Derby(away)predictions

[robinrover]

Oh yes
Aucks 22 points
Robinrover 12 points
Saxo 6 points
Champs 6 points
Can anyone stop the might of aucks

[champs95]

I went back to bed with a cold flannel on my head after that! To be honest, though, I thought we looked most comfortable in the last 15 minutes, which made it a bit less nerve-wracking.
Lots of Telegraph posters saying we were too defensive. To be honest, I thought the opposite. Given my cautious approach, I wouldn't have started with three attacking players, in a game where we were bound to be on the back foot. Also, I'd have taken Palmer and Armstrong off, moved Conway to the left, brought Bennett on in his usual position, and used just Graham and Dack in attack.
Mowbray got the job done, however, as he so often does.
I have to say, Armstrong has only been moderate so far, this season. Palmer? Jury still out.
Raya and Nyambe were very good. Williams ran miles to cover, and - as usual - Smallwood and Evans did what they're in the team for.
Dack didn't take the pressure off the defence enough in this match, but he was due an off day. (Does anyone else agree that Dack always seems to look at his best when Bennett is on the pitch? Perhaps it's just coincidence). Graham made a difference.
When we get through this spell of particularly tough games, I think we might see Rothwell featuring more, but the Telegraph posters who are arguing that Reed and Rothwell should be preferred to Evans and Smallwood from the start are just taking a punt. Why tinker in the area of the pitch that has done us proud? Even the new players seem to accept that.

Interesting points Aucks.
Certainly about Armstrong. I'm in agreement. He hasn't scored yet, and has looked okish. That's it.
You can see why we didn't want to pay more than £1.75m ....I don't think he looks like scoring much.
But I am wary of the situation. He did nothing at Bolton because he was played out left. Which he is playing with us.
He will vocalise he feels his best position is Central striker. But when played, he is pretty ineffective. Absolutely nothing like Graham. And about as half as effective. Tough one, he wont occupy a place centrally that much, and is pretty ineffective out left. Useful to have as a squad player, but nothing more. And we paid around the right fee.

I agree about Bennett aswell, re Dack. That said I felt Bennett did look very tired vrs Villa, and probably needed a rest. that's the point of having a good squad. I do also agree about Rothwell and Reed. Both are quality from what I have seen, but TM is keeping with players who have not let us down. The idea was to build a very strong squad up, so we create massive comepetion for places. I know it was dicussed at length as to why we where bringing in players, but now you can see. The whole squad has had an upgrade. And almost every player on the bench is as strong as who is playing. Armstrong did look ok out left in Div1. But this isn't Div1. Unlike Dack etc ....he cant make the step up in quality.
Whether I think Reed is better than Smallwood or not .....that's irrelevant. For now we have only lost once, and nobody has let anyone down. So it would be wrong to start taking players out for no real reason. Its a long season, league, cups etc. Mostly its 2 games a week from now on. Everyone will get a chance, Reed, Rothwell, Davenport .......

[champs95]

Oh yes
Aucks 22 points
Robinrover 12 points
Saxo 6 points
Champs 6 points
Can anyone stop the might of aucks

Me and Saxo in a relegation dog-fight.
I've been out in the Press saying I don't think Saxo has the mineral's for the fight.
I've been accused of thinking I'm 'too good to go down'.

We have a 6 pointer on Saturday at Stoke



.....like Burnley ....Alf's time is finally up

[AucklandRover]

