|
Post by professorplump on Sept 14, 2023 7:17:31 GMT
Lambert 1/10 - Totally out of his depth, possibly the most awful person(Dinosaur) imaginable to put in charge at that time - dreadful/clueless club management Rowett 6/10 - think I am the only fan in Stoke that would have liked to have seen him given more time, picked up a club rotten to the core and was going to take some rebuild even with money - half a season and one window ridiculous amount of time - clueless club management. Jones 1/10 - See Lambert comment O'Neil 3/10 - started off well and then looked like he lost interest, just another front man - got rid at the correct time - awful appointment at the time though given we were bottom of the table and he could only take the job on a part-time basis, had a drinking problem/conviction and zero experience in English football - beyond clueless club management. Neil 4/10 (so far) - needs time, certainly talks a good game, not sure he knows or has the experience of rebuilding a team. Once again lost with the windows though, I think we signed 9 attacking players in the last window and have 7 viable defenders in the entire squad, total lack of depth and quality in that position - no great headers of the ball and unable to defend a basic cross since the guy has been here and nothing done to rectify that. Don't be sending me stats on our defenders aerial duals - just look at the goals we are conceding week in week out Impressed that we did not hang on to MON and went all out for AN - has a decent record and lots of experience so I suppose we cant complain with this one and some of the football has looked the best we have seen for a while, but we have had the odd game where it has looked utterly shocking and total surrender. I think it is very below the belt and probably defamatory to refer to MON as having a drink problem. He had a drink driving conviction 2 years before he came to Stoke. There is nothing else on record to indicate that he had any other problems with alcohol and certainly nothing to indicate that it affected his ability as a manager.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Sept 14, 2023 7:47:44 GMT
Lambert 1/10 - Totally out of his depth, possibly the most awful person(Dinosaur) imaginable to put in charge at that time - dreadful/clueless club management Rowett 6/10 - think I am the only fan in Stoke that would have liked to have seen him given more time, picked up a club rotten to the core and was going to take some rebuild even with money - half a season and one window ridiculous amount of time - clueless club management. Jones 1/10 - See Lambert comment O'Neil 3/10 - started off well and then looked like he lost interest, just another front man - got rid at the correct time - awful appointment at the time though given we were bottom of the table and he could only take the job on a part-time basis, had a drinking problem/conviction and zero experience in English football - beyond clueless club management. Neil 4/10 (so far) - needs time, certainly talks a good game, not sure he knows or has the experience of rebuilding a team. Once again lost with the windows though, I think we signed 9 attacking players in the last window and have 7 viable defenders in the entire squad, total lack of depth and quality in that position - no great headers of the ball and unable to defend a basic cross since the guy has been here and nothing done to rectify that. Don't be sending me stats on our defenders aerial duals - just look at the goals we are conceding week in week out Impressed that we did not hang on to MON and went all out for AN - has a decent record and lots of experience so I suppose we cant complain with this one and some of the football has looked the best we have seen for a while, but we have had the odd game where it has looked utterly shocking and total surrender. I think it is very below the belt and probably defamatory to refer to MON as having a drink problem. He had a drink driving conviction 2 years before he came to Stoke. There is nothing else on record to indicate that he had any other problems with alcohol and certainly nothing to indicate that it affected his ability as a manager. He's been teetotal since said incident. Very poor comment as you say......
