A young player kitty for players to appreciate in value only works if you buy low and sell high and those players contribute. Brereton is going to have to make an amazing transformation for his £7m to be seen as low. It also assumes that we are going to become another Crewe, farming out players to leave at their prime and deliver for other clubs. Unfortunately that kind of approach isn’t going to pay our bills and we will continue to have our huge debts until we are promoted. With a strategy of selling players for profit that’s unlikely to happen. For me, with one exception (Dack) possibly two (Bell), every player Mowbray has brought in permanently has been a miss. That one signing is looking more and more like a fluke. His loanees have a slightly better return. Signings Leutweiler - miss Caddis - miss Dack - big hit Hart - miss Samuel - miss Gladwin - miss Bell - hit Downing - neither Rothwell - hit Armstrong - hit Davenport - n/a Loanees Chapman - big hit until injury Payne - hit Antonsson - miss Reed - big hit Palmer - miss (subjective) Harper - miss Rothwell is an enigma where Mowbray is concerned. He looks a class above, certainly an artist but Mowbray wants a team of XI soldiers - maybe he wants his soldiers to get 50 points and he’ll look to let certain players of the leash but Mowbray’s record here is once the job is done don’t aim any higher - as we saw at the end of last season when he threw in the towel as soon as second was achieved, despite the title being up for grabs. To my mind, we will be trying to dig out results all season. “Labore et Labore”

If he’s not currently having a dip in confidence then I’d question - his ability; his honesty; Mowbray’s man-management; or Mowbray’s approach putting a brave face on things.

What Mowbray (and others) don’t seem to appreciate is that all this does is raise expectations. If those expectations aren’t met then it leads to criticism and disappointment. On the back of those comments I’m expecting no more ‘potential’ signings this season but players that can deliver on the pitch. Immediately. Players who are going to go straight into the starting XI. Displacing/replacing Smallwood, Conway/Palmer; players pressing Nyambe, Bell, Lenihan; taking the pressure off Graham, Mulgrew. Of course we won’t bring in 7 players but there need to be an uplifting/upgrading effect, with Evans, Nyambe, and Bell becoming amongst the “worst” in a “better squad”.

We get this. To support your argument you are underestimating the wage that Brereton is likely to be on compared to players who cost half of his transfer fee.

I meant safe in terms of our league position, form, and immediate outlook. I feel anything but safe. The backdrop in terms of crap owners and debt only serves to polarise the need for promotion. How can you make a statement about the style of play of the U23s - subjective or otherwise - if you don’t watch them? Sorry but that just smacks of disagreeing for the sake of it. They did win the title. That means they were better than their peers and it serves to show that the problem lies in the transition between the U23s and the first team. If players are asked to attack in the reserves but defend in the first team - a point someone made earlier - then I can see this being a problem. They are being taught one thing and then being asked to do another and then dropped when they don’t quickly re-adjust to a new style of play. Nuttall, for example has the ball passed to his feet more, or to run onto, in the U23s; meanwhile, Graham is backing in to grab onto a defenders shirt while trapping a launched ball from the back. And people are scratching their heads why Nuttall isn’t as effective as Graham. (Brereton is maybe suffering a similar fate - he used to play well and regularly for Forest - a similar transition problem?). Our team is set up around getting the best out of an aging player. This will need to change, and in my view, before the end of this season (unless we are in the play-off places). I would agree with your last paragraph but loaned players need to go to a club who will give them an opportunity. There are lots of reasons why players may not get a fair deal. Scott Wharton went back to Lincoln as part of a huge recruitment drive which also saw them bring in the experienced Jason Shackell from Derby - a 34yo now blocking the progress of a 20yo - and Michael Bostwick - a 30yo preferred as his cb partner. If that’s your own player then it’s your choice, maybe like Graham is similarly keeping out Brereton, but if it’s a loan player then you are stunting their progress and impacting their parent club - which I expect is how Chelsea view we are treating Palmer. Although he is starting to get a little more of a look in from the bench and in fact covered for Shackell’s suspension in October it remains to be seen if he can force his way in - he may have to wait for an injury to Lincoln’s preferred pairing to get a chance but he has proven to be a more than adequate understudy. Lincoln are unbeaten when he has featured (and has a goal and an assist in his run of three full matches). The experience will be good for him especially if they get promoted and he has to be someone we are still looking at as having a potential future at Rovers. But of course, if he is frozen out or refuses a new contract then some quarters will call him a mercenary. That’s football I guess.

