In isolation the club could perhaps be forgiven for not having tied down a player who has had a couple of terrible seasons, an indifferent one and then has started on fire this time. I mean up till last season no one (or very few) would have wanted him to stay. Thing is it's not an isolation thing. Ignoring the price which would be a red herring imo, there are some key factors that meant it should not have been left to this year to get it sorted. Firstly last season was ok. A bit of a flat track bully and not amazing but enough to show there might be a squad player in there. Secondly we were already letting 11 players leave, and quite simply could not afford to try and replace yet another player on top of that. There's only so many players we can try and fail to replace in a window. Thirdly with Gally as the only other senior recognised striker we were really short in that position. One of the reasons it didn't hurt that the talented if erratic Holtby left is we had Rothwell, Buckley, Dack (when fit) and other youngsters to take his position. Up front we only had Gally who is hardly reliable. Fourthly the wide contract situation. We have a paper thin squad. Four loans go back at the end of the year. Four of our first 11 are out of contract in the summer. School of thought that we may need some players! Fifthly we have just had the Armstrong saga and not getting value for money. To have the same lesson repeated on us the following year is a very poor do. AS ever with Rovers if there is an easy and a hard way we chose the latter.

What the heck is happening to Cardiff? Decent squad, good manager - surprised they are taking a tonking of late.

I think what frustrates me the most is that situations are so avoidable. No depth and minimum experience after 4+ years of these same struggles is criminal. It's the definition of madness, doing the same thing over and over yet expecting different results. What makes it worse is the first 11 is surprisingly solid and good, as evidenced by Saturdays excellent display, despite the lack of strengthening it has had. If we - or rather TM - had learned some of the most obvious lessons we would have built on a promising first 11 and fantastic academy and been in a good position, despite the albatross of Venkys. It's the same mistakes: - some formations just don't work for us. - we have always been short on defenders and signing an injured loanee isn't going to help. - you can't build a squad on loanees - you need experience in the squad. The latter always pees me off most as TM always bangs on about it, and in all industries including football, the benefits of experience are evident to see. This team really could do with some more nous. It goes such a long way to making players better, limiting their weaknesses and managing games. We have so little it hurts.

See here's the thing for me. If I were an agent and not a Rovers fan I wouldn't be encouraging Ben to sign a new contract at Rovers. Why should he? He'll get a big signing on bonus somewhere, his stock with the international call up and goals this season is sky high and a bigger/more successful club will take a punt on him. After all, why wouldn't they? How much is he worth at the moment if under contract? A hearty signing on fee would be a fraction of that. I'd say he's an attractive option on the market for the more ambitious championship teams looking for a striker next year. The best (and imo) only option in damage limitation that Rovers have available to him is to offer him a contract with a low buy out clause. It'd well under his market value if he continues as he is and was under contract but it would allow us to recoup something from him rather than letting him go for nothing.

Along with deliberately misunderstanding the editing of posts is another naughty tactic. Seems to be a commonality...

The more I think on it, the more I wonder if there's something deliberately untoward about it. It defies logic and all business sense to expect "good value" season tickets to force people to buy these over individual games. Perhaps it would work if you had a huge market of customers, but we clearly don't. No one who is ambivalent - and given our attendances I suggest that many former attendees and the general Blackburn populace is - is going to go straight to coughing up hundreds of pounds. No one does that for any hobby/form of entertainment. Well maybe if you are loaded but if they think that's the target market then they are way off. Big purchases often come after research or trying and liking a smaller amount. In either case in terms of Rovers that would mean having sampled games beforehand. People don't jump to big price expenditure. The nearest I can think of favourably to Rovers is parents buying their kids games consoles at hundreds of pounds as an all in from the start. Even this however isn't a great comparison. Often they will have tried it/experienced it elsewhere, perhaps at a mates, there's the building on demand from previous consoles and peer pressure of wanting what their mates have to join in. Can't see much pressure not to miss out on following Rovers given our attendances, and without cheap tickets and given recent attendances there's little previous experience/interest to capitalise on. I'm no expert on this yet it's pretty clear from the off how flawed it is. It's inconceivable that our CEO and business department don't know this. Which begs the question why adopt this strategy? Laziness or something more untoward?

