|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 27, 2019 15:54:25 GMT
Its got me thinking this one. But I think its pretty hard to argue against the fact that when we get hold of a manager or player they instantly turn into a worse version of themselves. The list is endless.
I've thought about my own career and its dawned on me that when you arrive at a company and quickly realise there are many things wrong with the way the company operates you kind of lose the will to want to perform to your best. Eventually resigning yourself to stick it out for a bit and plod along until the right opportunity comes along to get a move to another company vowing to have learnt a lesson from the last move.
This is the problem at Stoke I think. I don't profess to know exactly what it is but there is something about the club set up that is draining any enthusiasm a player or manager might have when they first arrive. We can keep tinkering around with new managers and players but ultimately there is a pressing need to sort out what is going on upstairs and change the working atmosphere for the playing staff. Until then I think very little will change in terms of our fortunes.
|
|
|
|
Post by loosestools on Oct 27, 2019 16:18:10 GMT
The Owners are not demanding enough!
|
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 27, 2019 16:56:20 GMT
They need management consultants in first off to identify for them where the issues lie. It just seems to require a 3rd party with an unbiased set of eyes to point out what might be glaring problems that the owners are failing to identify. Then they can start making some decisions about new senior management appointments and form a sustainable plan to get the club moving in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by heworksardtho on Oct 27, 2019 17:06:46 GMT
Because they are shit bang average footballers 😎
|
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 27, 2019 17:10:06 GMT
Because they are shit bang average footballers 😎 That maybe so but why are they getting worse when they come here? Or is it me and they are shit anyway and just continue to be shit here? At the very least we never seem to improve a player. |
|
|
|
Post by chad on Oct 27, 2019 17:30:51 GMT
They’re not underperforming. They’re just wank
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2019 17:37:30 GMT
I think yesterday had a lot to do with not playing a number 10 who presses forward, and having a centre mid who can't control a football when passing out through the middle.
The rest of the season, honestly I don't know. We've performed like a horribly inconsistent mid table side, but we find ourselves in the bottom 2.
I still have hope we can at least scrape back up to mid table and carry on tearing out the rot.
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Oct 27, 2019 17:42:16 GMT
The manager is out of his depth. The squad is good enough to win the league.
Go figure!
|
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Oct 27, 2019 17:48:52 GMT
The manager is out of his depth. The squad is good enough to win the league. Go figure! We have the best midfield trio in the league in Allen, etebo and badou, the defence and attack need serious investment, jones was unlucky with the shawcross injury on the eve of the season but I think we’d be in the bottom three even if he was not injured. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 27, 2019 17:55:15 GMT
The manager is out of his depth. The squad is good enough to win the league. Go figure! This is kind of my point. On paper its a top six side I would say yet the players arrive and suddenly they perform like bottom of the league plodders. Same with the managers. Rowett a decent prospect, with relative success at Brum and Derby suddenly becomes clueless and out of ideas and gets so frustrated he starts having a go at the fans. Same happening with Jones, decent prospect with success in league one yet looks clueless here. Something is up somewhere. It can't be coincidence surely. |
|
|
|
Post by kidcrewbob on Oct 27, 2019 17:57:30 GMT
Because the club facilitates poor performance through not being professional and generally a soft touch on salaries, appointments and being influenced by rogues and charlatans on key decisions.
Naive and inept through emotion-lead strategies - too much heart and not enough head......
