Now come on, one thing most Rovers fans agree on was that Walton was poor. I mean post lockdown alone had more than enough mistakes in a few games then would be acceptable in an entire season. He had a terribly slow and poor start too and the best that those defending him could offer was he wasn't that bad. If we didn't miss a promising young keeper in light of all that, then I don't think we ever would! It is pure revisionism to say Raya wasn't missed. Interesting that his biggest clanger is racked up as him bit being in control. I can see the argument for this as £7 million for Bereton was insane and beyond illogical. That said there's little evidence for this situation too so hard to use as a defence. Do we just say all the bad ones were out of his control and the good ones were his? Not sure it's that simple. Ignoring Bereton there's been plenty of poor transfers - Walton, Johnson, Gally, Whittingham, Caddis, Palmer and Harper all spring to mind so his record isn't that good. Factor in the players we haven't got and needed alongside the short termism of his policy and you think there's plenty of mistakes too. Sure there's been some good stuff as you quote below, but it's a mixed bag. I think this is a misleading question. It's not whether we are happier since TM took over - with our owners and the trash they have appointed as manager it's impossible for things not to be any better. The question is whether it's good enough. To say better than the last 5 years is a very low bar - in fact the bar is buried. This leaves room for a very poor manager to still look comparatively decent. We need better standards than this. To answer your question of course I'm happier, but then that's a relative term, and we are still nowhere near where Rovers should be in terms of professionalism and competence.

Rovers transfer update 17/9/20 Giddy with success of actually signing a defender TM and Rovers fans alike are talking about bringing in a left back. In fact the only person connected with Rovers not talking about or excited about a possible left back is a certain Mr Bell. With Travis's injury there is debate as to whether the midfield can manage without a replacement. Discussion on the quality of our current midfielders is really a tallest dwarf situation and rather depressing given the candidates are: talented but unfit and injury prone (Holtby) highly injury prone and holder of the Vince Grella most time out award (Evans) unfit and untalented (Johnson) and marginalised and unknown (Davenport). It does however start another debate about Rothwell. "He's not played there much but looks really promising when he has, why doesn't TM play him there more." I'm sure we've had this conversation before. In a bid to defend Rovers new formation and the lack of a role for Dack within it, certain posters suggest that Dack won't be ready for first team football until January 2023 and even then might come back as the reincarnation of Chris Brown. One poster raises the question of who will score the goals should Armstrong go/be injured as none of the others look like breaking double figures. Or high single figures for that matter. Another points out our problem is actually keeping goals out. Sadly the two statements are not mutually exclusive suggesting there's still plenty of work to do in the transfer window. There's no new signings today but we've had one this week. Two seems a little greedy for Rovers fans even the squad is still in need of desperate reinforcements. Besides where's the fun (and debate) if we actually had a fully functioning squad?

Not saying you are imagining things at all - simply goals scored and involved in are good indicators of a striker/attacker's ability! Nice to see a few useful moments when Bereton contributed - it makes a chamgr from nothing. Is it enough improvement? I'm not convinced. I would suggest most decent players would have a much longer list of positives than the 4 moments you mention. Goodness any half decent striker would want much more influence than that. Or alternatively be clinical and do not much bar putting chances away. But he's not that kind of player either. I'm with you on what's expected on a 7 million signing but neither of us are suggesting he is worth that or looking anywhere near justifying his fee. The fee is on TM. The question is whether he is good enough to be one of our front 3 and I honestly don't think he has enough ability to impact games to the level desired. A year on loan would do him.the world of good and be make or break elsewhere without harming Rovers chances.

Oh come on mate your positive PR attempts are overloading the amount of contradictions you are posting. Last season is last season - like prior form doesn't matter? Problem is I've heard you mention TMs past achievements year on year - especially in bad patches - so let's have some consistency. Dack might not return the same player. Possibly but then you have banged on about how much we missed him last season and needed to factor that into our view of how we did. Again you can't have it both ways.

I think goals and goals involved in (rather than the assist stat) are very good measures for assessing our 7 million pound striker. The problem is he doesn't really contribute to either and only has looked decent against lower league opposition. He's not a championship level player.

I thought there was a need for a cm even before Travis was injured! Not number 1 priority that's the defence but it isn't that pretty in centre midfield. For starters I don't think Johnson and Evans are that good. Evans often goes missing and Johnson seems to either have a good game or a shocker. Further evidence of our weak midfield is that throughout we've complained of players getting too much space and not being closed down. Debatable as their ability is, what's less contentious is their fitness. Holtby and Johnson seem gassed after 60 minutes and Holtby and Evans are pretty injury prone. Realistically even with Trav they struggle to make up the numbers for a whole season. Without him we're looking at the unfittest central midfield collection in Rovers history. I guess we have got Bennett and Rothwell who can slot in there but both seem to be needed (or used in Bennet's case as I don't like him as full back) elsewhere. And sure there are other big issues with the squad but if we want to compete for playoffs imo we can't get through a good chunk of the season with such poor quality cm.

