roversfan99

Im not too sure that social media reactions are relevant at all to be honest. The only way that any genuine pressure/dismay can be portrayed is at games and with matches behind closed doors that is not a thing at the moment, and even if it was, I doubt that there wouls be much.

Ultimately the decision rests with negligent owners and a CEO is between who is a pal of Mowbray from a previous club, so I suspect that coming to a strategic decision that we are stagnating or not meeting expectations is quite simply not going to happen.

I think there are 4 of the front 6 that definitely are in our best side, and the only formation that fits them all in their best position is 4-2-3-1, Armstrongs goal tally since playing up front is unquestionable, Dack has consistently produced in a Rovers shirt as a number 10, Elliott has been fantastic coming in from the right (yet ineffective when Mowbrays typical meddling has moved Elliott into central midfield or as a false 9) and Travis is a beacon of consistency in the central. As far as im concerned, them 4 are on another level to Johnson, Brereton, Rothwell, Holtby, Trybull, Gallagher and an ageing Downing in regards to consistency and effectiveness. As far as I am concerned, the balance of the team would be crucial in filling those spare spaces in CM and wide left.

The 4-3-3 certainly has not gained a points yield anywhere near high enough to warrant it our unquestionable formation, there are more questions than answers.

8 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

The season hasnt finish has it? 

Let's see where we finish at the end of the season and review then. 

I take from your comments you want a change of manager? Any manager out there you would like? 

Whilst I appreciate that you dont want the manager out at the moment, does it worry you at all that in spite of the obvious personnel improvements (mainly Kaminski and Elliott) and the new style (death by a thousand passes) that we are picking up points at a rate that is unfavourable even compared to last seasons mediocrity, in which there was a public admittance that we had failed on our target? Or is there no gauge of progress in your mind until the season is over?

What are the parameters for you in regards to Mowbrays position come the summer? Would only promotion suffice? Would a top 6 finish regardless of what happens after that suffice? Would we have to only finish higher than 11th for you to be content?

I dont see the need to go from one extreme to another and start playing the percentages looking for long balls. Armstrong is a prolific striker, Elliott is a stand out talent in this league as is Dack (coupled with a very healthy goal and assist tally) now he is back, none of them 3 suit us playing the percentages, none of our players do, the closest would be Gallagher who is not very good in general and certainly isnt suitable as a target man.

I just look at certain aspects of our game whereby we are lacking in ways that reflect badly on the manager. We still concede far too many goals, we have a solitary clean sheet in 10 or 11 games and quite simply having to score at least 2 goals a game to win is creating a very difficult mountain to climb, that is something that Mowbray has failed to fix repeatedly during his time here. I dont think that the midfield is as productive as it could be, as much as we often dominate possession it in no way means that we are in control of games, we dont move the ball quickly enough which counteracts the desire to dominate possession, there is usually a lack of penetration and individually, Holtby is a passenger in almost every game and despite his brilliant goal today Rothwell isnt nearly productive enough either. From set pieces we are particularly poor too, we have attacking players in the 3 I mentioned who will score goals but you need to supplement that from set pieces but our attempts are often poorly executed, Mowbray said the other week that he leaves it to his staff but I dont understand why he hasnt stepped in.

.

43 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Desperate to discredit him? Jesus man, relax, you're losing the run of yourself in an attempt to defend any criticism

Just like having more possession doesn't win you anything, neither does having the top scorer if he is for himself too much. Another striker could bring more goals out of others. There have been numerous examples where Armstrong could have played someone in a better position in.  I don't think Dack will shy away from telling him that he needs to pass if he continues doing what he has been doing for a few games now. It all started with that game against Bristol city where he took on more pointless shots that I can remember, with teammates in better positions. A game we ultimately lost and the defence basically got all the flak for off some. It's clear to see though I'm not the only one who notices this. Armstrong is a funny one, there is has just always been something about his body language on the field too. Ever since League 1. I would say sulky. If he's scoring great, but I do standby the observation his goals have been mostly from penalties and against 3 teams we steamrolled. Now hopefully he makes me eat my words and starts sticking in worldies every week again like he has done in bursts in the past. Can he do that playing centre forward? Doesn't look like he gets the space.  

How many games would you give him without a goal before you would be happy to see someone else given a go there? 