|
|
|
|
Post by stokefc on Oct 27, 2019 18:07:41 GMT
it wouldn,t surprise me that they,re over performing and its gonna get worse..a lot worse
|
|
|
|
Post by tony1234 on Oct 27, 2019 18:17:59 GMT
Its got me thinking this one. But I think its pretty hard to argue against the fact that when we get hold of a manager or player they instantly turn into a worse version of themselves. The list is endless. I've thought about my own career and its dawned on me that when you arrive at a company and quickly realise there are many things wrong with the way the company operates you kind of lose the will to want to perform to your best. Eventually resigning yourself to stick it out for a bit and plod along until the right opportunity comes along to get a move to another company vowing to have learnt a lesson from the last move. This is the problem at Stoke I think. I don't profess to know exactly what it is but there is something about the club set up that is draining any enthusiasm a player or manager might have when they first arrive. We can keep tinkering around with new managers and players but ultimately there is a pressing need to sort out what is going on upstairs and change the working atmosphere for the playing staff. Until then I think very little will change in terms of our fortunes. Ask "why?" several times to get to root causes... a personal take below.... A couple of background notes:- Our underperformance is mainly attacking. While our defence make mistakes, our scoring record is completely appalling and our ability to fashion chances extremely poor. So, Q1. Why are we underperforming? A1. Players on the ball have a lack of options to pass to. (Watch 5 mins of a game and empathise with the man on the ball). This creates a lack of any ability to mount sufficient penetrative attacks. This makes any cohesive forward team movement more difficult. We also lack the quality of players to execute those more diffilcult moves which are inevitably a result of having fewer players offering themselves as options to pass to. Q2. Why don't players have the options to pass to? A2. Because players are unsure about their roles and responsibilities and haven't got a "picture" of the attacking patterns they need to execute. This means that they revert to "tucking in", passing backwards safely or attempting an over ambitious pass of the sort that inevitably leads to the attack breaking down. Q3. Why are they confused about their roles and responsibilities? A3. Because as professionals - around 50% of the hundreds of games they've played from age 11 were likely to be in a 442 and the rest 4411s and 4231s. The diamond is a system that they have gathered no instinct for. Consequently, they play it almost by rote. This is compounded because the team are interpreting it differently as team mates have been changing constantly. Opposition players will have probably had 200 games each of the system they are playing against every sort of opposition imaginable, but our's have maybe 5, 10 or 20 at most and are still learning in each new game. This alien system creates hesitation, doubt, mistakes, and what appear like poor decisions and even laziness at times. However, at the speed of professional sport, most decisions are "trained" rather than calculated in the moments that players get. The split seconds here and there basically lead to ineffectualness - the inability to surprise or take advantage of momentary opportunities. Q4. Why do we choose to play a system that our players are not experienced in over one they are? A4. Becuase our manager has had great success (in his view) with this system, he is wedded to playing it and has a strong belief it is the reason he gained his previous success. He extrapolates that to mean he can succeed at a higher level and with different players through the same method. Being a poor leader, he can't reflect or interpret the wider set of factors that created his success. This belief outweighs other considerations, and is compounded by the investments in this approach. Q5. Why does he still believe this when the evidence is counter it? A5. He has invested heavily in this system. Poor and weak leaders suffer confirmation bias. Namely, they will continue to justify a course of action beyond a logical time - because of their lack of confidence or knowledge of alternatives. The experience Jones had was indeed successful with the diamond, but the set of conditions in any one football club or moment are very rarely replicated elsewhere. Hence, experienced managers and reflective and confident managers would recognise and embrace the need to adapt. Jones has neither the bank of different experiences nor intellect to be one of them. Q6 So why did we employ a manager without the experience or intellect to learn? Q6. The decision of those that appointed him would have been made based on their priorities. Strong and confident leaders, again, recognise the limitations of their own expertise and employ people who will bring healthy influx of challenges, conflict, ideas and philosophies that will stretch the comfort of the organisation. A healthy organisation's management exists with a healthy conflict and tension between competing ideas and narratives. However, the comments and behaviour of Coates shows that these benefits are usurped by a deeper need to have comfortable and unchallenging people around him - and emphatically reject and downplay risk. ("Whats the fuss about?"). Consequently, he and the board exist in myopic denial of problems and recognition of solutions existing outside of their ability. It challenges their egos which are too fragile to accept criticism. Q7. Why does he behave like that? A7. Well we don't fully know. It could be because an advanced stage of life can bring a period of regret and denial to new realities. Or, in PC's case, it could be that mortality brings fear and a need to look after his son and carry on the bloodline. But to your point about motivation. Yes, that's bang on. Motivation comes from knowing goals are realistic, as well as inspiring, etc... But if you realise that all your energies are bound to be wasted because they are being misdirected by your bosses who don't know what they are doing, what happens? |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 27, 2019 18:29:31 GMT
