Does he? Haha. He failed to score as I said after November.

The usual 2, Gallagher and Chapman! Lets hope we dont stick to the same names.

Nowhere near enough. He did it brilliantly for the second v West Brom but he spends far too much time at walking pace and not enough really attacking the full back.

I saw a couple of tweets saying that maybe he could be worth another chance. With him and Samuel (who didnt score post November in League 1) its often a case of absence making the heart grow fonder. Neither are anywhere near the standard we need.

That then brings us back round to, could we afford to blow most of our budget on someone seen as an apprentice?! That cannot contribute and provide at least pressure on Graham for his spot? Yes hes only 19, but considering his price tag and his reputation following 2 seasons of regular Championship football, I think we all thought he would be seen as more than an "apprentice." Thats the first aspect of why this signing is so dubious. Anyone who was happy with just survivial is both massively unambitious and pessimistic. We have a competitive, mid table budget for wages, we have a very healthy transfer budget (which we choose to mainly splurge on an "apprentice") and many of our players have proven track records at Championship level. Lets not be fooled by a season under Coyle where we had the likes of Brown, Greer, Lowe, Akpan, Feeney, Emnes and Hoban on short term deals that Mowbray managed to shed off with ease at the end of that season. And the second aspect of this signing. We know hes young, hes raw. But he hasnt shown ANY positive attributes. Pace, skill, strength, a first touch, aeriel ability, goal threat, even a first touch or work rate to chase the ball down when hes fresh. I think Mercer makes a very valid point about style of play, our reliance on long balls and reluctance to as of yet even remotely move towards the style of play that Mowbray repeatedly mentions he would like to move towards is a concern in terms of progression; when will we see steps towards this on the pitch? However, to suggest as he has that Mowbray is a "dinosaur" and that we should instantly expect promotion is a bit ridiculous, albeit it is unfair to stretch your "instant gratification generation" comment to anyone beside him, S8 & Blue. And before you mention Brereton, please see my comments above on why he warrants his criticism for me. As you say, it is sensible, normal and realistic to have a plan to gradually develop the team, window by window. My only concern in this regard is Mowbrays success/failure in the transfer market, and how progressive I can see this process being. I feel like his work in the transfer market has left a lot to be desired. Dack was obviously an absolute masterstroke by him but aside from that, its been very patchy. His other signings last year ranged from ones that could have a short term impact at League 1 level (Downing, Armstrong, Antonsson, Payne, Smallwood) to some absolute wasters. (Gladwin, Hart, Whittingham and Samuel has been poor) With greater resources, he hasnt improved the side at all really in the summer bar the temporary addition of Reed, and I also worry that turning a blind eye to the foreign market and seemingly focusing on the same pool of players (Gallagher, Chapman) will stunt our progression. This isnt to say Mowbray is a poor manager or one who shouldnt be trusted. I think a lot of his quality lies with his man management and also his ability to get more from the players he inherited. But he will have to massively improve in the transfer market.

The thing is, age alone is not enough to justify a big fee. No one has pointed out any attributes that he has showcased in a Rovers shirt I actually think his price tag is somewhat working to his advantage as im not convinced his form from his cameos has done enough to guarantee a place in the 18 over even Nuttall. You say he is learning from Graham but ive seen no signs of it yet. He does the opposite of Graham, he doesnt hold the ball up, he doesnt press with the same intensity, he doesnt challenge for headers, he doesnt offer a goal threat. Your primary argument against those who suggest that the Brereton money could have been spent far more effectively is that the market is difficult, not every signing is guaranteed to be a success and theres a chance any alternative would have proved equally ineffective thus far. That goes without saying but in no way justifies the deal. @savage90 makes an excellent point on scouting and one that I have also mentioned, I feel that if our transfer list compromises of solely British based players including former players like Gallagher and Chapman then we are working at a disadvantage. Whether that be a restriction from above Mowbrays head, or a choice by Mowbray to solely target British players, and if its the latter I consider that to be a narrow minded principle. Huddersfield are an excellent example of what knowledge of the foreign markets can do. They were pottering around the lower end of the Championship until they exploited in particular the German market, signing the likes of Kachunga, Schindler, Lowe, Hefele and Quaner, blended in with a couple of loans in Mooy and Palmer and of course some British players they were at a massive advantage. You look at strikers like Pukki and Maupay who have been brought into the league by competitors (and we have competitive wages to offer) and it makes the Brereton deal look even less value for money.

