|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 5, 2019 10:29:14 GMT
They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened. Blimey, Rob. I don't disagree with you but if we had a 'dispirited squad on a downward spiral' post Pulis what does that make this shower of shit we've been 'enjoying' these past 3 years?! I didn’t realise they were mutually exclusive mate? What would you describe three wins in five months, a win record of 22% overall since the previous January and players chucking bricks through each other’s car windows as? Just because things are comfortably worse now doesn’t mean it wasn’t shit then?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 5, 2019 10:30:01 GMT
4 managers we have had since pulis?, each of them would have seen stoke as a progression or another chance at their career.. maybe we do do something that certain established higher profile managers just won't put up with? Who would be an ‘established manager’ in this context?
|
|
|
Post by chad on Feb 5, 2019 10:43:42 GMT
Blimey, Rob. I don't disagree with you but if we had a 'dispirited squad on a downward spiral' post Pulis what does that make this shower of shit we've been 'enjoying' these past 3 years?! I didn’t realise they were mutually exclusive mate? What would you describe three wins in five months, a win record of 22% overall since the previous January and players chucking bricks through each other’s car windows as? Just because things are comfortably worse now doesn’t mean it wasn’t shit then? Yeh. But at least we were Premier League shit 😊
|
|
|
Post by berahinosgoals on Feb 5, 2019 11:03:57 GMT
4 managers we have had since pulis?, each of them would have seen stoke as a progression or another chance at their career.. maybe we do do something that certain established higher profile managers just won't put up with? Who would be an ‘established manager’ in this context? Jokanovic springs to mind, 'wanted certain assurances', couldn't imagine allardyce lasting a season with Paul & barry , moyes has been approached before, o Neill not interested, Qsf turns the job down
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 5, 2019 11:13:08 GMT
Who would be an ‘established manager’ in this context? Jokanovic springs to mind, 'wanted certain assurances', couldn't imagine allardyce lasting a season with Paul & barry , moyes has been approached before, o Neill not interested, Qsf turns the job down Of those, isn’t Allardyce the only one who wouldn’t, to some degree, fall into the ‘another chance at their career’ bracket? Jokanovic has worked at two clubs where he’s had far less say in transfers than he’d have had here...
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 5, 2019 11:23:03 GMT
People still don't get this, do they? Hughes did not change. His scattergun approach to signings began from the start. He got away with it whilst he had the core of Pulis' solid premier league squad. Eventually, Hughes' lack of any clear plan caught up with him and the holiday camp atmosphere which he seemed to encourage finally destroyed everything that had been our strengths. It is because he had been allowed so long to take everything apart that it is taking so long to rebuild it. They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened. Interesting debate. Certainly signings like Arnie were good value for money - in hind sight. I sometimes wonder if it was the case that the signings like Arnie and Bojan ( waifs and strays at minimal cost) in Hughes' early years didn't make him (and our owners and chief exec) think that the obvious way to progress was "simply" to buy a few higher cost waifs and strays. I suspect Hughes thought that he had discovered a fairly foolproof way of putting the careers of talented players who had lost their way, back on track - and sadly the club hierarchy went along with it without asking too many questions even as the cost of such targets escalated.
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Feb 5, 2019 11:28:36 GMT
They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened. Interesting debate. Certainly signings like Arnie were good value for money - in hind sight. I sometimes wonder if it was the case that the signings like Arnie and Bojan ( waifs and strays at minimal cost) in Hughes' early years didn't make him (and our owners and chief exec) think that the obvious way to progress was "simply" to buy a few higher cost waifs and strays. I suspect Hughes thought that he had discovered a fairly foolproof way of putting the careers of talented players who had lost their way, back on track - and sadly the club hierarchy went along with it without asking too many questions even as the cost of such targets escalated. I am sure this is correct . A high risk policy bound to come crashing round our ears sooner or later.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 5, 2019 11:35:25 GMT
They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened. Interesting debate. Certainly signings like Arnie were good value for money - in hind sight. I sometimes wonder if it was the case that the signings like Arnie and Bojan ( waifs and strays at minimal cost) in Hughes' early years didn't make him (and our owners and chief exec) think that the obvious way to progress was "simply" to buy a few higher cost waifs and strays. I suspect Hughes thought that he had discovered a fairly foolproof way of putting the careers of talented players who had lost their way, back on track - and sadly the club hierarchy went along with it without asking too many questions even as the cost of such targets escalated. I think that’s basically it. The dogs’ home approach, only continental. I’m certain that’s what expired signings like Choupo and Jese, he saw another Arnie and Bojan in them.