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Sept 14, 2023 7:52:46 GMT
Totally get what you are saying and yes still would have been interested to see where he could have taken us. Given the situation he inherited we could have been in a worse position, as we saw when he left. There was an argument to say that the entire squad needed replacing when he arrived - it was a team that could not compete at any level, they had won one 1 competitive game of football in the calendar year before he arrived which included getting knocked out of cups by teams in lower divisions. I actually started a poll before a ball was kicked when Rowett was bought in - to see what the feeling was like, because I thought we might struggle and even fall through to tier 3. Every Stoke fan predicted that we would get automatic promotion - when I stated that we may struggle early on and that time would be needed - I got verbally raped by my fellow Stoke fans who I think at this time, like the owners were utterly clueless at just what a shambles the club was from top to bottom. On our relegation season the same fans/owners thought we were heading for Europe when we started the season with a centre-forward as our only viable option at right-back. Think he is a half decent manager at this level as he has proved before and after and, as stated, given the situation he arrived at he was never going to turn it around quickly - time was needed and no manager would have turned it around in one window and half a season. 75% of the players Stoke have signed since Pulis have been poor, same with the current manager, who I would also like to see given a bit of time - maybe some blame can be aimed at our recruitment team/policy? Again, he had £50m to spend. Spend that sensibly and we should have been in the play off mix at least. He inherited some problems but he added a shitload more. He isn’t someone you give a budget and expectations to, he’s someone you task with a shoestring and stability and hope he surprises you. He got everything wrong with us and close to nothing right. I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Sept 14, 2023 8:06:39 GMT
Again, he had £50m to spend. Spend that sensibly and we should have been in the play off mix at least. He inherited some problems but he added a shitload more. He isn’t someone you give a budget and expectations to, he’s someone you task with a shoestring and stability and hope he surprises you. He got everything wrong with us and close to nothing right. I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited. Again, with the budget he had, he could have ripped it up and started again. That's precisely what he did with his £30m front three (two of whom didn't fit his system). The only constant in his midfield was Allen. That's 2/3 of a side and he piled shit on top of shit. We should've been capable at the very least of being a play off contender with the budget we had but he squandered it. His tactics were dreadful as well, his man-management worse than that. He expunged all creativity from the side and then wondered why we couldn't beat the likes of Wigan, Rotherham and Hull at home. Every single defence of him, and the ones from you in particular, are always at pains to completely gloss over the budget he had. If he'd spent that wisely on a balanced side, it would have offered way more mitigation against whatever bad apples were left.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Sept 14, 2023 8:13:56 GMT
Again, he had £50m to spend. Spend that sensibly and we should have been in the play off mix at least. He inherited some problems but he added a shitload more. He isn’t someone you give a budget and expectations to, he’s someone you task with a shoestring and stability and hope he surprises you. He got everything wrong with us and close to nothing right. I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited. It wasn’t that short in the making but it was a continuation of the way we’d done business throughout our time in the prem. the fact that Arismendi sticks out like a sore thumb tells you all you need to know. We should have been making 5/6 such deals every season above and beyond what was required for the here and now. That we did one and by all accounts made a right pigs ear of it too and we all remember him when in terms of the success rate he was more likely to fail than succeed says it all. Clubs that are doing it right don’t talk about the ones that fail they talk about the astronomical success of the ones that succeed.
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Sept 15, 2023 7:09:21 GMT
Again, he had £50m to spend. Spend that sensibly and we should have been in the play off mix at least. He inherited some problems but he added a shitload more. He isn’t someone you give a budget and expectations to, he’s someone you task with a shoestring and stability and hope he surprises you. He got everything wrong with us and close to nothing right. I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited. So Lambert inherited a squad capable of staying in the Prem, but a few months later the squad inherited by Rowett was completely dysfunctional. I think the only key difference in those two squads was the loss of Shapiri and the £50M that Rowett was given to replace him. Rowett did an awful job here. He was tactically clueless and alienated and demotivated many of the players, including some of the ones he brought here. If it’s a managers job to get the best out of the resources at his disposal, it’s hard to imagine anyone doing much worse. The same obviously applies to Mad Nathan, and short of a valid tilt at the playoffs will apply to Alex Neil too.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Sept 15, 2023 8:07:11 GMT
Since Pulis (who's style I wasn't a fan of), but who got us promoted, I haven't particularly liked any of our managers.
AN is so far the best of the bunch for me because 1) He makes the most sense , 2) He speaks at a decent pace, 3) It looks like he's radically transformed the club, 4) All the others between him and Pulis have been dogshit.
My opinion may change over the course of the season depending on how we perform and if I notice him repeating himself.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Sept 15, 2023 8:13:05 GMT
Since Pulis (who's style I wasn't a fan of), but who got us promoted, I haven't particularly liked any of our managers. AN is so far the best of the bunch for me because 1) He makes the most sense , 2) He speaks at a decent pace, 3) It looks like he's radically transformed the club, 4) All the others between him and Pulis have been dogshit. My opinion may change over the course of the season depending on how we perform and if I notice him repeating himself. He makes sense? Right.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Sept 15, 2023 8:15:38 GMT
Since Pulis (who's style I wasn't a fan of), but who got us promoted, I haven't particularly liked any of our managers. AN is so far the best of the bunch for me because 1) He makes the most sense , 2) He speaks at a decent pace, 3) It looks like he's radically transformed the club, 4) All the others between him and Pulis have been dogshit. My opinion may change over the course of the season depending on how we perform and if I notice him repeating himself. He makes sense? Right. He does. A little reactively rather than proactively so far, but he generally acknowledges the obvious takeaways from games.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Sept 15, 2023 8:34:59 GMT
Again, he had £50m to spend. Spend that sensibly and we should have been in the play off mix at least. He inherited some problems but he added a shitload more. He isn’t someone you give a budget and expectations to, he’s someone you task with a shoestring and stability and hope he surprises you. He got everything wrong with us and close to nothing right. I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited. Not hindsight. Rowett was the wrong appointment in the first place. What was on his CV to be initially chased and then recruited to rebuild a promotion chasing side? He was, and remains an any shade of grey manager.