You make some good points but the answer - as always - is money. Which I why I hate to see us waste a huge sum on another square page for a formation of round holes. And is why I also hate Venkys. They have loads of money and have blown it on the wrong things yet the club is being run like a pauper’s church. Having to increase ticket prices and double our cheapest offers because we need the revenue.

Which suggests Mowbray doesn’t rate him either. I’d like to see him start up front against Newcastle in the FA Cup. If Mowbray can’t trust him to do that - or change the tactics to accommodate Brereton playing as a striker then he needs dropping from the squad for a few weeks. Either with Nuttall promoted to the bench or out on loan to make room.

Do you feel safe? I don’t. Right now - and particularly after the last half dozen or so games - I feel like we’ve been found out and are in a bit of a free fall. Draws aren’t going to save us but will be considered good in the next three matches. To be completely honest, I do prefer watching Johnson’s teams than Mowbray’s (most of the time) but the feeling of winning is much sweeter when it’s the first team. The point I was making was about style of play. In a club where the reserves were used to bring players into the first team I’d expect the style of football to be the same in both. This would enable the youth players to develop in the positions that will enable them to step up. Mowbray seems to have an approach of “that’s interesting” and enjoys watching the youth team for what it is and if he sees someone who is fit and works hard he may see a role for them in his side. Not surprise that this rarely translates. Look at Lewis Travis for example, played right back in a title winning team then moved up to play in midfield. Then dropped. With Nuttall it was short term until Samuel was fit again. Then dropped. The fact that there aren’t many other examples tells it’s own story. The only reason the discussion has gone from Venkys is because they have stopped talking. What happened on here as soon as there was a photo of TM with Balaji Jr? Our debt situation is precarious. It’s exactly the same as the situation Bolton were in before Eddie Davis died - look at the state they are in - and he loved the club!

Our Academy won their division last season (as a League One club) against their equals or betters at other Championship clubs. Johnson can’t do much better than that. My observation would be though that Johnson takes the game to the opposition and attacks whereas Mowbray tries to counter them. Either they are not on the same wavelength or one of them has got it wrong. I’ll get pellets for saying it but I think finishing second last season has clouded people’s judgement of Mowbray. With our squad and budget - and the likes of Graham, Dack and Mulgrew - we should have won the division. Mowbray is not the messiah, he just followed Coyle and his first gig made him one of the favourites. If he had stayed up that season, would we have kicked on and turned things around - without the bounce. I don’t think he would. I expect we would have struggled.

Loan players really add nothing to the business side unless they are a try before you buy. Sadly, in our case we got the deals for Brereton and Reed badly mixed up, with us stuck with an unpolished rock and handing back a diamond. That £7m should have taken away the need for us to invest heavily in a player’s development - otherwise we may as well have persevered with our own players. This one signing has undermined any business strategy because we now need to make a lot more money on other players to offset the cost and/or write off the potential value that we created in Dack. Such a transfer also gives a false impression of the club’s ambitions or reflects badly on Mowbray’s judgement and as a result puts future owner ‘investment’ at risk. Under Kenny we brought in mainly finished articles who just needed to be turned into a team. I’d say Souness was far better at developing youngsters but even he went into the market and bought quality.

The most adventure you’ll see will be playing Conway, Palmer, or Bennett instead of Armstrong. Reed will be on the right and Evans and Smallwood will be holding.

