Blue blood

Well that's cracking logic isn't it? I mean we beat Manure under the odious one at their place. Didn't make him a good manager though. Terrible logic. They were a damn sight nearer then we were. Which kind of suggests he is a better manager. Factor in where they were last season and it's a pretty good one for them. And even if it isn't, we aren't in a position to boast. Yes it is a rather big prediction. Wonder what sort of evidence could have printed such a conclusion.

Yes it is the same old argument because the argument is they are improving the clubs that they are at! You say we need a better manager - these guys are proving they are better managers by getting better results with the teams they are in charge of. I mean I'm not too sure where to go with this when you ask for a higher quality of manager, and when it's presented to you with evidence you dismiss it as "bla". Perhaps it's the boring football bit that puts you off. I'll be honest I find winning football much more palatable than good football, and it's hardly as if we get an entertainment masterclass as it is. Asking for winning with style is a huge ask, and maybe unrealistic with our budget. If I had to chose one it would be winning every time.

You mean two blokes who have had their clubs doing significantly better than us in a fraction of the time spent at the club? Am happy with the next Eddie Howe too but any competence - old school or new - would be very welcome.

Yeah that's a fair summary of the season, although it still lands us in the place of not knowing our best team or system! It's ironic that when we did have a plan it was a terrible one. But I do wonder if the lack of a plan is hurting us even more than having s bad one that can be amended and improved upon? As it is at least we would know what we are trying to do and what we are recruiting towards. As it is the current uncertain mess has us utterly adrift when it comes to recruitment. It's also worth noting that even with this plan TM has never recruited to a plan and just brought random players.

The more I think about it the biggest problem is TM has no idea of his best team and formation. Before anything else this is a crucial step to knowing what is needed. Without it we've been holed below the waterline before we begin. How can we know what players we need when we don't know the formation? How can we know what skills are missing if we don't know the team? There's been so much chopping and changing that different players suit different formations, and either way some large gaps appear. Just a few examples - Gally would probably benefit from 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 with him playing central. The former in particular would I think allow his limited strengths to shine. Bereton however only looks vaguely useful in a 4-3-3. So one of them because of the formation is going to be a dead weight. Or another example who are the main midfield three or two for example? If it's a 3 with Travis and Rothwell then we need someone who has a more defensive mindset. If it's more of the likes of Johnson then someone more mobile is needed. On Rothwell TM has talked about him playing in the number 10 role. If that's the system who else is going to play there when he is injured/rested as that role is pivotal to the success. If it's Rothwell in a midfield 3 then the cover would be a totally different kind of player. I could go on and on. Basically since we have no idea of the team or system then recruitment is going to struggle before we even begin. For us to not know our best 11, or majority of, or even the formation after 4 years of TM makes an utter mockery of the journey we are allegedly on.

Chaddy will have missed fair chunks of the debate as I am on ignore. (I assume for criticising the government rather than TMs transfer policy but I digress...)

Sigh. You asked me what the alternative to the City lad was. I offered you a number of options, one alternative being to sell our best player and reinvest the money across the squad. There were a few other alternatives which didn't require this which I also suggested which you have ignored.l, including free agents and loans to buy. You could also finance a signing by selling another player instead of Armstrong (albeit for less cash.) I've offered numerous reasonable ways of improving the defence, which if you don't just pick bits from the response you will see.

Blimey they must be scraping the bottle of the barrel. If he gets a call up I think I should reinvestigate my parents and grandparents nationalities, as standards have really slipped it seems. That said it can't do him or us any harm. Best case scenario he does ok and we can sell him, if it doesn't meh it's no bother to us. The most undeserving Rovers call up since Ferris played for Northern Ireland.

