+ Visit Blackburn Rovers FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 61

Thread: Rovers return for Brererton

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,297
    I just like known products, Champs. Gallagher was very good for us before, and he is ideal for doing Graham's job. I have nothing against Brereton, but it's a hell of a lot of money for a 19-year-old. I know he is supposed to be an "investment", but I am more interested in a player who has the obvious qualities we need right now.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,680
    Quote Originally Posted by AucklandRover View Post
    I just like known products, Champs. Gallagher was very good for us before, and he is ideal for doing Graham's job. I have nothing against Brereton, but it's a hell of a lot of money for a 19-year-old. I know he is supposed to be an "investment", but I am more interested in a player who has the obvious qualities we need right now.

    Hang on though Auks, there are some contradictions here?
    You state that you already believe that our squad is good enough. Results certainly back that up.
    As you regularly point out, we already have loads of players. Almost a full squad.
    Why would we need an ageing player? With no sell on value? Ready to play now? Don't we already have Graham doing exactly that? Backed up by another 3/4 players?
    Our club, our manager and our CEO have all stated we are building for the future. We are aiming for the Prem in the next 2/3 seasons. Not building for NOW. We already have an adequate squad (as you have pointed out)

    In 12 months time, do we want to have a squad young, good enough, and ready to try go for promotion?
    When Wharton is ready. When Travis is ready. When Lenihan is at his peak. When Dack is (if we managed to keep him, which we wont if we don't sign quality young players)?
    You, me ....anyone can see what Mowbray is building.

    Also, I quite liked Gallagher last time he was here. Didn't score nearly enough goals.
    His hold up play is ok. Nothing more than that. He is young, but his goal-scoring record is very very, very average.
    Brereton scored more goals than Gallagher last season, in much less games.
    I am intruiged as to how you feel Gallagher is so far ahead? His record isn't great, he offers no more gurantee than Brereton?
    He is a hell of a gamble? But the lad who has played much more, and scored much less is not a gamble?
    Who did you arrive at that? based on what?

    We are building a young, quality squad who will be ready to peak in a few seasons when we hope to be getting in the Prem. Backed by our owners, who trust our manager.

    I am unsure why us being interested in building for the future, adding to a solid squad, where we stay loyal to the same players who got us promotion, while adding along the way is looked at in a negative manner?

    Where you move between rating certain young players, labelling them as not a risk (imo Gallagher isn't as good, and cost almost as much) yet the next person, is a risk?
    How do you know?

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,680
    Quote Originally Posted by AucklandRover View Post
    Robin - this does look like a reasonable opportunity to try that. I'm sure we will be on the front foot in this game. One thing TM wil have been hammering home is: no repeat of that first half-hour against Millwall.
    If Travis does start, though, it will be hard to fit Rothwell in, because Evans looks a certainty. So I reckon it will be one or the other with Smallwood and Palmer on the bench. Some posters elsewhere are suggesting two of the front three might be rested, but I can't see this myself as TM will surely want to take advantage of the hot streak. Let's hope Dack has recovered. My guess:
    Raya
    Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Bell
    Bennett Rothwell Evans
    Dack Armstrong
    Graham.

    On the other hand, I have rarely been able to second-guess TM correctly, so don't hold your breath!

    So if we went out today and bought a ready to play striker Auks, which position does he walk in and start at tonight on his debut?
    So your saying we drop Graham? Or Dack? Or move our striker (Armstrong) to the wing?
    All so we can play the guy you insist HAS to play, and HAS to be ready?

    But you are the one normally who says, who will be dropped to play this new player?
    Dropping someone now, from a winning, unbeaten side? Would that be fair?


    If we sign a 19 year old for the future, he can play sometimes, but we don't rely on him? And over time, he will become our focal point? Graham wont be in 2 seasons. But you want him taken out now, so our new signing (who's goalscoring record isn't a patch on Grahams) can play?

    That not only goes against everything you normally say, it makes no business sense?

