Blue blood

I've never listened to this. Perhaps I should? I guess a bit like football I gripe about it and hate it but it doesn't stop me watching it/going. Only when it directly affected Rovers under Venkys did it really impact my actions.

Goodness. And seemed to be getting towards an NXT main event or championship push. However if it is true then as you say the least of his worries. It's sad to see such amazing talent go to waste but then a lot of wrestlers aren't angels. From the Benoit atrocity through to the self destruction of Pillman, wrestling has a heck of a darker side.

It was Hughes. You also if I recall have Dunn in the background shouting "he can't go up, he is too old.," My word that was a hell of a good day.

Not a big fan of the money in the bank matches being throughout the whole building. I get the no crowd and needing different ways of doing things. But if Wrestlemania showed one thing, it was that a well done ladder match translates very well even without a crowd there. The triple threat ladder match was arguably the best match of WM (Ripley Flair may have edged it) so it seems foolish to devalue what is normal and working. The problem with these action movie type matches and filming is that 1) it isn't wrestling and 2) it isn't anywhere near as good as movies. Also given how Eege-Orton and the Gargano-Champa matches dragged on and went on for way too long I fear that these will also be overly long and boring. If it were me and they had to keep going (which ethically, medically and quality wise I find questionable) then I'd do a fair number of gimmick matches to differentiate, shorter more action packed matches, really utilise the commentators and have shorter shows with filler of classic matches and moments from the Network (which would be a good plug for it). However I'm not in charge of WWE and they seem to have done ok without my guidance so far.

Bowyer also did well with recruitment. Wonder if this is a pattern or coincidence?

Agree. Although I can't recall him costing that much? I'm more forgiving of players who are poor and cost little compared.to our budget.

A lot of money spent but a much better return than Roy had. Shame he was clueless as a manager/motivator/tactician. To me there are 3 huge successes Jansen, Short, Carsley, 2 good players Gillespie and Kelly. McAteer was ok and the rest were duds. That's a fantastic record compared to Roy in the transfer market. Other than Ward not many of the bigger signings flopped. That's a decent record.

Funnily enough looking back it all looks horrific - terrible transfers, letting good players go. But I can't remember feeling like he'd royally screwed it up at the time or that it wasn't "our" team. (In fact his first season team is one of my favourites.) Perhaps it was because he had a good start? Or maybe it's hindsight? Or maybe because I was a kid? But given what he inherited and the youngsters coming through and the finance available it was a huge mess.

That is a horrific list both on the cheap and expensive. 2 good signings - Filan and Henchoz, 1 unluckily to get injured in Davidson. The rest - urgh. TM has a much better record than that and I don't think transfers are his strongest suit. My word Roy got it so very badly wrong.

Yes this is true. I think this was one of my favourite Rovers teams. Flowers, Kenna, Hendry, Henchoz, (ahem) Croft, Flitcroft Sherwood McKinley, Duff, Gally, Sutton was a heck of a fantastic side. Perhaps our most underrated 11. Problem was bar Wilcox (who was often in this 11) the squad was poor. Tore Petersen, Anderson, Valary, Dahlin, the squad players weren't much kop whatsoever. In fact bar Henchoz, most of Roy's signings were pretty poor. Even before he flashed the cash. Edit - how did I forget Ripley? Another quality midfielder who started the season on fire. Shame there was no depth defensively or up front. Mind you our attempts to strengthen there didn't go so well.

Yes, I really enjoy wrestling but this sits very uncomfortably. Its not even a backhander - it's a blatant, in your face bribe to keep open. Also sets a dangerous precedent, especially in the pandemic. Can businesses pay a fine / make a donation to stay open.

This was the year they fell out as I recall. Didn't help whatsoever. Davies was dropped 3 games into the season. It was a poor start and got worse. You would have thought after Dahlin that Roy would have known not to break up the Gally & Sutton partnership. Really, not aware of this. (The rumours). Please enlighten. Yes. A classic great number 2 poor number 1. Although so many fall into that category.

Yes Flowers got injured but Filan was excellent and eventually ousted him from the number 1 spot. Filan was incredible that year and one of the few bright spots. It was his best season and he didn't keep up that form. Dailly was brought as a centre back but played all over. I don't think he was very good but that can't have helped. Peacock was very limited at centre back which really hurt us. We also brought a ton of players with varying success. I think Flitty may have been out and a big miss that year. There was a lot of change. Ward, McAteer, Blake, Carsley, Dailly, Jansen, Peacock, Perez, Davies - there was a lot of change to the team l, and a right mixed bag at that, and I think a lack of a settled team really hurt us.