|
|
|
Post by emretezzy on Sept 15, 2023 8:38:49 GMT
How would you rate the last five Stoke City managers out of 10? Lambert 3/10 - ultimately went down with a whimper but in hindsight probably would have been better off keeping him than ending up with... Rowett 2/10 - spent loads, delivered very little. Just about recovered from that. Could well have led to another relegation given the shit that he signed. Jones 1/10 - I mean, just awful. Surprised he lasted so long. O'Neil 6/10 - stabilised us from the horror show we were under Jones, and no doubt improved us, but just couldn't push us on any further. Solid if not spectacular. Neil 6/10 (so far) - played some of the best football we've seen since we got relegated but oddly ended up in the worst position. Green shoots emerging this season but remains to be seen if it's all hot air. Lambert - 3 Rowett - 1 Jones - 0 O'Neil- 7 Neil (Pre Jared) - 4 Neil (Post Jared) - 6
|
|
|
Post by AlbertTatlock on Sept 15, 2023 10:11:05 GMT
Let's rate them from Pulis onwards Pulis 9 some of his football was shite but he knew how to get us promoted and keep us there, 2 trips to Wembley and a European venture, I'd donate one of my bollox to have some of that now. Hughes 8 some of the very best football I've ever witnessed from a Stoke side, Stokealona days were a pleasure to watch, let standards slip and it cost him his job and us ultimately relegation but I'm sure he'd have kept us up if he stayed. Lambert 3 didn't seem to handle the job very well tried to turn us into a defensive side without defenders that were good enough, seemed out of his depth. Rowett 1 slimy cock who thought it was a good idea to spunk tens of millions of £ on shit players while telling us Bojan was past it, continued to disrespect the supporters even though his team full of expensive garbage was failing and at the same time his football was garbage. Jones 0 delusional tool who told us about his vision for fast attacking free scoring football, in reality he tried to play his diamond system that the team wasn't set up for, signed Steven Ward amongst other shite, he would have got us relegated for sure if he wasn't sacked. MON 6 he came in and steadied the ship, kept us up when we were rock bottom but his insistence on playing 5 at the back without having wingbacks, some of his team selections and tactics were baffling and his football after a decent start fizzled out to more boring shite that would have had us finishing 17th for ever had he stayed. Neil 5 the jury is still out, a period of exceptional football early in the year, last season his hands were apparently tied due to FFP restrictions, no such excuses this season and given the backing the club have given him I'd say a push for a play-off position is the least we can expect. Let's hope Neil can deliver because it's obvious that since Hughes departure it's been a clusterfuck of appointments. Gouranga.