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,297
    I'm a bit puzzled, Champs. Gallagher is 22. "Ageing"?
    And where have I said I want to drop Graham? I've never said it. I supported him last year when he was getting a bit of stick.
    My point all along has been that the hold-up centre-forward spot is the ONE area we don't have adequate cover, and that's what Gallagher would be there for.
    There is not a single contradiction in my comment.
    As for comparing Gallagher and Brereton, I've never seen the latter play, whereas Gallagher's all-round play for us before was very good. What's more, he would be half the price.
    Are you honestly saying a 19-year-old who has only played 17 full league-games is not a risk?
    Transfermarkt's time-between-goals section shows Brereton scoring every 416 minutes; Gallagher's gap is 341, from three times as many full games - some of them in the PL.
    Yes, to me, it is less of a risk at the price.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,680
    Quote Originally Posted by AucklandRover View Post
    I'm a bit puzzled, Champs. Gallagher is 22. "Ageing"?
    And where have I said I want to drop Graham? I've never said it. I supported him last year when he was getting a bit of stick.
    My point all along has been that the hold-up centre-forward spot is the ONE area we don't have adequate cover, and that's what Gallagher would be there for.
    There is not a single contradiction in my comment.
    As for comparing Gallagher and Brereton, I've never seen the latter play, whereas Gallagher's all-round play for us before was very good. What's more, he would be half the price.
    Are you honestly saying a 19-year-old who has only played 17 full league-games is not a risk?
    Transfermarkt's time-between-goals section shows Brereton scoring every 416 minutes; Gallagher's gap is 341, from three times as many full games - some of them in the PL.
    Yes, to me, it is less of a risk at the price.

    That was reference to links with Cameron Jerome on another thread.
    Gallagher is valued over £7m.
    He didn't stop us going down, didn't score after Christmas, doesn't score nearly enough goals, his hold up play is ok, nothing more. He doesn't score goals like Graham, so would not be an adequate replacement. He did ok with us. Didn't pull up any trees, he just did ok. Gallagher has played a lot more, but not scored as many.
    Ive seen Gallagher, we all have.

    I haven't seen Brereton play much, I have seen him rip Arsenal apart and score and knock them out of the FA Cup.
    In you opinion its a risk.
    In the opinion of a professional football manager who is doing a fantastic job, who is willing to put his job on the line, and risk his own stock, does rate him, does think he is worth a shot, does see him as the future of our club. Mowbray knows he risks not being trusted again with money, risks losing the fans, risks his job if this goes tits.
    Mowbray isn't a massive risk taker. So ask yourself why? Maybe because he rates the lad?
    And we are inching towards getting him.

    We aren't even in for Gallagher.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,680
    ...............

    For me, on Sat (and at Carlisle) it was the dawn of a new formation and forward line.
    Dack Armstrong and Palmer play in a 3 up front. But it is very similar to the way Liverpool play. No CF (like Graham) no wingers. No number 10. All 3 swap positions, one drops, the other goes forward. Look at Dacks 2 league goals? Both centre forwards goals, getting in the front post in front of the defender. Armstrong drops and comes deep, Palmer drifts about. We now are looking at a fast, pacey forward line of young players.

    Gallagher is just Danny Graham mark 2. I don't believe (having watched us intently home and away since Mowbray arrived) we play just one way. He wants options. Gallagher doesn't give us options, which is why I think our interest has drifted.
    While he would be an ok addition, he isn't fast. He cant play in another position?
    clearly Mowbray is now looking at players who can play different roles. Rothwell is midfield is a lot more fluid than say a Smallwood. Or an Evans. Although the latter plays a huge role in this team.
    Gallagher is very one dimensional. And can fulfil one role. Of which his record isn't particularly good for £7m.
    Whereas Brereton is fast, is fluid, can play across the front 3 (our system we will be playing this season) ......Graham and that centre forward type play, is much more for the last 23/30 mins of games. We will beat teams in this division, with pace and fluidity up front. Not by playing quite an old fashioned Centre forward play.
    Of course, we have that option. But its not our default setting.

    And where I felt you where contradicting yourself, you quite often point out nobody has left? Our squad is full. Yet you want a signing to come in and play from the off?
    I asked, who would you drop straight away from this side, to play Gallagher? Would it be fair to just drop a player? He hasn't done it with anyone else. Rothwell, as good as he is, has to play himself into the side. It kind of goes against what you normally say.

    We are looking to sign a player for the future, who we don't have to rely on now, but will get stronger and develop with us, in our style of play.