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Feb 5, 2019 12:14:16 GMT
Hmmm🤔 yes we need to clear out, yes it’s a long term project, yes work towards next season. Trying to buy time for bugger all happening soon NJ, yes most definitely!
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Feb 5, 2019 12:28:12 GMT
People still don't get this, do they? Hughes did not change. His scattergun approach to signings began from the start. He got away with it whilst he had the core of Pulis' solid premier league squad. Eventually, Hughes' lack of any clear plan caught up with him and the holiday camp atmosphere which he seemed to encourage finally destroyed everything that had been our strengths. It is because he had been allowed so long to take everything apart that it is taking so long to rebuild it. They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened. Think you're going to have to use this template for a long time Rob.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 5, 2019 12:31:41 GMT
They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened. Think you're going to have to use this template for a long time Rob. It’s been years already mate, there’s no stopping the Cult of Tony.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Feb 5, 2019 12:36:28 GMT
Think you're going to have to use this template for a long time Rob. It’s been years already mate, there’s no stopping the Cult of Tony. The only man to take a club to three consecutive top 9 finishes while he wasn't even there.
|
|
|
Post by adi on Feb 5, 2019 12:37:56 GMT
Be unwise to settle on a plan until we know why leave we are playing in . ?
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Feb 5, 2019 12:39:41 GMT
Be unwise to settle on a plan until we know why leave we are playing in . ? The story of Brexit.
|
|
|
Post by adi on Feb 5, 2019 12:41:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2019 12:42:48 GMT
In 2 minds about this: 1. Yes, we know NJ. Thanks. 2. As we know we are planning for next year now, why were the decisions this past window so relatively conservative. Wouldn't you have a) shipped out pretty much everyone you could that was not part of your plan (Maclean? Bojan? Shawx?).. or v. likely to leave in summer (Butland, Allen), b) ... and then taken players on loan where possible to test their worthiness for being perm acquisitions summer; or got your 4 key targets in to give your team 1/2 season to gel, and steal a march? (aka Mings-esque sorts; get the LWB/LB in place; pay for McKenna if he is "the one" he has earmarked - Aberdeen would have accepted 8 +% of next sale and Souttar say, wouldn't they?) This season is gone for promotion, but couldn't we have got to 80% of next season's likely team, rather than 50% and faced with the prospect of having a major summer rebuild and 10 games to gel at the start of next season? As I say, am in two minds.... Guess it makes summer interesting. It's not as simple as just shipping everyone out. Someone's got to want them and they've got to want the move too. I don't understand what the sticking point on this is with some folk! It's a pretty basic issue isnt it... cant get rid unless we have someone to get rid of them to. He also had a whole TWO WEEKS. Who in the right mind possibly thinks that a manager can come in to a new club and not only figure everything out in two weeks, but get all the players in to suit?? Not only that - but to also sell earlier those 'likely to leave in summer' and replace them too! We got in to the shit because we got the wrong kind of players in without due diligence or ensuring they have the right character. So now we seem to be taking the extra effort to do that, it's suddenly a criticism because we've not been able to get enough players in! Jones was very clear from the start...it WILL take time, it CAN get worse before it gets better, but we're working towards something different and that takes time and patience. There are, seemingly, quite a number of folk who just have entirely unrealistic expectations and no idea of how the real world operates.
|
|
|
Post by Scrotnig on Feb 5, 2019 14:00:20 GMT
Be unwise to settle on a plan until we know why leave we are playing in . It'll be the championship, I think promotion has got away from us now, I assume you meant promotion, you're not stupid enough to be thinking of relegation are you...... Lots of people on here were ridiculed for talking of relegation last season.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Feb 5, 2019 14:30:33 GMT
Be unwise to settle on a plan until we know why leave we are playing in . It'll be the championship, I think promotion has got away from us now, I assume you meant promotion, you're not stupid enough to be thinking of relegation are you...... It would take a pretty catastrophic set of results to see us go down. If we lost say the next 7 I’d be worried.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2019 15:33:48 GMT
Come on then who's in?