Hugely charmed for the last two seasons. Even if it didn't make the difference between relegation or staying up (imo I think it helped last season but won't be necessary to stay up this year) it does inflate our league position making it more favourable. The best thing that has happened to TM and Maggot is COVID. Huge excuse for every ineptitude and failing making them bullet proof. Between that and all these administrations and the like they have it very easy.

That's ok - he's entitled to his opinion, even if it does seem a bit contradictory and confusing. Imo It's less ok to deliberately misunderstand other people's posts.

Indeed, it's a bit naughty as the meaning was clear. Even if you genuinely thought the timings were not a generalisation and a mistake the point still stood.

I mean there's so much wrong with this it hurts. Aside from the season tickets not being that cheap and the product poor. I remember in my first term at Uni that we covered price elasticity of demand. Simple concept stating that the price influences the amount of demand. Not rocket science, goodness it's covered at A level and recapped at Uni early on. And yet we have a CEO who is utterly unaware and uninfluenced by it. Tad worrying that anyone with an A level business revision book would have a better handle on pricing.

For those who can't be arsed to read: None of it is his fault and the future is grim. The fact he wouldn't call not getting a striker in a failure makes me wonder how he can look at himself in the mirror. That's exactly what it is. Also with regards to prices and attendances he couldn't have said "I don't give a shot" more clearly if he had used those words. Also it's not 1500 down you clown it's about double our season tickets pre venkys, minimum. Good Lord we have no ambition or idea. The future is hugely worrying for Rovers. We could not have more incompetence at the helm.

Well, given their dispicable behaviour in the car crash incident, i struggle to feel sorry for Derby. Add in the apparent huge stupidity of a trebled wage bill from £16m to £47m, their dodginess of accounting practices, and perrenial chronic underachievement with their resources and sympathy is in short supply. In a similar vein it shows how fragile the football bubble is. It's going to be a long season for Derby to survive - financially speaking that is, they're toast football wise. And that could really mess up the league. It's a house of cards, the football industry, no doubt about it.

Indeed. Pointless exercise if they dodge any question they don't like. Mind you its consistent they dodge them - no accountability anywhere in the club.

Not really paid any attention to him. What's his CV like? As I said before I think all managers have a good club in them. And probably the converse is true too they all probably have a bad club in them too! Guess that's where you need to do some digging to try to ascertain if they are the real deal or go with a good track record. Pearson is an interesting one. Not sure that it can be said he is past it as his previous role with Watford he did really well. He got them from dead and buried to having a chance of staying up before being sacked. It's a funny one.

My thoughts on managerial options (although I think we are stuck with TM forever): 1) You have to be careful with one club successes. It may be an indicator of greatness but it may well not be. Most managers have a "right fit" club where they do well - even Coyle with the Dingles. Hasslebank is another - excellent at Burton, poor elsewhere. (Had to have this pointed out to me but the point still stands.) I'd be cautious on this front. It's not a deal breaker but needs investigating. 2) Anyone not wanting McCarthy is imo pretty daft. Not an unblemished record for sure, but a very good one. Multiple promotions, lots of experience, but what stands out to me is the last 2 jobs he has done. He has revitalised Cardiff, improving them more in one year than our "epic" journey under TM. And Ipswich was a good job too, where he had them punching above their weight. Just look at what happened to them when he left. He's definitely not yesterday's man and would be my pick. Not that he would leave Cardiff for us.