    Look at the way Liverpool play, then watch us. Same back 4. Same 2 holding midfielders. 2 attacking you full backs (Bell will now stay in this side) a right sides mid for cover. And a fluid forward line, with no CF and no wingers. All 3 move about, all 3 inter-link and all 3 cause problems. No conventional CF. That's exactly how we played vrs Carlisle and Hull away. That's how we will play most weeks moving forward.
    I dont believe we are searching for a conventional CF. I don't think we have use for 2. I think it would be a total waste of money. We do have absolutely tonnes of it, we just want to spend it wisely. And we want to make a statement that we are having a go. Just not right now. Over the next few years.

    So the building of a young, fast squad makes sense.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,297
    Champs - you're putting words into my mouth. I haven't said DROP anyone. My argument all along has been that I am pretty happy with what we've got.
    After the new signings arrived, the only areas I could see where we genuinely needed cover were for the traditional centre-forward, and the skilful winger. As things have developed, I don't even think the winger is absolutely essential any more, as we have plenty of pace up front with Dack, Armstrong and Palmer, while Bennett looks as good as ever, even up a division. That just leaves cover in the "hold-up" centre-forward position for DG - which is exactly what Gallagher provides.
    I have no idea why you brought in Jerome. My only comment on that thread was that I'd be damned glad when the whole transfer rumour charade was over.
    Where have I said that someone should make way for Gallagher? Nowhere! Not once! I was talking all along about the concept of cover. You are the one who is keener to ring the changes! I was happy with what we've got.
    I totally agree that we CAN play without a traditional centre-forward, but Mowbray himself repeated, just yesterday, that in some matches, Graham would be first choice. That being the case, we need someone who can do the same job if he's injured.
    If you're saying that having a second target-man is a waste, then I could put the argument that getting a fourth fast, fluid secondary striker to go with Dack, Armstrong and Palmer is redundant too! Same logic.
    In fact, I'm not saying that. My argument is, quite simply, that if it did come down to either/or, I would prefer Gallagher because he covers a role for which we only have only one contender at the moment - a man in his thirties who rarely plays the whole 90 minutes.
    I honestly don't know why this makes you so heated.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,680
    Quote Originally Posted by AucklandRover View Post
    Champs - you're putting words into my mouth. I haven't said DROP anyone. My argument all along has been that I am pretty happy with what we've got.
    After the new signings arrived, the only areas I could see where we genuinely needed cover were for the traditional centre-forward, and the skilful winger. As things have developed, I don't even think the winger is absolutely essential any more, as we have plenty of pace up front with Dack, Armstrong and Palmer, while Bennett looks as good as ever, even up a division. That just leaves cover in the "hold-up" centre-forward position for DG - which is exactly what Gallagher provides.
    I have no idea why you brought in Jerome. My only comment on that thread was that I'd be damned glad when the whole transfer rumour charade was over.
    Where have I said that someone should make way for Gallagher? Nowhere! Not once! I was talking all along about the concept of cover. You are the one who is keener to ring the changes! I was happy with what we've got.
    I totally agree that we CAN play without a traditional centre-forward, but Mowbray himself repeated, just yesterday, that in some matches, Graham would be first choice. That being the case, we need someone who can do the same job if he's injured.
    If you're saying that having a second target-man is a waste, then I could put the argument that getting a fourth fast, fluid secondary striker to go with Dack, Armstrong and Palmer is redundant too! Same logic.
    In fact, I'm not saying that. My argument is, quite simply, that if it did come down to either/or, I would prefer Gallagher because he covers a role for which we only have only one contender at the moment - a man in his thirties who rarely plays the whole 90 minutes.
    I honestly don't know why this makes you so heated.

    £7m would be too much to spend on a guy who can only play one position. Hence we are not in for him.
    But we are in for Brereton.
    And I am not keen to ring the changes, I am supportive of a manager who is wanting to build a side for the future. Not now. And we are not ringing any changes. We are simply building a squad for the future. Over the next few seasons.
    Which is exactly what we are trying to do.
    I just feel TM is taking a big risk, and he isn't the type to do that. So I am prepared to back him. Because ...a. he has earnt that. and .....b. I trust in him.

    Far too much doubting and worrying, I just go and support the manager and players. Who am I to question it all? Its gone well so far, most weeks I turn up, we don't lose. That's been the case since TM arrived. If he wants to build, we build.
    We can sit and worry about players like Wharton going out on loan. He isn't ready, he will be next season.
    We can complain Travis doesn't get game time, but when he does, he makes mistakes.
    We can complain he doesn't need 2 holding midfielders. Ultimately, its working. And it is likely to keep on working over the next few seasons. we can sit and complain not enough of our academy plays in the first team, and ignore it when in the Millwall game, we ended the game with 5 of our home grown players on the pitch. But people want more ..... We can sit and worry, question it all, but it wont change the fact, we are heading in a positive direction. And has been for quite a long time.

