We just need the 4-2-2-2 and then someone must have a full house.

This throws me both on everything they have done in the past and the current poor situation. Can't get my head round it at all.

Much as I love a good cup run and hate not taking them seriously we are relegation candidates and we do have a thin squad. So less games will hopefully help our relegation scrap. That said when we won the League cup it gave us a boost for the relegation battle and a good cup run can boost moral. So perhaps a run would have been better for us. But for once I am not too disappointed by our early exit. As for the rest it shows what TM is like but nothing we didn't know.

What really annoys me about saying we can use all these youngsters is the assumption that they will all make the required standard. this does not happen! Having watched football for many years I cannot recall an entire squads worth of youth players all at once making the grade. Not here, not anywhere else. So why on earth should we ignore the precident of every other year and team and assume all positions will be covered by our youth? I'm sure some will make it, but I'm certain some won't.

Until none are replaced...

Think I agree on the whole one was bound to come good, and it is more than overshadowed by the huge and costly deals that he has done permanently and on loan that have caused so much damage to the club. Walton alone or the first two years of Bereton would have gotten some managers the boot. Disagree the sell on clause in itself is a bad move for Rovers. Combined with the last year of his contract it is very damaging but in isolation the reduced transfer fee to buy him should have more than been made up in the sale. Letting your star asset run down his contract though - criminal. Agree it's a huge number of goals to lose and even if we had just lost those two they would have taken a lot of replacing. Not sure any one or two other players will give us that amount of goals. That said I fear that the loss of the other players will be felt even if they weren't that good. As we learn repeatedly under Venkys something is better than nothing and we often see leaving without replacing. Yes most of the rest who have left were dross and lower end championship players at best (ok some were top end league 1 players) but without them being replaced we are reliant on youngsters coming in at that level. That's a big ask and many won't be/will need a few years toughening up in lower leagues. It puts enormous pressure on our young players, some of whom will be ruined due to being thrown in too soon. And somehow despite their loss, if not adequately replaced we are in a worse position.

I would imagine Southampton and Rovers both want the player moving as it bumps up the fee for both sides. For us it's income (of a sort) that doesn't have a chunk go to Newcastle. For them if they don't really want the player it's increasing the value without them using more catch. In a straight cash deal I would imagine we would not break the £20 million mark.

Well we have no new signings and according to the manager haven't worked on a style of play (and presumably alongside it tactics as they go hand in hand.) Anywhere else both would see heads roll, here it's business as usual. That said if we had to play anyone in said circumstances Swansea is as good as any. A new manager whose selling point is his philosophy over any achievements and a squad that has seen wholesale.changes too. All in all great first opponents for us. Ben will be on a high from his summer antics, the youngsters will have something to prove and be fired up. All in all I'm convinced we will get something from the game. Of course said enthusiasm won't last long but it will last longer than today, I feel especially given the opposition will be tentative. With both clubs liking to pass it around the back pointlessly I feel it could be a boring game but I think home field and enthusiasm will take us over the line. 2-1 Rovers.

Oh it's pretty stupid if it happens before the season start too. No long term planning, no assets, no experience and stunts our own players' growth. Whilst not adverse to loans in principle in our situation loading up on young loanees is a terrible way to go.

Agree the guy humiliates us. Mind you he is in good company with the owners and CEO on that score. There were a host of other issues with the comment I didn't go into (I felt 1 covered it) but a whopping 4th could be what about a style that suits the other 15-20 in the squad?

Pretty gutted by the comments our new signings dictate our style of play. It makes me wonder two things: 1) Could we get any more unprofessional. A terrible way to do it, and somehow even more foolhardy given said players will be loans and change year on year. 2) How does anyone hearing this stuff not roll on the floor laughing and question this bull? It's utter madness yet no one challenges it. Joke owners, joke CEO, joke manager. An utter insult to the club and I can only hope and pray the whole lot do one asap.

I think so. Younger and has pace but far less proven, especially at a higher level.

Before we bank on these premier League loans they could be Elliott and Tosin standard OR they could be the next Palmer and Walton. To be in this situation after 4 years of journeying is a joke. Will be interesting to see if/how much better off we are than when we got promoted or even under Coyle.

Indeed but given our track record of signings can you blame anyone for being wary? Another case of other clubs surprisingly also wanting players.

We'll never know. Given how much Wycombe rallied (showing it's possible) and if the pressure had been increased a bit more on ourselves and Derby (who only just missed out on relegation) through even just one more positive result for Rotherham would have caused I think they could have stayed up. Still it is academic and as you say it was grim enough for us regardless of relegation worries with 2 wins in 17. Not that it seems to matter much round Ewood these days.

Ah yes, who can forget that infamous excuse? However Wednesday and Rotherham both had legitimate gripes. The former losing their manager for a fair number of games the latter having to play a ton of games in short order. Personally I think without this we would most likely have gone down.

Not to mention their manager was absent with Covid for a number of games as well. They had a tough deal. Covid really did decide a lot of the relegation places last year.

There are countless examples of good players who get relegated. Graham with us and Pickford with Sunderland are the two that immediately spring to mind. Wouldn't write off a player just because they got relegated.

Yes. Although reckon he will have made a few of those add one. Not any promotion ones but games or goals related.

That's a fair point but again as you say it's a big if. And if I were another club and saw how many key players were running down their deals with only a year or two years left at Rovers, I would be confident that we wouldn't get our act together and get him a new contract. If it were me I would be looking to get a good part exchange in. 40% of a part exchange doesn't go to the barcodes. I'm not talking unproven youngsters but given how much Premier League teams hoard players and how threadbare the squad is, there surely must be an exchange or two to be done that is beneficial to us.

There's an interesting article on BBC as well backing up some of these points. In the vain hope of finding clubs worse than us this season Swansea and Derby seem to be trying to knock the relegation certs off of us. They seem in a bad, bad way. Difference being they have smartly recruited and been the right end of the table despite their struggles.

It's the one year left thing BDS. From what I see I think the two are comparable and fee wise we should be looking at that kind of fee. But one year left often reduces fees by at least a third so assuming 26 mill is the going rate 17 mill would be about right. Add in that we are desperate and it's not a good situation.

I would also add the sell on clause wasn't the issue. The issue was us letting him get to the last year of his contract along with having the most sorry lot of strikers available and everyone else decent running their contracts down too. Any one of these issues being addressed and the sell on clause is not so much of an issue.

Not sure on Armstrong going for £20 mill (given last year of contract and how desperately we are hawking him). But your last paragraph is spot on and a huge worry. We have let a lot of players on significant wages go plus all the loans and yet no one has come in. We have lost so, so many players and to not even have replaced one is a very worrying situation. The squad was short last season (albeit injuries contributed to this a lot) so without them it's only going to be more threadbare. And it takes time to get up to speed. It's a Coyle situation all over again. Taps off and the drips we do get come in late. It's going to cost us in August (and the rest of the season) big time.

Regarding Rothwell the phrase "in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king" comes to mind. Yes, Rothwell hasn't pulled up any trees here and only shown flashes of being a good player. However given the central midfield options are the over the hill Johnson, the perennially injured Davenport and the lightweight Buckley, my word, Rothwell would be a big loss. Bravo Tony, you've got it to the point where the loss of anyone half decent is a huge blow.