TM in the Championship.

[Saxo1man41]

Does any of you remember how we lined up under TM when we almost survived? Did we play 4231 or another formation? I can't remember.

[AucklandRover]

Does any of you remember how we lined up under TM when we almost survived? Did we play 4231 or another formation? I can't remember.

I think he varied the formation a bit in the course of the last few games. Hang on - I'll have a look.

Final match against Brentford, we sort of lined up 5-2-3 or 3-4-3, depending on how you view wing-backs.
Raya
Lenihan Ward Mulgrew
Nyambe Lowe Guthrie Williams
Gallagher Graham Bennett.

Interesting, actually. We tend to talk as if we have not made many changes, but the 18 that day included:
Steele, Ward, Hoban, Lowe, Guthrie, Feeney, Gallagher, Emnes, Joao, Akpan.
Craig Conway was the only other one from that day who is still with us.

[Saxo1man41]

Just wondering if things did start to go wrong whether TM will decide the formation won't work in the championship and change it. My interest in looking back to then is that it may give an insight into what he could do.

[AucklandRover]

Just wondering if things did start to go wrong whether TM will decide the formation won't work in the championship and change it. My interest in looking back to then is that it may give an insight into what he could do.

I think that's highly likely. Mowbray is not the footballing conservative some people made him out to be last season.
He thought we would be able to out-football other teams in D.1, but he quickly amended that when he saw it was as much about strength and solidity as skill. Hence the two holding players and talk of "soldiers". He did vary that, as required, however. We tend to forget that Whittingham played in every game of one of our best unbeaten runs.
Now, Rothwell is beginning to make a very strong case for a starting-role, and that may well happen. The problem is, he will only need to have one poor game, and the "nuclear reactors" will demand to know why Mowbray dropped our most consistent player... Smallwood!!
I honestly think your season very often comes down to one key factor: what percentage of good chances get converted. That was the beauty of Rhodes. He was often totally ineffective in other respects. He certainly couldn't hold the ball up in the way Graham can. His conversion-rate WAS very good, though. By the way, I sometimes wonder if Gary Bowyer wouldn't still be with us if we hadn't missed so many golden opportunities in our frequent periods of dominance during his time).
Champs will think I'm like a dog with a bone, but one reason I would have liked to see Gallagher come in was that he is the kind of "soldier-type" up front who could have set up the "artists" - Dack and Armstrong - with his strength and bravery. Brereton looks to me like another who is fast and skilful, and who likes to run with the ball. That's why I think we may actually see him playing wider. He may prove me wrong, but he doesn't look like a one-for-one replacement for Danny Graham.
That's not a criticism, but it would have been handy to have the flexibility provided by an experienced "target-man".

[champs95]

I do agree, I think we also needed a target man.
I don't believe there is 'one' person in football who can do that role. There are others who can do this role much better than Gallagher. He rarely played in that role for Rovers last time, under TM. That's the main reason. He played out wide.
On the rare occasion he did play central, he rarely scored.
He would need to step in and do more than hold the ball up. Like Graham he would need to score goals. His record his extremely poor. We where interested, but got put off by the price. He is hugely over-priced.
He missed an open goal for Saints last week in the league cup. His form is shot to pieces. They have kept him, as not one side wanted to sign him. Due to his massive wages. And his woeful scoring record.
I am unconvinced his hold up play is the best in football. His goals record is poor. And Stoke had an offer of £7m turned down.
He isn't in the same mould as Graham. He doesn't score goals, he doesn't play in others. He didn't last time he was here.
When he played centrally, the ball rarely stuck.
And he didn't score goals.
So I am a bit puzzled as to how he would come in and play Graham's role? He wont replace the goals. Would likely play out wide, like last time. And cost massive wages?

I agree, we needed a target man. I do think we made enquiries. We decided not to bother.
There are others we did go for, who we missed out on unfortunately.

[champs95]

I think he varied the formation a bit in the course of the last few games. Hang on - I'll have a look.

Final match against Brentford, we sort of lined up 5-2-3 or 3-4-3, depending on how you view wing-backs.
Raya
Lenihan Ward Mulgrew
Nyambe Lowe Guthrie Williams
Gallagher Graham Bennett.

Interesting, actually. We tend to talk as if we have not made many changes, but the 18 that day included:
Steele, Ward, Hoban, Lowe, Guthrie, Feeney, Gallagher, Emnes, Joao, Akpan.
Craig Conway was the only other one from that day who is still with us.

Gallagher was mostly used as a wide man with us last time. Not a holding central striker.
He only played that role last season where his hold up play and goals to game ratio was quite poor.
If you are going to sign a player who can play across the forward 3, and out wide then he would need to have pace. That's why we went for Brereton. He simply offers more options. £7m on one player who can only play one position is just not what we need or want? We need options. We cant justify spending all that on one player, in one position. Not when we need options across the front 3.
I do think we looked to get a player in that central role (like Graham) but failed in getting anyone in. I do not think it was for the want of trying.
TM knew he needed central midfielders desperately. That's where we were going to be weak. So he spent time on getting in quite a few in.

Sunday wasn't great, imagine what it would have been if Caddis, Whittingham, Hart etc etc all played!!!!!!??

[AucklandRover]

I think you've misunderstood my position on Gallagher, Champs. It didn't HAVE to be him; I simply wanted a target-man and he was the one who was mentioned most often in the context of moving to Rovers.
On the other hand, I think you're being very hard on him as a player. He put a huge effort in when he was with us last. I can't remember which game it was, but I recall him throwing himself into a post in a desperate effort to get a head on the ball. And, of course, target-men do not have to do all the scoring. It's always a bonus, but they can also do the job of setting up chances for others.
Incidentally, who WERE the other strikers we went for who are significantly better than Gallagher? The 32-year-old Cameron Jerome? Seriously?
You are again taking the line that if TM goes after someone, that player MUST be better than anyone else suggested. This leads you to assume that Brereton will be a brilliant success. We all hope he WILL be, but you can't just claim it off the top of your head!
Brereton, Dack, Armstrong and Palmer all like to do similar things. Their presence means we are very strong in that area between midfield and the No.9, but they can't all play at once. TM has already said Brereton may have to play as the "wide striker" ( in the same way Antonsson did), which is fine, but doesn't necessarily solve the problem of replacing Graham in the final half-hour or when he is unavailable.
Obviously, Armstrong fancies himself as an outright centre-forward, but he's not really a target-man, is he?
I accept we won't always need to play someone in that role at all, but I am simply echoing Mowbray when I say it is an alternative we need to have available.
At the moment, it's really only Nuttall who fits the bill, and he hasn't mastered the job yet.
In addition to the four "secondary strikers" I mentioned, we have Rothwell forcing himself into the picture as a creative/attacking central midfielder.
If he is in the team, along with Bennett, the situation up front becomes even more complicated. What I mean is, can we really take the risk of fielding the team which follows?
Raya
Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Bell
Bennett Rothwell Evans
Brereton Dack
Graham.
(So no Palmer and no Armstrong).
That line-up has huge scoring potential, but would it be secure enough? You see the problem? If there are no injuries, we are spoiled for choice in certain attacking areas, but a little lacking in respect of the Graham role.
In other words, did Brereton and Gallagher (or similar) HAVE to be "either/or"?
If it turns out that Brereton CAN lead the line, the problem will be solved, but we don't know that, and the Youtube clips suggest that has not been his primary function so far.