Well first off I'm criticising a whole strategy not just one transfer. As in the over reliance on loans all over the park. And the fact it's been going on for years - some of which when we have had a very decent transfer budget. For example had we got Bauer rather than Tosin (my go to example) we wouldn't be in as much as a mess. So it's a strategy for years that has set us back. Continuing with it is not going to help. Indeed even last summer the Ayala debacle shows there was some money there but we spent it poorly. Anyhow onto viable alternatives. Firstly if Armstrong is sold then some of those fees could be reinvested into the defence. A novel concept I acknowledge but we could be looking to spend some of that money on defence. Defenders are coming after all. Secondly there is the free transfer market. I haven't had a look but to say there wouldn't be a decent centre back in there would be very surprising. And we certainly should have money for a centre half on a free, just from Mulgrew's exit alone. But when you factor in the rest of the dross that has gone we have enough for a good wage for a free transfer. And had we not kept Johnson that would have been even more. Thirdly we could with good scouting minimize the risk of signing a lower league player. You say it's a risk we shouldn't take but with proper scouting that risk is alleviated. That's the point of good scouting, lowering the risks. What makes this a bit ironic is that you are talking about gambling on not proved in the championship yet are championing Carter who equally wouldn't be proven and Warton who has limited experience at this level. It seems a bit double standards on this point. Finally if we do go down the loan route I would prefer someone with a loan to buy option. That way if it works we can benefit from the learning curve in later seasons. With a sell on clause and another year to get the budget for it the likelihood of being able to afford the transfer. So there's a few different options!

That is the exact thinking which makes a loan a problem. It's stuffed full of hypothetical. Will Carter make it at this level - far from a given. How long will Warton's recovery take, and will he come back the same player, a player who'd looked promising/good for only a handful of games. (I'm more optimistic on the latter than the former as a side point btw). Why not actually fix the sodding problem? Why hope it goes away and gamble all on a couple of youngsters fixing it, when as we have seen this is far from guaranteed? Why not add a bit of consistency and longevity in there and who knows maybe if they perform well a saleable asset? Not trying to have a go but it's this sort of deferral, blind optimism and no concrete plans to address things that causes us no end of problems. And I've not even got into talking about possibly needing a more tough as nails or experienced centre half...

I think it is the short term-ism that's maybe being objected to. As in its just deferring a problem for another year. We've seen it in goal and defence over the years. IF they are the final pieces of the puzzle that's fair enough, get them in. But often we use them as sticking plasters over gaping wounds to defer a problem. We've had 3 years of shoddy left backs, for example. just imagine if we had signed one (I know we have now, but 2 or 3 seasons too late.) Or instead of Tosin, Bauer. There'd be continuity and we wouldn't be facing the same problems and deferring issues for later. The amount of signings needed each year wouldn't be overwhelming. It's a terrible way to go. So yeah I can see some frustration at our current loan policy. Although am not against, indeed actively for, them filling in the final pieces of the jigsaw. For us however they make up half the picture and that is a problem.

Well that seems pretty much the opposite of us in every respect! Competence, continuity and a plan - none of which we have seen. Heck l, TM can't get consistency as the sole and bullet proof manager. Not bringing in loans to improve team spirit. Buying under performing players who aren't utilised correctly. Living within their means. Blimey it's the utter opposite of us isn't it? Yes there's worries when they sell on but the club will be in a much stronger place. We could certainly do with a spell of their competent ownership and flipping. As an aside just imagine what would have happened if this lot had got us pre Venkys...

I always remember Hodgeson more fondly than I perhaps should. That storming start, beating Arsenal at their place (including an amazing goal from Gally) securing European football in the last game of the season with a thunderous Sutton free kick, the emergence of Duff, signing Honchoz, a midfield as tough as nails, some of the premier League winning team still there. That first season I remember really fondly. As it is between Roy and Kidd they destroyed us. That kind of money should have seen us be one of the big 6 and at the top of the table for years to come. As it was we got a load of dross and wasted our financial reserves. Was a really poor time. That said compared to these days - at least then they were trying to do things right and had standards. both of those have left our club completely.

Indeed. Under Jack we had that. Now...

That's what I said to the missus. "They get these owners and we got sodding Venkys." Offside and VAR really need looking at but not too gutted in this instance given I would much rather Chelsea lost.

Firstly the Friend idea seems exactly the sort of thing TM would love to do. But your main point which is a concern I share is can they get a decent replacement. That's my worry with all the outgoing lot - that we'll miss them even though we are crap because we replace them with worse. On the Johnson 2+1 for appearances, this seems another black mark on the absolute neglect of our defence, as Johnson racked up a few more appearances at centre back. If that pushed him towards the threshold for another year that's criminal. Indeed we do everything to devalue our players. Shocked by how many of our young players only have a year or so left on their contracts. Let's say Rothwell or Nayambe show some great form in the new year, we aren't going to get what they are worth because of the sole year remaining. Same with Armstrong. Of course buying a load of players who are duds or aging also doesn't help our finances either.

