying that Gallagher cannot be questioned as he is part of a team that has hit some good form, so surely by the same token if we are judging individuals based solely on the teams results then he was only deserving of criticism during Coyles tenure as even though his goal tally was as impressive as it ever has been in his fledgling career, the team was losing? Ive not said that he isnt offering anything or that he doesnt have any attributes of any use, because of course he does. I also have read @Atko's Engine and whilst I slightly disagree that hes "mainly" played wide (against Charlton, Fulham, West Brom and Reading he played central, against Hull, Boro and Cardiff wide, as a sub v Millwall mainly central) and I totally appreciate that his game is different to Graham. I dont believe a striker yet to score's contribution can be described as excellent to be honest. I also think it is very fair to demand that at some point, our (£5m!) striker starts adding goals to his game as we can not be solely reliant on other positions scoring all season in absence of our seemingly now main striker, especially as we are far from free scoring anyway. I have not put specific demands on how many goals, I dont expect him to score 20 goals, or to be honest even match Grahams tally, but we must never lose sight of the main purpose of a striker regardless of what else he might offer, its not enough without goals.

Absolutely. Mentioned earlier that good strikers miss chances even when they arent scoring, by getting into the right positions.

So surely by that same token you were unhappy with his contribution when we were losing every week in his last spell? Even though he scored some goals, albeit 1 in 4 is very average. Its obviously true that he was in an inferior side last time but ultimately and factually, Coyles tactics seemed to suit Gallagher more than Mowbrays have done, in either spell. He was far more of a goal threat under Coyle in his 442, with Emnes or Graham with him, and wingers either side. To clarify, I am well aware that Coyles tactics and management as a whole were obviously terrible as a whole, and he is a terrible manager. He does have some attributes to his game that ae helpful but I think as our striker it is pretty obvious that he needs to start scoring goals to merit his place going forward.

Waggott said we were 10th to 16th last season but with Downing, Johnson, Gallagher and Holtby amongst our signings you would suspect that that figure has gone up considerably.

So should we not critique the team on anything but the result? Ie if we win but theres an area of potential improvement, we shouldnt mention it, and conversely, if we lose but someone plays well we shouldnt mention that either? A striker who has started 7 and come on in the 8th of our league games this season and is yet to score a goal (or rarely even threaten) is something to consider. We will need our striker to score goals over the course of the play offs in order to make the play offs.

I am not opta, how should I know. Not that many which ties into my earlier comments about good strikers always getting chances regardless of form, they get into the right positions.

He has plenty of tools especially physically but, as much as I appreciate the methodology behind phasing out a veteran striker for a young striker, if he continues to not score goals youd presume that Graham would have to come back in. Against Luton next week could be a perfect chance for Gallagher to get a goal mind.

Good strikers even when not in goalscoring form repeatedly get into goalscoring positions. The worry is always when them chances are not coming very often. Dack has 40 goals in 100 games and I struggle to remember one outside of the box. For all of his tricks and nutmegs he is brilliant at anticipating where the ball will fall in the penalty area. Much about goalscoring is about movement off the ball and anticipation. Im not convinced Gallagher has that strikers instinct to sniff out potential chances.

Would it?

Your examples are a little strange, and somewhat back up what many of us are saying, that the best bet is to stick to and master the one formation, and when you want to adjust dependant on the fixture, you do so via changing players within that set system, rather than constantly changing formation from game to game. Liverpool always play that 433, your example of Origi played wide forward is an example of what we could do, within the parameters of a fixed and consistent way of playing, being flexible more in terms of personnel rather than shape. But their players are clearly always aware of the roles within Klopps team. Again, City rarely move away from their 433, Pep's consistent way of playing tends to make his teams almost machine like, and more than anyone else can get away with bringing new players in, Fernandinho CB is very much alike to playing Mascherano, Yaya Toure and Javi Martinez in that position in the past. Wolves always play with 3 at the back. If they want to be a bit more attacking, they often change it up via their wing backs, picking Vinagre and in particular the converted wing back Adama Traore over Jonny Otto and Doherty. But again, the system stays the same, 3 centre backs, 2 wing backs, 2 central midfielders with a third slightly ahead and 2 up front. They have struggled with the increased rotation in personnel required compared to last season, Patricio, Doherty, Bennett, Coady, Boly, Jonny, Dendonker, Neves, Moutinho, Jiminez and Jota was their team almost every single week. Chelsea and Tottenham are more unclear examples. Both seem to be struggling for consistency both in terms of system and results at the moment.

