The thing is, Mowbray has had plenty of money, 3 windows, plenty of time and surprisingly plenty of flexibility from the owners to mould his own side. He signed 7 players alone in the summer for around 10m. Even the most staunch person defending Mowbray, can you say that whatever selection will be made for Saturday will be anything other than another random assembly of players with the hope that something clicks? And can you honestly say that the squad has any real balance to it? Raya will start, our only acceptable player tonight. Nyambe had his second appalling game in a row, as bad as even when he looked so nervous breaking into the team. Do we have a feasible alternative? No. Mulgrew and Lenihan are our only decent centre backs, the latter in particular has been inconsistent and both are brittle. We have absolutely NO backup. Rodwell showed himself up as a midfielder playing in the back 4, that second goal was as bad as it gets. Should never play there again. Why has he not signed a centre back bar Downing a year ago who is not trusted? (understandably) Both left backs are absolute shite, one he signed in Bell is a joke. He will pick one on Saturday and just hope that he doesnt embarrass himself again. Thats all he can do. Central midfield, we are well stocked in terms of numbers. Evans is ok usually, Rodwell was always a big gamble, Davenport hasnt been off the injury table, Smallwood is a League 1 player, and Reed has been good but is often shoehorned out wide. Out wide, a particular source of frustration. He seems to hop between the likes of Bennett, Armstrong, Palmer, Rothwell, Conway, none of whom are doing anywhere near enough to guarantee a place, none of whom are contributing to our attack, and its as if he picks 2 out of a hat and hopes something comes off. 3 he signed, so far he has got 2 goals from all 5 of them. Dack is off the boil, although we may aswell not play him if we are just going to kick the ball in the air all the time. And up front, we have Graham who cant play all the time, and Brereton who is the luxury we simply cannot afford with the rest of the squad as lacking quality and imbalanced as it is. We dont seem to have an identity, we havent really had any plan in terms of attacking all season, the most long balls in the league, a pitiful number of goals from open play, Mowbray doesnt carry the same stigma or stereotype as Allardyce/McCarthy but the football barring one or two exceptions this season has been painful to watch. And before its misconstrued, Im not saying he should be sacked. He does need to sort things out starting Saturday though.

Embarrasing performance. Mowbray has had 2 weeks to prepare for 2 local derbies and we have been embarassed in both. He signed 7 players, none of which were centre backs. Rodwell again gave away a penalty in the most pathetic way ever, beaten by a long ball from their keeper. The sub at half time, to bring on a shocking left back for a striker at 1 down summed the manager up. Shocking. Why does he keep persisting with Smallwood. He is nowhere near good enough. Both of the left backs were as bad as anyone, Bell is an absolutely shocking player and Williams was easily beaten again as he was at Preston. Armstrong was shocking yet again, where is Rothwell? Even Palmer? Dack was shite again too although all of our attackers are not going to thrive if we have no attacking plans aside from hoofing it in the air. Brereton was rubbish too when he came on. Over 9m spent and has it improved us? The team didnt seem to have a plan, was disorganised, disinterested, didnt seem to know what it was doing, just shocking and Mowbray has to take the blame for that.

Whilst I disagree that he has done OK in his cameos wide (barring v QPR a d Rotherham when he played far more centrally) theres total disregard towards the alternatives to Brereton when Graham is unavailable. I dont think that anyone would or has doubted Grahams importance. He is the master at making the most of what has been, this season especially, a more often than not rather thoughtless process of getting the ball forward, with us playing more long balls than any other team. In 2 of the 3 examples you give, v Swansea and Preston, we undoubtedly missed Graham but we had Dack up front v Swansea and both him and Palmer centrally v Preston. It quite clearly didnt work, and hasnt worked on the other occasions we have tried to play Dack up front. It also blunts our best player in the process. Brereton came on at Bristol I admit but was totally unfit as that was his debut. Quite simply, imbalanced recruitment has left us over reliant on Graham but we have to weigh up what the best alternative is when he isnt fit, acknowledging that he wont necessarily be the same replacement. Brereton hasnt shown here bar glimmers in 2 cameos that he can play as a lone striker as he simply hasnt had a chance. He did impress and garner the reputation he had to warrant us paying the money we did playing as a lone striker. And crucially he is naturally a striker. Its ok being "not convinced" he can play there but the alternatives are far, far less capable of playing that role, and not even naturally strikers. Yes we will need to tamper with our tactics and approach regardless of who plays when Graham cant, but your theory is invalidated by its alternatives.

I dont think its something that can suddenly be introduced on a match day. But I hope we see some improvement soon as I don't feel like we are playing to our full potential in terms of some of our players in forward areas. I'm not convinced that any of the old guard (the likes of Bennett and Smallwood) will be eased out any time soon in terms of starting every week in favour of the likes of Rodwell and Rothwell to give us more technical ability in our team.