|
|
|
Post by shrewspotter on Sept 16, 2023 6:30:56 GMT
Let's rate them from Pulis onwards Pulis 9 some of his football was shite but he knew how to get us promoted and keep us there, 2 trips to Wembley and a European venture, I'd donate one of my bollox to have some of that now. Hughes 8 some of the very best football I've ever witnessed from a Stoke side, Stokealona days were a pleasure to watch, let standards slip and it cost him his job and us ultimately relegation but I'm sure he'd have kept us up if he stayed. Lambert 3 didn't seem to handle the job very well tried to turn us into a defensive side without defenders that were good enough, seemed out of his depth. Rowett 1 slimy cock who thought it was a good idea to spunk tens of millions of £ on shit players while telling us Bojan was past it, continued to disrespect the supporters even though his team full of expensive garbage was failing and at the same time his football was garbage. Jones 0 delusional tool who told us about his vision for fast attacking free scoring football, in reality he tried to play his diamond system that the team wasn't set up for, signed Steven Ward amongst other shite, he would have got us relegated for sure if he wasn't sacked. MON 6 he came in and steadied the ship, kept us up when we were rock bottom but his insistence on playing 5 at the back without having wingbacks, some of his team selections and tactics were baffling and his football after a decent start fizzled out to more boring shite that would have had us finishing 17th for ever had he stayed. Neil 5 the jury is still out, a period of exceptional football early in the year, last season his hands were apparently tied due to FFP restrictions, no such excuses this season and given the backing the club have given him I'd say a push for a play-off position is the least we can expect. Let's hope Neil can deliver because it's obvious that since Hughes departure it's been a clusterfuck of appointments. Gouranga. nailed it
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Sept 16, 2023 8:27:38 GMT
I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited. So Lambert inherited a squad capable of staying in the Prem, but a few months later the squad inherited by Rowett was completely dysfunctional. I think the only key difference in those two squads was the loss of Shapiri and the £50M that Rowett was given to replace him. Rowett did an awful job here. He was tactically clueless and alienated and demotivated many of the players, including some of the ones he brought here. If it’s a managers job to get the best out of the resources at his disposal, it’s hard to imagine anyone doing much worse. The same obviously applies to Mad Nathan, and short of a valid tilt at the playoffs will apply to Alex Neil too. There were players at the club who had the talent but we're only here because we we were in the Premiership. Lambert marginalised them and tried to grind out results. At the end of the season most of those players left or had checked out mentally. Rowett did get the best out of what was available but what was available wasn't good enough for promotion so he was judged as a failure. Jones (like Lambert) was on a whole new level of useless and made the team worse than it was.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Sept 16, 2023 8:47:26 GMT
I think you are completely wrong in thinking the squad that got relegated was capable of promotion. It was completely dysfunctional - the core of that squad was rotten. The club and the fans assumed it was a matter of throwing money at some decent quality Championship players to bolster what we had and an instant return was on the cards. Rowett was sold that dream and he did what the club and the fans wanted him to do. Thing is he was sold a pup - the squad he was asked to build had rotten foundations. In retrospect we should have done what Burnley did - rip it up and start again. If Rowett is culpable of anything it is in believing in the strategy - he should have assessed the situation earlier and spelt out some home truths. What he isn't culpable of is failing to get that squad promoted - it was never going to happen without a complete reset and that wasn't his brief. Hughes started the rot by losing focus. However if used properly the squad Lambert inherited had enough quality to stay up but he destroyed any hope of survival by suppressing the talent and trying to grind out results with a squad that was suited for that way of playing. Once we were relegated the talent either physically or mentally left the building. What was left were players over the hill (Crouch, Adam), injury prone (Shawcross) or woefully out of form (Butland). Rowett was stitched up by Hughes and Lambert and owners (and fans) wearing rose tinted glasses. I'm not saying he didn't make mistakes but I think he's been made a scapegoat for the horrendous state of the squad he inherited. Not hindsight. Rowett was the wrong appointment in the first place. What was on his CV to be initially chased and then recruited to rebuild a promotion chasing side? He was, and remains an any shade of grey manager. Yes that's exactly what he is - a competent Championship standard manager. He wasn't the mistake. The mistake was thinking we had any chance of bouncing straight back. The club should have recognised where we were, gutted the side and started a rebuild as soon as we were relegated. It might have taken 2 or 3 seasons and someone like Rowett to stabilise us before getting in someone better but it was over estimating what the relegated squad was capable of achieving that cost us. Rowett has just become the fall guy.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Sept 16, 2023 9:36:52 GMT
So Lambert inherited a squad capable of staying in the Prem, but a few months later the squad inherited by Rowett was completely dysfunctional. I think the only key difference in those two squads was the loss of Shapiri and the £50M that Rowett was given to replace him. Rowett did an awful job here. He was tactically clueless and alienated and demotivated many of the players, including some of the ones he brought here. If it’s a managers job to get the best out of the resources at his disposal, it’s hard to imagine anyone doing much worse. The same obviously applies to Mad Nathan, and short of a valid tilt at the playoffs will apply to Alex Neil too. There were players at the club who had the talent but we're only here because we we were in the Premiership. Lambert marginalised them and tried to grind out results. At the end of the season most of those players left or had checked out mentally. Rowett did get the best out of what was available but what was available wasn't good enough for promotion so he was judged as a failure. Jones (like Lambert) was on a whole new level of useless and made the team worse than it was. Again, how are you ignoring that he had 50 MILLION POUNDS to spend, and then say “he got the best out of the players available”? Can you not see the innate contradiction in that?