Sure investment in the team and lack of success are issues, but it's hardly just that. The idea that price isn't a factor goes against all business advice (and evidence, as we have not had success for ages). Nor can the dislike of the owners or management not be considered a factor either or the fact it's been 10 flipping years of them. Your point of would we break even with the lowering of prices misses off a number of factors. Firstly factor in the extra pies, programmes etc that those extra fans may bring. 10k - and we aren't getting anywhere near that which should get alarm bells ringing - will buy 10k's worth of stuff. 12k, 12 k's worth of stuff. Sure not as much as a ticket but each extra fan likely brings in more than their ticket value. More importantly for sustainability and growth, the more fans the better. For example most Rovers fans are introduced by family or friends or contacts. Here 12k worth of fans makes for more growth and sustainability than 10k. In this case, again the bigger numbers help. Again with this the lower price helps. What I, or others, may try at £20, is different to £30 for example. Again this can help entice new fans to Rovers. Long term more fans and lower prices benefits Rovers. If our management could see this the situation might not be as bleak as it seems.

As others have said it's a perfect storm really. Poor football, terrible owners, increased prices and non existent efforts to engage fans all add up. Any one on its own will cause problems, bit all of them together is huge. Add in the longevity of this - 10 years of decline - and it's a hell of a window to walk away. I think there are other smaller factors which add to the main ones. Covid getting people out of the ha it and seeing more people with financial pressure being a key one. Both would be issues anyway but Covid makes both issues worse. Another factor - which I have banged on for years about - is the attraction and ease for supporting the big 6. I've gone on for years about how easy that is, with everything geared to it, and that again will only be making it is really for people, young fans especially, to follow Rovers. Perhaps the biggest issue is that there is zero sign of change. Swag or some of will certainly be here next season and our owners. There's no recognition of any problem. Our biggest issue is little will change so the decline will continue.

I disagreed with most of the post but the highlighted bit is incorrect. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but that doesn't mean that some aren't wrong. For example if I call Messi a crap player or say Kaminski should play centre mid. Sure, most opinions are more nuanced and a bit harder to prove/disprove but not sure on the anything goes idea.

Give it a rest @JHRover you aren't getting the rules of the game here. He is doing badly at Forest ergo he is a crap manager. All his other successes (for reasons I have yet to fathom and suspect I won't) do not count as evidence and must be ignored.

Absolutely how is he meant to react to that when he has only had 4 and a bit seasons at the helm and 8(?) transfer windows? Poor chap had no chance.

Well that's a new one for a manager to be proud that we dropped a 2 points and a 2 goal lead within a half. It's hard to stomach that expectations can be so low.

Makes a lot of sense this, cheers for clarifying. It would be interesting to know what the split of disparing to floating - or better phrased less interested in the deeper stuff - fans is. Maybe it's the echo chamber thing but because most Rovers fans I knew were invested it seems a lot were in this category. Added in I think it's hard to be ignorant of some stuff. Of late the Brockhall thing and earlier on Singh clowning around got lots of airtime. So I struggle to see how you can remain ignorant on this as someone with more than a passing interest in Rovers. Still regardless of the breakdown of the whys and wherefores the issue is clearly crap owners and crap management.

More to the point a vaguely competent management set up could steer us well away from FFP. Also @Mattyblue it's not just floating fans we have lost. It's a ton of deeply concerned and bothered fans who couldn't take any more. No way were they all floating fans albeit a fair number would be.

To me I think the biggest issue regarding supporter split is positive/negative outlook, a philosophy of stand by the club no matter what. Why? Because most critical voices have left. We have lost about 10k regular fans, presumably the majority of whom weren't happy with things. Sure there will be some glory hunters, some personal circumstances but the former probably would have left beforehand and the latter won't have seen such large numbers all in one go. And, imo, it's been a shower over the last 10 years, so logically a significant amount of the more critical or demanding type of fans will have gone. That leaves a significant majority with a ahem, positive outlook. I'm sure there must be some fans who have only known the Vs reign of terror who also shout criticism down but again I imagine a lot of these would have been connected to "positive" fans. They would be the ones most likely to bring new people along and accept the status quo. Can't remember who said it about being born after WW2 but knowing about it - think they are right and it's that principle. I imagine they would be more critical if being brought into Rovers by the BRFCS fans view. Also I can't see many coming in off their own bat - poor form, divided fan base, relegations and a huge amount of incentive to support the big 6. No, can't see too many fans coming in from a neutral view point, albeit there may be a few contributing towards this category. The third category of fans who may be easier on TM are distant fans. Armchair fans or those who only have a passing interest in the club. If that's the case I can imagine that they probably don't feel too hostile to TM if only taking a surface view. Listen to a few of his comments, glance at the table and it doesn't appear too bad. Lots of the issues are only when you look a bit deeper. Imagine they would have a more positive view of TM too. Ultimately though we need all fans, no matter our views. We have lost a ton already and if the Vs reign of terror continues I imagine it will only get worse.

