You pretty much always expect comfortable wins though. At this point, you may as well stop making statements like that, and instead just say 'I'm Mercer'. We'll know what you mean, and it saves you on the typing. I don't expect a comfortable win against QPR. Why do you? QPR just beat Swansea 4-0. They're still in need of points to avoid relegation, whereas our season is over. As you say, some of the young players may be getting a game too, which could improve our performance or weaken it, it remains to be seen at this point. I expect to beat Bolton though.

Yet Smallwood can do it and it's no problemo. Bennett last season too. I really feel that TM lets the more senior pros get away with things he punishes the hell out of younger players for. Another example is that Nyambe had a few off games in December I think it was, and he got benched for pretty much three months as a result. Meanwhile, Bennett has put several runs of poor games together and is a mainstay. Williams has been frequently awful but is always in or around the first team. It's bizarre. The only logical explanation (beyond doing it to keep his core of senior players, who he consults on everything with, happy) is that maybe he thinks the older players are too old to learn, but that it will help the younger players develop. I don't buy that, but at least there'd be a line of thinking which wasn't sychophantic. On Reed though, in fairness he did have a bit of a run of not being fully at the races. I don't think he was particularly any worse than Smallwood though during it. I think the fact he isn't our player and doesn't seem likely to become so is also a factor.

And anyone who has shown enough to earn more game time in the matches until then, should play the last game too, with any who haven't playing the cup final. First team football is at least as important to their development as that final, plus it gives us a sense of whether they can be relied on for next season. If the youngsters barely feature, we won't get that, which means when TM brings in new players the youngsters will just get sidelined all year. It's imperative we take advantage of this dead rubber end to the season to blood them properly. It's pretty much the only thing left worth doing!! TM talked a lot about doing this, and now the scenario has come to fruition he is getting cold feet on it. It's frankly frustrating.

In fairness I did remove some of the context (just because it was already a big post). The Lancashire Senior Cup final is two days after the last Championship game, and there is a Premier League Cup tie against Everton 24 hours after the Bolton game. But we have four games to play, not just two. Full article: https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/rovers/news/17581221.rovers-boss-mowbray-isnt-letting-his-players-lose-focus/ Aren't we allowed to play senior players in the senior cup though? Whoever made way for the young lads could just go play that to improve our chances of winning.

No. Here's some of Tony's latest comments about the youngsters, from the LT today: “I’ve said that I would like to do that but it’s about picking the right moments,” Mowbray said. “I’m not going to be changing the starting line-ups too often, but I might bring on some young players in the last four games. “The bottom line is that I don’t want to break up the Under-23s just to give people 10 minutes here and there. It’s important they finish their season strong. “It’s a balance. There might be a few players involved but generally it will be off the bench rather than starting.” Very encouraging words, no? He 'might' involve a few players, but it's likely to be off the bench rather than starting, in our complete dead rubber matches. His faith in youth is palpable. Also some contradictory remarks there...it will be off the bench but there's no point breaking up the U-23's season to give people 10 minutes here or there. Perhaps he intends to give them 20 or 30 minutes, woooo! Come on Tony, the ones who have already had little cameos off the bench, like Buckley, need a start in order to learn and showcase their skills, not more cameos. It's understandable to give cameos to the ones who haven't had one yet though. When TM first arrived, almost every presser I read seemed to make eminent, refreshing sense. What has happened? These days almost every presser leaves me frustrated at the lack of sense. There's also an inconsistency to them, such as this one where he implies cameos are a waste, but also that he won't be starting them, but he 'might' give them some game time. The comments about the transfer market are similarly confused - whilst most of the time he says he wants 'competition' and a 'deeper squad' (which we all know isn't enough) he has infrequently alluded to trying to bring in better quality first teamers. I just don't know what the hell he is planning anymore, or if he even has a clear vision.

I don't even remember when we last moved early in the market pre-Venkys. I feel like we did a bit of business early when we first came down to the Champs under Venkys? I may be wrong. If I'm right, what I do know is it was still shit business.

The problem with that is, as you've alluded, just as our rivals don't know where they'll be next season, nor do some of the clubs we would target players from (Charlton are a prime example). This may make clubs and players reluctant to commit to anything right now. I agree with the concept of moving quickly though, and we certainly should be doing groundwork now. It's just we may struggle to wrap anything up until the end of the season - which is still plenty of time to spare. If we do solid groundwork now, we may still be able to steal a march on rivals.

Really? That would be a very odd clause. Don't think I buy that rumour. Why should Boro care when we first play Chapman? I can only envision this if they thought he was faking how bad his injury and fitness issues are to get a move.

What contract rumour is that?

I would...I'm not interested in signing cover, I want a first and 2nd/3rd choice CB, with the others pushed to being 3rd, 4th and 5th choices. Lenihan may be good enough to stay starting.

Weren't we linked with Wheater last summer?

Team of the week or team of the season? It's irrelevant who makes team of the week.

Nah his worst cameo was the one in December I think it was, at Ewood, but I forget the opposition. He barely even ran. Graham had been on the pitch for about 70 or 80 minutes already, and was still chasing down the ball as the opposition defenders passed it between them. Moments later, Brereton got the chance to do the same, and pretty much just sauntered towards the ball despite being younger, faster, and in dire need of impressing. I thought he was pretty poor against Forest, but I feel I've seen him be worse on a few occasions. Shame as he has been a bit better lately when I've seen him, though still no great shakes. Pressure probably got to him against his old team - he seems to have a pretty thin skin I think. Which isn't very promising in itself.

Glad I'm not a Forest fan. It's a terrible song.

Haha same! I'm sure Pickering was a fantastic player, but was he ever considered the third best player in the whole of world football? Because Big Al was.

Good point. If you asked TM who our 5 most important players were, I reckon he would answer something like (in no order): Bennett, Dack, Graham, Mulgrew, Evans. The fans would agree on D&G but none of the rest. If we pushed it to say, 8, he'd likely add Raya, Smallwood and Lenihan.

I don't care what order the positions are filled, to be honest. So long as we don't spunk our budget on the striker at the cost of getting the right defenders.

I don't care what order the positions are filled, to be honest. So long as we don't spunk our budget on the striker at the cost of getting the right defenders.

Thanks, that settles my internal debate over whether Mulgrew's goals and set pieces bring enough to the side to compensate for his defensive shortcomings.

Exactly. I never booed the great man, too much to be grateful to him for. Even with Kenny and Jack, with no Shearer we weren't winning that title in 95. Maybe we could have done it the slower way that Jack initially envisioned (and maybe that would even have given us a more stable base in the long run) but I certainly wouldn't want to re-roll the dice on that without Big Al. That's ignoring the fact that if we hadn't signed him he'd have been spearheading that excellent Manure team for his whole career. If they'd had him they'd have been unstoppable.

Shearer being positive about us is a (relatively) recent thing. For many years he seemed, to me, to act like we hadn't happened. That hurt me, as he was pretty much my hero. It seemed like he changed his attitude to us around about the time he had the street named after him. I think the reasoning is that he was hurt by the way some fans turned on him after he left. Which I can understand, though I also know why fans were hurt in the first place given his misleading comments prior to leaving. The street thing probably showed him that he was still very highly thought of here.

Hopefully after today 'the mysterious case of Joe Rothwell' can be consigned to the history books as an unsolved one, like the Mary Celeste or who shot JFK.

He looks better there. I think that's partly because of how weak we look there when Mulgrew or Rodwell play instead though. I still don't trust him in the team.

As well as another one for the 'criminally underused' category.

Some sort of injury for Reed. He wasn't on the bench either.