Seen absolutely no signs that this process is in anyway progressing. As others have pointed out, we are still a long ball team even when Graham is out. We have bar a couple of games this season been full of committment sure but boring to watch. Danny Graham is as important as anyone is to us at the moment.

He was a top player but he seems to be an arrogant tosser of a human being.

May I ask why you said good luck to Campbell? The man is an arrogant, self-obsessed bell end who bleats on about his brilliant CV and seems deluded enough to think that its his skin colour thats stopping him from being Man City manager. Id be amazed if he does well. Bradford have been shocking since they appointed Hopkin and he clearly isnt the man for the job. Yeah they have Payne, Akpan and also Paul Caddis

Few things: - You say why question the logic after Mowbray has explained why hes treating Brereton as he is. I and many others feel that Mowbrays explanations are illogical, its as simple as that. Not considering a striker to play as a striker due to a lack of physicality, then playing tiny midfielders there instead. Even you have said that is something you disagree with. - Your defence of Mowbray on how Brereton is used is totally hypocritical in that you believe he should be used centrally, and have asked more than once for him to be started, I encourage you to be stronger in that opinion, rather than shutting down people who actually have a more similar view to yourself than Mowbray may! It doesnt mean you dont like Mowbray. - Its natural for us to be compared to other clubs in our division. You have to get used to that and have never complained about it before. - Its easier to not take Mercer on when he says Coyle. You are providing the reaction he craves.

No, hes not snapping at Grahams heels in that Mowbray doesnt even consider him to be a striker at the moment,

Was Paul Cook being intended to fill in at left back for them?

I don't trust his current judgement on Brereton in that what I see with my own eyes seems to suggest that this judgement is flawed. Especially when quotes about Brereton not being physically capable of playing as a central striker are coupled with playing diminutive attacking midfielders there. I don't think it can be possibly attributed to potential effort or attitude as to why he is played wide rather than central. This is a messageboard for us to discuss our opinions and thoughts, so not really interested in platitudes about trusting and remaining calm. You mention him getting the best out of players, there are a few notably Dack, (up until playing him up front) Nyambe, Mulgrew, Lenihan, Raya etc that he has got more out of than previously or has notably improved them. Mowbray deserves credit for that. On Brereton, he warrants criticism.

I doubt that occasional cameos in a wide role are great for his confidence either. Theres no way anyone can come in on the luxury of playing when we are a couple of goals up. This is a player with over 50 games of Championship experience. There are no suggestion that he cannot handle the pressure.

So why not mention any of those in for example the Championship, rather than constantly mentioning one of the best players in the world? Age is a factor, and you have to appreciate his age, and the fact that he is always going to be someone to develop at that age. On the flip side, the situation seemed perfect in that we have an ageing but very experienced, effective and knowledgeable striker already in the team who in theory could slowly be eased out, with Brereton learning from him in the meantime, and snapping at his heels desperate to take his place for as many games as possible, as soon as possible. I suspect that your expectations of him are too high, in that you see to have expected him to be the game changer straight away, which his price tag may justify, but his credentials etc perhaps dont. That being said, many seemingly have expectations that are far too low of him. Theres no way that we can have the luxury of such an expensive player ONLY for the future. He has to offer something now, we understand he will improve but he has to and can offer a lot now. Some people seem to have lost sight about the fact that Brereton has played over 50 Championship games, mainly and most impressively as a central striker. He isnt a youth player. He has shown very small glimmers, he played more centrally v QPR and Rotherham and looked better when he was in central areas, he looks clumsy when he moves wide and it removes any semblence of a physical presence in the box. I had hoped that these cameos would have made it clear to Mowbray that he belongs centrally, but following the quotes he made during the international break about him, and also on Saturday when we needed a goal and Brereton was only the third choice sub, dumped wide again, has removed that hope. Use of the name Coyle is to provoke a reaction, but my point is that Mowbray has been criticised plenty about the Brereton situation, so lets not pretend that Mowbray is getting off free of criticism. I would agree had you suggested that he should be starting more games or playing more minutes than he is, but my expectations are lower, in that if I could see him pushing Graham, eased in but clearly with the intention of one day dislodging him, then I would understand.