Ive been consistent in saying that his performances recently have not been of the very high standard hes set himself. The Bristol City one was probably the worst, the defeat wasnt solely down to him and suggestions that it has damaged morale, that he was playing up to the cameras etc were a total overeaction but of course we have suffered because our prolific goalscorer is not on top form. But as far as im concerned, his performance level defined by his goal output this season and this year does indeed give him a little more scope for patience because he has been so good for us. By all means criticise his recent form but talk of dropping him, selling him while we can, of him being easily replacable, conspiracy theories about why he is taking so many shots (he is a striker so a level of selfishness is natural) are all unnecessary.

Armstrongs whole demeanour changed when he moved from playing out wide to being central, he has been a different player.

Regarding your last question, the fact that the only alternative is Sam Gallagher, I would probably be especially patient with someone who keeps scoring so many goals that he could return to scoring ways. That being said, for a player who has a longest goal drought of 3 games in 2020, it goes against reasonable evidence that he will go on a massive run without a goal and of course if the goals stopped then its different.

5 minutes ago, Stuart said:

It’s a fallacy.

First, unless he scores he doesn’t contribute - in fact he takes something away. Rhodes was far more clinical and was slated on a weekly basis.

Second, yes, we need another player who scored goals regularly. Whether a terrible strike rate or not. At the minute one player is hogging the chances. Gallagher and Brereton aren’t the answer and we could have brought in an experienced Championship goalscorer to partner him, and had change!

Third, it isn’t just about the player, it’s the system. Armstrong wasn’t nearly as prolific when Dack was in the team. Similarly, if Armstrong left, another player would take his place and be the leading scorer.

We do however need a system which regularly brings other players into goalscoring positions. I thought we had someone in Dolan but it seems Mowbray doesn’t trust him. At the moment of teams stop Arma they stop Rovers. But for a moment of unscripted brilliance we would have lost 1-0. I honestly couldn’t see where a goal was coming from.

Rhodes' goal record was brilliantly consistent over numerous years but in 2020 since he moved centrally Armstrong has scored goals more regularly and at a faster rate even than Rhodes is. The key is to maintain it. I would potentially say that with his pace, and with his ability to score from range, Armstrong has a wider skillset. I always defended Rhodes and always will because hes a goalscorer. Its the same with Armstrong since he moved centrally, scoring goals at such a rate for me gains goalscorers more patience during a rare and/or belated dry patch which all strikers go through, if they score goals at a rate of

Another player will at some stage take Armstrongs role in the team, I would be pleasantly surprised if he scored to the same extent because Armstrong has scored more than all but one. I have always felt in recent years that goalscoring has become an underappreciated skill, especially when a striker sets such a high standard as Rhodes did which meant that some people took the goals for granted and looked for flaws especially physically, he wasnt fast, strong etc but his main skill was in his brain which is the case with all goalscorers. Selfishness is a trait within all goalscorers.

I would play Dack as a 10 behind Armstrong once the former is fully fit. Not only would that couple 2 goalscorers but it would also allow Dack to slip Armstrong through on goal.

12 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

There are other leagues you know, not just this one. 

He's not getting the space to run into, so something has changed. Plus he has clearly gotten greedier. He has the goals, can't take that away from him, but if he had 9, I'm sure people would be quicker to point out the issues. Now it seems some get offended if the GOALden boy is questioned. I'm not referring to you there by the way. I know you're open minded. 

I think a few are even starting to sound like Mowbray with your inability to see when something isn't working and going on regardless. 

Hopefully having Dack and Brereton with him will get him back amongst the goals. 

But thats the thing. He doesnt have  9 goals, he has 15. If he had scored 9, which would be not a bad tally, but people would naturally question his contribution a lot more than if he is the second top scorer. I dont understand why you think that is illogical.

He has always been greedy, goalscorers often are. Against Bristol City he was particularly poot but it was one game so to start implying that it has impacted on morale or making out as if that game was normal for Armstrong is totally unfair.

Hes in poor form in 6 games with only 1 goal and I havent seen anyone denying that but you are definitely underappreciating the number of goals hes scored and seem desperate to discredit him. It would be incredibly difficult to replace a striker scoring goals at the rate that he is.

It would be a total myth to suggest that teams only in recent weeks have tried to remove the space in behind for Armstrong to run onto, and it does him a disservice to suggest that the only goals he can score are from running in behind.

Goalscoring has become an underappreciated aspect of being a striker.

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I said I would take 17 million. I didn't say he's the problem. Teams have figured us out. He's not doing enough for me in the last 5-6 games..some of which he actively hindered the team with his greediness. 