Its got me thinking this one. But I think its pretty hard to argue against the fact that when we get hold of a manager or player they instantly turn into a worse version of themselves. The list is endless. I've thought about my own career and its dawned on me that when you arrive at a company and quickly realise there are many things wrong with the way the company operates you kind of lose the will to want to perform to your best. Eventually resigning yourself to stick it out for a bit and plod along until the right opportunity comes along to get a move to another company vowing to have learnt a lesson from the last move. This is the problem at Stoke I think. I don't profess to know exactly what it is but there is something about the club set up that is draining any enthusiasm a player or manager might have when they first arrive. We can keep tinkering around with new managers and players but ultimately there is a pressing need to sort out what is going on upstairs and change the working atmosphere for the playing staff. Until then I think very little will change in terms of our fortunes. Ask "why?" several times to get to root causes... a personal take below.... A couple of background notes:- Our underperformance is mainly attacking. While our defence make mistakes, our scoring record is completely appalling and our ability to fashion chances extremely poor. So, Q1. Why are we underperforming? A1. Players on the ball have a lack of options to pass to. (Watch 5 mins of a game and empathise with the man on the ball). This creates a lack of any ability to mount sufficient penetrative attacks. This makes any cohesive forward team movement more difficult. We also lack the quality of players to execute those more diffilcult moves which are inevitably a result of having fewer players offering themselves as options to pass to. Q2. Why don't players have the options to pass to? A2. Because players are unsure about their roles and responsibilities and haven't got a "picture" of the attacking patterns they need to execute. This means that they revert to "tucking in", passing backwards safely or attempting an over ambitious pass of the sort that inevitably leads to the attack breaking down. Q3. Why are they confused about their roles and responsibilities? A3. Because as professionals - around 50% of the hundreds of games they've played from age 11 were likely to be in a 442 and the rest 4411s and 4231s. The diamond is a system that they have gathered no instinct for. Consequently, they play it almost by rote. This is compounded because the team are interpreting it differently as team mates have been changing constantly. Opposition players will have probably had 200 games each of the system they are playing against every sort of opposition imaginable, but our's have maybe 5, 10 or 20 at most and are still learning in each new game. This alien system creates hesitation, doubt, mistakes, and what appear like poor decisions and even laziness at times. However, at the speed of professional sport, most decisions are "trained" rather than calculated in the moments that players get. The split seconds here and there basically lead to ineffectualness - the inability to surprise or take advantage of momentary opportunities. Q4. Why do we choose to play a system that our players are not experienced in over one they are? A4. Becuase our manager has had great success (in his view) with this system, he is wedded to playing it and has a strong belief it is the reason he gained his previous success. He extrapolates that to mean he can succeed at a higher level and with different players through the same method. Being a poor leader, he can't reflect or interpret the wider set of factors that created his success. This belief outweighs other considerations, and is compounded by the investments in this approach. Q5. Why does he still believe this when the evidence is counter it? A5. He has invested heavily in this system. Poor and weak leaders suffer confirmation bias. Namely, they will continue to justify a course of action beyond a logical time - because of their lack of confidence or knowledge of alternatives. The experience Jones had was indeed successful with the diamond, but the set of conditions in any one football club or moment are very rarely replicated elsewhere. Hence, experienced managers and reflective and confident managers would recognise and embrace the need to adapt. Jones has neither the bank of different experiences nor intellect to be one of them. Q6 So why did we employ a manager without the experience or intellect to learn? Q6. The decision of those that appointed him would have been made based on their priorities. Strong and confident leaders, again, recognise the limitations of their own expertise and employ people who will bring healthy influx of challenges, conflict, ideas and philosophies that will stretch the comfort of the organisation. A healthy organisation's management exists with a healthy conflict and tension between competing ideas and narratives. However, the comments and behaviour of Coates shows that these benefits are usurped by a deeper need to have comfortable and unchallenging people around him - and emphatically reject and downplay risk. ("Whats the fuss about?"). Consequently, he and the board exist in myopic denial of problems and recognition of solutions existing outside of their ability. It challenges their egos which are too fragile to accept criticism. Q7. Why does he behave like that? A7. Well we don't fully know. It could be because an advanced stage of life can bring a period of regret and denial to new realities. Or, in PC's case, it could be that mortality brings fear and a need to look after his son and carry on the bloodline. But to your point about motivation. Yes, that's bang on. Motivation comes from knowing goals are realistic, motivating, etc... But if you realise that all your energies are bound to be wasted because they are being misdirected, what happens? A very interesting read that Tony, very interesting indeed. You should give the club a ring and offer your services. You might be able to effect some change  |
|
|
|
Post by TheWiseMaster on Oct 27, 2019 19:21:08 GMT
Many good points above
Also in the summer there was less money made available to our young manager - he went for experienced journos
Quantity over quality
And doesn't seem to recognise that his buys don't fit the system
Critical the full backs do not fit the diamond - he tried to make one in McLean and failed
Poor recruitment continues over many years
Given the choice he has fallen back on the old guard which is fitting comment on his own buys
|
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Oct 28, 2019 3:15:31 GMT
They need management consultants in first off to identify for them where the issues lie. It just seems to require a 3rd party with an unbiased set of eyes to point out what might be glaring problems that the owners are failing to identify. Then they can start making some decisions about new senior management appointments and form a sustainable plan to get the club moving in the right direction. We gave the fuzzy wuzzies a fair trial before we shot 'em Courtesy Corporal Jones, Dads Army |
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Oct 28, 2019 6:02:13 GMT
I think yesterday had a lot to do with not playing a number 10 who presses forward, and having a centre mid who can't control a football when passing out through the middle. The rest of the season, honestly I don't know. We've performed like a horribly inconsistent mid table side, but we find ourselves in the bottom 2. I still have hope we can at least scrape back up to mid table and carry on tearing out the rot. If we change to a manager with some tactical knowledge we will, with NJ we'll go down. |
|
|
|
Post by Godo on Oct 28, 2019 6:53:35 GMT
For me the reasons are:
Poor and outdated leadership from the executive with no real football men anywhere to be found at the top of the club.
