I just fundamentally disagree about Pears. In form he is a steady Championship keeper, but he's rarely in form for long. He makes lots of mistakes that seem to go unnoticed by most fans, in the form of awful positioning. So you get comments like 'he couldn't have done anything about that' and that's because he wasn't in the right position in the first place so leaves himself with no chance. Almost as iffy on crosses as Leo. Lower Championship quality (I'd say he's bottom 5 material over a full season) isn't good enough unless we want to stay scraping around at the ass end of the Championship. I'd make the opposite argument to the one you make about great keepers of the past - that by having only a badly out of form Leo to compete with he's starting to look to many like he's a better keeper than he actually is, as your last paragraph hints at.

I wonder how much Mowbray's abject surrenders in the cup year after year cost us.

Agreed, we also need a striker, we shouldn't have sold Kaminski (at least not for that pittance or with such a poor replacement) and I doubt we will use limited funds to rectify that mistake. But we were talking about what we should do, not what we will do. We miss chances to kill games, so do all teams. But we have the league's top marksman. We have one of the league's worst set of goalkeeping options. Furthermore, worth considering that a good striker will cost a lot more than a good goalkeeper, generally. Those limited funds aren't going to manage it. If we bring in a striker it's likely to be another Telalovic/Ennis type signing and I just don't see the point if that's the case.

I was a CB and can totally agree. With a good keeper behind me I was twice the player.

They call that forlorn hope.

We're scoring. We're conceding. I know which one needs changing. Pears isn't a decent Championship keeper, he's a decent backup Championship keeper.

A journeyman player is one who has been at quite a lot of clubs. When we signed him back from City, he had only played for 3 clubs, over 9 years. He wasn't a journeyman. In fact he played for 5 clubs after he left us the second time, so he was arguably more of a journeyman later.

Speak for yourself. I know that goalkeeper is the key signing. Not that I expect us to sign one.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2024/january/23/loan-rovers--gent-grabs-first-senior-goal-/ Gent seems to be impressing at Motherwell.

He wouldn't be teaching them how to suicidally pass it around with the defence, so I doubt his services would be desired here.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/24070847.blackburn-talks-advance-hope-third-january-transfer/

I dunno what makes them think a 20 yr old League Two CB who has question marks over his defensive ability even at that level should be going for 2 million. I'm not even convinced it's a profile we should be spending 500k on.

Well I think if we're being technical, he's still on loan but signed to a pre-contract for when his deal expires.

That's what it sounds like to me, if it's true. I wouldn't mind that, bringing in an experienced keeper on loan and sending Leo to League One whilst he adjusts to English football. Or abroad, to see if it can tempt buyers or restore his confidence.

It would do the same thing for Brentford it would do for Arsenal - kick the payment down the line. If they're confident in passing FFP in this period without that injection, it makes sense to receive the payment later to shore them up for future FFP cycles. And it probably did also impact the sell on clause and save them a little.

It was definitely reported as for Arsenal's benefit. Although I imagine it benefits Brentford the same way. Just little old Rovers it shafts.

You know that link is probably made up, right?

A draw would be the worst outcome, I'd fancy us to fuck it up away if we can't dispatch them at home, and the last thing an injury-stretched relegation-threatened squad needs is another midweek game.

That much is true and fair enough. Although when needs have musted before, we have played RBs, CMs and AMLs there instead of him. Though with him and Carter out, I still expect they'll be replaced by one CB who can play LB, or vice versa, almost certainly on loan. And one CB that we were already seeking. I can't see JDT putting up with any less than two CBs. He already wanted two, let alone now (Pickering being one of our CB options in emergencies, you could argue we're now up to 4 short of where JDT wanted us to be, but I'm expecting just 2). If money has to come from another area (like any attacking options we were targeting) to make it happen, then I expect it will. We don't have literally zero money by the sounds of it, just very little.

It's a reference to the film Candyman. He does play left back, but it's abundantly clear the staff (and quite a few who watch the U21s apart from yourself) don't think he's ready for the first team yet. We're sinking into a relegation fight. Think we need an LB who is ready. Batty isn't that, we don't know if Chrisene is yet, and Pickering is out for a while.

You're like some kind of Batty-obsessed Candyman. If people mention left-back (just one time though) you appear and suggest Batty.

Absolutely. Only just turned 22, still time to kick on, wages won't be much, contributes (I'd say we've missed him) and I'm certain he would have a market value. The question is whether he should be given a new contract, and that depends on his wage demands as well as how he performs when he comes back into the team.

Extendable.

Just seen Gally's penalty claim...my god that was blatant! The big giveaway is when the player behind tumbles to the ground as well, it can only mean he has collided. Shocking decision.

I fully expected to see us bottom of that table, but what I find additionally concerning is that apart from the Bristol (14th) win over a month ago, all our points in these 10 games came at home against the other 2 teams with the next worst form. We really are easy pickings at the moment.