Maybe Chapman is quicker over the first 5 yards before his hamstring goes!

I understand that he may bring something different, and I totally appreciate that a different type of forward could be brought in assuming we changed our style. But then my argument would be, Mowbray spent 9m on strikers who prefer to run in behind (albeit Brereton hasnt shown that) but neither have proved effective central as we would have to modify our style and go less direct, something Mowbray has been unwilling or unable to do. Surely if that changes, we should try and base it around at least part of our 9m worth of strikers, because playing Gallagher in our current style would IMO prove as fruitless as it has with anyone bar Graham. I'm not saying that Gallagher is useless, albeit his goal record in the Championship is very modest, I just dont understand prioritising the sort of striker that Gallagher is. I also think going for him and Chapman would be the rest of some very limited recruitment/scouting. Dack over Gallagher and Reed any day! Think it would be incredibly unlikely to see all of the Dack money reinvested, for a start if you plan to spread the cost over 5 players thats a hell of an increase in wages etc.

Gallagher scored quite a few headers due to good movement predominantly so fair play but I stand by that he was weak and unable to play that lone striker role very effectively. Rhodes also scored a number of very good headers, but he wasnt a good hold up man either, although I would argue he was better than given credit for and of course justified a place solely down to his phenomenal goals return, of which Gallagher doesnt offer. Mowbray ended the season with Gallagher in a wide role and Graham in a central role. My argument is based around the fact that I wouldn't want Gallagher in that number 9 role, I don't think he has the skillset to play with his back to goal alot of the time and supplement Dack. I also dont think that Mowbray would see him as a natural replacement when Graham is unavailable, therefore if we are going to have to change our game without Graham anyway, it would surely be wasteful to not try and do that with one of the 2 strikers he bought in the summer for a combined 9m. You are right about Graham, he knows how to play referees as much as he knows how to play defenders, Hes an average striker with a very modest goal total of 17 goals in 89 games. He definitely showed more to his game than Brereton has thus far, I would rather have him on our books now, but for the reasons above I see no point in signing him on a loan deal, especially when I consider both full back positions, a wide man and a centre back to be more needed than a striker, especially one like Gallagher.

Its quite clear that looking at the strikers we have had under Mowbray; Armstrong and Brereton this season and Samuel and Antonsson prior, not to mention Gallagher himself. He has not trusted anyone bar Graham because he has the skillset needed to play as a lone striker (with Dack as a 10) in that he holds the ball up. Gallagher is flimsy, weak, like Brereton in terms of his inability to win flick ons despite his height, and thus is incapable of doing the same job. His assets are more that he is a fairly quick runner who can carry the ball. It would make absolutely no sense to sign another striker who would most likely be stuck out wide, where he is not very effective, and one who doesnt have the skillset to come in when Graham is unavailable to play that same role. He has already spunked 9m up the wall on strikers that he doesnt trust to play that central role due to an inability to hold the ball up. If he wants to modify his style of play when Graham isnt in the team, then he may aswell persist with the 2 permanent strikers he has already signed, rather than loaning in another bang average striker. I think I would prefer Armstrong to play as a centre forward over Gallagher, and Breretons price tag means he is under pressure to at least try and get a return on him. Thankfully I suspect theres at least a chance that it is just lazy journalism. We are linked with the same handful of players, predominantly former loanees like Gallagher and Chapman, hopefully Mowbray is casting his net further than that otherwise we need to look at our scouting structure. Chapman is riddled with injuries and he openly doesnt trust him to start games, and towards the end of his first season, he put Gallagher wide in a front 3 because he didnt trust him in his natural position. Why he would settle for 2 players he clearly has doubts about is beyond me.