Have we declined since John Coates took a more active role?
A manager who is out of his depth playing formations - mainly diamond or 532 or some desperate/confused hybrid - that do not suit a squad with no left back/inconsistent right backs and that has very limited pace and does not (or can't) do the basic requirement to pass and move.
A recruitment strategy that has saddled us with a squad of players on comfortable contracts who have not addressed the glaring gaps we've had in the squad for the last 3-4 seasons, namely pace, power, technical ability and bite, drive and athleticism.
So we have a club run by out of their depth amateurs, who selected a manager who is really out of his depth to coach an unbalanced squad of journeymen who, Etebo and N'Diaye aside, we couldn't give away if we left them all on the car park with a "free to a good home" sign next to them.
The future is now really concerning because I'm not sure we can trust the executive to make the decisions required and I'm not sure ANYONE coming in to manage this squad could achieve anything beyond 15th/16th. Meanwhile in the background we have a massively bloated wage bill with players we couldn't off load (again Etebo and N'Diaye aside), a need for further investment in 3 or 4 good players and another relegation and financial fair play rules looming ever closer. I think it demands big changes at the top to something that approximates some of West Brom's professionalism and ruthlessness at the top or a dose of Leeds pride and vision....instead we've got indecision, no plan in our recruitment strategy and a club that blunders towards disappearing up it's own tired old backside.
|
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Oct 28, 2019 7:18:44 GMT
Basically they’re the highest paid players in this league and don’t really give a shit, they’ve been given long contracts so guaranteed to earn millions regardless of what happens.
Then there’s the non staff playing who have no idea, again being paid a fortune to under perform, so rudderless see above.
Crap house of a club
|
|
|
|
Post by skip on Oct 28, 2019 9:13:25 GMT
You are always supposed to employ better than you’ve got, right? Football relegation is possibly a unique proposition in staff and change management, as you need to transition your staff to a group of professionals with a slightly different, and bizarrely, lower skill and experience set. Other factors to include are that your most skilled employees are more than likely to seek employment at a competing company. Furthermore, you need to rebuild a team in a time frame that would be treated as damage limitation under unforeseen circumstances in most other walks of life.
To achieve all of the above, a business requires leadership with the most acute sense of reality, contacts, negotiation skills, remodelling strategies and forward planning. And that’s where both Coates now apocryphal comment “I don’t see what all the fuss is about”, combined with Scholes’ clearly below par direction and corporate management have led to the near demise of the club.
Coates (junior and senior) and Scholes have overseen the relegation from the Premier League plus the factors that led to that and now over two years of change management that is nothing short of neglect. A string of managers fail. Scores of players are brought in and are stiffed to the training ground, loaned out or under massively under perform.