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Sept 16, 2023 17:35:02 GMT
Manager | League Games Played | League Wins (%) | League Draws (%) | League Losses (%) | Goal Difference | PPG | ~ Income | ~ Expenditure | Net Spend | Gary Rowett | 26 | 8 (31%) | 11 (42%) | 7 (27%) | -1 | 1.35 | €30.15m | €51.45m | -€21.30m
| Nathan Jones | 34 | 5 (15%) | 13 (38%) | 16 (47%) | -18 | 0.82 | €1.28m | €18.15m | -€16.87m
| Michael O'Neill | 128 | 47 (37%) | 33 (26%) | 48 (37%) | +8 | 1.36 | €18.03m | €6.85m | +€11.18m
| Alex Neil | 46 | 14 (30%) | 10 (22%) | 22 (48%) | +1 | 1.13 | €22.45m | £14.40m | +€8.05m
|
Michael - 7.0 (Good job on a budget) Gary - 5.5 (Poor spending in the transfer market but managed to grind out results and make team difficult to beat.) Alex - 4.5 (Potential to improve if he can get a good run. Benefit of the doubt till christmas presuming it doesn't get worse. Needs to start turning losses into draws at a minimum. Surprised that he has a higher loss rate in the league than Nathan Jones over a larger amount of games.) Nathan - 1 (Diabolical) Transfer data based on Trasnfermarkt.com, may be inaccurate.
|
|
|
Post by blackpoolred on Sept 16, 2023 21:36:05 GMT
Lambert 1/10 - Totally out of his depth, possibly the most awful person(Dinosaur) imaginable to put in charge at that time - dreadful/clueless club management Rowett 6/10 - think I am the only fan in Stoke that would have liked to have seen him given more time, picked up a club rotten to the core and was going to take some rebuild even with money - half a season and one window ridiculous amount of time - clueless club management. Jones 1/10 - See Lambert comment O'Neil 3/10 - started off well and then looked like he lost interest, just another front man - got rid at the correct time - awful appointment at the time though given we were bottom of the table and he could only take the job on a part-time basis, had a drinking problem/conviction and zero experience in English football - beyond clueless club management. Neil 4/10 (so far) - needs time, certainly talks a good game, not sure he knows or has the experience of rebuilding a team. Once again lost with the windows though, I think we signed 9 attacking players in the last window and have 7 viable defenders in the entire squad, total lack of depth and quality in that position - no great headers of the ball and unable to defend a basic cross since the guy has been here and nothing done to rectify that. Don't be sending me stats on our defenders aerial duals - just look at the goals we are conceding week in week out Impressed that we did not hang on to MON and went all out for AN - has a decent record and lots of experience so I suppose we cant complain with this one and some of the football has looked the best we have seen for a while, but we have had the odd game where it has looked utterly shocking and total surrender. I think it is very below the belt and probably defamatory to refer to MON as having a drink problem. He had a drink driving conviction 2 years before he came to Stoke. There is nothing else on record to indicate that he had any other problems with alcohol and certainly nothing to indicate that it affected his ability as a manager. There was also an article on Sky Sports that a championship manager had been sent home from the training ground drunk, bit of speculation it might be our man and he didn't last much longer - it was never proved to be MON that much must be said - but would not be surprised, if you can get in a car drunk and try to drive it then possibly no problems turning up to training slightly inebriated - all conjecture though on my part. We speculate and take guesses to what is going on behind the scenes with players and managers and some people here things and rumours second hand and pass them on to us - so we may have opinions and comments that might well not be based on facts or truth, that is the concept of a chat site though is it not and part of the reason we come on here? I would say if every post has to be factually correct and cited for you and your offended by something that might not be true or a bit of gossip then the oatcake is possibly not for you - or any other fanzine come to that matter.
