5 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

I wanted us to keep an experienced player who could/should be playing a part in our battle against relegation. Good to hear you’ve got a hotline to Tomasson  - look forward to further enlightened inside information

We're closer to the play offs than relegation. 👍

4 minutes ago, Wheelton Blue said:

Why do you constantly have the need to to insult people when you reply to them?

You might want to read the whole discussion. Get back to me when you have 👍

6 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

We didn’t have to let him go. We’ve signed someone who was offered to us. And he’s not what we need. You can’t make it from dot 1 to 2. 
 

 

So you wanted us to keep an unhappy player that the manager didn't want and not sign the player he wanted.

Oh wait, we only signed him because he was offered. Cos you'd know that obviously🙄

Keep us updated with the inner workings of the recruitment team. It's enlightening stuff and not at all cringe.

Just now, Bethnal said:

You’re absolutely right, I am making assumptions about a Brighton youth player. The Brighton fan I play football with has described him as “high hopes, time wasted at Coventry, hopeful he can kick on” and I’ve seen 5’8”, 20 years old, Coventry’s form improving after he came out of the team and a lot of comments about a lack of physicality, with a sprinkling of comments about a lack of commitment.

Would you prefer I base my assumptions on his YouTube highlight reel?

If you've made your mind up before seeing him play then that's fine. Seems reasonable. 🙄

1 minute ago, jim mk2 said:

When you’re in a potential relegation battle with a an inexperienced and injury hit squad you don’t ship out one of your most experienced players who can play a number of positions even if he’s out of the manager’s good books at present. It’s easy to join up the dots

He's asked to leave. We've signed someone who wants to play for us to replace him.

Those dots are eluding you again, as they always do. 

Just now, Bethnal said:

Fairly confident I can isolate this one deal from the separate Travis deal. In fact, I have.

That's convenient. Yet the same principle applies. 

You've also made a lot of assumptions about a player I'm fairly confident you won't know anything about.

Just now, Bethnal said:

Absolutely no idea which position he’s gonna play here. Ahead of Szmodics? No. Ahead of Wharton? No. Ahead of Garrett? Maybe. Ahead of Tronstad? No.

Feels a lot like Brighton have called us up and said, “Yasin’s not having a nice time at Coventry, can he come and play with you?” 

People are upset Travis has left and he's not ahead of any of those players either. Can't have it both ways.

Looks like the new signing has upset some folk.

Here's a video. Get him written off. 

Just now, wilsdenrover said:

Can’t it be both?

He’s asked to leave because of a lack of game time and it’s a manager’s job to keep fringe players happy.

To your second question, all players should fight for their place.

How can a manager keep a player happy who is demanding game time when the manager only rates him as 3rd or 4th choice? It's not likes he's a young kid, he's club captain. 

Travis wants to move cos the manager doesn't rate him, the player has therefore asked to move. Not sure that can be pinned on the manager. No player has the divine right to be picked. 

LT analysis on Trav's move:

The Lancashire Telegraph understands that Travis has reluctantly accepted a move away from Ewood Park for the good of his career, considering his lack of game time.

The 26-year-old didn't start any of the matches over the busy festive period and has completed 90 minutes once since November the 10th. 

Travis hasn't started a Championship match in central midfield since October the first, a 4-1 home defeat to Leicester City. Since, he's been used as a substitute or to fill in for injuries and suspensions at full-back.

So game time is a huge driver for this move. Travis is not the type of personality to sit on the bench and be happy.

That is partly why Rovers have sanctioned the deal too. The captain holds a great deal of weight in the dressing room and having an unhappy figure around the camp isn't beneficial for either party.

Removing his wages from the books could also open the door for more wiggle room in the January window. If Tomasson isn't using him, the player is unhappy and the club need to balance the books, they'd argue it's the right move.

However, considering Rovers had a bid on the table from Millwall in the summer, albeit a very flimsy 800K, loaning him out isn't a great look. There was also interest from Major League Soccer side Atlanta whilst Luton Town were linked in the summer.

Another source of friction between Tomasson and Travis has been his position in midfield. The captain hasn't been used in the holding role that he excelled in under Tony Mowbray. Instead, Travis has been used as an advanced number eight which has looked clunky, at times. 

Whilst the midfielder has improved on his offensive side of the game, anyone can see that it hasn't brought the best out of his skill set. Travis best qualities are the defensive side of the game, adding energy, tenacity and tough-tackling at the base of midfield.

Sources claim that Travis has sought answers from Tomasson about his role in the midfield but to no avail. A lack of opportunity to showcase his ability in holding midfield, both in competitive matches and internal games, is another factor in this move away.

At Ipswich, Travis will operate in his natural role, with Kieran McKenna playing a 4-2-3-1 which is better suited to the midfielder. The argument for Blackburn fans will be that if he's good enough for the team sat second in the division, he should be good enough for Rovers.

Tomasson may argue that the captain hasn't shown the desired qualities in possession to play as his single pivot. It's a role Adam Wharton has occupied when the two have played together, with Wharton particularly impressive at receiving the ball under pressure and playing through the lines.

Sondre Tronstad has occupied that role since coming into the team at Queens Park Rangers. He has been in excellent form since he broke into the side and it's allowed Wharton to play further forward, where he is more effective.

Simply put, there is an argument that Travis just didn't suit Tomasson's style of football.