If we don’t address all of the above from the top of the club and we go down, we are done. Add to that the very real possibility that sports sponsorship from gambling companies will soon go the away of tobacco and alcohol and I wouldn’t want to contemplate the next five years at Stoke City.
|
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Oct 28, 2019 9:53:50 GMT
Its got me thinking this one. But I think its pretty hard to argue against the fact that when we get hold of a manager or player they instantly turn into a worse version of themselves. The list is endless. I've thought about my own career and its dawned on me that when you arrive at a company and quickly realise there are many things wrong with the way the company operates you kind of lose the will to want to perform to your best. Eventually resigning yourself to stick it out for a bit and plod along until the right opportunity comes along to get a move to another company vowing to have learnt a lesson from the last move. This is the problem at Stoke I think. I don't profess to know exactly what it is but there is something about the club set up that is draining any enthusiasm a player or manager might have when they first arrive. We can keep tinkering around with new managers and players but ultimately there is a pressing need to sort out what is going on upstairs and change the working atmosphere for the playing staff. Until then I think very little will change in terms of our fortunes. Ask "why?" several times to get to root causes... a personal take below.... A couple of background notes:- Our underperformance is mainly attacking. While our defence make mistakes, our scoring record is completely appalling and our ability to fashion chances extremely poor. So, Q1. Why are we underperforming? A1. Players on the ball have a lack of options to pass to. (Watch 5 mins of a game and empathise with the man on the ball). This creates a lack of any ability to mount sufficient penetrative attacks. This makes any cohesive forward team movement more difficult. We also lack the quality of players to execute those more diffilcult moves which are inevitably a result of having fewer players offering themselves as options to pass to. Q2. Why don't players have the options to pass to? A2. Because players are unsure about their roles and responsibilities and haven't got a "picture" of the attacking patterns they need to execute. This means that they revert to "tucking in", passing backwards safely or attempting an over ambitious pass of the sort that inevitably leads to the attack breaking down. Q3. Why are they confused about their roles and responsibilities? A3. Because as professionals - around 50% of the hundreds of games they've played from age 11 were likely to be in a 442 and the rest 4411s and 4231s. The diamond is a system that they have gathered no instinct for. Consequently, they play it almost by rote. This is compounded because the team are interpreting it differently as team mates have been changing constantly. Opposition players will have probably had 200 games each of the system they are playing against every sort of opposition imaginable, but our's have maybe 5, 10 or 20 at most and are still learning in each new game. This alien system creates hesitation, doubt, mistakes, and what appear like poor decisions and even laziness at times. However, at the speed of professional sport, most decisions are "trained" rather than calculated in the moments that players get. The split seconds here and there basically lead to ineffectualness - the inability to surprise or take advantage of momentary opportunities. Q4. Why do we choose to play a system that our players are not experienced in over one they are? A4. Becuase our manager has had great success (in his view) with this system, he is wedded to playing it and has a strong belief it is the reason he gained his previous success. He extrapolates that to mean he can succeed at a higher level and with different players through the same method. Being a poor leader, he can't reflect or interpret the wider set of factors that created his success. This belief outweighs other considerations, and is compounded by the investments in this approach. Q5. Why does he still believe this when the evidence is counter it? A5. He has invested heavily in this system. Poor and weak leaders suffer confirmation bias. Namely, they will continue to justify a course of action beyond a logical time - because of their lack of confidence or knowledge of alternatives. The experience Jones had was indeed successful with the diamond, but the set of conditions in any one football club or moment are very rarely replicated elsewhere. Hence, experienced managers and reflective and confident managers would recognise and embrace the need to adapt. Jones has neither the bank of different experiences nor intellect to be one of them. Q6 So why did we employ a manager without the experience or intellect to learn? Q6. The decision of those that appointed him would have been made based on their priorities. Strong and confident leaders, again, recognise the limitations of their own expertise and employ people who will bring healthy influx of challenges, conflict, ideas and philosophies that will stretch the comfort of the organisation. A healthy organisation's management exists with a healthy conflict and tension between competing ideas and narratives. However, the comments and behaviour of Coates shows that these benefits are usurped by a deeper need to have comfortable and unchallenging people around him - and emphatically reject and downplay risk. ("Whats the fuss about?"). Consequently, he and the board exist in myopic denial of problems and recognition of solutions existing outside of their ability. It challenges their egos which are too fragile to accept criticism. Q7. Why does he behave like that? A7. Well we don't fully know. It could be because an advanced stage of life can bring a period of regret and denial to new realities. Or, in PC's case, it could be that mortality brings fear and a need to look after his son and carry on the bloodline. But to your point about motivation. Yes, that's bang on. Motivation comes from knowing goals are realistic, as well as inspiring, etc... But if you realise that all your energies are bound to be wasted because they are being misdirected by your bosses who don't know what they are doing, what happens? Say that again??? 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by future100 on Oct 28, 2019 10:30:34 GMT
