To be fair, I think the main reason for that is that when we do business, there is little in the way of public demand for gossip on freebies and loanees joining a mid table Championship club.

I don't see what relevance that has, but no I am not. I understand that the managerial situation is easier to fix, but the fact that the owners are not going anywhere does not make it necessary to put my head into the sand and state that "our current plight is purely down to the manager." I still will criticise them when appropriate, rather than deflect the blame elsewhere. I get that they are more than anything or anyone else the constant in our situation/demise, but you could equally argue that whilst employing a manager to progress us is a fixable task even with Venkys here, it is something that has continued to elude them throughout their time here. They should have sacked Mowbray long ago, it is under no circumstances a lack of fortune on their behalf as you suggested. They always back the wrong horse and then even when they do, they keep backing that horse out of stubborness/disinterest for far too long. Mowbray is merely a rather blatant symptom, the disease is in India.

They are the ones who need to be interested enough to judge the managers performance and remove him when he is not performing or progressing, which has been the case for a while now. How can you possibly consider it unfortunate on the owners behalf? They always back the wrong horse, that isn't a lack of fortune, it is gross incompetence. To trust a manager with excessive time again isnt something to be credited for, it is poor ownership. And the embargo is not Mowbrays fault, it is incompetence above his head. The regression on the pitch is his fault, and it is down to those bastards over in Pune to stop it and remove him.

My defence was more to the initial point that you made that you are "actually of the belief that our current plight is purely down to the manager. The owners backed him and gave him time, he spoke of "journeys", yet here we are with 11 players gone, no clear direction on our style of play and no signings in. They backed another clown, unfortunately." Venkys are the common denominator, and I felt like the above comment made them seem somewhat unfortunate. Recruitment has always been at a snails pace every summer under Venkys ownership, all but in the last 2 summers, they insist on the manager flying over a week after the season has ended, cup in hand, unaware of how much they will have to spend, making planning for the season after very difficult even if our fate (mediocrity) is secured with weeks to spare. This summer has seen a second transfer embargo, no matter how you look at it, that is not the fault of the manager but down to negligence and incompetence above his head. That could have caused better free agents to be snapped up with us unable to offer any security over a potential contract. I did agree that we have had 3 weeks since to get his arse into gear since, so I don't excuse that, but the main reason this summer has to be the embargo. I am also not convinced that interviewing the head of recruitment is Mowbrays specific responsibility, he undoubtedly may play a part, but the search has been for a long time and he hasnt been on holiday during that time, plus we was told that targets had been identified prior to Harveys departure. Mowbray does have plenty of deserved criticism for his recruitment, many poor signings and/or signings that are totally odds with his flawed style of play. And I do think he should have really got someone in by now, but I feel that it is only right to put the blame mainly at Venkys door for a second embargo in 5 or 6 years.

Apologies, I forgot to put the link on my initial post. https://www.rovers.co.uk/fans/fans-forum

The fans forum latest minutes are now on the website. I do find it strange that they don't even warrant an article on the site, they are just added but it is little wonder when the questions are so tame. - We are not in a transfer embargo, no clarity on whether we was at any point. - "Plans will be put in place" a very vague answer to questions about the current absence of communication aside from emails and on the website. - The transfer market is dead apparently. According to transfermarkt, there have been 89 transfers so far this summer in our division, once you exclude returning loanees. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/transfers/wettbewerb/GB2/plus/?saison_id=2021&s_w=s&leihe=3&intern=0