Until December, there were no real cries for Travis to come back in. But a run of one win in eight has changed the mood in the fan base. 

At Huddersfield, particularly, there was a complete lack of fight. Rovers didn't, and perhaps couldn't, dig in and stay in the game, against a side with far inferior talent.

The team has been accused of being too soft during this period. The goals conceded column is alarming and needs to be rectified. 

It's impossible to argue that Rovers are a stronger squad, at the time of writing, without Travis, for those reasons, if nothing else. In what is already a difficult transfer window, this has added an immense amount of pressure.

Rovers must now replace Travis as well as address the other obvious areas that need bolstering in the squad. Incomings are expected this month but the financial landscape at the club has not dramatically altered since the summer.

We're five days into the window and the pressure is on. Strap in, it could be a bumpy ride.

Just now, belfast_rover said:

You fundamentally misunderstand JDT's brief.

 

He has been given the job to manufacture saleable assets and avoid relegation, not necessarily to win football matches.  It is clear he has little say in transfers, responsibility there appears to lie with the director of football who appears to be in a similar position in that the club has directed him to reduce the wage budget as far as possible and maintain a playing staff that can be sold for profit.

The "style" is a direct result of this as Premier League clubs want to be paying for technically proficient prospects rather than seasoned championship battlers.

Perhaps this is a reaction to the money hemorrhaged on Rothwell, Brereton-Díaz, Lenihan - even Dack.  Perhaps it's necessitated by Venkys financial position.  Perhaps it's both.  But it's clear that the thinking at the club currently is that promotion is too unlikely to bet the farm, and so this is the model for long term sustainability.

I'm not convinced it is going to work (and certainly doesn't seem to be working currently) but it seems pretty clear JDT is working with a player development focus rather than a "win at all costs" mentality.

Good post. JDT stated what his brief was the other day in the press, basically to develop players in a way that fits the 'style' of PL teams. 

Just now, wilsdenrover said:

You don’t consider that to be part of a manager’s job then?

You don't consider that the player has asked to leave because he isn't getting game time? Would you say, as club captain, he should have fought for his place? 

1 minute ago, Tugayisgod said:

I doubt it tbh

doubt what?

4 minutes ago, Polky said:

JDT doesn’t think he’s good enough to play our style of football, but the Ipswich manager currently playing better football and sat in 2nd place thinks he is.

Not sure you've watched Ipswich recently but they play a different style to us and the demands on their midfield are different. They are a bit more traditional in their approach, with the likes of Morsy in midfield and a traditional winger.

Whether they play 'better football' is moot, I would say Travis just suits their style more. 

Just now, J*B said:

Trav wants the move because he’s fallen out with the manager over both game time and position. JDT prefers Garrett and Buckley in CM. 

That's the manager's prerogative.

It's a shame Trav, as club captain, has demanded a move because he hasn't been good enough to get in the 1st XI. 

2 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Keeping fringe players happy is a key part of a manager’s/head coach’s job.

Meaningless. 

Trav might have asked for a move. Rovers might want him out to facilitate an incoming. JDT might have been told that Trav was moving on and he had no say in it. 

If he's 3rd or 4th choice and the club needs to free up funds to sign players who will make the starting line-up then it makes sense. 

If it's been done purely as a cost-cutting measure with no incomings to compensate then it's a ridiculous move. 

JDT's press conf will tell us more

5 minutes ago, martonrover said:

A lot of the fan base have simply stopped attending.

Of what’s left, there are the naive happy clappers and the folk who aren’t happy, but attend out of habit.

So absolutely nobody attends because they enjoy it? 

1 minute ago, JHRover said:

He joined Brentford in Summer 2022 

We got £15 million for Adam Armstrong yet apparently still had to sell our training ground and were still on the 'cusp' of FFP problems so not sure how they can be so much better off.

I suspect the difference is that their new Turkish owner has ambition and wants them to grow and get better. Whereas our owners, nobody really knows what they want but it ain't growth or improvement I think we can all agree.

We got 60% of £15m. 

10 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Agreed, also on a more basic level it has always baffled me how people think selling a player then bringing in several for the same money ( who by definition must be inferior) enhances a team/squad.

If you think you can replace Travis like for like with a better player - fair enough. But I doubt that's what's happening here.

It's always baffled me how little context exists. 

Tronstad cost nowt and he's the best DM we've got. We might get £2m plus for Travis who is 3rd choice DM. 

Just now, RevidgeBlue said:

Not if you want to pay your highest wage to the worst outfield player at the Club.

Now you're just being silly. 

6 minutes ago, neophox said:

Muric, Zaoury and Benson seems available at our rival club. They were the reason they went up. All would walk in to our team.

Benson's off to Hull according to reports. They have money. 

4 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Not saying they don't need to go as well and they're probably on a fraction of Gallagher's wage.

Good win % when Gally plays. We've missed him. 

And he's very handsome, with great hair. 

There's no downside with Galligol.

Just now, AJW said:

If you believe the links it will be Isaac Hayden that will come to replace Travis … time will tell if that’s an improvement or not 

He can play CB, DM and RB according to wiki

Just now, RevidgeBlue said:

Reportedly.

If the Indian judge could only refuse to sign off on one item of expenditure.................

Aye cos the other strikers have been incredible.