roversfan99

He was dropped for a period in the Championship season. Indeed at Ewood they had understudy Jamie Jones playing.

I am just saying that obviously he mainly played in League 1, and maybe it is telling that reviews were mixed and they didnt seem too upset that he wasnt coming back, or indeed Cook himself wasnt desperate to bring him back.

You only really see a player once you watch them week in and week out. Wigan fans were hardly gutted to see him go following his solitary prior season at this level, and Cook upgraded to get in an experienced and proven goalkeeper.

@JoeH whilst I understand your skepticism in regards to loans, its a little simplistic to say that any team that finishes mid table may aswell do it without any loans. That would imply that you are settling for mid table before you start the season. Swansea got into the play offs having loaned Brewster and Gallagher, but failed to get promoted. Ultimately they are back to square one but again, they were successful signings still. Adarabioyo for example, I think we would have been better off getting Bauer as he would have been permanent and an equally competent Championship centre back. But once that deal was allowed to slip through our fingers, Adarabioyo came in as the best we could have got and indeed was a successful signing, even though I take your point about being back to square one now. Even if it hadnt worked, we could have just played Williams with Lenihan, not ideal but competent. Goalkeepers are a seperate issue though for me, a totally different issue to the discussion on loaning players in general. When you loan in a kid as keeper, you are most likely doing so under the promise that he is coming to play, not sit on the bench. You are also probably going to have a second choice goalkeeper as an alternative to him. Henderson a few years ago was the exception to the rule yet defenders of the fact that we may (or may not) loan in a kid in net always point to him, but its not accurate of what usually happens, and of how much it is a gamble. But you look at Virginia at Reading or indeed Muric who we have been linked with, who went to Forest. Both players really struggled at the start of the season, and both clubs were lucky that they had the resources and the time to realise so soon and get in very successful goalkeepers in Rafael Cabral and Samba. Why anyone on the back of me would defend a deal to sign Muric should it come about, and to clarify, thats all we are doing at the moment, discussing hypothetical links with players in the media, is beyond me. He is a kid with 5 senior League appearances, in which he made a few errors at this level and was dropped. Surely no one would want him to come here on the back of that thinking that he is the answer. Then you look at Huddersfield who loaned in Grabara from Liverpool, highly rated but untested, he really struggled for half a season and they had to loan in Lossl in January but ultimately suffered losses of points in the first half of the season because they had no alternative. And closer to home, we had Walton regularly costing us points. We had to suffer that because we had no alternative. I dont see any reason to advocate potentially loaning in a kid in that position. I am dead against the idea and will be very unhappy should we go down that route in that position. If we loan in one or two players who are upgrades/improvements in other areas to help us along? Totally different story and I am much happier with that. The ideal situation is to get an experienced goalkeeper. If we cannot, at least someone like this Pears would be ours to develop, a goalkeeper at his/Iversens/Murics age is more prone to making mistakes due to inexperience and learning on the job. There is also little scope for a competent goalkeeper should you want to take the kid out of the firing line, with only a back up goalkeeper who himself is probably not going to be too good. The idea of having a kid in net costing us points then going back does not sit well with me, especially post Walton who compared to Iversen and especially Muric, had far more of a track record of senior football.

Spot on. Unfortunately things like sitting in specific seats and having a beer and a pie on the concourse are going to be impossible luxuries at first. Many of the points that you have answered are logistical issues that as you say do not impact the ability to sell seasom tickets. The tickets could be transparent in their flexibility and there is no need to refund in any situation, any payment could be deferred. If there are a few people that would refuse to commit because they have no guarantees on where they sit, fair enough, but many still would.

This isnt specifically anything to do with Mowbray but it is never too early to get promoted to the benefit of the club. And the quality towards the bottom of the Premier League means that with some calculated and wise spending, its not unfathomable to be competitive. Also, the notion of it being 2 or 3 more seasons before we are challenging is totally flawed because it implies that the side sticks together and gradually improves. For various reasons that wont be possible and indeed it would be likely that the core of Nyambe, Lenihan, Travis, Dack and Armstrong will all be elsewhere in 3 seasons.

If only we could sign Copenhagens goalkeeper!

Arent people just commenting on players as and when they are linked with us, as per the whole point of this thread?

