Well a week tomorrow all will be clear. 4 players and some significant cash buys is a lot to get done in that time. Mowbray has my support and so I'll reserve judgment until the window shuts and I hope to be pleasantly surprised. Given how this summer has progressed to date and given the owners history I think my reservations are justified. If the window shuts and we're still short and the talk is then about using the loan market to our advantage instead I'll be disappointed but not surprised.

Quite a few usually meet in the pub opposite the train station on the riverbank which is a 5 minute walk to the away turnstiles.

Odd way of dealing with it really. You'd think if they were likely signings the last thing the manager would be doing is telling the press that those guys aren't at the top of the list. I'd be surprised if either came here now, so lets hope Mowbray has some better alternatives on the way. I also find it strange that Mowbray refers to experience and game time in the Championship as being an important factor in his recruitment and yet the 3 he has brought in are all young and inexperienced. Rothwell has no Championship experience (or negligible), Palmer about 40 games and Davenport less than 20.

Been saying it all along. Feeney and Ward out of contract, Davenport and Rothwell in on contract. Wharton out on loan for the year, Palmer in on loan for the year. I suspect there's very little if any room on the payroll and numbers authorised for more incomings, particularly permanent deals, until departures are secured first. Wouldn't surprise me to see Gladwin, Hart or Caddis paid off soon to make way.

It would be poor form from the club to peddle the whole agent benno thing if there wasn't something coming with Armstrong, given the whole thing is a reference to Bennett being on the case of trying to get him back here. Given the Telegraph's form for being non-committal I would expect Sharpe's 'update' to be something along the lines of Armstrong is a target but his fee/wages are an issue so instead there is a loan offer with Newcastle and we're waiting to see whether they accept it. Just my guess.

Think there's the 4/5 favourites - Stoke, Villa, Boro, Forest Then after that it could be anyone. For all the talk about Villa crisis I look at their squad and manager and simply cannot imagine them being top 6 at the minimum. I think Norwich will be up there after some good business and their German manager will be used to the division after an average season last year. I'd be surprised if PNE, Sheffield United or Millwall lived up to last year's levels. I don't think Swansea or West Brom will be anything more than play off pushing. One or two unknown quantities in particular Bielsa at Leeds and Lampard at Derby.

Not that I want to make excuses for Coyle but one problem was that our significant transfer business was left until the 11th hour when Williams, Gallagher, Emnes and Mulgrew arrived. By the time they were here and up to speed we were playing catch up. Now where does that seem familiar. So yes he was an appalling appointment who should never have been anywhere near this club but it seems getting our important business done at the last minute isn't a one-off.

Or I could just refuse to answer the question, as I tend to do when I think it is silly and needless.

Birmingham are in trouble with FFP because they spent heavily on players last summer. They might well have been fighting relegation for 2 years but that is better than getting relegated and being in League One for the last 2 years. Their problem was appointing poor managers in Zola, Redknapp and Cotterill. I think Monk is more clued up than those so should have enough nous to keep them up. If he walks then they are in trouble. The fact is that despite their embargo and our lack of one we've only added 3 players and spent £500k or so at this point. Not a massive difference. Have Birmingham lost anyone like we have? We may have some momentum to carry over which could help us as we have a confident group and are used to winning games. Why would you expect us to finish above Wigan? We finished below them last season, we are currently weaker than we were then, whereas to my knowledge they haven't lost any important players. That might change but I'm not interested in what might happen, only where we are now. Millwall had momentum last season and arguably overachieved, as did Sheffield United. I expect both will struggle to reach those heights again, of course might be wrong.

The likelihood of Lenihan, Mulgrew, Graham or Evans making it through a 46 game Championship season without getting injured is remote. Remove any of them for any length of time and we have no depth. We're relying on Downing or the unknown new CB to step in at the back, unproven Travis or Davenport in CM or Whittingham, and nobody up front at this stage other than Samuel. Lots of work to do so whilst satisfied with the Palmer addition there are another 3 required as a minimum, and they have to be good enough to play every week.