Great post @roversfan99! I think, like most things that it is a balance between youth and experience. But also getting the right players into the team that will perform and deliver for BRFC. Only by doing that do they return their investment in terms of a transfer fee profit. Right now we have very few players who we can turn a profit on. As you say Dack is the holy grail of signings: cheap/slightly soiled, low risk, successful as an individual and delivering success for Rovers, and has a huge sell-on potential. Brereton is the wooden spoon of signings: huge outlay, high risk, has to become a superstar to return on the investment and isn’t delivering for self or team on the pitch. Nyambe looks the next most likely to return a sale. Probably/hopefully a similar move to Martin Olsson when the time is right. Bell could improve but has a long way to go. Nuttall I could see being let go or going cheaply tona League One side with a sell on fee being agreed. This strategy relies on the incumbent manager developing and playing these players. It could be argued that Johnson is putting player into the shop window but isn’t getting any takers, meanwhile Mowbray prefers to look at other clubs’ players than his own but then doesn’t play them. Where we do need to improve soon is in the area of bringing in experience (30+) to replace the likes of Mulgrew and Graham - ready-made quality and experience with no sell-on but to be able to help the young lads to develop and to ensure that the team is as successful as its budget will allow - which is the whole raison d’être of a football club.

Just watched the second episode of “Sunderland til I Die” (I’m a bit behind - sorry @Bigdoggsteel) and it’s quite fascinating. It included an interesting exchange between Chief Exec, Martin Bain, and the Youth Academy Manager, Jimmy Sinclair. The discussion was around the value of players on and off the field and came in the wake of huge net losses on player transfers. Sinclair is making a proposal: “....the club’s last 40 signings only three have yielded a profit for the club. So what I’m suggesting or advocating is that - and this might sound fanciful - 75% of the first-team pool should be under 25. That would leave a manager with the potential to play six players in his starting 11 who are older than 25. So any manager can’t say you’re asking me to win the league with kids. They become assets; we are testing our best young talents rather than playing with players that will get us better results but no end product for the club I think the only question marks you would have would be if they can make the challenge without embarrassing us too much. I think it would be healthier for the club, healthier for the young players and cheaper.” This is an interesting peek into the pressures of delivering player value, something which the Ben Brereton thread is nudging as a theme but I feel deserves seperate discussion. It’s hardly a stretch to think that similar discussions have been, and continue to be, had at Rovers and that much of our problems are down to the need to manage the return on investment of players vs buying players who can make an impact now. I think it is a very dangerous game to bring in too many youngsters and Sinclair’s suggestion of 75% is too many. 25% would be better. However, looking at Rovers current squad, 13 out of 22 are under 25, or 60%. Is this a big reason for our lack of prospects and is Mowbray going to struggle for a couple of seasons - assuming we aren’t relegated first? Secondly, if we are to realise the value of buying and developing young players then they need to be sold around 25 or 26 years old or earlier if necessary. Dack would likely be a player who will go first (stating the bleeding obvious). Here is our squad / ages:

But in doing so he is opening himself up to the suggestions of wasting money or picking a bad player. The buck stops with Tony - otherwise we are all still being lied to.

That role only works though if manager (Head Coach) and DoF are on the same page. But in our case who is our DoF equivalent? The Mowbray era relies on the idea that there is no more of the old tricks going on behind the scenes. If they are then it’s all an illusion, and “In Mowbray We Trust” is a fallacy.

