Could be higher if we hadn't spunked 12 mill on forwards. We also had highest in league 1 but didn't win the league. Money helps massively but it doesn't equate to success. Likewise it's harder with limited finance but that doesn't prevent success. I could be wrong but do either of them have more recent promotions from the championship then TM. I have a feeling they do but can't be arsed checking. Pulis work at Stoke and McCarthy at Ipswich are recent positives having teams punching above their weight. you only have to look at how Ipswich have done without McCarthy to see what a positive effect he had there and what a good job he did. Must be others of that ilk out there. If we had a proper upper management structure we might uncover one.

We will win a couple of the dead rubbers for sure giving a false gloss to the season. Huge game at the bottom, a loss would shatter Boro's moral. But I think they will edge it sending Hull closer to the drop. Surprised Stoke are making quite such hard going of things. Dark horses for relegation if Barnsley and Luton keep improving?

Living in Leeds I really need us to win this one. And in some ways it is set up nicely for us. They are desperate for points, they will come at us, we prefer being underdogs. No big Leeds following to cheer them on. And Leeds struggled Vs Luton and with Brentford breathing down their necks - all in all a good time to play them. The problem is no left back whatsoever means captain calamity starts there and that will cause all sorts of issue. I morbidly wonder what he has to do, for TM to play someone else there as a stop gap seeing he has been a nightmare there every time he has played. It really does undo us. The false 9 thing clearky isn't working, which means TM will give it a few more weeks. Again this really does not help our chances. Bereton is out and whilst he has still been totally ineffective Gally has to take the worst of the crap strikers award. (In a perverse way, quite an achievement.) With one less name in the tombola there's more chance he will play and play wide right which also is a big weight dragging us down. I can't see us getting a win from this with our self inflicted handicaps but we may get a draw. Cue TM, the Telegraph and others saying how this shows we are serious promotion candidates. 1-1 more in hope than expectation. Samuel to score putting his 237th chance away calmly.

Blaming it all on Lenihen - aside from the whole can a Dad be present at a birth issue (imo yes for a variety of reasons but it feels done to death) - detracts attention from the other culprit of the situation, who made this an issue - TM. Had we had defensive cover of an adequate standard and not been threadbare in defence, Lenihen missing for injury, parental leave or any other reason would have been far less grievous. The fact we only had Mulgrew available 2+ windows after realising he wasn't good enough (and there's a school of thought there was some prior warning to that too, including his age) is shambolic. The fact the only other centre back is also possibly our first choice left back (Williams) and is good enough for neither position really also shows the mess TM has made. If one didn't have to show horn Bennett in and Williams was fit he should have slotted in at left back as he's not an utter liability there unlike Bennett. So we haven't had cover, proper cover, in terms of numbers or quality all season. If this had been a game under Big Sam say or Hughes, no one would have batted an eye as there was plenty of cover in defence. Likewise under Souness. No one wouldve cared had it been Samuel or Gally It's only an issue at all because we have such a terribly unbalanced squad. That's nothing to do with Lenihen whatsoever.

I get what you are saying but in fairness I think some of it is poor planning from TM. In defence he knew Lenihen was injury prone early on (appreciate that's not why he was missing this time) and Mulgrews age wasn't a secret. To not get adequate cover for either of these is poor management. Midfield we have known for years Evans is more injured than fit. It's no surprise as it has been that way for years. Other than Travis the quality of our more defensive minded mids is poor. Had we better quality than Johnson or Smallwood again the miss would have been less. Dack is a blow, a big blow and is unlucky as is Travis so yeah he has had it hard done to. But with Dack he had 2 or 3 players who could fill that role so didn't need to change formation. So he has been unlucky but his blunders have made the situation worse imo.