Hard to disagree with this list. Would add Flitcroft in there and the original Gally. But a list of cracking players.

Yeah. Agree it was a terrible time to go to Sunderland. Mentally he seems to be spectacularly weak (as well as looking pretty useless on the documentary) and these two factors combined were a recipe for disaster. The fact is he has been dropped from first choice at his 3 previous championship clubs (twice to 3rd choice) which really suggests he isn't good enough for that level whatsoever. It's too much of a pattern for it being a case of just not working out

That was always going to be a spectacular goal or a dead fan in the away end...

I had that fear too. After the Sunderland til I die documentary I have a lot more time for the guy as a bloke. He seems like a good person. It did however confirm as a keeper he is comfortably the worst I have seen at Ewood.

Injuries as I recall. Add in also we had 6 strikers on the books which is a fair whack now and back then was huge. I remember that Davis started the first two/three games and then Gallagher was brought back in. We then started getting a few points beating West Ham and Leicester. So yeah if they could have played regularly it would have helped. Kidd's tactics didn't help either. Remember us whacking it long to Jansen and Gally Vs Forest when needing a win. Sad times.

That Wigan game when Reid scored was fantastic. New Years Eve, a 3-0 win, a packed away end. We took my uncle and nephew from the States to that game, and they were shocked by the atmosphere (which in fairness was one of the best I have ever seen.) Brilliant performance as well. My Dad always says Mokoena's goal was the best, a hell of a belter from a most unlikely source. For me, and I may need help remembering this correctly, I think it was a Duff goal vs Spurs, 2-1 when we came back into the Prem (I think!!!). He started on the touchline from nothing, midway in their half, waltzed round half their team before scoring.

Made it to print if I recall. This model will kill the LT. No way the ads will stay with even lower viewing due to the paywall. Mind you they've been useless ever since Venkys rocked up. It's no big loss based on the last fe years.

Whaf are your thoughts in NXT and the Takeovers? The Takeovers for me in particular are stunning. Yeah a lot of good older stuff on there which is great. Some naff stuff as well as WCW went mental at the end.

Thanks guys that is helpful. May have a look at ITV and then make a decision. Yeah the Network is pretty good. Aside from the excellent (imo) NXT and without peers Takeovers, there's NXT UK, the library catalogue and documentaries all of which are good. Not sure who watches some of the other stuff like drive along and the bump (apologies if that's any of you!) nor the belated Raw/Smackdown unless a classic episode. But even so I think there is enough good content on there to make it a good investment.

Ricky Steamboat was pinned by Ric Flair in it a few months before Hogan joined WCW on a spring time PPV. Both wrestlers shoulders were down the video analysis showed and so they redid the match which Flair won clean. Not watched any AEW. Feel it looks and sounds good from what I hear but not sure I want/can afford to shell out for that and the network.

Encouraging. It suggests that fan and media power has some (limited) influence. Hopefully it can encourage the premier league and players to actually do something positive.

The highlighted bits are why Wyatt struggled twice. Don't get me wrong I don't like the hocus pocus stuff either but at an even more simple level wins and loss and a clear direction matter even more. He faced Rollins way too soon with little build up, harming the character and momentum. The story felt rushed He then lost the title to someone most serious fans don't rate any more with equally little build up. Neither of which were the big deal they should be - other than rectifying the worst hell in a cell result ever... As an aside isn't it interesting the title win and loss both took place in Saudi. Without these shows there may have been a better storyline progression, with Bray raging about a title screwy finish at HIAC and getting redemption by destroying everyone in the Rumble Anyhow yeah the big problem for the current character is little storyline or rushed. Even the Miz Bryan angle could have run for longer as Bray played on the pairs animosity. That would have been a quality triple threat match slotted in as well. Then of course there's the win loss ratio. That killed his old character. Heck if he had just beaten either Reigns or Cena he would still be considered a threat. It's dead simple build people as monsters who can't be beaten and they matter and fans take notice. If not fans are understandably underwhelmed. Thing is both gimmicks/characters work, even with the hocus pocus. Remember the Taker and the power of the urn? Warrior getting power from the ropes. I didn't like it as was too cheesy but it didn't hold either character back. What doesn't work however is poor storylines and regular losses. On a separate point the rematch clause is fine. Nothing wrong with it. It exists in real sports like boxing. It's plausible and makes sense. Also if you got rid of so many of the same matches on Raw the odd rematch would be fine. More than fine in fact.