|
|
|
Post by johnnypotter on Feb 5, 2019 16:07:44 GMT
I wonder if Alan Durban has looked at the position N.J has at Stoke and can see similarities with when he came in the first time. Both were/are young Welsh managers coming in from a lower league. Both managers came into a Stoke side in the lower half of the table. Durban took on a team that had recently been knocked out of the F.A cup by Blyth Spartans, the slight difference with our Shrewsbury defeat was that N.J was already here, but not long into his tenure. The first task for Durban was the indiscipline of his squad that needed their arses kicking, Nathan has certainly seen the same problem. Durban knew that for the remainder of that season he had to instill good habits into his players, this is another thing N.J will be attempting to do. The next full season they could stamp their authority and character into the players, this is the same for N.J. The only major difference was that Durban had to bring bargain buys to improve his squad. So, I think that as with Alan Durban, Nathan Jones will have a better squad and attitude at his disposal as long as N.J brings in players he wants/needs.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Feb 5, 2019 16:17:56 GMT
I wonder if Alan Durban has looked at the position N.J has at Stoke and can see similarities with when he came in the first time. Both were/are young Welsh managers coming in from a lower league. Both managers came into a Stoke side in the lower half of the table. Durban took on a team that had recently been knocked out of the F.A cup by Blyth Spartans, the slight difference with our Shrewsbury defeat was that N.J was already here, but not long into his tenure. The first task for Durban was the indiscipline of his squad that needed their arses kicking, Nathan has certainly seen the same problem. Durban knew that for the remainder of that season he had to instill good habits into his players, this is another thing N.J will be attempting to do. The next full season they could stamp their authority and character into the players, this is the same for N.J. The only major difference was that Durban had to bring bargain buys to improve his squad. So, I think that as with Alan Durban, Nathan Jones will have a better squad and attitude at his disposal as long as N.J brings in players he wants/needs. Lambert was dealing with things similarly to Durban. Durban wasn’t hampered by having to deal with millionaires who could pick up astronomical wages for doing bugger all. The players in the 70s team were playing for their livelihoods. It’s a massively more difficult job now I’d imagine. That’s no disrespect to Durban who I don’t think gets the recognition he should for the job he did.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 5, 2019 16:50:11 GMT
People still don't get this, do they? Hughes did not change. His scattergun approach to signings began from the start. He got away with it whilst he had the core of Pulis' solid premier league squad. Eventually, Hughes' lack of any clear plan caught up with him and the holiday camp atmosphere which he seemed to encourage finally destroyed everything that had been our strengths. It is because he had been allowed so long to take everything apart that it is taking so long to rebuild it. They ‘don’t get it’ because it isn’t as simple as that. You act like Hughes inherited the keys to the kingdom and got lucky, in his early years he actually breathed new life into a dispirited squad on a downward spiral and took it to heights it hadn’t previously reached. It wasn’t ‘scattergun’ at first by any stretch. He wanted to play a counter attacking 4-2-3-1 and recognised the team needed proper full backs, some pace and some creativity, which he initially delivered. He absolutely did fail to replace the key components he inherited and lost sight of what had made his football work so well in the end, but it isn’t true to portray him as this blundering chancer who rode Pulis’ coattails as that really isn’t what happened.
It's the main reason i'm looking forward to a big change in the squad over the summer.
No-one can go around hailing Tone as the Messiah years after he's gone anymore, as there won't be any of his players left....although i'm sure the same people will somehow find some other reason that any success Jones may have will be actually down to the old fucking dinosaur.
It's just myth, after myth, after re-writing of history with these lot.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Feb 5, 2019 17:50:49 GMT
Really good championship players will be hard to get as the clubs they are with now will want to keep them!
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Feb 5, 2019 17:52:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 5, 2019 18:17:30 GMT
We have been planning for next season ever since I started supporting this club in 1968!!! Its been working a treat so far........
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 5, 2019 18:20:33 GMT
I wonder if Alan Durban has looked at the position N.J has at Stoke and can see similarities with when he came in the first time. Both were/are young Welsh managers coming in from a lower league. Both managers came into a Stoke side in the lower half of the table. Durban took on a team that had recently been knocked out of the F.A cup by Blyth Spartans, the slight difference with our Shrewsbury defeat was that N.J was already here, but not long into his tenure. The first task for Durban was the indiscipline of his squad that needed their arses kicking, Nathan has certainly seen the same problem. Durban knew that for the remainder of that season he had to instill good habits into his players, this is another thing N.J will be attempting to do. The next full season they could stamp their authority and character into the players, this is the same for N.J. The only major difference was that Durban had to bring bargain buys to improve his squad. So, I think that as with Alan Durban, Nathan Jones will have a better squad and attitude at his disposal as long as N.J brings in players he wants/needs. Lambert was dealing with things similarly to Durban. Durban wasn’t hampered by having to deal with millionaires who could pick up astronomical wages for doing bugger all. The players in the 70s team were playing for their livelihoods. It’s a massively more difficult job now I’d imagine. That’s no disrespect to Durban who I don’t think gets the recognition he should for the job he did. Very problematic comparing 70s football to modern day stuff.....The money involved makes it a completely different world and culture. Even the balls are different now!