I think that's right, but I still worry that we have a bit of redundancy. I do accept we might need a change or two on Saturday. Presumably, it will be dependent on knocks and bruises assessment in training. I don't worry too much about the midfield or defence, in any case. It's quite easy to see how different players can drop in and out there without too much disruption.
Up front is trickier, however. Brereton is, I assume, the medium-term replacement for Graham, but he doesn't look quite the target-man type. I've watched the Youtube stuff on him again, and he definitely seems to prefer picking the ball up deeper and running at players.
On the evidence, Armstrong would probably be best playing off Graham as the secondary striker, but I can see TM's dilemma, because he wants Dack reasonably central too, which forces Armstrong wider. Given that Palmer would probably be at his best in Dack's position, it gets very complicated.
It would almost be simpler to have just two in front of the midfield. As I said, I thought three forward players against Derby was high risk.
On form, and to cover a few bases, I wouldn't mind seeing this:
Raya
Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Williams
Bennett Smallwood Evans Bell
Dack
Graham.
That's asking a lot of Danny, but Bell and Bennett are capable as both attackers and defenders.
4-4-2 seems to be out of favour, but I still think it has a lot going for it. With those two out wide, we could even afford to replace one of the holding midfielders with Rothwell in the games where we are more likely to dominate possession. (Incidentally, I didn't think Conway did too much wrong, so I could understand him looking p*ssed off. We did need Graham as an outlet, though).
The headache for me at the moment is solving "how many and which ones" from Graham, Brereton, Armstrong, Palmer and Dack?
To be completely honest, I'm not even sure what Palmer has been signed as. Transfermarkt has him down as an "attacking midfielder", but we're not going to use him in that role, are we? Is he just cover for Dack, then? I know he has sometimes played as a winger, but I don't see how we can easily slot him in there, either.
Some good players are going to spend a lot of time on the bench.
I know managers feel comfortable like that, but how the hell do you keep everybody happy if the team is quite settled and not disrupted by injury too much over the course of a season?
On that bench? Rodwell, Downing, Davenport, Reed, Rothwell, Conway, two from Palmer/Brereton/Armstrong, and one from Bell/Williams - not to mention the youngsters. A hell of a group to be doing training only!!

[champs95]

I think that's right, but I still worry that we have a bit of redundancy. I do accept we might need a change or two on Saturday. Presumably, it will be dependent on knocks and bruises assessment in training. I don't worry too much about the midfield or defence, in any case. It's quite easy to see how different players can drop in and out there without too much disruption.
Up front is trickier, however. Brereton is, I assume, the medium-term replacement for Graham, but he doesn't look quite the target-man type. I've watched the Youtube stuff on him again, and he definitely seems to prefer picking the ball up deeper and running at players.
On the evidence, Armstrong would probably be best playing off Graham as the secondary striker, but I can see TM's dilemma, because he wants Dack reasonably central too, which forces Armstrong wider. Given that Palmer would probably be at his best in Dack's position, it gets very complicated.
It would almost be simpler to have just two in front of the midfield. As I said, I thought three forward players against Derby was high risk.
On form, and to cover a few bases, I wouldn't mind seeing this:
Raya
Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Williams
Bennett Smallwood Evans Bell
Dack
Graham.
That's asking a lot of Danny, but Bell and Bennett are capable as both attackers and defenders.
4-4-2 seems to be out of favour, but I still think it has a lot going for it. With those two out wide, we could even afford to replace one of the holding midfielders with Rothwell in the games where we are more likely to dominate possession. (Incidentally, I didn't think Conway did too much wrong, so I could understand him looking p*ssed off. We did need Graham as an outlet, though).
The headache for me at the moment is solving "how many and which ones" from Graham, Brereton, Armstrong, Palmer and Dack?
To be completely honest, I'm not even sure what Palmer has been signed as. Transfermarkt has him down as an "attacking midfielder", but we're not going to use him in that role, are we? Is he just cover for Dack, then? I know he has sometimes played as a winger, but I don't see how we can easily slot him in there, either.
Some good players are going to spend a lot of time on the bench.
I know managers feel comfortable like that, but how the hell do you keep everybody happy if the team is quite settled and not disrupted by injury too much over the course of a season?
On that bench? Rodwell, Downing, Davenport, Reed, Rothwell, Conway, two from Palmer/Brereton/Armstrong, and one from Bell/Williams - not to mention the youngsters. A hell of a group to be doing training only!!

Everyone will play a part. Maybe not so much Downing etc.
We could say the same for Bell? Why did we sign him?
He barley played, and Williams is decent.
We have him, as we needed someone as good to step when Williams got injured.
Bell hasn't put a foot wrong really, so will now not lose his place in the team. And its not like Williams did much wrong.

As good as Reed, Rothwell etc are, why should they walk straight in? Before Evans and Smallwood, Bennett etc?
We are where we are in the table Auks, because we have a really strong squad.
Had we kept Hart, Whittingham, Caddis, once we got injuries ....we'd have really struggled.
Everyone will play in a 50+ game season. You simply have to have a large squad, with 2 players of equal quality in every position. Get injuries, suspensions you aren't massively weakened.
Meaning every week, a good set of players miss out. But will likely feature 23 days later in the midweek game.