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Sept 17, 2023 7:42:31 GMT
Manager | League Games Played | League Wins (%) | League Draws (%) | League Losses (%) | Goal Difference | PPG | ~ Income | ~ Expenditure | Net Spend | Gary Rowett | 26 | 8 (31%) | 11 (42%) | 7 (27%) | -1 | 1.35 | €30.15m | €51.45m | -€21.30m
| Nathan Jones | 34 | 5 (15%) | 13 (38%) | 16 (47%) | -18 | 0.82 | €1.28m | €18.15m | -€16.87m
| Michael O'Neill | 128 | 47 (37%) | 33 (26%) | 48 (37%) | +8 | 1.36 | €18.03m | €6.85m | +€11.18m
| Alex Neil | 46 | 14 (30%) | 10 (22%) | 22 (48%) | +1 | 1.13 | €22.45m | £14.40m | +€8.05m
|
Michael - 7.0 (Good job on a budget) Gary - 5.5 (Poor spending in the transfer market but managed to grind out results and make team difficult to beat.) Alex - 4.5 (Potential to improve if he can get a good run. Benefit of the doubt till christmas presuming it doesn't get worse. Needs to start turning losses into draws at a minimum. Surprised that he has a higher loss rate in the league than Nathan Jones over a larger amount of games.) Nathan - 1 (Diabolical) Transfer data based on Trasnfermarkt.com, may be inaccurate. Thanks for the stats. The PPG is truly awful. How did Nathan get so many games? The transfer figures for Rowett look wrong to me. I can only think of around £20M income in his time, which would make his net spend £30M. If MON hadn’t done such a good job bringing some order back to the finances we’d be playing the Vale this season.
|
|
|
Post by stokefanone on Sept 17, 2023 10:13:50 GMT
Should have kept Hughes till the end of the season, we would have stayed up!
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Sept 17, 2023 10:23:17 GMT
Manager | League Games Played | League Wins (%) | League Draws (%) | League Losses (%) | Goal Difference | PPG | ~ Income | ~ Expenditure | Net Spend | Gary Rowett | 26 | 8 (31%) | 11 (42%) | 7 (27%) | -1 | 1.35 | €30.15m | €51.45m | -€21.30m
| Nathan Jones | 34 | 5 (15%) | 13 (38%) | 16 (47%) | -18 | 0.82 | €1.28m | €18.15m | -€16.87m
| Michael O'Neill | 128 | 47 (37%) | 33 (26%) | 48 (37%) | +8 | 1.36 | €18.03m | €6.85m | +€11.18m
| Alex Neil | 46 | 14 (30%) | 10 (22%) | 22 (48%) | +1 | 1.13 | €22.45m | £14.40m | +€8.05m
|
Michael - 7.0 (Good job on a budget) Gary - 5.5 (Poor spending in the transfer market but managed to grind out results and make team difficult to beat.) Alex - 4.5 (Potential to improve if he can get a good run. Benefit of the doubt till christmas presuming it doesn't get worse. Needs to start turning losses into draws at a minimum. Surprised that he has a higher loss rate in the league than Nathan Jones over a larger amount of games.) Nathan - 1 (Diabolical) Transfer data based on Trasnfermarkt.com, may be inaccurate. Thanks for the stats. The PPG is truly awful. How did Nathan get so many games? The transfer figures for Rowett look wrong to me. I can only think of around £20M income in his time, which would make his net spend £30M. If MON hadn’t done such a good job bringing some order back to the finances we’d be playing the Vale this season. Of course they all inherited other manager's players who were performing poorly but didn't have the...not his players excuse rolled out after every loss for a year and a whole season of shiteness ignored to make it look better by some. Obviously Rowett spent big Rowett had a better win record 😁 MON considerably better and sacked after a better start that we've had this season. This gel takes some time...did we buy it on some dodgy Chinese website?