Bar Armstrong for Bereton arguably our strongest team available. I worry about us front and back. Up front no proven players albeit 2 talented youngsters. Armstrong could do with another player with experience to help take the burden off him this year (as well as Gally.) At the back half is top 6 championship standard half is league 1 standard. Risky all round and shows a fair bit still needs doing to the squad.

Rovers transfer update 15/9/20 Given there's a match on today TM can be forgiven for not signing any players today. That said Tony has excellently multitasked in the last two games, simultaneously managing the team whilst also sending a compelling message to the owners about our need for defenders. The signing of Ayala is rumoured to be nearing completion. Fans remain cautious as, short of cowboy builders, the phrase nearing completion has never been used so frequently with such little end result as in a Rovers transfer window. That said fans are getting excited about the signing of Ayala. On paper he matches all three essential criteria for this summer's signings for Rovers: 1) he plays in a position we desperate need cover for. 2) he has championship experience and 3) he has played for Boro. Despite being a positive signing fans begin arguing about who was "in the know" and knew this transfer was happening. Fractious lot this BRFCS crowd. Personally I'd settle for our manager and managing director being ITK and not shadowy forces pulling the strings. In light of the three essential criteria necessary to sign for Rovers we are reputedly in for Pears. Concerns are raised about whether he has enough experience albeit when the only other options are youth keepers this becomes something of a moot point. Rovers issue a statement denying the European scouting team haven't been seen since a team bonding day getting pissed in Tyneside. All in all a positive day in the transfer window.

Ayala: Positives - Proven championship experience. A centre back. Decent age. At least a couple of years in him. Negatives Big question marks about fitness. Bit of a reputation for chequered history. Overall thoughts - solid transfer. Fairly pleased. Would I be so enthusiastic if we weren't so desperate, definitely not. But given that's the situation we are in, we really need defenders, and that it could be a lot worse, it's a pretty good deal for the club.

That's true I suppose and makes me feel a bit better about it. That said can a reserve keeper really command that much of a wage (relatively speaking)? Also it assumes length of contract in both cases is the same. You're right it is more complex than just the fee - a free transfer may have a signing on fee too for example. Maybe it is just a distraction. Perhaps it's who we are buying - he hasn't had huge amounts of football and had it been £300k for.someone else I'd be less fussed. Maybe it's our general malaise in the market that makes me negative. I would have thought though there were better deals out there though. Still, any port in a storm...

The good news is it's a decent second keeper. The bad news is the fee. Surely there would be a decent back up who doesn't cost a fee. Especially when we really need a centre back and left back.

Transfer update 14/9/20: TM only has 17 players to work with for the game Vs the Barcodes but is relaxed about it. Presumably another 6 need to drop out before we consider this an issue. Swaggot comes up.with a new tasty marketing campaign to entice new players to the club "if you can't get a better offer elsewhere we'll have you." One descerning fan states that Rovers fans may be less critical of TM and Rovers in the circumstances had previous transfer windows not been ballsed up. Given we haven't signed a player in a January transfer window since 1066 and TMs "defenders are coming" speech omitted "but they will be late to the party and bog off after one season" there's plenty of evidence to suggest this theory has legs. However other Rovers fans desperate for signings look to ensure the bar doesnt have to leave the ground. Comparisons with struggling Boro are made (despite them signing more players than us.) The plan is apparently Cunningham and Ayala. Thank goodness for that European scouting network enabling us to come up with this. Meanwhile Chaddy continues to reinterpret what he has posted, our third game is rapidly approaching and of course... ... we still haven't signed any more players!

I know. A lot of games went the opposite way to what I thought. Usually my predictions last a bit longer than week 1 of the season! Think it shows what a tough league this is going to be.

Sounds like typical Rovers. Enough promise and good stuff to keep us in this division but the same basic errors that will prevent us from ever progressing or getting promoted. My worry is the good stuff is spread rather thin, albeit offensively we do better than on paper would suggest. But even so it's a thin, thin squad, which might tip the balance towards more negatives than positives.

Think your dislike of Brentford/Raya is colouring your view of how well they will do. They know how to replace players they lose - they do it year after year. Agree about playoffs, so many teams could make it. Forest for top is a bold prediction but I wonder a) about their lack of stability as a club, especially with managers and b) their mental fortitude - all they had to do was not totally implode and they did. Playoff position for Forest for me. Think you are right about Bournemouth. Managers make all the difference. Fulham would have won the league last year with that squad and a better manager. It's all about managers in this division. Well not all about, but a lot. Agree about Reading struggling and if not them at least one other basket case club, possibly Birmingham, will go down. Of the two I think Reading are weaker and feel.the instability combined with a manager new to championship might cost them. @roversfan99 highlights Wednesdays predicament and 12 points is a lot to make up even if you are a decent team - just ask Wigan. Having a full season of knowing the target will help them but crikey it's a lot of points in a tight league. So what am I saying? Nabbing 99's prediction of Watford for top along with Brentford for second. Going down I will go with Wednesday, Reading and Rotherham although Luton I feel could also go down and not have the resources to survive. Appreciate it's cheating to have 4 but hey! Its only a message board. Barnsley have a bit too much fighting spirit and Coventry have a fair few recruits so should scrape enough to survive. The playoffs are as easy to predict as the lottery numbers but I will go with Derby (hopefully not) Norwich, Swansea and Forest. But who knows on this one. Am sure in 12 months time I'll see how wildly inaccurate I was. And all could change by October with a few key transfers for a team.