Because they are shit bang average footballers 😎 Being managed by a less than average manager. I totally agree with Tony about the lack of movement, no one seems to know what to do when they are off the ball, it was glaringly obvious watching the Millwall game which seems to me to indicate poor coaching. The players have it in them to perform, two wins against clubs near the top of the league prove this, the poor performances all seem to point to inexperienced or poor coaching. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2019 11:56:40 GMT
I think yesterday had a lot to do with not playing a number 10 who presses forward, and having a centre mid who can't control a football when passing out through the middle. The rest of the season, honestly I don't know. We've performed like a horribly inconsistent mid table side, but we find ourselves in the bottom 2. I still have hope we can at least scrape back up to mid table and carry on tearing out the rot. If we change to a manager with some tactical knowledge we will, with NJ we'll go down. Who? And what tactics do they play with this side? I genuinely don't think NJ will send us down. I think it depends on how you view the Swansea and Fulham games. If you think they were an oasis in the desert and nothing like any other game then generally you think jones is poor. If, like me, you think they were a level of performance that we've seen already this season and that we've been very unlucky to have only won the two, then you're a bit less negative. I think we've played like an inconsistent mid table side with no confidence. In my opinion we are unlucky, or at least Jones is unlucky, that individual mistakes have caused us to be where we are. And when I say individual mistakes, I don't just mean poor positioning from a defender. It's been unbelievable. Our International class goalkeeper has thrown it in his own net on 3 separate occasions. Our international midfielder has missed 3 open nets from less than 6 yards out. If you disagree, that's fine, and I understand that. But I don't see how any other manager we could get changes what we're seeing on the pitch. We all agree we need a big, long term change to the club, and for me, I think we may as well give Jones that time, instead of sacking him for a sticking plaster who at best gets us 15th, then we have to hire another, likely worse calibre, long term appointment. Who we'll inevitably sack after 8 months because of bad results. And the cycle continues. |
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Oct 28, 2019 12:08:51 GMT
If we change to a manager with some tactical knowledge we will, with NJ we'll go down. Who? And what tactics do they play with this side? I genuinely don't think NJ will send us down. I think it depends on how you view the Swansea and Fulham games. If you think they were an oasis in the desert and nothing like any other game then generally you think jones is poor. If, like me, you think they were a level of performance that we've seen already this season and that we've been very unlucky to have only won the two, then you're a bit less negative. I think we've played like an inconsistent mid table side with no confidence. In my opinion we are unlucky, or at least Jones is unlucky, that individual mistakes have caused us to be where we are. And when I say individual mistakes, I don't just mean poor positioning from a defender. It's been unbelievable. Our International class goalkeeper has thrown it in his own net on 3 separate occasions. Our international midfielder has missed 3 open nets from less than 6 yards out. If you disagree, that's fine, and I understand that. But I don't see how any other manager we could get changes what we're seeing on the pitch. We all agree we need a big, long term change to the club, and for me, I think we may as well give Jones that time, instead of sacking him for a sticking plaster who at best gets us 15th, then we have to hire another, likely worse calibre, long term appointment. Who we'll inevitably sack after 8 months because of bad results. And the cycle continues. I guess your belief in him not is based on stats and facts then? I actually don't think anybody could have done worse with this squad than NJ is doing! He's been here for around 30 league games now and still we have only one 4 or 5 of them. If you still believe this clown can keep us up I really wonder what that is based upon, belief!!??  |
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Oct 28, 2019 12:15:27 GMT
They need management consultants in first off to identify for them where the issues lie. It just seems to require a 3rd party with an unbiased set of eyes to point out what might be glaring problems that the owners are failing to identify. Then they can start making some decisions about new senior management appointments and form a sustainable plan to get the club moving in the right direction. ^ this ^ Run like a vanity project hobby |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2019 12:40:25 GMT