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Sept 17, 2023 10:30:47 GMT
Should have kept Hughes till the end of the season, we would have stayed up! I agree 👍 we were doomed the moment PL entered the building a cluster fuck of an appointment.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Sept 17, 2023 13:07:57 GMT
Manager | League Games Played | League Wins (%) | League Draws (%) | League Losses (%) | Goal Difference | PPG | ~ Income | ~ Expenditure | Net Spend | Gary Rowett | 26 | 8 (31%) | 11 (42%) | 7 (27%) | -1 | 1.35 | €30.15m | €51.45m | -€21.30m
| Nathan Jones | 34 | 5 (15%) | 13 (38%) | 16 (47%) | -18 | 0.82 | €1.28m | €18.15m | -€16.87m
| Michael O'Neill | 128 | 47 (37%) | 33 (26%) | 48 (37%) | +8 | 1.36 | €18.03m | €6.85m | +€11.18m
| Alex Neil | 46 | 14 (30%) | 10 (22%) | 22 (48%) | +1 | 1.13 | €22.45m | £14.40m | +€8.05m
|
Michael - 7.0 (Good job on a budget) Gary - 5.5 (Poor spending in the transfer market but managed to grind out results and make team difficult to beat.) Alex - 4.5 (Potential to improve if he can get a good run. Benefit of the doubt till christmas presuming it doesn't get worse. Needs to start turning losses into draws at a minimum. Surprised that he has a higher loss rate in the league than Nathan Jones over a larger amount of games.) Nathan - 1 (Diabolical) Transfer data based on Trasnfermarkt.com, may be inaccurate. I genuinely think that posting these statistics should be banned till the New Year. It's depressing reading them.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Sept 17, 2023 22:52:18 GMT
I think it is very below the belt and probably defamatory to refer to MON as having a drink problem. He had a drink driving conviction 2 years before he came to Stoke. There is nothing else on record to indicate that he had any other problems with alcohol and certainly nothing to indicate that it affected his ability as a manager. There was also an article on Sky Sports that a championship manager had been sent home from the training ground drunk, bit of speculation it might be our man and he didn't last much longer - it was never proved to be MON that much must be said - but would not be surprised, if you can get in a car drunk and try to drive it then possibly no problems turning up to training slightly inebriated - all conjecture though on my part. We speculate and take guesses to what is going on behind the scenes with players and managers and some people here things and rumours second hand and pass them on to us - so we may have opinions and comments that might well not be based on facts or truth, that is the concept of a chat site though is it not and part of the reason we come on here? I would say if every post has to be factually correct and cited for you and your offended by something that might not be true or a bit of gossip then the oatcake is possibly not for you - or any other fanzine come to that matter. Half the population of Stoke on Trent get into a car and either drink or drug drive so not sure why you've come to the conclusion it was O'Neill that was sent home pissed.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Sept 18, 2023 5:05:31 GMT
I think it is very below the belt and probably defamatory to refer to MON as having a drink problem. He had a drink driving conviction 2 years before he came to Stoke. There is nothing else on record to indicate that he had any other problems with alcohol and certainly nothing to indicate that it affected his ability as a manager. There was also an article on Sky Sports that a championship manager had been sent home from the training ground drunk, bit of speculation it might be our man and he didn't last much longer - it was never proved to be MON that much must be said - but would not be surprised, if you can get in a car drunk and try to drive it then possibly no problems turning up to training slightly inebriated - all conjecture though on my part. We speculate and take guesses to what is going on behind the scenes with players and managers and some people here things and rumours second hand and pass them on to us - so we may have opinions and comments that might well not be based on facts or truth, that is the concept of a chat site though is it not and part of the reason we come on here? I would say if every post has to be factually correct and cited for you and your offended by something that might not be true or a bit of gossip then the oatcake is possibly not for you - or any other fanzine come to that matter. He’s been teetotal since the drink driving incident, he’s said it himself. Why won’t you believe the man himself, but you see a half baked rumour on social media and immediately think MON is the culprit?
|
|
|
Post by blackpoolred on Sept 18, 2023 22:03:25 GMT
There was also an article on Sky Sports that a championship manager had been sent home from the training ground drunk, bit of speculation it might be our man and he didn't last much longer - it was never proved to be MON that much must be said - but would not be surprised, if you can get in a car drunk and try to drive it then possibly no problems turning up to training slightly inebriated - all conjecture though on my part. We speculate and take guesses to what is going on behind the scenes with players and managers and some people here things and rumours second hand and pass them on to us - so we may have opinions and comments that might well not be based on facts or truth, that is the concept of a chat site though is it not and part of the reason we come on here? I would say if every post has to be factually correct and cited for you and your offended by something that might not be true or a bit of gossip then the oatcake is possibly not for you - or any other fanzine come to that matter. He’s been teetotal since the drink driving incident, he’s said it himself. Why won’t you believe the man himself, but you see a half baked rumour on social media and immediately think MON is the culprit? The article was on Sky Sports news not SM and others speculated it might be MON - I merely said it would not surprise me. I have a drunk/alcoholic in my family and anybody else that has one in their family will tell you they are good at bending the truth - just because he tells you he has not had a drink does not necessarily mean it is true - but good of you to take his word - some of us though are more sceptical by nature. For me, in the end he was just a manager going through the motions, the club was stagnating the windows were awful and the club was being run in to the ground once more - we have just had to sign 18 players and are in the process of a complete squad re-build for a reason - poor manager for me and the reason I gave him a low mark in my OP - although the conversation has morphed a little since then