So ok 3 of 15 penalties, then 6 against Wycombe, Derby and Coventry. So that's 9 out of 15. Not doing it enough when it really matters. Well I would also add ,forget about the end of last season, pressure was off then. That seems to suit him I suppose. 

I just don't think he is bullet proof in centre forward and that we can't even raise the suggestion that he shouldn't start there. He's struggles to get the better of the centre halves when they sit deep. Early on clubs foolishly played a high line against him. Nobody is doing that anymore and it's killing him. 

Of course, we dont know how 17 million would filter back, but don't tell me a manager couldn't get a better championship striker for that much. All hypothetical of course. 

I dont see how he cannot be bullet proof as centre forward. The only other one we have is Sam Gallagher.

Ive acknowledged the dry spell hes had in front of goal but that came on the back of a hot streak and within a season in which he is the second top scorer and in a year in which he is the top scorer in the league. Its a little premature to make out as if he is anything other than indispensable or that he has been "figured out."

As far as im concerned, the improvement on the 2nd top scorer in the league would be having the very top scorer.

4 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

Maybe not so much on here, but Twitter is full of it. Local journos seem to like that particular narrative.

I find as well that a lot of the snobbery is indirect in criticising the way that our opposition play. Stoke received plenty of criticism regarding how they played but they controlled the game in spite of having little possession and we failed to carve out any chances of note. Sheffield Wednesday have again received plenty of criticism but for me its based on an assumption that possession automatically means entertainment.

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Missing the issue. He is the focal point, so it's logical he has more goals. He hadn't done it againt top teams and I would say his play when he's at his worst hinders the team and kills momentum 

Even look at today, watch the highlights. He has a decent shot that hits the post, comes back and he gets it again. Now look at where Dack is when Armstrong shoots weakly at the keeper for the he many times in 5-6 games? Clearly Dack was the pass and it's a mild example of when Armstrong has done this. 

I dont need to watch the highlights, I watched the full game and I havent doubted that in recent weeks, perhaps due to desperation/frustration that he has made incorrect decisions more often than usual. His goal tally however shows that more often than not over the course of the last year that he HAS chosen the right option. The high quantity of shots is as far as im concerned something I am prepared to accept with a striker when he is scoring the number of goals that Armstrong has. He is a massive part of our attacking armoury and to take him out of our team would massively reduce our goal threat. He played the Swansea game where he couldnt run and then missed the following game v Boro and we failed to score in both games, he came back v QPR and got the 2 goals that got us to win. Was I surprised? No.

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

We clearly need a target man because we are far too predictable. Teams know we won't get it in the box and if we do, we will typically lose the aerial battle.

Armstrong has been very lucky. His goals to shots ratio shows how many chances he needs to score. Ya, he has goals, against teams we hammered mostly and penalties. Not doing enough for me after that. We can do better for a figure like 17 million. Maybe he would be better in a front 2. Doesn't lead the line well enough at all for me. You can talk about his goals all you like, I know what I see. As I mentioned , the vast majority of those goals were penalties and in 3 games where we flat track bullied the opposition. 

Come back to me if Armstrong does it consistently for 1 whole season, at least. 

I cant get my head round a striker scoring 27 goals in 1 year being described as "very lucky." 3 of his 15 this season were penalties. He has consistently scored goals (I think more than any other Championship player in 2020) and its a massive disservice to imply that he needs changing/selling, or just not appreciating how good it is to have a striker to be scoring us so many goals. Id be absolutely amazed even if we got 17m which for numerous reasons (including the sell on) we wouldnt receive all of to reinvest that we could attract a striker to improve upon the goal tally that Armstrong is providing us.

2 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You're not sure how bad Stoke were to watch? Did you not see the game? We were never than negative under Hughes and even under Allardyce. Being "black eye" rovers is a very different thing than getting every player behind the ball for 83 minutes of a game. 

We were worse against Rotherham?  No we werent. We played fair more football, we just didn't score til late on. If you're talking pure entertaining footballwise , Stoke are putrid. Now the results v entertainment is a completely different debate 

That Stoke game was one game though. One isolated game in which they scored early on and managed the game, factoring in numerous absentees and a hectic schedule to get the win whilst being in full control throughout. Its not fair to judge their style in general on that one game.

I wish we had other players whose goal to shot ratio was masked by being the 2nd top scorer in the league.