He should have started the games that Graham was deemed unfit to do so, he should be second in line in my opinion. My points are not based on any expectations of him scoring goal after goal like Rhodes did. My main point is not based around the amount of game time he has played, although it has been less than I would have liked. It is based on how he has been used. I expected him to be number 2 behind Graham and to be slowly phased into that position, playing at first when Graham is tiring or unavailable. You mention my gripe on positional use and imply that I would moan regardless but that is unfair. I agree he should be eased in, and from the start Graham and Dack were the key partnership. But I feel that shoehorning in Dack (or Palmer) as a number 9 requires far more of a tactical adjustment than playing a striker with experiencing of playing as a lone striker at this level, with someone playing off him. Whilst I think that spending so much on someone not ready made is a potentially valid point, his age isnt irrelevant and you have to appreciate that he will improve over time. Constantly namedropping Mbappe (a world class player) just belittles your own point. I am not sure where the suggestions have come from that he lacks the bottle to handle the big money fee either. Mowbray has been critiqued at length just as anyone else would for the signing of Brereton (correctly IMO) so youve just put that last line in to try and provoke reactions, which I'm sure you will manage to do.

He may be the manager but that doesnt mean that we should always agree with him, or even that he is always right. I stand by my assertion that Brereton should be at least in contention to start games, and crucially that he is not being used correctly by playing fleeting cameos, most often as a wide man. Mowbrays quotes about him are of particular frustration in that a change is unlikely in the near future. His reasoning for this is flawed as discussed. The only logic to any of it is the fact that Brereton has been somewhat (albeit IMO overly cautiously) eased in. My main gripe is to do with positioning, and it seems that is the same with most people. The budget thing is a two pronged point. I think you would have to be pretty pedantic to not admit that he was obviously the majority of our budget, we signed 2 loans, a free agent and 2 players for nominal fees. The other 2 were Armstrong and Brereton and it was universally acknowledged that the fee for Brereton will be far higher than it was for Armstrong. Also, signing Brereton was as a result of a summer wide, patient search for a much needed striker. Seeing as Mowbray didnt sign a striker, Brereton was presumably seen as that striker, so something has gone amiss in the short term if he is now not considered to be that man. It should be clear that he lacks the physicality unlike the titans of Dack and Palmer to play that role, no?

All of those comments are the standard claptrap that any manager comes out with when he signs either a young or an expensive player, or both in Breretons case. They dont explain the illogical way that he has been used, and totally dismissed as a player in his natural position despite a lack of alternative to Graham. Did Mowbray say or did you say that signing Brereton was too good an opportunity to miss out on? Such an attitude may explain why he seemingly doesnt know how to use him properly. You have many times aired your thoughts that you disagree with Mowbrays treatment of Brereton so youve no need to defend him if that is the case. I dont think most managers would spend the vast majority of their budget on a player that they still havent started in late November. Its a fair point, its an individual point that you have childishly lashed out at in your second paragraph.

One of the primary reasons has to be that he has played quite a lot of his recent minutes in a position that doesnt suit him. I feel like assuming that his drop of form is based on off the field issues is a big presumption to make. I dont feel like our long ball football is going to get the best out of him anyway. He was particularly poor against QPR in his natural position when we were terrible as a team with Smallwood and Evans far too conservative in the centre, and we never played the ball through the lines and to his feet so he can turn. We cant drop our only source of goals. We need to play him in his best position, in a style that suits him. And others around him also need to step up and ease the burden on him.

I didnt say that. I asked a question because I didnt understand your comments about not expecting too much.

I dont understand your justification that "Mowbray is taking his time" with Brereton or "not expecting too much." His reasoning behind playing him wide even when Graham is unavailable or unfit is flawed and makes no sense, owing to the alternatives. Have your changed your mind or do you think that Mowbray is wrong to play him wide?

Agreed. Its when Graham is not on the pitch that the main confusion comes for me. If Mowbray thinks that Graham is our best striker in terms of acting as a focal point, I dont think many would disagree. Resorting to playing midfielders as "false 9s" is a tactical experiment that doesnt even have any logic to it. Moving our best player from his natural position, as an alternative to someone in Brereton deemed not physical enough despite being far smaller. The false 9 formation was made popular by Spain and their passing football. We play the most long balls in the division, we cant go from one extreme to another like that. With Armstrong, I think he does have more of a skillset and more historical evidence to suggest that playing wide suits him. Brereton on the other hand certainly doesnt and I suspect that barring a sudden realisation from Mowbray, he is going to be the subject of continious debate for quite some time.