Agreed. I look at Brereton and Gallagher ie both of our other most senior (and that is saying something) attackers and neither is a natural goalscorer likely to get into double figures very often, that can be worked around if they accompany a prolific striker but take Armstrong out of the equation, and then so much reliance is on them 2, and beyond that, we only have promise without much real evidence of further goal threat, players like Chapman, Dolan, Butterworth and Rankin Costello. We need to replace Elliott with someone already, if Armstrong goes we will need a new striker and then at least another player beyond that, perhaps a goal scoring wide man to help to make up that worrying deficit. I don't doubt that the manager is not fit to continue and I share many of the same issues with him, I don't doubt him as a person but tactically he is trying to build based on massively flawed principles, his recruitment is at best hit and miss etc, ultimately results show regression. But I don't see how you can possibly say that the literal impossibility of being able to register players up until recently will not have affected him, he did say that targets went elsewhere and it makes sense if other clubs could offer security in the form of a contract from that moment that we simply couldn't offer. It is undoubtedly a genuine problem that he shouldn't have had to deal with but did. Of course, we have been out of an embargo for a few weeks now and still haven't signed anyone, so that is on him. They haven't "ended up with clowns running the show," they have yet again hired clowns to run the show, it is on them. They cover the losses that are unnecessarily massively increased based on their own incompetence. They shouldn't need to be attached to the town or the club, if they want to view it as purely a business and indeed the nonsense about the club being "their baby" that they have spouted in the past was indeed as expected not genuine, then they should still try to run that major business as efficiently and as effectively as they possibly can. We do always leave it late, again that is a common theme beyond just Mowbray's tenure, they usually dally around waiting for the manager to fly to India after the season and thus do not know the budget until weeks after the season has ended. We have had 2 transfer embargos under their tenure, and they seem to never be far away from turning off the taps suddenly and without warning. I dont think that at the moment, we should be waiting on the Armstrong funds with such reliance. Many teams we are competing with are dealing solely in free transfers and loanees, thats fine, the key is to be proactive and get the best ones before other teams do. The embargo robbed us of the ability to do that, and even now, Mowbray and whoever else is negotiating have seemingly continued that precedent of incompetence in the weeks that have followed. If Armstrong goes, we should have a list of players ready to go, as it is I am sure that it will be a panic loan. I do think that Armstrong being our only sellable asset is again a bad reflection on Mowbray's trading, bad luck on Dack aside. If you put Gallagher, Brereton or indeed any of the cheaper purchases that he has made in his time here, Rothwell, Chapman, Davenport etc, I don't think we would raise much money at all. For me, McBride should not be considered or indeed we certainly shouldn't demand or expect him to be a member of the squad to be depended upon, not yet, not until he has proven it. My choice would be for him to get some game time in League 1 or 2, but even if he sticks around, I am not saying that we shouldn't give him chances if and when appropriate, but any impact should be considered a bonus rather than a given.

Totally agree. Once Armstrong leaves, we have to buy a replacement, of course I am not expecting one for an equal fee. Loans do have their uses, signing a couple of loans that are better than what we have can be a very effective way of improving the quality of our team. But replacing our sole asset would need to be done by a permanent signing. 100%. The average age of our team is far too young, and I fear will be lessened further by a handful of kids on loan. There seems to be an unhealthy dependency on a clutch of essentially unproven young players all breaking through together this season, we are crying out for experience. In the past I have seen calls for the new Craig Short, the new Mark Hughes etc, veterans at the end of their career, for me it is probably a bit extreme to get players in of that age, but we definitely need more experience, maybe late 20s or even early 30s.

Your words were that "Im actually of the belief that our current plight is purely down to the manager." A manager should only continue be given time if that manager is showing signs of progression and improvement, something which stopped quite a while ago, so I would disagree that in this instance, it was even in theory the correct thing to do. Mowbray has been given plenty of time and reasonable resources, although sometimes the latter is slightly exaggerated, the key reason why it is obvious that his time has been up was the obvious and significant regression last season compared to the previous one. The play offs during the last 3 years I think would have been, whilst feasible, an overachievement. That is what we need, a quality manager utilising comparatively limited resources to the max and getting more from the team than the sum of its parts. The bug bear for me has been that we haven't ever been close, and the key is that we are getting further away rather than closer. This summer has a feeling of deja vu to it, one of which spans well before Mowbray's appointment. The embargo was totally unnecessary and the result of incompetence above his head, something which happened before when Bowyer was manager and we spent that summer losing key assets and scrambling around beyond the bottom of the barrel to fill spaces in the squad, who can forget Nathan Delfoeunso, Danny Guthrie and Fode Koita. Mowbray will have undoubtedly been hindered by the embargo and the radio silence from Pune, I have no doubt that he wanted to get players in by now and he has struggled to do so at least partially if not predominantly because of people above his head. Mind you, I don't have any sympathy for him in that if the owners were interested and competent, then he wouldnt be here.