Sheffield Wednesday are charging £39 an adult for their game against Hull in a couple of weeks. Same price for 'non member' home fans. Members get a £5 discount. Outrageous prices. Sheffield Wednesday's justification for doing so is that they need to boost income to assist with FFP compliance. Whether that is true or not, it goes to show that those nonsensical rules are actually in some cases punishing supporters. In the absence of a maximum ticket price some clubs are shafting supporters to generate extra funds. If we get those prices at Hillsborough I certainly hope that Rovers repay the favour. One way around it would be to charge their fans £39 a piece and then have a members price of £20 a head for 1875 members. Repeat that for Leeds, Norwich and QPR who will screw our away fans and it suddenly brings in a lot of money and also makes the 1875 membership worth buying.

I'm not sure to be honest. People are tipping Birmingham to struggle because of their embargo and lack of new signings but they've an ok squad and haven't sold anyone. Brentford always seem to do well and surpass expectations. Wigan we finished below last season and we're currently weaker than then. We will have to finish above Rotherham and Bolton, and should be capable of finishing above Millwall.

Unfortunately in Chelsea's case there are lots and lots of other Todd Kanes. Players who will have been lured to Chelsea as kids, moulded in Chelsea's academy and then spend their careers being farmed out all over the place. Kane will be 25 by the time he leaves Hull at the end of his loan and will have never kicked a ball in anger for Chelsea whilst moving round countless loan clubs. As there are big drawbacks to ourselves relying on loan players, there are drawbacks to these sort of players who waste their careers with a nomadic existence when if they had put down roots at a decent Championship club or lower Premier League club there is every chance that over a few years they would develop into first team players. The drawback to Rovers on relying upon loans is we have a nomadic existence ourselves where we cannot properly plan or develop a squad or identity because each and every summer we are waiting until the 11th hour until we discover who, if anyone, we are able to borrow, rather than seizing control of our destiny by owning our players. Tammy Abraham - now 20 - last 2 years on loan at Swansea and Bristol City, 2 appearances for Chelsea Ola Aina - now 21 - 3 appearances in 3 years at Chelsea, last season on loan at Hull Lewis Baker - now 23 - never kicked a ball for Chelsea, last 3 years out on loan at Sheff Weds, MK Dons, Vitesse, Middlesbrough and now Leeds Jeremie Boga - 1 appearance in 3 years at Chelsea - 3 years on loan at Rennes, Granada and Birmingham Fankaty Dabo - 0 appearances - loans at Swindon and Vitesse Michael Hector - 0 appearances - loans at Reading, Frankfurt and Hull Tomas Kalas - now 25 - 2 appearances - loans at Vitesse, Cologne, Middlesbrough x 2 and Fulham x 2 Todd Kane - 24 - 0 appearances - loans at PNE, Rovers, Bristol City, Forest, Nijmegen, Groningen, Oxford and Hull Kasey Palmer - 0 appearances - loans at Huddersfield x 2, Derby and Rovers Plenty of others on the list.

I suppose we'll never find out why it has taken until August to announce embargoed clubs with less than a week of the window remaining. What's the point in even announcing it at this late stage?

Interesting that it has finally emerged via Birmingham's website that they are not allowed to sign any players. Don't think they concede they are in an official embargo, just that the League are not approving any transfers, and that they are working with the League to resolve the situation, no indication given as to how long the embargo is for or what they have to do to lift it. Also no mention from the League themselves what is happening, in stark contrast to the blaze of publicity they made when Rovers were under an embargo. Also odd that Bolton are now paying money out despite being in dispute with players over unpaid wages and bonuses and QPR are rumoured to be trying to sign Jackson from Stanley for more than £1 million. If ever 2 clubs should be embargoed it is those 2. Whole thing stinks. A Birmingham fan messaged me earlier saying 12+ Championship clubs have broken the rules but only 4 have been embargoed, so that's 3 beyond Birmingham. No idea who they are but would assume on business done so far that 2 of them are Villa and Sheffield Wednesday.

That was more or less the total. 3400 in BBE, 1900 in JW Upper, 1500 in JW lower and 2100 in Riverside approx.

I did a quick add up last night and reached 9000.

