More desperate gossip which will no doubt have zero substance to it.

My issue is with the theory that Venkys themselves are choosing projects that they want to invest in, yet suddenly 6 months later the taps are totally off. The manager should be the one tasked with making signings, if there is an aim that we make profit on younger players then he follows that and is judged on that. Obviously the manager shouldnt be Mowbray. Who do you think wanted Pickering specifically? And indeed Brereton and Gallagher? With Pickering, like anyone else I have no idea how he will be and I am not judging him as an individual. My point was that it was either a wreckless signing financed by the owners if we was not on track with FFP. Or if the LT was wrong and it had no impact on that as you suggest, then my issue is with the sudden turning off the taps 6 months later, and the general bizarre lack of consistency. I agree with the idea of signing players for cheap and selling at a profit, although Venkys have certainly not achieved that as a strategy. Are the last ones Duffy, Gestede and Cairney, all sold on the cheap due to another embargo and thus desperation for money? But you cant only sign younger projects, you need some experience and know how, not every player is about potential. Lets hope that Venkys have had enough, then there may be a light at the end of the tunnel.

What are these facts that prove Mowbray to be a worse manager than Coyle? Assuming that they are based solely on their Rovers careers. Even if you take out the promotion season, Mowbray has finished 15th twice and 11th. Coyle left us in 22nd or 23rd. I presume it is based on a specific run of form extrapolated but your overall statement cannot be true. Mowbray deserves to be sacked and that is something based on his own merits. You dont need to make nonsensical comparisons based on hand picked runs of form to justify that he needs to be sacked. Meeting FFP regulations obviously encorporates everything, there are various methods to help to increase income and reduce expenses. It is not JUST wages that cause the problem. Increasing income via ticketing/advertising policies, selling assets at the correct time, not spending much on incoming transfers, having a low wage bill etc. Meeting or indeed failing to meet FFP encorporates all of that. If this is the case as per the LT that we failed FFP, we should have known that would or could be the case 6 months prior. In which case, surely dont spend over 500k on a new player! And to answer your question, the deal didnt have to be done in January, but someone cheaper, a free or a loan. If not and Phili is correct and we went into embargo due to late submission of accounts/funding methods then as I touch on below, why are we spending a reasonable fee on Crewes left back when 6 months later we cant even afford freebies? Where is the consistency and the logic? Even if there were no issues with FFP and the LT was wrong, its just bizarre how we can be spending on fees then literally unable to sign freebies within 6 months. I based my assumption we went into embargo due to issues with FFP based on an article in the Lancashire Telegraph a week or 2 ago. But whether it was down to sustainability issues, late submission of accounts or funding issues, I of course stand by my criticism of Venkys for allowing it to happen, massively hindering the manager. But even putting the embargo to one side, why are we spending 500k (the 350k will surely then be listed as a creditor so it will still be in the accounts regardless of payment date) on a player in January yet 6 months later, the goal posts are moved to the extent that we cant even sign free agents? Its just illogical from the owners, no joined up thinking. Assuming that your theory is correct regarding Venkys being willing to invest only in specific projects which take their fancy, it is little wonder that we are so screwed. What makes them qualified to do so? My doubts over this theory personally would stem from, what is exciting them so much about a left back from Crewe when 6 months later, we cant even sign up freebies because the belt has been tightened so much? But yeah, whatever the reason for the embargo, nothing them tossers in India do makes any sense. The theory of them picking projects to spend on has been mentioned before, im unconvinced personally but either way, there is never any logic to what they do. Even if it didnt cause the embargo, that Pickering deal for a reasonable fee makes no sense when we are here 6 months later we are on a loans only policy.

Spending over 500k on a fee 6 months before sustainability regulations to which our losses ie our expenses against our income were too high was a showing of negligence by the owners. The wages are too high compared to the income which is not as high as it should be yes but spending over 500k on a fee was not a wise financial decision. He might well turn into a good signing but perhaps one that we couldnt afford within those regulations.

Mentioned it in a longer post earlier, but how irresponsible was it from the owners to allow Mowbray to spend over half a million on a left back 6 months before we went into embargo for FFP regulation issues?

Mowbray is not fit to continue as Rovers manager but he is not factually a worse manager than Coyle.

Lets perfect one formation first. Many examples of teams who have gone up after perfecting one formation. Consistency and knowing exactly what your role is has been underestimated. As I said, 3 at the back tends to need central defenders who are good on the ball, none of ours are, that isnt their game.

Russell Martin seems like one of these all the range managers, obsessed with style of play, playing from the back, philosophise and all of the modern lingo. I remember last season when MK Dons went on a poor run and he was defending himself by saying about sticking to his principles etc and he got loads of praise. They had a fairly unremarkable season really. Swansea dont look in good shape at the moment, so many key players have left too. They couldnt have hand picked a better opening day fixture though!

