DE.

Also must be British, and ideally played for one of the manager's former clubs. Second part can sometimes be bypassed if the player fits the rest of the criteria.

It's only the Carabao Cup tbf, and they won their first match of the season away to Brentford, so a bit early to be calling doom on them yet!

As far as I'm aware they don't have a national TV deal. They're owned by a wealthy broadcast company called Sinclair who have local stations but nothing national, so they're effectively on syndication which is obviously quite an outdated model in the modern era. They've tried internet broadcasting to get higher penetration but it hasn't really worked out for them, primarily because of numerous technical glitches and the fact ROH has always been a niche product with little mainstream appeal. They were beginning to gain some traction through the Bullet Club/NJPW angles but obviously that is now dead in the water. Blood has been in and out of wrestling, generally depending on the political climate. There have always been and still are federations where excessive blood is common. In the late 90's both WWE and ECW were full of blood, although WCW was always a lot more restrained with blading. Nowadays it's very rare to see intentional/real blood in WWE. TNA/Impact has some but not a lot, and it's to be determined how AEW will handle blood - their PPVs had some of it, but I can't see the folks at Turner being happy with regular blade jobs once they are on TNT. I suspect it'll be similar to WWE with some accidental blood on occasion and intentional blading on a select few PPVs, but otherwise minimal.

It's possible Smallwood simply doesn't want to drop down divisions at this point, particularly if it would lead to a pay cut. If he believes he can win his place back here then he's within his rights to say he's going nowhere, and I get the feeling that's pretty much the case. Otherwise surely one of the clubs pushing for promotion in L1 would have signed him, as he's a proven commodity at that level.

A very good point. The debt is not going to decrease unless we find a way into the Premier League, it's only going to increase. At this point whether Venky's have £200m or £300m debt to Rovers is irrelevent, as if they pull the plug and want their money back then I doubt anybody would have paid £50m worth of debt on the club, let alone £200m+. Let's not forget that this is all Venky's fault, too. Their horrific mismanagement of the club has essentially left both Blackburn Rovers and its fans hostage to these distant owners who have never shown they care one iota about the club's legacy or the love that the supporters have for it. It was their decision to sack Allardyce and bring in Kean. It was their decision to hand the reigns over to SEM and allow us to fall into a pit of disorganisation on and off the field. It was their decision to hand out ridiculous contracts and agents fees, skyrocketing what was at the time a somewhat manageable negative net balance. It was and still is their choice to never hire a proper manager, always relying on cheap, out of work chancers or untried rookies and therefore never giving us a fighting chance of moving forward. It was their choice to consistently fail to hire a proper board of directors at Ewood Park, relying on the likes of Paul Agnew, Shebby Singh and Derek Shaw. I could go on and on but just typing this is raising my blood pressure. They are the sole reason we are in such a sorry state and I will never feel any gratitude to them. I hate them for what they've turned this club into and I hate that if Desai wakes up one day and decides she's had enough the club may very well cease to exist.

Whilst I don't think Smallwood is a very good Championship player and not really even good enough as back up, I do agree that if he wants to stay then nobody can blame him. It was Mowbray who decided to extend his contract. Smallwood has always given his all even if it's ultimately not good enough for our current level. If he wants to stay and fight for his place rather than seek first team football lower down the pyramid then fair enough.

Too late for that. The only difference between us and Bolton is that Venky's haven't turned the taps off yet. Wouldn't matter if we spent £100k or £100m at this point, if Venky's decide enough is enough and refuse to let the club go without getting their money back then we are sunk as nobody is going to pay that.

You didn't make that clear though. Now you have, so fine, but your post read as if Nyambe was a new signing when he isn't. Don't really care how Downing looked against Rangers tbh, the fact remains he is not a defensive player and never has been. If we are planning to use him in that capacity we take a huge risk and I seriously doubt many people would have been happy at the end of last season if we'd been told Downing was going to be one of the defenders that were coming.

Yeah, but the person you quoted specifically said new signings. The problem with seeing Downing as a defensive replacement is that he really has no history of being a defender. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/stewart-downing/leistungsdaten/spieler/4063/saison/2018/plus/1#GB2 Going by this he either played as LM, RM or AMC last season for Boro, there's nothing about him playing in defence. Are we really going to try and convert him at 35 years old? Absolute madness if so.

We'd still concede at least two.

Eh? Nyambe was already here so he's not a new signing. Downing was played as a winger so until Mowbray plays him in defence we can't call him a defensive signing. Tosin is our only proper defensive signing to date.

Seen it before tbf. One win and they'll be right back to normal.

If they could turn back the clock I doubt they would ever have purchased us to begin with.

Now that would truly be the ultimate admission of failure.

Wee Stevie is still available. I wouldn't put bringing him back past them. "You know, Madame, we were 3rd when Steve resigned..." Not even going to go further with that. The very thought makes me shudder.

Sadly I think you're right, I don't think LB is being given high priority at all. Which is a shame as I consider it as weak as CB and weaker than RB, where we at least have Nyambe.

Well, obviously, but I bet Gladwin and Whittingham were on a decent wage for League 1. Relatively speaking if Olsson was willing to drop his demands, which he may well do if he's without a club and recovering from a serious injury, then why not give it a shot? I'd certainly make contact at the very least to discuss it.

If we were going to go for any unattached player with a bit of injury risk then I'd be fine with it being Olsson. The lad knows the club, has pedigree at this level and plays a position we are critically weak in. I doubt he'd be asking for crazy wages at this point either. Unfortunately he fails two major criteria: - Not British - Hasn't played for any of Tony's former clubs So he's probably not even on our radar. But even so, if we can give the likes of Gladwin, Whittingham and Caddis multi-year deals then why not offer Olsson a 12 month deal to see if he can get back up to speed and give us a useful option on that side? Maybe we already have and he isn't interested in what we're offering, but I haven't seen anything to suggest we've even considered it.

Well, your first paragraph is the ballsed up the transfer window option, so yeah. Saying "we just missed our targets" with a shrug isn't good enough. Not when Bennett and Bell are starting on the flanks. I consider relegation unlikely, but before the Charlton match kicked off most of us were harbouring ambitions for at least top ten if not an outside shot at sneaking into the playoffs. I'd consider both highly unlikely without defensive reinforcements.

There's no probably about it imo. Our current defence isn't Championship standard. Mowbray stated exactly this at the end of last season, so he's either changed his mind since then (and if so he is wrong), or he's ballsed up this transfer window and likely wrecked any ambitions we had for the forthcoming season short of staying in the division.

We only had two shots on target so yeah, we'd have needed a 100% coversion rate to draw.

We can only conclude that we're paying a bloody massive loan fee for this City lad.

Pretty sure current day Baresi, Maldini and Costacurta are still better than those three at defending.

Should that be the case then I'm sure Mowbray, being the honest and transparent man that we are told repeatedly he is, will enlighten us on why we've been able to spend £5m on a striker - despite already having quite a few on the books - but were unable to spend anything on the one area of the pitch that desperately needed it and that he assured us would be addressed. "Defensively we're alright" doesn't cut it.

"Celtic finished Wednesday's defeat with six strikers on the field"... why does that sentence not surprise me in the slightest?