Amazing! Every word of this is wrong. (Yes I cut off the last bit, which was right)

So have all of us. Yet, here we are.

Hopefully, absolutely out of it or was never in it.

I've just thought now, not only is it Broughton's first time as DoF, but the club itself hasn't had one since Dalglish in the mid-90s as far as I can recall? Certainly not for a long while in any case. So, not only is Broughton learning on the job as you put it, but the role he is learning is to all intents and purposes, new to the club. So who is going to reliably show him how it's done? Guide him on what he can and can't do? It's a vague, variable (between clubs) role in football at the best of times, that he doesn't have experience of, and here there is no frame of reference for him. In the additional context of self-serving people in the corridors of power at Ewood, I can see him being given more limits than freedom. Does anyone know if Waggott has worked with one before?

Does it? I only remember reading generalities. He didn't even say what sort of market we are shopping in. Will it be League One, Norway, all of Europe? Loans? What positions will we prioritise? Do we have a budget to pull it off? Sure he wants young players, that's been our transfer policy for years.

Agreed, absolutely. It's still as successful as we have been in this horrendous Venkys reign though, and it took that abysmal second half of the season, largely the fault of dire management and a little bad luck with player availability to it up. Most managers would have been able to get us across the line to reach the playoffs at least. We have had one similarly bad collapse, last season when we pissed about with a going-nowhere possession style and finished even lower. I do believe the right manager could make that approach, with some alterations, work. But I also think we lack the right personnel to be truly effective with it. If the new manager wants to go back to that, the new recruits will have to be very good at it to compensate. Only Buckley and Dack are up to it from our current crop I'd say.

What's your point? I was clear that pace alone isn't the only thing that matters, and I clearly explained why missing pace in a team is a problem. I've been over my points fairly rigorously and I'm just not sure you've been reading them. Side note, we finished 8th, it was our joint best season since relegation. We ballsed up crossing the finish line, but overall it was as successful as we've been for a decade. We were at our best when our defence was really solid and we were punishing teams on the break. With our pace.

True, and I've previously said I have a feeling he will more or less replace Khadra. I think we are going to want a quick attacker to replace BBD when he leaves. Then we can possibly survive by just being down Rothwell's pace, as it's probably more important in the final third than from the middle third. Long passes onto quick attackers can compensate, so we are probably reliant on Buckley and whoever replaces Rothwell.

Rothwell bursting forward this season worked a lot better than Holtby and Trybull keeping the ball ticking around in no mans land. A team that doesn't have any pace doesn't have an easy outlet when under pressure, can't stretch the play as easily, can't exploit a slow defence as easily. A team needs a style and we have shown we are better at countering, which needs pace in the team. Of course it isn't enough to just be fast or Usain Bolt would have become world class. I wouldn't advocate signing someone who is fast but shit. But I want someone who is quick and can play. You can get away with being a bit slow these days still if you're an absolute baller, but you can't have a whole team of those - I can't think of a successful recent team with no pace in their locker.

Ok so when you said 'vast experience of that market' shortly after mentioning 'different parts of Europe', the market you referred to was just Norway.

Yep. When you have someone who is quick, they can get on the end of that at even longer distances.

Of course, winning is the be all and end all. But in modern football, it's a lot harder without pace. Watching Rovers the last couple of seasons has shown me this squad doesn't have much else in its locker when it doesn't counter attack with pace. Sure, we will recruit, but if that's for a different approach we will still end up with half a squad who can't play it.

Does he? I thought he just had a little under 5 years experience of Norway. Not sure that translates into 'vast experience' of the whole of Europe.

Ahh ok, so Giles wasn't played out of position? He's a right-sided forward is he? Bradley Johnson is a natural false 9? 'Start' to play players out of position...he did it through most of his tenure. Gally, Bennett and Bucko at RB, Dack as false 9, Rodwell as CB where he hadn't played since he was about 18, JRC at LB, two big lads on the flank with a little fella in the middle. I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

We will look very pedestrian without the pace of Rothwell and Khadra if we don't replace it.

Is it? He won the Swedish title a couple of times with one of the biggest teams in Sweden. It's decent but it's not all that impressive. Nothing compared to what Knutsen did. Malmo have won the most Swedish titles and the most national cups. Prior to that he got fired after getting Dutch side Roda relegated. Mowbray had won the league we actually play in, reached an FA Cup semi final with a Championship side and had more experience than JDT does when we signed him. This is not a defence of Mowbray of course, but JDT's CV really isn't all that impressive.

I suspect he will be released next summer when his contract expires. Without making an appearance for us. It's probably a testament to both of those things.

Exactly. It's an advantage, but it's a secondary or even tertiary consideration.

Absolutely. I don't see promotion as being remotely on the cards this season though.

Sorry, yes, you're absolutely right. I nearly phrased it differently to include about Kidd having been a successful player and assistant too, but it seemed superfluous as I forgot about Bowyer. I think it's a little bit different when someone has been handed the reins on a caretaker basis first and shown they can handle it. Otherwise appointing Bowyer straight to first team boss would have been a bit batshit. Then again, even then at least he would have had the advantage over the likes of Carrick in terms of knowing the club. I still wouldn't do it though, as some have advocated doing with Damien Johnson.

I was being general, as Kidd has come up a few times lately as Joe said. I'll take your word about the specific reference. But it's still a fair point for Sparks to make - it's close to irrelevant whether a manager won trophies as a player. Being a great player doesn't make you a great manager, but some like to talk as though it does. I prefer to judge managers on their management.

Yes, it's in reference to the rumours (and recommendations, from some batshit fans) about the likes of Ferguson, Carrick etc.

So what you're saying is Rovers need to have a shower and put some makeup on. Maybe wear a nice dress.

Not the point being made. Of course most managers are ex players and someone has to give them their first job. It shouldn't be us though. It's too much of a risk, too much of an unknown.

Both of those had actually managed though. Ince had even had success with MK Dons. That's why Kidd is being brought up, he's the most recent example of us giving someone their first senior management role.