He has also suggested Ogilive who is about to join Portsmouth, and Reach who now isnt good enough now it seems that he is going elsewhere.

I am aware of FFP rules but there are so many way that the owners could massively reduce the losses they incur that some seem desperate to praise them for offsetting, much of it comes down to hiring people worthy of their jobs, which they have never done. Better sales/season ticket sales increasing income. More responsible use of budgets and indeed requiring transfer profits if need be, rather than suddenly turning off the taps, making us suddenly uncompetitive. Anyway, back to transfers. A reasonable summer would have been the avoidance of an embargo which was not impossible as mentioned above, a change of manager prior to the end of last season, selling Armstrong by now, giving the new manager a small fraction of that amount to sign a replacement, and then allowing him to sign 2-4 players on free transfers at a fraction of the wage budget of the outgoing players. Just as a random question, why did we spend over half a million on Pickering in January? Surely that was ill advised with a potential embargo, and is not consistent with the cut backs? Not a reflection on the individual, but it was money that we clearly didnt have. As it is, we are seemingly only shopping in the market of begging big clubs for untested kids, so it is impossible to get excited about that. It is going to be a long season. Also, Coyle did not have a decent budget, he was and is an appalling manager who puts no importance on coaching, shape or nutrition as we all know. But lets not recreate history.

I don't doubt that Mowbray is the protagonist for the squad being in the state that it is, which is a big reason why I want him out. I just think that it is only fair to acknowledge the difficulties that he has had to face this summer, that any manager would have found problematic. I feel like doing so makes me feel like I am defending Mowbray still being our manager, I certainly am not and still am very sure that he needs to be removed. Venkys have been and always will be the root cause. They seem to have managed without trying to ensure throughout their reign really that there is always someone closer to home that can take the blame whilst they are seen as almost an innocent party (not by yourself specifically to clarify) pumping money in yet are being let down. I could not put it any better than your last sentence though. "Funding the club" is a bit disingenuous, our losses are self inflicted because of their incompetence and negligence, whereas funding the club implies that they are chucking in money out of a desire to be successful, which is blatantly untrue. We failed to initially meet FFP requirements, hence the embargo. We can all list huge lists of kids, but too many together will lead to poor results/inconsistency due to a lack of experience. I presume that we will be paying something (wages and/or a fee) for kids, if it came to it, I would have preferred 2 or 3 freebies with experience over 4 or 5 loanees without experience, although even if that was an option, the embargo would have damaged such a plan. This is not the first time that this sort of summer has happened, it is at least the third under their reign, whereby funding is just totally stopped in a non constructive manner. The first time led to a massive backwards step and slide down the league with a couple of managers as collateral damage, the second time it ended in relegation and I fear that the third time will also end in relegation. Trybull is dog shit, why loan a player, then sign him again after he has proven himself not to be good enough? Mowbray said that the players we are waiting for are young kids who are playing in pre season whilst players who played internationally over the summer are on holiday. So they will be players with minimal first team experience, the opposite of what we need.

I agree, I have been a regular critic of the squad and how it has been assembled over the last few years, and I feel like Mowbray should have long since gone. We should be in a better position than we are entering this summer of turbulence. That being said, it is only fair to at least acknowledge that this summer in isolation is an unnecessarily difficult one based on factors above his head, such as the embargo and the total unwillingness to give the manger even a small % of savings made in the budget to remain competitive. We didn't spend much last season, with only Kaminski and Pears costing fees totalling less than a million. Over his tenure, he has had reasonable resources, but more importantly plenty of time. He should have done better, he should have built better, and most importantly last season, we noticeably regressed. I dont really have any sympathy because if the owners gave a shit and indeed had the competence to avoid these restraints, ie by abiding by sustainability regulations to avoid an unnecessary embargo, and by encouraging savings by offering at least a proportion of funds raised through fees and wage savings to keep the squad competitive, then Mowbray wouldn't be in a job, he only is because of Venkys. But I can still acknowledge those difficulties. I feel like because everyone is in agreement about Mowbray needing to go, that he is also being blamed for things without any willingness by people to appreciate specific limitations that he has specific to this summer. The embargo was an issue, as is having to rely on kids on loan despite clearing so much of the wage bill.