Who? And what tactics do they play with this side? I genuinely don't think NJ will send us down. I think it depends on how you view the Swansea and Fulham games. If you think they were an oasis in the desert and nothing like any other game then generally you think jones is poor. If, like me, you think they were a level of performance that we've seen already this season and that we've been very unlucky to have only won the two, then you're a bit less negative. I think we've played like an inconsistent mid table side with no confidence. In my opinion we are unlucky, or at least Jones is unlucky, that individual mistakes have caused us to be where we are. And when I say individual mistakes, I don't just mean poor positioning from a defender. It's been unbelievable. Our International class goalkeeper has thrown it in his own net on 3 separate occasions. Our international midfielder has missed 3 open nets from less than 6 yards out. If you disagree, that's fine, and I understand that. But I don't see how any other manager we could get changes what we're seeing on the pitch. We all agree we need a big, long term change to the club, and for me, I think we may as well give Jones that time, instead of sacking him for a sticking plaster who at best gets us 15th, then we have to hire another, likely worse calibre, long term appointment. Who we'll inevitably sack after 8 months because of bad results. And the cycle continues. I guess your belief in him not is based on stats and facts then? I actually don't think anybody could have done worse with this squad than NJ is doing! He's been here for around 30 league games now and still we have only one 4 or 5 of them. If you still believe this clown can keep us up I really wonder what that is based upon, belief!!?? Partly it's hope, partly I am of the opinion that some of our results this year have been out of his hands. (Derby/Charlton/Forest/even Preston to an extent). Also I just generally believe that our performances have not been as bad as a team that looks like it is going down. In terms of genuinely awful performances, I'd say QPR, Millwall, maybe Birmingham, maybe Preston (but that was marred by the mistakes). We've had as many good as we have awful in my opinion. And without the hand of god, generally in the form of Butland or Allen, we'd probably be around mid table, which in my opinion is about what our performances have deserved. |
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Oct 28, 2019 16:11:44 GMT
I guess your belief in him not is based on stats and facts then? I actually don't think anybody could have done worse with this squad than NJ is doing! He's been here for around 30 league games now and still we have only one 4 or 5 of them. If you still believe this clown can keep us up I really wonder what that is based upon, belief!!?? Partly it's hope, partly I am of the opinion that some of our results this year have been out of his hands. (Derby/Charlton/Forest/even Preston to an extent). Also I just generally believe that our performances have not been as bad as a team that looks like it is going down. In terms of genuinely awful performances, I'd say QPR, Millwall, maybe Birmingham, maybe Preston (but that was marred by the mistakes). We've had as many good as we have awful in my opinion. And without the hand of god, generally in the form of Butland or Allen, we'd probably be around mid table, which in my opinion is about what our performances have deserved. I must just say being good between the boxes really isn't that important, but being good in the boxes really matters. I hope you can see what I'm trying to say here. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2019 17:32:10 GMT
Partly it's hope, partly I am of the opinion that some of our results this year have been out of his hands. (Derby/Charlton/Forest/even Preston to an extent). Also I just generally believe that our performances have not been as bad as a team that looks like it is going down. In terms of genuinely awful performances, I'd say QPR, Millwall, maybe Birmingham, maybe Preston (but that was marred by the mistakes). We've had as many good as we have awful in my opinion. And without the hand of god, generally in the form of Butland or Allen, we'd probably be around mid table, which in my opinion is about what our performances have deserved. I must just say being good between the boxes really isn't that important, but being good in the boxes really matters. I hope you can see what I'm trying to say here. No I do understand, and I'm not far off the same belief, but generally I think we've 'deserved' (awful way to say it I know) more points than we have from our performances. I do not believe that Nathan Jones is the reason we are in the bottom 3, because I think individual mistakes have cost us so many points this season. You can say 'well he's picking them' but even so, you do not expect England and Wales internationals to singlehandedly cost the team 10+ points in 14 games. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Oct 28, 2019 18:07:17 GMT
I must just say being good between the boxes really isn't that important, but being good in the boxes really matters. I hope you can see what I'm trying to say here. No I do understand, and I'm not far off the same belief, but generally I think we've 'deserved' (awful way to say it I know) more points than we have from our performances. I do not believe that Nathan Jones is the reason we are in the bottom 3, because I think individual mistakes have cost us so many points this season. You can say 'well he's picking them' but even so, you do not expect England and Wales internationals to singlehandedly cost the team 10+ points in 14 games. I am still just about with you Lilfraise. Just. But even being of a more positive outlook I am really beginning to question whether he can get out of this rut. I go further though to say I think the culture/atmosphere/environment the senior management have allowed to fester at the club for 4 years now is making his job harder than it should be which is also why I am giving him some extra slack. He can't afford to lose against W.Brom which is a massive ask currently. |
|
|
|
Post by loosestools on Oct 28, 2019 18:26:07 GMT
After all of the above, well considered, analytical views - we need a new Manager to turn the tide.
|
|