You need to accept though that everyone applies their own experience and perspective to situations. Without being drawn either way, mafia organisations do exist and do control certain things whether we like it or not. That’s not disputed. Football clubs have been bought by all kinds of unscrupulous individuals in the past - just ask a Pompey fan - or a Rangers fan. That’s not disputed either. Mafia links to football clubs is or was rife in Italy and South America for example. It’s not that big a leap that it could happen in the UK at one club or another. And if it was going to happen you would need naive people with money and a number of shell companies and agents. Again, I’m not saying it is true or false but to say it is far fetched is only your own perspective. For me, it’s a stretch to think that a bloke who prides himself on a self-styled image of integrity and self-respect - enough to walk away from Coventry - would put up with players being bought that he didn’t want - even if the money was there. Because that would be disingenuous. If he wasn’t fully responsible for decisions on incoming and outgoing players then surely he wouldn’t just shrug and carry on. Would he? Yet a respectable/respected poster obviously believes this to be the case because TM is still here.

There’s no difference at all. Both are rumours and we have no way of knowing what happened with the sale of the club. I saw more detail than the majority about what was presented to the football authorities in terms of the money trail and even I didn’t see all of it. The difference is how cynical people are as to what they are prepared to believe or not. How old were you when Venkys rocked up if you don’t mind me asking?

It’s a shame because I think he’s actually a decent guy who I could very easily get along with. Just likes to throw stones for a larf. Anyway, it beats being at work! ???and later on?

No need to bring me into your squabbles. But it’s interesting you can buy a conspiracy theory if it backs up your own opinion of Mowbray. Yet if it doesn’t suit, you are collecting in the tin foil hats.

Astonishing. Once again, Matty’s “what a mess” sums up this situation perfectly. Imagine paying £7m for a player and then having to send him out on loan because we don’t play in a way that suits him. If it’s true that he isn’t Mowbray’s player then it’s another joke decision by clowns still interfering. However, how can any manager work under such circumstances? That said, the only manager who did have the integrity to tell them to stick it is still hated by Rovers fans.

Not comparing Mbappe as a player - even though they are coincidentally the same age, just using the example of wages and fee not being on a flex basis. We do have some common ground but I do think you are making too close a relation between wage and fee though. To suggest that ‘all in’ we could afford Brereton (£7m plus wages) but couldn’t afford Reed (on the same basis) is not credible. I go back though to the issue at hand. The real reason anyone is defending the Brereton signing is because it is a done deal. If it wasn’t and it was a loan only and I was sat here saying we should pay £7m for him (because he has potential and will be on cheap wages) rather than try to sign Reed, people - you included - would think I was stupid or just being contrary. I’m afraid we went for the wrong player with the transfer fee money.

But it’s an important question. It means that people aren’t actually providing their own opinion on what they’ve seen they are just saying “there’s no point crying over spilled milk”. But it’s an expensive bottle of milk and I don’t want another one dropping. If you think Brereton has shown something that makes him worth the money then fair enough but I’ve seen the opposite and believe it’s been a waste. You keep using this term “fee/wage flex”. That’s a made up term, it doesn’t exist. Wages have always been commensurate with fees. Agents have made sure of it. Do you really think Mbappe is on peanuts because of the fee/wage flex? I wouldn’t be surprised if Brereton is amongst our highest earners. Maybe you can show me differently. Now, “Reed is probably too expensive right now”. This is exactly the point I was making. We could have paid £7m for him. Now he’s “too expensive”. (We won’t agree on this point, by the way, because you believe in a equitable fee/wage ratio calculation which presumably means you think Reed would be on significantly higher wages than Brereton despite costing less. I can only assume this is some kind of extension of the wages commanded by PL who move on a free (?) - which is a different discussion entirely. The lack of fee simply means that the player wages become an auction and clubs justify it by saying “well he would have cost £Xm”.)

Merry Christmas to you too!

‘Turning up the heat’ - have a word. He is under pressure for this team to perform having had significant funds to strengthen and not doing. He is still playing his L1 side. Couple of questions: Would you want us to sign BB on what you have seen so far? How would you feel if we could have signed Reed but now couldn’t afford him because the money was already spent on BB? And I said ‘heading the way of Gladwin and Hart’. But looking at BB yesterday in isolation I can see why you made that inference.

Check Ask Admin...