1. My comment was more in relation to if we had signed a player deemed to be 8 out of 10 so soon, I would presume he had made an immediate and far more tangible impact. The whole Brereton debate seems to be centralised not around the fact that he has potential, but how he has been used and whether he is fit for purpose in terms of what we needed to sign, whether we can afford such a luxurious signing. I do feel it is slightly ignorant to seemingly ignore all of these factors and cling to the glimmers of potential he has been able to show. The whole debate is more aimed around Mowbray than Brereton himself. And also to compare against previous disastrous summer windows in which we have sold key players and/or spent little to nothing in return is not fair, Mowbray hasnt had to deal with these restrictions this summer. 2. The first bit I agree with, I don't think people realistically expected him to be thrown straight in the team with the form Graham has shown. Its where he has been used thats the issue, surely it would be more sensible to play him where he is most comfortable, where he plays naturally, admittedly around when Graham is fit enough to play. 3. The Forest side he was in was like us a mid table Championship side. Moving Dack is doubly detrimental in that it moves our best player to a position he is clearly not suited to, and I dont think he has scored in. (May be wrong on that) There may be occasions when Brereton wide may be a wise option, perhaps when we are chasing a game or whatever. But its Mowbrays quotes insistent that Brereton is not even considered as a striker, black and white, simple as that, despite having played there before, that confuse me. All of the positive aspects about him, England youth international, Championship experience etc he has achieved this blossoming reputation as a striker. He ripped Arsenal to pieces as a striker. And now he is beneath 2 midfielders who when they have played there, have not impressed or looked comfortable, and Breretons fleeting impressive contributions have all been within the width of the 18 yard box, his (wrongly offside) finish, his winning of a penalty, coming alive in the box to square for Dack. Surely its a least worth a consideration next time Graham isnt fit. 4. If Armstrong and Brereton are both being groomed to play wide and slowly end up as central strikers. Surely one of such an experiment is enough, and it goes back to the balance of the squad that we discussed earlier? 5. I believe it was Liverpool at home when Dack played up front, if I recall it was at a point in pre-season when Graham was injured, and Mowbray was demanding for patience in his hunt in signing a new striker believe it or not! 6. I dont want to lose sight of the fact that I (and almost every single fan) appreciate that Mowbray has done a lot more right than he has done wrong here. Notably the whole change of atmosphere at the club. And that the signings he made in the summer are on paper, almost exclusively ones that if utilised correctly, can improve us. And on Newcastle, agreed!

Bell cannot attack so we would be totally bereft on that side.

Do you not think that considering Brereton an 8 out of 10 signing is not over the top considering that in a Rovers shirt, he is yet to start a league game, and we are very much clutching at straws based on cameos? Are you happy with the way Brereton has been used so far? Both in terms of the lack of starts and often wide where he looks uncomfortable. Do you not acknowledge that Brereton made his name as a central striker, and that any doubts about his physicality (despite a season of playing as a central striker in this league already) become somewhat obsolete when he chooses to play Dack or Palmer there instead? You mention that we need time to build a truly well balanced squad and I somewhat concur but he has contributed to the imbalanced selection of attackers. He signed 4 players who he clearly considers them to be wide men, at least short term. Surely it made far more sense to sacrifice signing one or two in favour of a central striker(s)? No one is doubting that we have a set of attacking options far better than we did last time we was in this league. And I think there is little doubting that we have a player with potential in Brereton. But im struggling to see how we can possibly consider such a big money signing for us to solely be a project, and the fact that he has played at this level for over a season before surely vindicates that he should be playing more than he is, and he should be at least 2nd choice behind Graham. I also dont agree that our recruitment has been "fantastic" under Mowbray. His main strength I have always maintained has been as mentioned by others the extra he has got from our existing players.

But weve not even seen Brereton start a game so how can you give him such a high mark? Surely on the pitch performance even at such an early stage is the key thing to judge our signings on. Otherwise Palmer is still a talent who has recent, previous promotion credentials and is the most successful signing of them all, and not a show pony? A disallowed goal, an assist and a dive for a penalty are definitely signs that Brereton has something about him but we knew that anyway. The discussion is centralised around how he is used (well not used), the flawed/stupid explanation as to why hes not playing his natural position, and whether we can afford such a luxury. I dont think Brereton himself is getting much if any stick recently. Do you think the criticism of Mowbray playing him wide, and his attempts at justifying it, are valid, or do you agree with what people have said. What mark would you give our overall transfer recruitment then? In terms of both quality of signing and the shape of the squad following these signings. Balance is difficult but its not impossible and I do feel that our squad is too imbalanced in certain areas.

Most people havent doubted necessarily the quality of the individuals. But you havent accounted for whether they are fit for purpose. The main position Mowbray was seeking in the summer was a striker, he said as much. He signed 7 players (Davenport too) including 9m on 2 strikers. Does the fact that we have only 1 striker in Graham considered for that role before we resort to playing midfielders there not even remotely suggest that he is not fit for purpose. Literally no idea how you can give a player yet to start a League game an 8 out of 10 and describe as "fantastic" is beyond me. And that is not a slight on Brereton as an individual. Neither Armstrongs poor form this season nor Rodwells lack of game time warrants the high mark you have given them. I dont think peoples main gripe is the quality of signing in terms of the individuals. Its the balance of the squad and signing players in the positions that were needed.