Rovers transfer update 11/9/20 - Rovers fans get excitable about the signing of Rathbone which turns out to be false. However no one feels too bad for being suckered by the rumours as he plays in midfield which increased the credibility of the rumour a thousandfold. - The first PR rumblings of operation 'we don't need defenders we have Del and Warton' emerge. This leaves fans a tad bemused as to why we have been hunting defenders if we have the necessary players here already. It also leaves fans a tad bewildered as having seen Del play they know he is not very good. - Hot off last night's clarification of what comparisons with other teams are acceptable (if you missed it, the answer is only those that make Rovers look good) Chaddy published his helpful player character test. If they sign for other clubs they are money grabbing bar stewards mercenary pansies and all round bad eggs that we don't want here. If they sign for Rovers it's due to their admiration of TM and their ambition. - And of course Rovers still haven't signed anyone else. Why would they,? The season only starts tomorrow.

Think this is a very fair summary of the Raya debacle albeit a tad overly kind to Walton.

Sigh. You compared us to someone - kinda spurs given it was their chairman talking about their experience. (Please, please, please look the words inference and implication up in a dictionary.) But even if it wasn't spurs you have been comparing us to other teams. However when I do it with Coventry it isn't a valid comparison. So in short - you compare us to teams and that's ok. I compare us to teams and it's not valid. This is the crux of my issues. Same on other threads - coronavirus. You compared us to Brazil and USA, but someone else compares to New Zealand or France isn't allowed or valid. So can we or can't we compare to other countries? Can you not see the hypocrisy? All I am asking for is that the same standards are allowed for both sides of the debate. As it is you dismiss factors when they are against you and yet use them to champion your argument. That isn't fair. It isnt logical. And it really isn't doing you any favours. I can't make it much clearer than this. Am sure you will pick on some obscure tangent but i have made my issues very clear. You can't not see the issues I have with your posts.

Some good evasion here. Yes I mentioned Coventry. You said it wasn't a valid comparison despite comparing us to Spurs. As I said before you are allowed to use a comparison but I am not. That seems somewhat biased. It's a question of permissibility of comparisons I have an issue with not the quality. I really don't want to knock the club, would love for them to be doing a great job. The difference is I'm honest when they don't. Also it's super childish to switch to motivations and say I want to knock the club. If my points are invalid show it. My motivations are irrelevant (and you have them wrong too!) However this seems a last desperate attempt to deflect from me highlighting some inconsistencies in your stance. But moving it back from motivation to content none of the inconsistencies I have raised tonight have been answered: Are hypothetical/potential transfers or attempts allowed - you used them as evidence for your stance but criticised me for doing so. Are comparisons with other clubs allowed? The Spurs link is but Coventry isn't. It's these things that are detracting massively from your content.

This!!!

Wonders never cease, a criticism of Rovers. Did you say we can do no wrong - yes you did by implicatiin and insinuation. I've explained how the English language works involving implication and insinuation multiple times so won't again. Suffice to say your posts clearly do absolve Rovers of any blame in the transfer market. Again the hypocrisy kicks in. Y'see we wouldn't be in for the big transfers Levy was talking about however this counts as a valid comparison. But Coventry aren't a valid comparison (despite being in the same division) because we wouldn't want any of their players. So help me out here - is comparison with other teams allowed or not allowed even if the players are of a different level? I think you need to refrain from defending Rovers as each day you are tying yourself in knots with contradictions. This is the second or third one from just today!

Yes the only positive thing about it turned out to be the muck up that we got a temporary replacement in. When your mistakes become the only saving grace in a transfer you know you have made a boo boo.

Raya wanting to leave after only one season reflects badly on him. Us letting him go for peanuts when his value has trebled in 1 year reflects badly on us. And that's before we factor in we got Walton as a replacement.

We get it, you think the club can do no wrong and are doing a brilliant job. As you like to say not a fair comparison, but I appreciate that comparisons are only allowed, along with hypotheticals and near misses, if it makes us look good. Coventry (I think they have signed a few) must be miracle workers to get some players in.

Congratulations you have grasped the rules of the debate! Likewise if a hypothetical link is unfavourable for Rovers then it is dismissed as not being concrete. However the possibility Rovers might sign someone must always be held and used as a positive of Rovers approach.