Nixon said Jack Byrne was a cracking signing so I'm not interested in his view on things.

I'd never expect them to announce two signings simultaneously or even in the same afternoon unless they had to. So whilst I hope and expect we've got a few other irons in the fire even if they're done and dusted the club wouldn't announce them all at once. There's way too much publicity and fun to be had on social media these days, they can have thousands hanging on their every word for days on end. I'm not overly fussed about Chapman, I'd have him back happily as he'd probably be a decent option but not sure whether he's ready to start games and also have fitness concerns. Armstrong much more important in my opinion although more difficult to get done if we're scrimping our way through the market. Palmer is a positive step but several more needed!

I think it will be Palmer and Armstrong, both on loan. Can't believe that the club would use the Agent Benno thing if it wasn't a reference to his tweets earlier in the summer re. Armstrong. I'd be very pleasantly surprised if we had managed a permanent deal, but I've reached the stage where any decent incomings no matter what the deal will be a relief.

I heard that Lionel Richie was the possibility this summer

The 'big' signing has been referred to for the last week or so in Sharpe's stories in the paper. That's the one that 'might' eclipse the Dack fee of last summer. So I suppose big if you're accustomed to a couple of hundred grand signings and loans but not big by Championship standards.

At the start of the summer, assuming no major departures, I wanted 7 incomings, preferably all permanent deals but a couple on loan if necessary. We offloaded Feeney and Ward, and lost Payne, Armstrong and Antonnson, so we were 5 down on numbers before we started, and in my opinion needed a bigger squad and more depth than we had last season. That number perhaps drops to 6 if we could find someone to play in a couple of positions, but we can't really go below that. Our manager has said the same in his earlier interviews - he wanted 6 and preferred permanents over loans. Only his position seems to have shifted in recent weeks - according to the Telegraph 5 incomings is a likely outcome of which 2 will be loans and 1 a CB. My view has been consistent in terms of numbers and a clear preference for permanents. We've brought in 2 to date so need at least 4 more in my opinion. Those 4 need to be of sufficient quality to go straight into the first team or dislodge existing players over the course of the season, not players who will be sat on the bench at best making up the numbers like Gladwin. Also depends on the 'calibre' of loan - Rhodes to Norwich and Wildschut to Bolton are in my view better than kids from academies that have never played in the Championship. As you rightly point out the window isn't closed yet and it isn't too late, though we're already at a stage where new arrivals are likely to be too late for Ipswich. I think you've admitted yourself today concern at what you're hearing in terms of a permanent defender and loans elsewhere.

Probably right. The club aren't daft and know that putting out tweets like the Bennett one will get a lot of people hooked on the premise that we've a 'busy' week of activity and people will immediately assume that means multiple new signings arriving. As you say it could just as easily and probably more likely refer to the frenzy ahead of the Ipswich match. No doubt they've got Sky sports people down there all week whipping up a frenzy especially as they haven't got the Premier League for another week.

I'm not trying to bash Mowbray here. I've already said that his success in leading us to promotion vastly outweighs poor transfers and justified everything he did. He's in credit, significantly. But coming back to those players he has brought in I think it is wrong to suggest that his recruitment has been brilliant and that he's revolutionised the club with it. As explained above the likelihood is that 7 of our 11 at Ipswich will be players who were here before he was. The 'big ones' of Mulgrew, Lenihan, Bennett and Graham were given debuts or in Lenihan's case given a central role under the very unpopular Coyle and Lambert. Dack was a massive success and will probably make the owners a lot of money when they sell him, much more than the cost of our transfers over the last 4 years combined. That alone makes it even more odd that they won't fund Mowbray to a higher level. Surely they know that Dack has been a big success and will make millions in profit and they want some more of that from other signings? Surely they know that they won't ever profit from borrowing other club's players? When Rhodes arrived he was unproven in the Championship and a gamble, particularly for the cash we paid, yet there was confidence he would do it as he had done it to an exceptional level for several years in League One. Almost immediately following his arrival it was clear he was going to score a lot of goals for us. Hopefully Samuel and Dack will follow and be good Championship players, but at the moment they aren't.