Agreed. A strange comment from someone who repeatedly dismissing managers he deems to be "boring" irrespective of results, but its a result business! That being said, a team with top 6 hopes should be capable of blowing away a very poor Luton side at home.

It is not enough for a striker to work hard, he needs to score goals. Like I said and you ignored, a good striker even during a bad patch will still find chances coming to him, showing hes getting into the right positions. Of course there is somewhat of a grace period considering hes new (sort of) but ultimately we cannot afford our striker to not contribute goals to our team. Successful teams do get goals from various places but your striker has to get goals, last season our striker got 15 goals, weve spent big money on Gallagher and he needs to score goals to merit his place. If you dont feel that employing a consistent way of playing is often the key to getting consistent results then we will just have to agree to disagree but the 3 promoted sides from last season back up my point. All teams with a set way of playing, with players knowing their roles, meaning that if they make a change in personnel, whether enforced or to give them a different attribute, they can slot in with minimum fuss and keep the momentum. My point was that Buckley is not a player Preston "couldnt dream" of having on their bench. He may be a decent prospect but as of yet he hasnt impacted upon the first team and looks quite a bit off being ready to me. With the competition in that area I suspect a loan spell may have been better for him in the lower leagues, to let him get kicked about, to see how he can handle it. Of course the timing of the Holtby deal meant that this wasnt the avenue we went down. I know, but it is common sense that a manager with bigger resources is at an advantage to one with lower resources. That sentence is not an opinion, it is objective.

Would personally suggest that either or both of him and Buckley should go out on loan in January and get some game time, get kicked about a bit and see how they cope.

What was your question, the one about the chances Gallagher had yesterday? I couldnt comment, I (presumably like yourself) didnt watch the game myself. I saw the chance he had which he blazed over when he should have scored. Have you heard the phrase when a striker is going through a dry spell and keeps missing chances, "at least hes getting into the right position." I would consider how rarely Gallagher looks even likely to score to be a concern too. All this said, my comment about 0 goals in 8 league appearances (7 starts) is perfectly valid, our striker really must offer a goal threat, and I am entitled to question his place in the team if he continues to fail to do so. We need our striker to score goals. I think our options in midfield are a reason to be optimistic, but your comments on Preston are a little strange. They definitely do have depth, especially in midfield like ourselves. Pearson, Gallagher, Johnson, Browne, Harrop, Bodin, Barkhuizen, Potts, Bayliss, Ledson. The main thing there though is the CONSISTENCY in the way that they play. They can mix it up in terms of personnel, but that system stays the same, the changed players slot straight in and as a result Neil is getting the very best from those players. Thats a further example of what regularity in way of playing can do. I think the likes of Holtby, Johnson and Downing would have potentially been unobtainable due to their wage demands, I suspect that Mowbray has got an advantage over Neil due to Prestons low wage cap. Preston have made a name for signing players for really low prices, Johnson for 50k, Barkhuizen dirt cheap from Morecambe, Browne (and Maguire) for peanuts from Ireland, and developed them into top Championship performers. If we could replicate that level of consistency and familiarity, then I would like to think that our quality of players could end up surpassing those at Preston. Do you really think that Preston "couldnt dream" of having someone like Buckley on the bench?! Baring in mind that he has struggled when he has played physically, and Preston have signed Bayliss, a player who has really impressed for Coventry, who cost 2m and cant get on the bench. Or Nyambe?

That system is the same system that they have played for the last 2 years though. The point that @Tyrone Shoelaces makes is bang on, its not specific to our title winning team, it is about how having a settled system and what that can bring cannot be underestimated. There are other examples, Norwich played 4231, Sheff United mastered the 3 at the back and wing backs, with overlapping centre backs, Villa went 433 with Grealish and McGinn in front of a screen of Whelan or Hourihane. All 3 went up playing different formations but all with consistency. I would totally disagree with what @Paul Mani said about Prestons squad too in terms of its depth. At the moment Alan Browne is often left on the bench due to the form of Johnson as 10 in front of Pearson and Gallagher. They similarly to us have plenty of midfield options, Potts, Bodin, Harrop, Barkhuizen, Ledson, and when needed/chosen, they slot in and it doesnt cause any confusion, or any inconsistency, everyone knows their shape. They can also go with the movement of Maguire or more direct with Stockley up top. Playing a consistent, regular formation and system doesnt mean that you dont have flexibility, that comes through the personnel. As Paul Mani said, our midfield choices tend to have different skillsets, we have technical ones, we have physical ones who can get the ball back for us, we have ones who can run at players.