Its still too early to assess? I like Palmer. When Dack was injured, he came and scored the winner vrs the team second in the Championship. He was signed for things like that Auks.
Because hardly anyone stays fit all season. Its a squad game, definitely in this league. Our manager knew this and worked hard and bringing in quality.

[champs95]

Everyone will play a part. Maybe not so much Downing etc.
We could say the same for Bell? Why did we sign him?
He barley played, and Williams is decent.
We have him, as we needed someone as good to step when Williams got injured.
Bell hasn't put a foot wrong really, so will now not lose his place in the team. And its not like Williams did much wrong.

As good as Reed, Rothwell etc are, why should they walk straight in? Before Evans and Smallwood, Bennett etc?
We are where we are in the table Auks, because we have a really strong squad.
Had we kept Hart, Whittingham, Caddis, once we got injuries ....we'd have really struggled.
Everyone will play in a 50+ game season. You simply have to have a large squad, with 2 players of equal quality in every position. Get injuries, suspensions you aren't massively weakened.
Meaning every week, a good set of players miss out. But will likely feature 23 days later in the midweek game.

Its still too early to assess? I like Palmer. When Dack was injured, he came and scored the winner vrs the team second in the Championship. He was signed for things like that Auks.
Because hardly anyone stays fit all season. Its a squad game, definitely in this league. Our manager knew this and worked hard and bringing in quality.

at 19 I don't think Brereton was bought to play every single week.
And why would be drop probably one of our best most important players.
Over the season, lets see how a 19 year old lad with talent gets on with being intergrated?
Lets maybe assess a 19 year old in 12/18 months time? Not after 2 weeks.

[test]

at 19 I don't think Brereton was bought to play every single week.
And why would be drop probably one of our best most important players.
Over the season, lets see how a 19 year old lad with talent gets on with being intergrated?
Lets maybe assess a 19 year old in 12/18 months time? Not after 2 weeks.

I think we have agreed a fee of six or seven million for Brereton in January so I hope that a full assessment has already been made. We cannot afford another Grabbi at this stage of our comeback.

[Despair]

Yep, it's a huge gamble by TM .
As Champs points out there are many many equally huge valued signings being made left right and centre now in the Champs (thanks Sky!). The majority, if not all have been 'criticised', TBH for which I couldn't give tuppence ie it's their potential folly.
However, no one is infallible and therefore human and will make errors of judgement now and again. TM is one such individual, and leads our club.
This is not negativity or criticism, but given our position it is a hell of a gamble.
I earnestly hope he has got this one right.

[AucklandRover]

It IS a gamble, but I accept Brereton will be developed over the next 18 months. I also wouldn't deny for a minute Champs' point that it's a squad game. All the same, the 2017-18 players have still been the go-to ones so far (with Reed and Rothwell looking very promising), and, after Tuesday, I would find it very puzzling if Williams gets dropped again. In contrast, I am not sure what Palmer has done so far to warrant a place that - to some extent - unbalances the team.
There are lots of calls for Reed and Rothwell to play ahead of Evans and Smallwood, because of their superior ability to keep possession. Well, that is only speculative at the moment, and I wonder if they would have coped as well with Derby's onslaught as the two old stagers did! One extra point on that - the excellent discipline shown. Derby committed 18 fouls to our 13, which is quite remarkable in a match with that pattern!
Some posters on the Telegraph are saying TM picked a conservative team. I don't agree at all. As I've said, I wouldn't have risked three forward players and a semi-winger in such a match! Mowbray had a definite plan that didn't require ball-playing central midfielders. Unfortunately, the front three couldn't hold on to the ball in the way he expected and things had to be changed.
When we get to some of the "easier" games, I am sure we'll see Rothwell or/and Reed, but I think TM is quite entitled to ask why he should make significant changes, given where we are in the table.
Incidentally, the difference Graham made (despite the fact he wasn't quite as accurate as usual) adds weight to the theory that the "target-man" is not dead, despite the modern trend towards fast, versatile forwards. (Sorry, Champs, but that's why I'd have gone for Gallagher, or someone similar, in the short term, rather than Brereton. So far, neither Brereton nor Armstrong has looked ideally suited to that important role. I think we may well be able to build a team around the qualities of Brereton and Dack together over the medium term, but not this season).