Yep, we definitely cant become dependant on other teams being shite We need to make a few shrewd improvements to weak areas and Mowbray needs to stop with his nonsensical ideas, false 9s, wide strikers etc and get us playing in a way that is familiar and gets the best out of our players. But Sheffield Wednesday being deducted 12 points and Bristol City and Bournemouth choosing novices or seemingly more qualified and experienced alternatives is a good start in my opinion.

You said I was being very judgemental and over the top which was totally unwarranted considering that I had put together a few thoughts, half of which you yourself agree with, and some bits from his performances, things like Nothing about Pears that I put was in my opinion very judgemental and over the top. I tried to take both sides into account and indeed even said that I would prefer him over loaning in a kid because at least we could develop him as our permanent player. I have not assumed that we are even signing him, I am just passing comment as I have with others we have been linked with. If you are only prepared to comment once all business is done then this thread isnt for you and neither is taking any interest in rumours.

https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/transfer-news/blackburn-rovers-pears-middlesbrough-transfers-18747156 Interview with someone from Teeside Live on Pears. Pretty much as expected. Young. Broke through. Has made mistakes especially on crosses. Might be willing to move for first team football. Raw talent but nowhere near the finished product.

Crazy, but I am pleased that they have appointed a novice rather than a proven Championship manager in Hughton as it is better for us, being in competition with them. Reading the comments underneath, it is safe to say that the fans are not happy and understandably so.

Can you please stop with this shite everytime I post an opinion on a link. Obviously my opinions and comments assume that he is signing, as is the point of discussing transfer targets. Do I think he, Iversen, Muric, Phillips, Marshall, any of them are likely to sign? Poissibly not, I know that being linked with a player rarely leads to a signing so at this stage it is hypothetical. I commented on Mowbrays scouting network and how signing the son of a former teammate of Mowbray, an opinion you clearly agree with having liked Paul Mani's status saying as such. I said that I think it could be a good move if he was underneath a more experienced keeper, a point again you agree with having liked Paul Mani's status saying as such. I mentioned Marshall specifically. I also shared some opinions from Middlesbrough fans because obviously with such few appearances, knowledge on him will be minimal on him. You are constantly vocal on not caring what other fans think, fair enough, scroll past it because I do and I would suspect that other fans would be interested in what fans at his current club think of him should there be anything to the rumour as its good to know what we are getting. Their opinion was again mixed, but suggests what you would expect from a 22 year old, that he is probably not ready made to be a number 1 for a team chasing promotion. I shared a statistic which was somewhat favourable in regards to his shot stopping, so again thats not "judgemental," just adding some meat to the bones in terms of our limited knowledge on him. If I had said that I am outraged that we are even linked with him, or if I said that if we sign him I wont go and watch us etc then you may have had a point. In general, my opinions on the 5 goalkeepers that I have seen us linked with have been very varied, 2 (Phillips and Marshall) I have said that I am happy with, 2 loans that I have dismissed (mainly on the principle that I do not want a kid on loan which is a consistent opinion I have held) and on Pears, mixed, very skeptical if he comes as number 1, which I suspect he would (would we pay a fee for a sub keeper?) but I much prefer that if the goalkeeper is young, that he is ours. I dont think that I am being judgemental by having these opinions, nor negative. (or positive, there is a mix of opinions) If you are genuine in your first sentence, surely you wont bother reading this thread until the end of the window? The pestering journalists and debating and suggesting potential signings will stop and you will wait and only comment once all of our business is done?

People have been fairly unanimous in being content should the links with Phillips and Marshall be anything other than paper talk. As the board was when we signed Johnson for example. And Holtby. So not sure that this "our fans are desperate to moan at anything" is totally accurate.

I am unconvinced that he would move (especially from his home club) at such a young age permanently to come and sit on our bench. I would agree though that it could make much more sense to us if it was accompanying a more experienced keeper ie a Marshall.