I personally wouldn't go for Obafemi for similar reasons ie he is unproven but we need a senior replacement for when Armstrong goes, we cannot expect a kid who has never played senior football to suddenly come in. His best bet would be a loan spell. We cannot avoid signings for fear of blocking unproven kids, by all means give them chances where appropriate but as well as having that senior experience. If they are pushing enough they will/should get game time regardless.

No way is it purely down to the manager. The embargo for example was unavoidable incompetence above his head. We have also seen this time and time again in summers, everything is so slow because of them, our transfer business is always slow, they usually insist on the manager coming over to beg pre-covid, the embargo is a second one within their ownership, they dont work in a logical way. Mowbray needs sacking but Venkys are the ones to blame, that should never be forgotten and how anyone defends them, I have no idea.

28 goals is right up with the very best tallies at this level to be fair but I don't see even without Elliott why he wouldn't score plenty of goals still, he scored plenty in the second half of the season before without Elliott once he was moved central and I don't foresee the goals drying up, I think he is a goalscorer who will score at this level regardless. That being said, letting him go on a free would be crazy, unfortunately he would be stupid to sign a new deal so we need to sell him as soon as possible. Some absolutely crazy shouts there, Alioski and Bruma are crazily unrealistic, as are Wilshire and Carroll who like Wickham spend 90% of their time on the injury table. From the rest, Stiepermann I suspect may well have better offers so may himself be unrealistic but he played an important role in the first promotion that Norwich achieved in his time there, a really tall and unorthodox attacking midfielder but one who proved very effective in behind Pukki. Moritz Leitner is a deeper lying central midfielder who has also been released by Norwich and I would probably take both if they were realistic. Ribeiro I think is going back to play in Portugal and Reach has been covered but seems to be a target that we have allowed to slip away.

The point about him keeping us up is a valid one, I can't see us surviving really without him, or it will at least be a huge struggle and a dog fight with a team full of kids. But would you loan a player of Armstrongs ability for 15m? As good as he is, surely that isnt economically viable.

I am not convinced about Reach to be honest, there are pros and cons, he does have ability, he can chip in with goals, and he is of a good age to bring some experience, although he is very inconsistent and his attitude especially in a relegation season (ducking out of challenges) really irked Wednesday fans from what I have seen, so perhaps not necessarily what we need ahead of our own battle. Seems like typical dallying will see him go elsewhere though. This is far from the first time that everything from the owners seems to have totally ground to a halt. I can understand working on a small budget or even selling key players, reinvesting some of the proceeds and even keeping some of that amount to offset losses, working to a strategy and proactively. This current shambles, its unforgivable. The result yesterday like al friendlies is fairly immaterial. The team that we put out very much wasn't, it was our strongest possible team with zero senior alternatives. The defence is continuously creaky with Ayala very much the elephant in the room, the midfield 3 would have had any of the 23 other Championship managers licking its lips at how soft and ineffective it is, and our goal threat was totally focused on one (almost certainly soon to depart) player. All the subs are kids. And then you look at the players that we are without, would they make a difference? Rankin Costello and Dolan themselves are kids yet to fully establish themselves. Wharton had a few good games, wont be fit any time soon and himself is not fully established. Neither Brereton or Gallagher have themselves fully convinced, plus the former in particular is very much in the earlier stages of his career. Dack is obviously a write off sadly for the foreseeable, so it just leaves Johnson who would provide experience and character but isn't up to it from a footballing perspective anymore, and Travis, I hope his injury isnt serious, radio silence on that, but again you are looking at a 23 year old to lead. Presumably the most likely type of signing will be young kids, even if they are improvements on what we have like Elliott and Harwood Bellis were, its not only risky but the landscape of our squad has changed, we are dying for know how and experience. Plus any quality frees have surely been snapped up, players like Mowatt and Marcondes were unrealistic, but others such as Vrancic, Woods, Matty James, they have been snapped up now.