Thing is no one I know who has to do this brings it up or complains about it as much as he does. I've two friends in Leeds who are consultants, both of whom have to work away from home regularly. When asked about it both simply shrug and say it's part of the job. I'm sure they are on a lot less than TM and yet if they - not to mention truckers, oil rig workers and the like - don't complain about it, what on earth gives him the right to. Also on this a ton of health care professionals had to leave home in lockdown (my wife included.) I'll be honest TM makes more of a fuss and a fanfare of being away from home than they do. It's a disgrace.

Add in there may not be any points deductions or Covid or clubs with an embarrassing budget for league 1 to help keep us safe and it could be a nightmare. Other than Armstrong TMs record of buying strikers is horrific Bereton, Gally and Samuel haven't been of the required standard. Not sure I trust him to get it right in replacing Armstrong whatsoever. And when he is a third (I think?) of your goals that's an issue. The defence will be neglected as usual, which looks thinner by the year. And this is assuming none of our other contracted players go. With only 1 year left on a couple of contracts I think there's a couple of bargains to be had in the Rovers squad. It is shaping up to be horrible next season.

My biggest worry is that we have lost so many players - most of them not very good to be fair - and we take so long to do deals, that we are going to go into the new season with an understrength squad. Add in that TM doesn't have a good record in the transfer market and the Mulgrew situation painfully showed something is better than nothing and the situation looks dire. Factor in a small transfer kitty too and we are beginning to look rather stuffed.

He's a clever snake I will give him that. Linking criticism to expectations of winning the premiership (even though that has never been the case for any manager) means that all criticism will be regarded as unreasonable and unrealistic expectations of fans. Cunning and immoral. If he showed half as much nous outwitting the opponent as he does trying to save his skin, we'd do a lot better though.

I don't really swear but TM can fuck right off after those comments. So many posts on here already highlighting how appalling these comments are. Reminding us it's not 1995 - y'know I've not held that against Souness or Hughes and all have given me some of my best times as a Rover. And when I've been pissed at managers from Hartford to Ince - the standard was never 1995. To remind us of this is insulting and a deliberate attempt to discredit any dissatisfaction. Doesn't wash though Tony. You aren't just confirming you are a a crap manager you are a crap human being. As for the aim is to compete nonsense I've got a number of issues with this. It's a vague unaccountable standard that ensures you cannot be pulled up for your inevitable failure. More to the point given your previous comments you think competing is losing 1-0. Well, no shades of 95 but even under the circus of Venkys that is an unacceptable, unprofessional and incompetently low bar. So just fuck off Mowbray and take your conmen with you. Not been this angry since Kean. Congratulations for getting me there.

My thoughts on this too. Because if connection is key that excludes competence because anyone competent would not connect well to TM. Anyone competent would be asking "what the hell are you thinking" and "what a stupid idea" when TM comes up with gems like 5 million for Gally or a 3 year contract for Ayala. Can't imagine that would do much for the connection. Personally though I think it's a message saying it's going to be a yes man for me that gets it. I'm still calling the shots.

Hardly ambitious I admit but personally I think he does a decent job in central midfield, lots of energy. Add in his versatility and I think he is worth keeping as a squad player. The fact we need to replace all of this season's outgoings - loans and end of contracts - plus get a bit more depth in defence and possibly an Armstrong replacement also factors into my thinking. That many players will be very hard to do, so its one less in an already busy summer. The Mulgrew debacle taught us that even a bad something is missed when not replaced at all.

It would certainly raise eyebrows from me too, but it's their decision to make. Besides Sam found a use for Andrews so most things are possible with a competent manager. All that said if it were me I wouldn't keep any bar Bennett for an energetic centre mid squad filler (and even then it's touch and go.) As it is the process of discovery for the new chap, if there is a new manager coming in, will head into next season.

You missed a few other tick boxes. Loved by the media irrespective of ability - tick Likes to utilise top 6 loan kids - tick Spends big money on strikers he can't get a tune from - tick. Ideal candidate if ever there was one.