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Sept 19, 2023 4:03:00 GMT
He’s been teetotal since the drink driving incident, he’s said it himself. Why won’t you believe the man himself, but you see a half baked rumour on social media and immediately think MON is the culprit? The article was on Sky Sports news not SM and others speculated it might be MON - I merely said it would not surprise me. I have a drunk/alcoholic in my family and anybody else that has one in their family will tell you they are good at bending the truth - just because he tells you he has not had a drink does not necessarily mean it is true - but good of you to take his word - some of us though are more sceptical by nature. For me, in the end he was just a manager going through the motions, the club was stagnating the windows were awful and the club was being run in to the ground once more - we have just had to sign 18 players and are in the process of a complete squad re-build for a reason - poor manager for me and the reason I gave him a low mark in my OP - although the conversation has morphed a little since then We were rebuilding the squad this season with or without MON due to the contract situation of many of the players, and the number of players we signed on loan last season mainly because of FFP………
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Sept 19, 2023 6:58:31 GMT
The article was on Sky Sports news not SM and others speculated it might be MON - I merely said it would not surprise me. I have a drunk/alcoholic in my family and anybody else that has one in their family will tell you they are good at bending the truth - just because he tells you he has not had a drink does not necessarily mean it is true - but good of you to take his word - some of us though are more sceptical by nature. For me, in the end he was just a manager going through the motions, the club was stagnating the windows were awful and the club was being run in to the ground once more - we have just had to sign 18 players and are in the process of a complete squad re-build for a reason - poor manager for me and the reason I gave him a low mark in my OP - although the conversation has morphed a little since then We were rebuilding the squad this season with or without MON due to the contract situation of many of the players, and the number of players we signed on loan last season mainly because of FFP……… We might've needed to rebuild slightly less if we'd signed more players fit for purpose over the last few years?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Sept 19, 2023 7:39:35 GMT
We were rebuilding the squad this season with or without MON due to the contract situation of many of the players, and the number of players we signed on loan last season mainly because of FFP……… We might've needed to rebuild slightly less if we'd signed more players fit for purpose over the last few years? We’ve just signed 17 players and have Wesley as our sole striker and no cover at left centre back or real physical presence in defence and the club are patting themselves on the back over their recruitment and the fans are waving lyrical about players who have proved very little as yet. In general I’m not sure we lost a penny on the “not fit for purpose” players though, and Brown and Wilmot were perfect signings for the direction of travel we should be aiming for as a club, one has made us a profit and one would if he were sold tomorrow (as would Laurent and even Baker to be fair). Gayle is the one example still on book of a bad deal in hindsight, although MON never had the opportunity to show us what he had planned for him and Delap medium to long term before getting sacked. I’m happy to show patience towards AN and the process, I also wanted MON to be given at least 6/7 more games as 5 games into a league season is not sufficient to judge anything. I suppose the question is those wanting rid of MON after 5 games last season how much patience do they show towards AN?
|
|
|
Post by vidigal7 on Sept 19, 2023 7:44:07 GMT
We might've needed to rebuild slightly less if we'd signed more players fit for purpose over the last few years? We’ve just signed 17 players and have Wesley as our sole striker and no cover at left centre back or real physical presence in defence and the club are patting themselves on the back over their recruitment and the fans are waving lyrical about players who have proved very little as yet. I’m not sure we lost a penny on the “not fit for purpose” players though, and Brown and Wilmot were perfect signings for the direction of travel we should be aiming for as a club, one has made us a profit and one would if he were sold tomorrow. Gayle is the one example of a bad deal in hindsight, although MON never had the opportunity to show us what he had planned for him and Delap medium to long term before getting sacked. I’m happy to show patience towards AN and the process, I also wanted MON to be given at least 6/7 more games as 5 games into a league season is not sufficient to judge anything. I suppose the question is those wanting rid of MON after 5 games last season how much patience do they show towards MON? My issue with O'Neil was his idea of football, possession football on the edge of your own 18 yard box hardly inspired hope. I had my own reservations about O Neil before we signed him aswell, it was quite clear his knowledge in the market would be extremely limited, as would his knowledge of the league and the players he was going to come up against. It seemed a really ill thought out appointment to me at the time so how we come to the conclusion he was a good bet I'll never understand. It isn't like you could back him up with his record for his doubters. He'd not been there and done it, he didn't know the way
|
|