I have repeatedly said that Mowbray should have been sacked a while ago, is out of his depth and have criticised the squad that he has assembled. I hardly think that I have a place in the Tony Mowbray fan club. Fact of the matter is that being subject to a transfer embargo for much of the summer, being limited to only borrowing kids on loan deals when a considerable chunk of the wage bill has been cleared at the expiry of the contracts of various experienced players, and to not be guaranteed even a small proportion of any sale proceeds that Armstrong will bring in would handicap any manager, not just Mowbray. Venkys have created the prolonged crisis ever since they bought us. The fact that Mowbray is still here is again on Venkys, its not just a mere oversight.

To be fair, he did tend to play slightly ahead of the holding midfielder last season but he never seemed to get fully up to match fitness. But I agree that positional discipline isnt his strong suit hence why I don't think he suits being the most defensive midfielder. With such a young squad, you would think that we would utilise the energy and athleticism in the team and try to really press.

It is difficult to suggest that it worked fully against Leeds I would say, we never offered much of an attacking threat, Leeds clearly didnt play to their full potential and all that it really allowed us to do especially in the second half is to defend in numbers. I don't like the idea of our manager again over complicating things and repeatedly changing formations, and I also dont think that the formation suits us, especially as none of our centre backs are ball playing ones. I also do not understand your insistence on Buckley playing ahead of Rothwell "every week." Neither fully convince to the point that they guarantee their selection.

Venkys have always been the problem with any underperforming manager being merely a symptom, and that is evident this summer. Not only an embargo that has massively hindered the manager, but seemingly no scope to try and bring what we need in, even at a fraction of the cost of the outgoings. Our remaining squad is very young and needs some leadership, so the manager being restricted to only be able to bring in kids on loan will only compound that issue. It feels like the summer when Coyle was in charge and also Bowyer's last summer, one of which ended in relegation and the other ended in the stripping of all our key assets. Its not a constructive way to run a football club. So do you agree that we are in need of experience and that a loaning kids only policy will likely cause huge issues? Reach is a player that I believe you recommended earlier in the summer so I was surprised to see you suggest that he wouldn't have improved us the other day. I was rather unconvinced, he does have a screamer in his locker and he is technically decent but he is very inconsistent and there are also huge questions about his application, coming under fire for his attitude in a relegation fight last season which would be a huge red flag ahead of our battle this season, would he have the character? As it is, standards are so low that he would have probably been an important signing for us and would certainly get into our team. I get the need to raise money, for example to cut the wage bill of which a huge chunk has been cleared, but at least allow a small proportion of that saving to be reinvested into bringing in senior faces, on free transfers if necessary. Likewise, no guarantee of any funds to replace Armstrong, even if you say if you sell him, you can have 2/3/4m for a replacement and keep the rest, surely thats the way to go. The most galling thing is that almost everyone was in agreement that releasing the likes of Holtby and Evans was the correct thing to do. As it is, they would possibly both start next week if they were still here. I also am repulsed every time I see people still desperate to defend Venkys, the losses they "fund" are self inflicted.

Specifically the age, of course not. But our squad lacks leadership, character and experience. Our squad was already young and most of the remaining experience is seemingly about to be replaced by kids with presumably little if any senior experience. When a bad run comes around, where are the characters to look to to drag us out? I also dont think we have that much quality but I was specifically pointing out how young our squad will be. I know its the owners fault. Whilst its hard to be too sympathetic to a manager who under normal circumstances would have long since been sacked, and one who has left us with a very poor squad. It is the owners that I have consistently criticised this summer, I can accept trying to make a profit in the transfer market, but we have lost a big chunk of the wage budget and are about to lose Armstrong and you have to allow at least a small proportion of that budget to be reinvested, otherwise it will end in inevitable relegation, chuck in an unnecessary embargo and it looks grim. The same source that suggested that Reach would join and that Rothwell would leave this week?

We are going into the season with only 2 players aged 30 and over, neither of whom seemingly can stay fit, especially Ayala who seems unwilling to play under any pain whatsoever. We seem destined only to loan more kids. When we inevitably hit poor runs of form as all teams do, where is the leadership and experience to get us through it? No character, no backbone, trouble ahead.

No I bought the stream and watched from home.

Absolutely dismal for an hour, the 5 at the back rubbish needs to stop, none of our centre backs are good on the ball for a start, we had absolutely no threat and were constantly on the back foot. Buckley, Rothwell and Gallagher had a big impact and gave us a spark that was totally absent, Brereton was really poor for an hour but his main aim has to be to score more goals so 2 goals is very encouraging, the second was a very good technical finish which is usually not his strong suit. The main intrigue comes from players that we know less about or those yet to guarantee a first team spot. Armstrong was in third or fourth gear and Travis was off the pace but we know that they are good enough, Kaminski and Lenihan likewise. Pickering was much more encouraging today with some good passes but he wasnt overly tested defensively. Davenport again was fairly ineffective and is not very good on the ball although he puts himself about, and their left winger was a constant threat and tore Magloire apart really, him and Carter looked a little shaky, possibly not helped by the stupid formation. Dolan is too over elaborate at times with needless stepovers.