Done well? Not sure about that. Rothwell has barely featured and has yet to score or assist. Obviously has something about him but I dont see how he has done well. Bell has been a liability, bar very rare exceptions.

My comments comparing Conway to Bennett and mentioning his inability to play as a full back where about him. The line you quoted was in response to a conversation about the potential of selling Dack for 20m to remodel the team. Our reliance on him and Graham for goals makes them as criticial a strikeforce to a team as any in the league id suggest. Any notion that the likes of Rothwell could come in and replace him are fanciful to say the least. Where is this from?

I just feel that some people are perhaps underestimating quite how crucial he is. Especially his goals. We will really struggle to get near replacing him.

I suspect in terms of his defensive awareness, a move that sort of makes sense but may prove similar to Bennett, ie it might prove to be a change far better in theory than in practice. I also think its more of a hindrance at full back rather than in midfield to be playing on the opposite side. There is nothing to suggest that 20m (we wouldnt get all of it but even if we did) would be of more use to us than Dack. We need him to stay for as long as possible.

I have previously written off Conway but in recent performances, he has obviously similar levels of understanding of the role and hard work going back compared to Bennett, but has also given us an added attacking threat with his crossing. With Bennett, he has shown quite clearly that he is incapable of playing that right back role. His positioning there along with his tendency to dive in makes him a liability when asked to fill in that role. His crossing has been below par lately bar the cross he put in for the goal yesterday which was a brilliant ball in. He should only be considered as a wide man, hopefully Nyambes exclusion yesterday was purely fitness based. I think that Evans has been playing well enough (bar his penalty concession yesterday) to keep him in the team where his style compliments Travis nicely. The only problem is that means having to play Reed in a wide role. If you do that and play Conway or Bennett on the other side, I feel its a little conservative and lacking in pace. But on the flip side, the likes of Armstrong, Rothwell and Palmer have failed to nail down a spot on the other side. The left back position is a massive area of concern. I feel like we must get rid of Williams or Bell and bring in an upgrade or we will continue to struggle in that area.

Thought it was a good performance against a disjointed Newcastle with very little quality in it. Dack and Graham are a reliable fulcrum of goals and our obvious quality in the team; Dacks header was superb from a very good Bennett delivery and the 2 are critical to our chances. Travis was again very good in midfield, tenacious and composed with more risks in his passing, although not all came off. Evans was good alongside him up to his indiscretion that cost us a penalty, a very needless flail of his leg. Conway was industrious but Armstrong was very poor and didnt offer a threat at all. Mulgrew was a rock with some superb deliveries and almost a brilliant acrobatic goal, and Lenihan again was much improved alongside him. Thought Bennett was a liability one again at full back, he cannot play that position quite simply. His cross was superb though as said previously. Bell was not that much better on the left, full back is a really problematic position for us at the moment and needs addressing in the window. Raya as people have pointed out seems never to save a penalty, his kicking was again poor and he spilled one but he made a couple of solid saves. Subs wise, Reed fitted in without excelling, Williams was a very strange sub and Brereton again didnt do anything but his ducking for aeriel duels is rather annoying.

I may have missed them, but who has blamed Brereton for us losing the lead? People have commented on his cameo, which again was underwhelming, either you have added that and us conceding together incorrectly, or I have missed posts saying "its Breretons fault we didnt win" in which case I apologise. The support the team rubbish that is often peddled in defence of him is getting tiresome. We are on an internet messageboard. Its neither supportive or not to either praise or criticise a player on a platform such as this. And in the ground the team is always supported. The general theme is that people would have taken a replay but are dissapointed at the lateness and manner of the equaliser. If you choose to misconstrue that, purposely or otherwise then thats up to you. People have only said that if you take the valid criticism that it is worrying how often we throw away leads out of context. Criticising this recurring theme that keeps costing us wins is not saying how bad Mowbray is.