There should be no reason or excuse even surrounding Armstrong in regards to freeing up funds for other positions, assuming that it is accepted that those signings need to be free transfers and loanees. We have cut a huge chunk from the wage bill, with senior players such as Holtby, Mulgrew, Evans, Bennett, Downing and Bell all released, as well as Douglas leaving. Even if we brought in 2 or 3 freebies and 2 or 3 loanees we could do so at a fraction of the amount that we have saved. The Armstrong deal could then be independent to that, we could have a list of replacements should he leave with the profit surplus helping the costs, a chunk ideally saved for the future but ensuring that the whole summer window is not waiting for that one sale as otherwise we are in an increibly weak position. Sadly we arent run like an efficient club, hence the unnecessary embargo, random turning off of the taps, incompetent manager and idiotic CEO all still very much present. I think that the Armstrong sale will either go until the last week of the window, leaving no chance for a replacement with people lapping up how the likes of Brereton, Gallagher and the kids can fill the void, or indeed we keep him and let him go for free out of stubbornness/stupidity.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/15683242/watford-adam-armstrong-blackburn-premier-league/amp/?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=sunfootballtwitter&utm_source=Twitter&__twitter_impression=true Same story as last week. The Armstrong saga could do with concluding sooner rather than later but its no excuse not to use the free agent market in particular. This squad without Armstrong is a relegation one quite possibly. As if a 30k a week conribution for Gray is realistic.

A lot of assumptions have been made, players either to return from injury, those who already have, returning loanees, emerging kids or players who can be moved from different positions, of players being of the required quality. Brereton, Gallagher, Chapman, Rankin Costello, Dolan, Chapman, Butterworth, McBride, Vale, I keep hearing that we have plenty of options there, same as in midfield to a lesser extent with Buckley and Davenport. Of all the players mentioned, how many are fully established and proven? So many ifs, buts and maybes, I don't even agree with the idea that we need players in for depth, our first team isn't particularly great.

It would be true to suggest that the likes of Holtby, Evans and Downing all were not players who would have given us value for money and therefore it was correct to let them all go. That being said, especially the first 2 would have walked into that side today ahead of the likes of Davenport and Buckley based on current ability. People are seemingly expecting breakthrough seasons from both based solely on their age rather than any justified signs in the first team. Same with Butterworth in attack, he needs loaning out really.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2021/july/Minutes-in-the-tank/ “We know we’re a bit short due to injuries at the moment." Well, that and not replacing any of a full team of outgoings.

I presume that in Mowbrays absence, that there will ne no questions aimed at Venus in regards to how urgent they see the fact that we barely have any senior players?

Just watching QPR who have been very proactive in the transfer market and seem to be tipped as a dark horse this season, they are absolutely battering an under strength United side.

Stefan Johansen currently being unveiled to the QPR fans.

The subs bench named for a game 2 weeks before the start of the season is frightening. The starting 11 contains 3 or 4 who are yet to establish themselves also. Mowbray needing to isolate will presumably ensure that it is difficult to get anyone in before Swansea, with a nice excuse to go with it.

It is always a sign of an absence of a constructive response when a poster implies that someone is merely being negative, even if the point put before them is something that has happened time and time again in the last 10 years. Why would anyones default response still be to give the owners or even Waggott or Mowbray the benefit of the doubt?!

As you say, not many cash transfers anymore, teams seem to be more aggressive in letting players go on frees and ultimately the free agent market is possibly the most important of all at the moment. It requires proactivity to master.