Domestic free agents cannot agree contracts with us until June, when we was in an embargo and when the better ones went elsewhere when we could not finalise deals. And Mowbray could not be expected to predict an embargo. That is on Venkys. Mowbray needs to go but people are not judging this individual situation rationally by overlooking the impact of the embargo.

I just think that as Rovers fans, it is easy to perhaps look at the situation whereby we follow every game and are emotionally involved and obviously more clued up as to the direction that we feel the club is in. A random player who has no affiliation to us would I suspect view us and a clutch of other teams around us in similar esteem, all a much of a muchness. They would probably be ignorant to slumps or peaks in form that we may have had, the main driver between any 2 clubs would be money, and beyond that, more trivial matters, things like being played in specific positions, maybe knowing players/the manager from previously, location etc. And whatever club they choose, the usual sound bites will come out, they have a good feeling, the club is ambitious and going places, I want to play for the manager, its a big club, we are going in the right direction etc. An example would be Bristol City. I remember that their form was absolutely awful after appointing Pearson. Just checked and they lost 7 (and drew 2) of their last 9, and lost 15 of their last 21, winning only 3. I am unsure if you was aware of that, the average player may not be aware of quite how bad they were under a new manager, and they finished 19th, do you think that players would join Huddersfield over both us and Bristol City, they finished 20th but rather than a prolonged poor run, they were just consistently worse? I think it is only fair to at least accept that the embargo in particular has made Mowbray's life harder. Whether he could have been more proactive post the embargo, perhaps yes, but there was a massive disadvantage in the first place in that we couldnt confirm deals past the point to which many contracts expired and indeed those players had got fixed up elsewhere. I also don't think that he is "toxic" or even that he doesn't want to be here, I think he does, I just think that he shouldnt be, and thats on the owners. I do think we will be in trouble which is more generalised than a specific run of form but that is for a number of reasons, one being the financial restrictions to the point where we could sell our best player for a big fee and not spend a penny, hence why we cannot even compete for the sorts of players that I touched on in the first 2 paragraphs. The manager is also a reason, but if Rovers offered a player 5k more than anyone else in the league, we would almost certainly get them, Mowbray or no Mowbray. We do definitely both agree on the main issue, the whole thing certainly is rotten, and its so shit to watch it unfold like this.

Of course he has had plenty of time since but no blame is being put to Venkys for allowing us to slide into another embargo in the first place. He does have excuses this summer, the embargo, the lack of guarantee that we would get any money to replace Armstrong and the extent to which the taps have been turned off all would have impacted any manager. His blame lies for what has happened prior to this summer and the current state of the squad and he shouldnt be here, I get that but it doesnt mean that he deserves the brunt of the blame for a summer of nothingness caused by those in India. I've repeatedly stated that Mowbray should go and the current squad state is down to him. But this summer, much of what has happened is not his fault, or will have massively impeded his job to improve the squad. If you genuinely think that people are specifically avoiding us and Mowbray because of the "2 wins in 17 run" then fair enough, I personally dont think that is the case at all. We have been a mid table Championship club for 3 seasons, one that we follow intently from the inside, potential signings external to that wont avoid us based on a random spell of form. The worst team in England is not mid way up the second tier. The free agent market is definitely a key one especially in these covid times and an especially congested one with so many teams needing to use it and little money across the league. I think because Mowbray shouldnt be in the job, which I agree with, the difficulties of working whilst literally unable to sign players for much of the summer are just being ignored. Many free agents that may have appealed will have already gone elsewhere (Vrancic, Woods, James, Marcondes, Pearson etc) by the time that we came out of it, or were probably already deep in discussions, ie Mpanzu who chose to stay at Luton.

The main thing that will drive most people like anyone in life is going to be money. If we offered more money than another mid table club, a selective run of form last season wont swing the decision. But there is no way that a player would say, they won 2 in 17 at one point last season, I better had go elsewhere. Equally, they could look at a few thrashings that we gave out or isolated runs of 3 and 4 wins, but again form levels out and we finished 15th, which is what they will see. I dont doubt that Mowbray shouldnt be in the job, and has had loads of time, and competitive resources. But not for the first time, our summer business has been massively impacted by Venkys. By all means try and make a profit with sales v purchases, but not to the point when it isnt competitive, and also the embargo was a huge hindrance.

His wages are speculative, I very much doubt in these times that anyone has come close to equalling his wages. He will be a squad player at West Brom.