Pears would make further mockery of this European scouting network if Mowbray went and signed the son of someone he used to play with at Boro! He is also not a goalkeeper for the here and now, he is a goalkeeper well away from his peak, it wouldnt be a move that says we want promotion. Boro fans seem fairly split (to be kind), common acceptance that Warnock (a much more ruthless manager) will trade him in for the finished article in a short term move, some think he has talent, some mention that he is too small, weak at crosses, comparisons to Steele and Connor Ripley etc: https://www.oneboro.co.uk/forum/topic/10500-the-summerautumn-transfer-thread-2020/page/186/#comments Might be ok with an experienced keeper aswell like Marshall but I dont think theres any chance of that. If we sign him we will have a 22 year old goalkeeper which is not really suggesting any serious promotion aspirations. https://twitter.com/MarkTaylor0/status/1288012506192125957/photo/1 His shot saving % is pretty decent, similar to Raya and better than Walton. All being said, I would at least prefer him over someone like Iversen or Muric as he would at least be our player to develop. Iversen was playing in League 1 and seemingly not pulling up any trees, Muric had a shocker, at least Pears has a bit of Championship experience and would be our player, thats scraping the barrel for compliments. But yeah, give me a Dillon Phillips, a David Marshall, or indeed someone outside of the usual names who can come in and perform straight away. Pears for sure above a kid on loan but not what we need.

Even assuming that Marshall joined on a one year deal, which I dont think would be the case. We will assume as such for comparitive sakes. Both are stop gaps. One is an experienced goalkeeper, of proven quality, part of a better defence than ours last season and not error prone. One is a total rookie, very young, very little senior experience bar one bad experience. Even if Muric did grow, it wouldnt be to our benefit.

No, my point was not necessarily about the duration of the players deal, although youd probably sign Marshall for 2 or 3 years rather than one. It was and always has been that I am against the idea of loaning a kid in net, when he is most likely to make mistakes that will be on our watch rather than for his parent club. I also feel that this approach is made 10x worse because we had a talented keeper of a similar age to Walton and Iversen and older than Muric and we sold him for cheap, wasted the money and now instead of developing our own young, talented and raw goalkeeper, we are developing worse keepers for other teams for a year. If you have a young keeper who by the fact he is young will make more mistakes, you want it to be your own at least. Marshall at least would be a steady hand, the opposite of thesr error prone rookies, and one who has already shown that he is capable at this level. A critical part of a better defensive unit than ours. Compared to this, Muric has made barely any senior experiences and a team who finished above us last year dropped him after 4 games, upgraded and sent him back. How could you possibly get excited about someone like that, regardless of a penalty save he once made when he conceded 5. You have suggested them both (Iversen and Muric) numerous times this week, defended them and the prospect of signing them, of course on the back of hearing the rumour that we wanted them, have externally requested and posted stats for them etc.

So much inconsistency here by the way. You dont want Marshall because of his age and thus lack of longevity yet are bigging up signing a kid on loan for a season? You also are regularly insistent on players being desperate to play yet have a presumption that Marshall is after the money. Also, I would welcome Marshall because he would provide experience and has shown his quality at this level already. Surely that goes against your theory (like with Dillon Phillips) that I am just moaning at anyone we are linked with?

Further views on Iversen to a Leicester fan asking for views on him from Rotherham fans. Mixed views. Common view seems to be that he was good but there is better out there. Weak coming for crosses. Talented but makes mistakes. You look back at Walton and people said the same.

http://www.footballforums.net/threads/transfer-rumours-20-21.276622/page-12 From a Forest fan on Muric as apparently Rotherham want him, ironically to replace Iversen: "Muric was horrifically bad - to the point he handed 3 points to WBA and then was laughed out the stadium at the Valley by the Charlton fans. I would rather have a 58 year old Lee Camp back than him in goal." Also interestingly they also are close to signing Dominic Samuel according to that.

Lets assume that there is genuine interest in Phillips, Iversen and Muric. Why is the first target one that will cost a fee and the other 2 are kids on loan? Last year we had a permanent keeper. We couldnt get in a permanent replacement because wed blown our money elsewhere and the Walton loan seemed very much a late in the window last resort. So IF that happened again and we ended up with a kid on loan, I think people would be very entitled to be annoyed.

If he was ours, considering that the other goalkeeper would also be a kid, id play him. At least hed be ours to develop.

Where is there anything to suggest that Iversen is so highly rated?

He has barely played any senior football to research on. Just because he is at City doesnt mean that he is any good. But even if he will be, he is miles away from his peak. Forest loaned him in probably thinking the same, he played a couple of games and then Forest instantly replaced him. If you cant see the risk and the problems with loaning in a kid who has barely played any professional football then fair enough.