Just to say Chaddy I this is one of your best posts as you give reasons for your thoughts and I can see the logic and evidence of some of them. As I've said before, just because you have an opinion doesn't make it correct or valid (for example I could think the moon is made of cheese, which isn't an opinion that should be taken seriously.) In this case however, I think you do name some very valid strengths of TM, showing he's not a complete duffer. Do these outweigh the negatives - I massively disagree on that. I think the spunking of the budget (more of that in the next post) would be a huge negative. Overall I don't think his record in the transfer window is very good, but will admit from this when he gets it right he gets it very right. Sadly that's not often the case. His constant playing players out of position is another. And keeping players playing long into badly performing runs is a third issue. Given the first has huge implications for us and the second and third are so basic and shouldn't be happening, for me it's a taken us as far as he can. No good manager would make such basic regular mistakes which are massively hurting us, and the loss of £12 mill plus in resources is something we cannot afford. I'm a bit less convinced with this one mind. I get there is an element of hindsight but there was some evidence at the time. Certainly the fees paid represented an outlay that only should have been spent on proven talent, and as you yourself have said, you'd have spent the Gally money on a keeper and couple of defenders (which I agree with.) None of that is hindsight. We all knew what sort of quality that sort of money should bring in. We all knew the defence needed more strengthening. And we all knew what type of player Gally was like. I honestly think Samuel is the best of the three strikers he has brought (excluding Armstrong.) At least he gets into positions even if he fluffs them. and Samuel isn't that good but for ten and twelve times the amount Samuel cost, you have to be getting much better and we didn't The risk was huge and it has come back to haunt us. Plus even if it was pure hindsight (and I'd say it's not as scouting, common sense and previous experience should mitigate this) the fact is it hasn't worked out and the blame for that rests on TM. Basically I think he could and should have known better on both signings. Buying players isn't a lottery, it's educated speculation. If we go down the we can only know with hindsight route, then we can't credit him with the signings of Dack or Armstrong either. So do think he has to take the blame on this one. No ducking, diving or excuses. He mucked up. Captain does matter on two levels. Firstly they lead by example and a good captain can make a big difference to team attitude and moral. Secondly you have to play your captain, so if your captain is a player who shouldn't be playing, and you play him anyway because he is captain, you are weakening the team. So it does matter, because it affects the quality of your first 11. In Bennett's case he shouldn't be first choice at right back or right mid, and definitely shouldn't be playing at all at left back which is suicidal. So yeah, the captain makes a difference. To think we've gone from the likes of Flitty and Nelson to Bennett.It's a hell of a comedown. (And I don't mean we're at a lower level, I mean as in the role and character the captain has in the team.) A much better state then when he came. I'd agree better, but not on the much. Bare in mind as well that this really is a tallest dwarf competition - we'd had years of Venkys pulling the plug, and living solely off frees, selling our best talent and replacing them for peanuts. We'd also had a clueless manager with not even a shoestring for a budget, and had languished under his ministrations. So yeah, 6 windows and 12 million plus in fees later, it's no wonder we are in a better position. That said we're not in that much of a better position. We go into next season with no keeper and half a defence. We have 4 non scoring forwards .Our best two players when he arrived - Mulgrew and Graham are both aging and haven't been adequately replaced, whilst the likes of Johnson and Downing are also getting on and will need replacing. (Johnson doubly as he is so poor at times.) We need at least 5 players next year just to stand still, let alone improve. We still don't know our best formation, our style or best 11 three years after he has joined. For me that isn't much progress, that's a mess. Interesting we compare vs Coyle, which is no comparison at all, but how does this team and squad compare to the Bowyer one pre FFP. Rhodes and Gestede are streets ahead of our current strikers, with King as another tasty option. Out wide the creativity, flair and supply of Conway and Marshall, as well as Cairney gave us loads of attacking options. We also had Hanley and Duffy as centre backs. Did we have Olsson at left back too. Sure there were a few duff ones, a favourite shoehorned into the side even at full back and a terrible keeper. Doesn't seem that dissimilar to now. But the first 11. I;d say it was better then, or that fewer pieces of the puzzle were needed.

Spot on Rev. The club is still corrupt just more discrete about it these days. The Smallwood example is just one of it. The last 3 managers being from there another. Which when that lands you with Lambert, Coyle and TM it leaves the club in a very bad place indeed. Go back to the second formarion. We don't have the players for 4-3-3. The strikers struggle as wide strikers and it means we play (or should play) less of the failing lot of them in the other formation. It also stops us playing a false 9, although to be fair I thought that was a description of our strikers rather than a position. It also works well when Dack comes back and you can slot him and Holtby in the team. Fixed it for you. He's not a wide forward or midfielder or footballer either imo.b Agree with where the money should have been spent. I think TM did however see him as Graham's replacement. I mean if he's anything at all he should be that kind of striker. The problem is he's not very good and it's a demanding role to play leading the line alone, so he isn't a suitable successor. Yep strengthen the defence instead looks a much smarter bet, especially with Armstrong improving. We already had 2 substandard strikers on the pitch. The chopping and rotating between the 3 and Graham and anyone else TM decides to play as a striker must make it even harder for them to develop. Perhaps without Gally one of the others would have had a run and found a bit of form. Unlikely, very unlikely, but better odds then the chopping and changing.

Hart still thinks he is premier league quality and should be in the Burnley team. He's delusional and would no way stoop to a lowly championship club. He's also not very good. Crap in fact, premier league second keeper standard not even good enough for any odius premiership team that plays in claret. That speaks volumes. He's rubbish. That said he's still head and shoulders above Walton and Steele so would be an improvement for us. (Probably better than Raya too right now but their trajectories may mean that changes soon.)

This is a pretty big failing. And there's a hell of a difference between not leaving it to football men and letting the manager appoint their own boss! The non pressure and lack of a proper management structure is costing us dearly. Then there's the issue of budgets not being set till late on because they can't be arsed using Skype and the apparent lack of money for defenders which whilst hearsay appears to have legs. They are far from model owners. Better than they have been but not good at all. That said I agree that TM should shoulder a lot of blame and has in many ways had it far too easy. His money for strikers has been good. He hasn't had any scrutiny in the fact that they haven't worked out either. He's not been under pressure after runs that would be sacked at any other club and he appointed his own boss. For all the disfunction of Rovers TM has done very well out of it and should shoulder a fair chunk of the blame for the current issues.

this is the thing for me. Samuel is missing sitters but I cannot remember Bereton or Gally having as many chances combined in the last few games, or regularly getting in those positions. It's a really tough choice - someone who gets in those positions but doesn't score or someone who might be more clinical but gets in less positions. Shambles either way. At least at £500k at this level it's perhaps to be expected. makes you think he perhaps shouldn't have been frozen our.