Fancy us to win and good to see us putting out a strong team v a Newcastle second string, Dont get why Bennett is starting at right back though, and I'm surprised that Brereton and Rothwell havent been given a start.

Thank you very much for coming on here to give your educated thoughts on Brereton. His goal record was a massive concern prior to his arrival, albeit his age could be a factor, but he has not really provided a goal threat at all in his time here. He has also dived and thrown himself to the ground quite a few times, but he has won 2 penalties with "exaggerated falls" so its worked in our favour at times. I saw him v Arsenal and I recall him being superb, although he did miss a number of chances. May I ask what attributes you feel are his strengths? I was under the impression that he was fast and a powerful runner but he has seemed quite slow and lethargic in a Rovers shirt. He also is very weak and technically is poor with a really poor first touch. But he obviously has something, to even come close to warranting such a fee, his England youth career shows promise and he has played a lot of Championship games already. Surely he must have something to his game that can be improved further. But what is it?! Rhodes was a classic case of our (and presumably every other teams) fanbases bizarre under appreciation of goalscoring within an attacking players skillset. His consistency of goalscoring here was absolutely incredible, in some really poor teams, in a team geared to suit Gestede more than him, however, he continued to score goal after goal, he was a guaranteed 20 goal a season man. Once that became taken for granted, people were more focused on his weaknesses without appreciating the whole purpose of a striker. A lot of people have downplayed Dack's impact at Championship level, and I've seen more than one poster advocating selling Dack for big money and reinvesting, with one suggestion that even Rothwell Dacks goalscoring has always been consistent for us and the most integral part of his game, not the tricks, skills, nutmegs, passes etc, its the goals that make him so in demand. Back to Brereton, your comments echoing people that Brereton has received a lack of support at games is total fiction. Social media and forums will be full of negative comments and criticism about a player who cost 7 million who is yet to showcase any attributes to justify the hefty fee or supposed raw potential that he has. They are the perfect place to air such judgements. At the games, he receives full backing like anyone else, yet for some reason some seem desperate to portray comments on social media/forums etc or even conversations between people as "not backing Brereton and not giving him a chance." Nobody would benefit from him proving to be a poor signing and a poor player, and anyone who thinks people do want him to fail are talking rubbish.

Absolutely, he has looked a class above Smallwood who has been evidently lacking in quality for much of the season. The composure and energy of Travis and also the intelligence really stood out. Was just a point about West Broms midfield.

I agree with you on your analysis on Travis v Smallwood, but West Brom's midfield isnt the best in the league, Barry and Morrison are both well, well past their best and lacking in mobility and Phillips is a winger shoehorned in there to give them mobility.

They have been riddled with injuries but still I am very surprised as to the extent of their struggles. Neither team has been particularly improved by their summer business to be honest.

To be fair, even though I agree that Smallwoods performance levels dipped during the second half of last season, it would have been a needless risk to change him at that point and his selection was justified by promotion. That being said, Smallwood this season has already received far too much loyalty when he has often come up short. I felt it was premature in the summer to give him and Williams new contracts as rewards, and they were decisions lacking ruthlessness with both very much carrying question marks over their ability at Championship level. Now is the acid test for Mowbray, if he reverts back to Smallwood (assuming Travis' performance levels dont nosedive) then he is going to face some flak. Not sure Jason Lowe was a direct competitor to Alan Judge either, I'd argue Chris Taylor woule be a better example of a poor player who seemed to be ahead of Judge.

Hes a liability at right back however you dress it up. His tendency to needlessly dive in coupled with his poor positional play leaves us massively exposed in that area, with Harvey Barnes and Enda Stevens the latest two to run amock down that side. His crossing was also particularly poor yesterday. Thats not his fault though, he simply isnt at right back. He tries his best there as he always does but we are a poorer team with him filling in at right back.

My maths may be wrong but I think so far in the league, Lambert has 6 points from 11 league games (0.55 points per game) and Hurst collected 9 points from 15 league games. (0.6 points per game) Hes actually performing worse.