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Feb 5, 2019 18:40:30 GMT
In 2 minds about this: 1. Yes, we know NJ. Thanks. 2. As we know we are planning for next year now, why were the decisions this past window so relatively conservative. Wouldn't you have a) shipped out pretty much everyone you could that was not part of your plan (Maclean? Bojan? Shawx?).. or v. likely to leave in summer (Butland, Allen), b) ... and then taken players on loan where possible to test their worthiness for being perm acquisitions summer; or got your 4 key targets in to give your team 1/2 season to gel, and steal a march? (aka Mings-esque sorts; get the LWB/LB in place; pay for McKenna if he is "the one" he has earmarked - Aberdeen would have accepted 8 +% of next sale and Souttar say, wouldn't they?) This season is gone for promotion, but couldn't we have got to 80% of next season's likely team, rather than 50% and faced with the prospect of having a major summer rebuild and 10 games to gel at the start of next season? As I say, am in two minds.... Guess it makes summer interesting. It's not as simple as just shipping everyone out. Someone's got to want them and they've got to want the move too. Absolutely bang-fucking-on. Why can't people fathom that we have players on enormous contracts (even with the salary drop) and both our club another club and the player themselves have to agree to a move? Fuck Imbula off, fuck Wimmer off etc etc... that's great but no fucker wants them!
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Feb 5, 2019 18:41:17 GMT
Lambert was dealing with things similarly to Durban. Durban wasn’t hampered by having to deal with millionaires who could pick up astronomical wages for doing bugger all. The players in the 70s team were playing for their livelihoods. It’s a massively more difficult job now I’d imagine. That’s no disrespect to Durban who I don’t think gets the recognition he should for the job he did. Very problematic comparing 70s football to modern day stuff.....The money involved makes it a completely different world and culture. Even the balls are different now! The balls, the pitches, the money, the supporters, the stadiums. There's not much left of the game I first started watching. That's why it grinds my gears when some dick-measurers say it can only be new supporters who're ready to give up. Some older supporters just don't recognise or want to associate themselves with football as a business in comparison to the sport it used to be, and they'll take this opportunity to jump ship. Sorry, wrong thread I know.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Feb 5, 2019 18:56:08 GMT
In response to the title of the original post........and so he should be!!
IMHO this season (for a plethora of reasons) has been a nothing short of a disaster. 2018/2019 has seen us reap the benefits of mis-management of the highest order over several years.
For me its back to “ground zero” and I’m hopeful that “reality” will witness the start of a revolution with NJ at the helm. The importance of this summer’s and next January’s transfer windows cannot, and should not be underestimated. Otherwise the footballing wilderness will be calling.
|
|
|
Post by tony1234 on Feb 6, 2019 10:35:34 GMT
In 2 minds about this: 1. Yes, we know NJ. Thanks. 2. As we know we are planning for next year now, why were the decisions this past window so relatively conservative. Wouldn't you have a) shipped out pretty much everyone you could that was not part of your plan (Maclean? Bojan? Shawx?).. or v. likely to leave in summer (Butland, Allen), b) ... and then taken players on loan where possible to test their worthiness for being perm acquisitions summer; or got your 4 key targets in to give your team 1/2 season to gel, and steal a march? (aka Mings-esque sorts; get the LWB/LB in place; pay for McKenna if he is "the one" he has earmarked - Aberdeen would have accepted 8 +% of next sale and Souttar say, wouldn't they?) This season is gone for promotion, but couldn't we have got to 80% of next season's likely team, rather than 50% and faced with the prospect of having a major summer rebuild and 10 games to gel at the start of next season? As I say, am in two minds.... Guess it makes summer interesting. Tony We can’t ship anyone out unless there is a taker or we pay contracts up. It’s easy if contracts are only running until June, players like Berahino have got almost 3 years left (I think) Understand that. I found it surprising and curious that NJ was optimisic about making big changes in the summer when he talked. It made me wonder, well if you are so confident of getting players out in the summer, then why wouldn't you do more of that in January and have a longer run with a team you wanted? Before he said that, I was of the same mind - that it was practically impossible to shift most of the players we'd like to see gone.
|
|