Armstrong's sell by date?! Hes a bloody 23 year old striker who has scored 15 this season, 27 this year, and has never gone more than 3 games without a goal.

Hes not playing very well at the moment, hes hit a bit of a dry spell (1 in 6 after 5 in 5) but people are massively overreacting if they think he is anything but key to this team. We are too reliant on him. 

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

If someone offered £17 million for Armstrong,I would take their hand off. Finished tap ins when we steamrolled a few pants teams at the beginning, can't do it when it matters against decent defences. Doesnt link the play up, far too greedy with pointless shots and lacks that bit of cuteness in key areas to bring it round the keeper or finish when there is more to be done that a curler or arrow into the bottom corner. I would wager another manager would have him out from the centre and back on the left. We need a target man to get the ball into the box more directly to. 

Why do we NEED a target man? Armstrong is not in the best of form which happens to all strikers but hes a bloody effective Championship striker, the second top scorer in the league and if you take him out of this side you take away a massive chunk of any attacking threat. He has also been so much more effective since he moved central at the start of the year.

A load of shite yet again. People are so obsessed with possession stats as if they directly correlate to entertainment but we are awful to watch aside from the couple of times when we have swollen the goals for column with beatings usually against 10 men. Its side to side passing, no penetration, teams even without the ball tend to control games as Stoke also did last week more than we are doing because we are often devoid of ideas. Even today I have seen a lot of snobbery towards Sheffield Wednesdays style but it was a horrible watch from us too, we didnt have a shot in the first half and of course we did have a spell in the second where we had a few chances but that was only because they had a lead to defend.

Mowbrays inability to fix the defence continues and is particularly concentrated at LB. Douglas has been a shit signing, and he also compounded that by re-signing Bell so we have no credible alternative, whoever out of those 2 plays will cause us problems. Ayala I am still to be convinced by too, the clean sheet record is simply not good enough.

In midfield, Holtby is a myth. He never contributes anything and he personifies the team perfectly, pedestrian and unproductive. Rothwell's goal was superb, he is what he is, slightly more productive than Holtby with occasional brilliance. Johnson was incredibly sloppy in front of the defence, Downing surely has to be considered for starts.

Armstrong too often having to play out wide, hes a striker and although hes hit a bit of a lean spell, at this level hes a bloody good one, a bit of overreacting to him and rubbish about cashing in on him etc, so close to hit the post, a few decent runs and always our attacking threat. You take his goals out of our side and we will struggle to replace them. Gallagher a waste of space, Elliott surprisingly quiet. Great to see Dack back and he was involved like hed never been away, so crisp and purposeful with his passing, Brereton has been out for a fraction of the time but I thought he was the one that looks like he has missed a year, he looked like the old Brereton but hopefully that is ring rust.

You cant argue with the points tally, we are mid table fodder and will continue to stagnate under the current manager. The season feels as good as over in December.

Is watching Stoke that bad? Cant say I watch them every week but against us, they scored an early goal and with an injury ravaged team and amidst a hectic schedule, they did what they needed to do and we never looked like scoring as a result.

Kaminski

Nyambe Lenihan Ayala Douglas

Holtby Trybull Rothwell

Elliott Armstrong Brereton

50 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

 

 

 

Most not at all but I would agree that most managers is pushing it so fair play. Most managers might appreciate Mowbrays net spend coupled with the time hes had to mould his team for sure.

10 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

You heard of net spend Ken?

Is it not relevant how much we sold before he came in?

And where that places us amongst divisional rivals over the past few years?

 

Criticise Mowbray all you want, and much is justified, but this “he’s spent loads more than everyone” is not true

Has anyone said "hes spent loads more than everyone" specifically? If so then of course that is shite, whereas a very competitive budget and more time than all of his rivals would be more accurate. 

My theory is simple, why change a position for a key player that worked, to benefit lesser players and to stick to a formation that has not improved results?

Hes not some brute who can only play long ball either.

Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

If we don't play with a 10 then he's no choice.  All we know is what Dack has said in the article  "Creating from a little bit deeper is something I really enjoy doing"  

 

Of course, that is the main issue. For me, I dont see any overwhelming reason to continue with the 4-3-3 if it means any compromise to Dack, a consistent source of goals and assists from a number 10 role, to essentially help far less effective and inferior players, and when the team isnt any more successful playing that formation.

Putting Dack as a 10 gives us another major goal threat and him and Armstrong together could be prolific, and it would potentially mean a second central midfielder would add a bit more solidity. Win win for me.