That situation had crossed my mind and worries me too. He's showing that he isn't very good or reliable whatsoever.

Ten times less the cost. But neither are any use whatsoever.

Given he was one of our biggest signings in league 1 (with Dack and Whittingham) he's looking more like falling into the latter category with every game. Misses too many good chances and doesn't do enough else to be worth a place.

Both were way better than this lot. Neither could trap a bag of cement or had an ounce of composure. But what both of them did have was physicality and they used that to bully defenses, create chances and get in the mix. It meant they got a few goals for us. If Samuel or Gally were as effective as that for us then it would be a huge step up. I would be delighted at that level of performance.

I have no idea how our captain gets to play every week regardless of how dire his performance is. Thing is Mulgrew really should go out on a high with us. The 5 subs rule mean he can be saved for the last 10-15 which he probably still just about has the legs for and would give us a huge bonus from his set pieces. The benefits aren't worth the risks over 90 but when chasing a game or trying to break down stubborn opposition bringing him on as a super sub really could work.

,Well safe to say no one predicted that! Mulgrew starting makes not playing him in particular using him as a super sub during the 5 subs ruling even more pointless. Bennett remains at left back? That's a disaster waiting to happen. Glad Gally is our, and feels a tad harsh but don't think theres much difference between him and Samuel bar 6 million. Neither really good enough. Great Armstrong starts. Best attacker and goal threat, we are a different team when he plays.

Call me cynical but the reason Gally and Ben play wide forward is because it lessens the focus on their lack of goals and it keeps them in the team when they aren't good enough to lead the line.

I'm not sure we've had 3 really good centre backs in the entity of Venkys time here. Having two has been a tall order! But I get your point. Also to highlight it speaks volumes as to the recruitment. If we wanted to play this way why not buy players who fit the system. The sooner Dack is back and forces him to go back to a formation that generally works the better.

Think you are being a bit over optimistic here. Personally other than downing I would put everyone down a level.under the current regime. A couple of them may have a role still with us under a canny manager who can utilise their strengths and limit their weaknesses being exploited but right now I think many of the players cannot be relied on. On the positive side I do think a few of our youngsters will improve to championship level quality - Buckley and JRC for ezample. One interesting thing to note from this is how few quality additions we have had. Two joined in league 1, 3 are academy products, so you do wonder what has happened the last 4 windows.

The top 4 don't have players playing out of position where they are clearly uncomfortable. We might be at a disadvantage financially but that one's got nothing to do with money yet holds us back a lot.

Agree. Mind you I think TMs handling of Nayambe has been shoddy throughout. he's been played behind the likes of Caddis and Bennett, both of whom are very poor full backs. Unlike Bennet's many gaffes Nayambe is singled out by the manager. Can't see him wanting to stay with that kind of treatment. Also any fee we do get won't be spent on defenders and will leave our defence even more threadbare. So here's hoping by some miracle we can convince Nayambe to sign a new contract.

Agree with this although Charlton have now won two on the bounce. They look like they are getting their act together despite several key players pulling a strop and not playing. I had them down after that but their response has been.excellent.

The fact Wigan fans weren't bothered about him not returning should have been a warning sign. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

The last two are what does my nut in most. That said he is big and bulky so has the physical attributes to be a problem for defenders and has a few goals for us too so there is a spark of potential. a quality manager might make him into a useful squad player.

Said it before will say it again - when we are debating who is less crap rather than who is better, as in the case of our left backs, you know there are real issues. For me we need: A good solid championship keeper who is ours. A decent back up keeper better than Leus. A proper championship quality left back. A proper championship quality centre back to replace Tosin. A reserve centre back for when Lenihen is injured. Who could also perhaps provide full back cover. And by this I mean better than Williams. A proper defensive/centre mid to partner Travis. As in someone better than and less injured than Evans. A wide attacking forward/wide midfielder who adds width. A quality target man striker. You could argue we get away without either a target man or wide forward with Armstrong occupying one of these roles, but really is it good that he is the only striker likely to score? You could also say between Downing, Johnson and Evans we don't need a partner for Travis. But two are aging, one is injured and Downing covers multiple positions. You could say Williams is cover for CB and lb but it's questionable he is of the required quality at CB and definitely not at lb.you could say a youth player could cover reserve keeper but that's heck of a risk. So I think there is a case for needing 8 players to make this squad promotion worthy. Even best case scenario needs 4 or 5. For the record I don't think we will get near this in terms of numbers or recruits but this is what I think is needed. Perhaps players in the squad will step up and fulfil these roles to this level. Again though I can't see it happening