As the dust settles it's hard to be anything other than disappointed. Looking at each signing: Edun - the only positive really. Perhaps our sole fee shouldn't be spent on a lb but given he can play multiple positions, it's a position we had no cover for and he is the right age and seemingly rated, all in all it seems a good signing. Centre back - contrary to some I think we really needed one. Ayala is.injury prone, Warton could take a while to come back and Carter deputizes at RB. Plenty of need for a centre back. However it absolutely should not have been a loan. Firstly we have loaned 4 centre backs in the last 3 years. Quite simply that suggests that we have not had enough of them on our books. If we had brought one at any point we'd have actually have developed our own player, had continuity and an asset at the end of it. Who knows we might have even had capacity to do other transfer deals. Secondly my big worry is loan signings don't get dropped. They are kind of obliged to play. This means that it could stunt the growth of Carter and Warton, which is fine if it is our player and on merit. Without this though it becomes a much more damaging thing to Rovers. Thirdly it shunts the problem down the road, again. What if Lenihen doesn't re-sign? (I think he will mind but no guarantee.) Ayala is getting on too. Nayambe's contract is ending. In short there's a lot of work to potentially do in defence in the next year and we have just shunted another recruitment issue till then. So yeah not a fan of this signing. The Liverpool lad. Seems both to have talent and be very similar to Buckley. The big question is whether he is good enough to make it worth dropping Buckley. A bit too early to tell, but really the fact it's not clear already makes me a tad worried about the signing. Again, even if on an individual level the loan signing makes sense, it's still yet another player who needs replacing next year. The wingers. Bunched them together. Utterly not what was needed to replace Armstrong with. Let's go with the positive interpretation that they will play on the wing and Ben/Gally moves inside. In that case signing a winger doesn't seem too bad on the surface. The problem is imo, twofold. Actually it's asking a lot of Gally and Ben who undoubtedly will improve playing central but enough to take a 28 goal mantle? (Or a significant part of it.) From what I've seen of both of them they will improve but I can't see from their past performances that they would be top level championship strikers. The other issue is it means the winger, as a wide forward contributing goals and being good. And neither one looks a top of the range championship winger/wide forward either. In their natural positions neither to me seem to have the quality to make up for Armstrong's loss, or anywhere near it. Of course this is a charitable assumption. TM has already talked of Poveda being a false 9. And in such a position I have even less faith the wingers are suited to playing this role. Even Elliott, a top class loan, struggled in that position so what are the odds that either one of them will be good at the role? And of course it leaves Gally in particular limited out wide. It's a recipe for disaster. Then of course, as with virtually all our signings, it's loans. We boot the problem of inadequately replacing Armstrong even further down the line - on top of all the other issues and with Ben potentially not signing, to create more problems down the road. In short without signing people we couldn't have done much worse. I think I would rather have had 10 percent of the 15 million spent on 2-3 permanent additions, who at least would give the club assets and a bit more of a team going into next year. I can't believe a good enough striker couldn't have been found (because it's very difficult when you only have 6 months and a head of recruitment) but to not even get a calculated gamble or a top quality loan, combined with an obsession with false 9d is a very worrying position to be in. Terrible window.