    I'm excited a young quality player wants to join us, I don't see that as being a negative at all.
    And like it or not, he is miles ahead of Nuttall, Butterworth etc etc etc ....that's just a fact of life. He wont stunt their growth, he is just an exciting prospect that TM belives in.
    Like he believes in Bradley Dack.

    The same Bradley Dack that people who are worried about this and that said last season .....yeah but this is only division one, he may not be able to make the step up!!
    *******s, I said last season he could step up with ease. And he will.
    Now the same people who doubted he could step up, are now worried about him leaving to go to a Prem Club. I give up!!!!

    So I leave the bloody worrying about EVERY SINGLE THING ....to others. And just enjoy going to games, as its very enjoyable. Once the worrying subsides, there are some positives!!

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,297
    But why are you throwing these things at me, Champs?
    I have been one of Mowbray's strongest supporters - both here and on the Telegraph site.
    Where I differ is that I don't agree with your view that if Mowbray says it or does it, it must be right.
    I am happy to see a season of consolidation in this Division. If that's unambitious, so be it.
    I suppose one point of difference is that I have no particular interest in getting promotion, anyway. This was another thoroughly entertaining game today, and the Championship is already throwing up surprises: look at Stoke; look at Bolton.
    Saxo will hate this, but I must admit I like it here! What would we be facing if we did go up? Well, last season's final PL table tells the story. Burnley were in seventh place with a negative GD, 46 points behind the winners!
    Of course it's glamorous to be visiting United, Liverpool, etc, but we all know it would actually be a case of playing to avoid 18th place.
    I have thoroughly enjoyed all our games so far this season, and that word "enjoyment" does seem to get forgotten a lot.
    Champs, if Brereton comes, I will welcome him and I will be delighted if he does well, but I reserve the right to express the view that his signing is a risk. It's ridiculous to suggest that Mowbray never gets things wrong. Even now, I don't discount the possibility that a couple of the fringe players might come good, but I would say the majority of fans judge Whittingham, Gladwin and Hart to be mistakes on the manager's part. "So what?" is my response to that. No manager in history has got all his signings right. But you have to apply that to the future too, so you can't just say to me, "Don't question TM's judgement about Brereton."
    To take this further, I would say that Rothwell was, if anything, a stop-gap. Mowbray really wanted someone of proven class in that position (Freeman, McGinn, McGeouch), but those pursuits failed. As it turns out, though, Rothwell is looking very good. There is always an element of chance in these things, and - as you know - I have always believed the same thing applies to managerial success.
    I have had many debates with Saxo over the years on this subject and we have agreed to differ!
    In a year's time, Mowbray could be moving on to a top club, or he could be a "zero" to most fans, because things go pear-shaped. That won't change my opinion of him at all. He has turned our club around and brought back positivity. All the same, if I am not convinced by a signing or a playing-decision I will say so, always hoping to be proved wrong.
    Would I be a football supporter in the first place if I didn't have opinions?
    This is totally different from those people who didn't like Mowbray from the start, and now continue to ignore all the positives, while jumping on any little thing that seems to show him in a negative light.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,190
    Wow, you guys are making my head burst!!! lol....lots of very interesting conversation.

    I would take Sam Gallagher. I think 8 million pounds for Brereton is a gamble, but hey, if Venky's have the bucks, why not? But, I've not heard anything regarding Gallagher.

    I would have had Rhodes back...but, that's a non-issue now.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Forum Info

Footymad Forums offer you the chance to interact and discuss all things football with fellow fans from around the world, and share your views on footballing issues from the latest, breaking transfer rumours to the state of the game at international level and everything in between.

Whether your team is battling it out for the Premier League title or struggling for League survival, there's a forum for you!

Gooners, Mackems, Tractor Boys - you're all welcome, please just remember to respect the opinions of others.

Click here for a full list of the hundreds of forums available to you

The forums are free to join, although you must play fair and abide by the rules explained here, otherwise your ability to post may be temporarily or permanently revoked.

So what are you waiting for? Register now and join the debate!

(these forums are not actively moderated, so if you wish to report any comment made by another member please report it.)



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •