bluebruce

Anyone else a bit alarmed by how short this new deal is? 2 years is awfully short for a talented 21 year old who plays frequently in the first team. It's also the exact same length as if we just exercised our one-year extension on the existing deal. I hope at the very least the new deal has an extension too. But I think a 3 or 4 year deal was called for, personally.

Yup

So 16 goals from midfield at 21? Doesn't sound particularly available.

Unless he watches them day in and day out playing against senior players competitively, I'm not sure why you think that merits a jesus-wept.

Bigdog. I like you, honestly. But why the fuck, when I just told you that I categorically wouldn't have said that, in the very post you quoted, are you telling me that I would? That's frankly more than a little obnoxious. Know me better than I know myself, do you?

He knows the youth players inside out despite many of them having never played a single game of senior football? That's a neat trick. He didn't need to play a whole rookie team. One or two starters would have been plenty. Hell some off the bench would satisfy most. Nobody who asked for that would have melted down at a defeat. Also...why the hell do we 'need' maximum points?

He did bring in 'competition' last summer. It's worrying that that's how he defines competition though, with all the recent talk of bringing in 'competition' this summer.

The win doesn't vindicate the selection, because the criticism of the selection was never that it wasn't good enough to win the game. No, I wouldn't have criticised him if we lost and he had blooded some youngsters. I and others have made it clear, we didn't value the result highly and we wanted youth to be given a chance. Why would we contradict ourselves by complaining about a defeat where youth was given a chance? (This is assuming he didn't play them in ludicrous ways like Butterworth in goal)

The win is a good enough result, obviously. The lack of desire to try the youngsters out, is not. The wins don't really matter anymore as safety is assured and promotion is impossible. Very simple logic, I'm surprised you didn't follow it, as enough people have said it.

Can't wait to see what Brereton can do in 5-10 minutes on the pitch.

He was on about Wanky Wanderers, not Venkys.

Personally I wouldn't buy anyone on the basis of how good they looked against Benno at RB.

Because we don't particularly care about the result, we just want to see our highly promising youngsters given a shot. If they don't get it now, it's hard to see when there'll be a better opportunity.

A packet of crisps. Not the premium brands either, Aldi's own.

Any keaner, I don't care (within reason, obviously not Rothwell or others who need more game time). It's not about rewarding recent form anymore, or winning particularly. These things don't matter at this stage, only preparing for the future does.

So the perfect opportunity arose to blood youngsters, and they're not even on the bench. The result is fairly meaningless and the u-23s have no game until Tuesday. Fascinated to hear the excuse. The only change is that the backup goalie out of contract in the summer finally gets a start, against the only team we've already seen him play against. This suggests to me that TM is considering keeping him on and not bothering with genuine competition for Raya. The only other reason would be to do Jayson a favour and put him in the shop window, but why do a favour to a player we aren't keeping but not bother to give a chance to the youth we own? Bet the young lads are gutted. After everything Tony was saying (until yesterday anyway) and with our safety assured, they will have expected at least someone to at least make the bench. This also means they're even less likely to play against Bolton, since they have a game the next day for that one. Pathetic decision, disincentivising our youngsters.

Totally unacceptable if true. They don't even have a game until Tuesday. No excuse, short of the entire u-23 team being injured, would be acceptable.

Nothing to suggest he isn't brave enough...except his own most recent comments which I quoted, suggesting starts will be very limited and he doesn't want to interfere with the u-23 season.

Ah that's true, I forgot we moved fairly quickly that summer. I feel like I remember some fans (maybe not many) still managing to panic about it though. It felt like TM got caught cold a bit when we came back up. Prices and wages were no longer what he expected them to be, having not done business in the Championship for years. He also felt the lads who got us up deserved a shot. I can understand the issues in summer to a degree. The failure in January was pretty unforgivable though, he should have known by then on both counts.

I'm not getting into this. Unlike Britt.

In him? Dirty bastard.

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.