[champs95]

It IS a gamble, but I accept Brereton will be developed over the next 18 months. I also wouldn't deny for a minute Champs' point that it's a squad game. All the same, the 2017-18 players have still been the go-to ones so far (with Reed and Rothwell looking very promising), and, after Tuesday, I would find it very puzzling if Williams gets dropped again. In contrast, I am not sure what Palmer has done so far to warrant a place that - to some extent - unbalances the team.
There are lots of calls for Reed and Rothwell to play ahead of Evans and Smallwood, because of their superior ability to keep possession. Well, that is only speculative at the moment, and I wonder if they would have coped as well with Derby's onslaught as the two old stagers did! One extra point on that - the excellent discipline shown. Derby committed 18 fouls to our 13, which is quite remarkable in a match with that pattern!
Some posters on the Telegraph are saying TM picked a conservative team. I don't agree at all. As I've said, I wouldn't have risked three forward players and a semi-winger in such a match! Mowbray had a definite plan that didn't require ball-playing central midfielders. Unfortunately, the front three couldn't hold on to the ball in the way he expected and things had to be changed.
When we get to some of the "easier" games, I am sure we'll see Rothwell or/and Reed, but I think TM is quite entitled to ask why he should make significant changes, given where we are in the table.
Incidentally, the difference Graham made (despite the fact he wasn't quite as accurate as usual) adds weight to the theory that the "target-man" is not dead, despite the modern trend towards fast, versatile forwards. (Sorry, Champs, but that's why I'd have gone for Gallagher, or someone similar, in the short term, rather than Brereton. So far, neither Brereton nor Armstrong has looked ideally suited to that important role. I think we may well be able to build a team around the qualities of Brereton and Dack together over the medium term, but not this season).

This is all I will add to all of this re Brereton.
Tony Mowbray knows this is a large amount of money to spend.
He knows his stock has never been so high as a manager. He has the full trust of the club, and the full trust of the owners. Who have trusted in him, and given him a large sum of money to sign a 19 year old.

Nothing about TM makes me think he is a gambling man, who takes huge risks.

Why would he take such a massive gamble is all I ask? Has he every looked like being a risk taker?

He has an almost unbleamished record at Rovers, so he will be fully aware he is risking all of this.
If this Brereton deal goes wrong, forget the promotion. Forget not losing in over a year. Forget the direction we have turned. Forget the positive feeling inside the club.

People are sat waiting for one result to go wrong, before they can start.

Or one signing that may not come off? And the same, they will be so quick to pounce. People just sat waiting for things to go wrong, so they can jump on it.

Like writing this lad off after a few weeks and not seeing him play. That's a huge call.


I will be looking to see what this 19 year old lad is doing in 12 months time, as I understand how football works. This Sky generation has taught normal fans to not think straight, and demand success HERE AND NOW!!!

He has to be playing now, and scoring 3 goals on his debut or I will be sat here every weekend questioning it? Nah ........football doesn't work that way.

What you guys wanted, was a guy to come in, and take DG place basically. Which completely goes against this notion of agreeing that Bennett/Evans/Smallwood should not be taken out of the team.
But you DO want a striker to walk straight in, displace probably our best and most senior pro .....because you believe in this pathetic Sky generation of everybody has to be successful today! Not tomorrow, or next week ......TODAY!! NOW.


For level headed people, and you would not expect this with anything else? Why expect this? If we lose 5 games in a row, do you think we should SACK MOWBRAY!!!! BECAUSE WE ARENT DOING WELL HERE AND NOW!!!!


No, that would be absolutely mental.


We aren't going down, we are actually quite a strong side right here and now. Why rush a 19 year old because of YOUR expectations, not really based on sound thinking? In short, what is your rush in seeing a finished article Auks? So surley now is the time to get in young players, to progress? As we are actually very strong as it is. Id rather spend £7m of a 19 year old. than £10m on a 29 year old. Both of similar ability.

Do you think a side who has just been playing Div 1 football, who have a relatively tiny budget compared to the rest of the league, should be going out and buying a finished article?

You keep saying Gallagher?? Nobody wanted him. And he is playing against a bunch of kids in the Under 23 league. He has hardly progessed has he? He appears to have gone backwards. Why risk £7m on a guy who is going backwards? Who we know cant do it?? As he was with us before, and we went down. He showed no real signs of progressing, since then he has scored less goals? That seems a huge gamble? And not one side wanted to sign him. Put off by the stupid £7m fee.