Last 3 managers.....

[Mafiabob]

To get us promoted..... DAVIES, SMITH, COX.

See a trend? Hard tough no nonsense managers who got results out of teams whatever the performance. 

Maybe time to get results over performance, maybe time to slay the beast that is we need to play good football, maybe time to hit hard instead of pussy footing around looking pleasing. Maybe time to be a bit brutal.

Maybe time to ditch the mythical "Derby Way" we have become seduced with.

[sage]

1 minute ago, Mafiabob said:

To get us promoted..... DAVIES, SMITH, COX.

See a trend? Hard tough no nonsense managers who got results out of teams whatever the performance. 

Maybe time to get results over performance, maybe time to slay the beast that is we need to play good football, maybe time to hit hard instead of pussy footing around looking pleasing. Maybe time to be a bit brutal.

Maybe time to ditch the mythical "Derby Way" we have become seduced with.

We played in the Derby Way under Smith and Cox.

[kingsy1884]

Only Davies wasnt the derby way. Hoof to howard and defend a 1-0 win.

[Mafiabob]

4 minutes ago, sage said:

We played in the Derby Way under Smith and Cox.

Point I'm making is that all 3 managers had a no nonsense style to management, no airs or graces about them. Obviously I'm trying to conclude that my preferred manager here would be Pearson

[deano180]

37 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

Point I'm making is that all 3 managers had a no nonsense style to management, no airs or graces about them. Obviously I'm trying to conclude that my preferred manager here would be Pearson

Guess we get Mike Bassett then 

[Mostyn6]

not sure they were that different. I'd be inclined to say that if the media coverage existed back then, with internet etc, that does now, we'd have different opinions on Smith and Cox.

[G STAR RAM]

Cox and Smith some similarities, both played decent football and fell apart when given access to the cheque book. 

Billy Davies polar opposite in terms of football but also had no idea how to spend money wisely.

All seemed good at man management, Cox and Davies especially so.

[Van der MoodHoover]

Wasn't Arthur's nickname The Sergeant Major, or something?

Didn't think TBE was hard or no nonsense, just p***ed.

[Duracell]

3 hours ago, Mafiabob said:

Point I'm making is that all 3 managers had a no nonsense style to management, no airs or graces about them. Obviously I'm trying to conclude that my preferred manager here would be Pearson

Doesn't that mean your point is about how managers interact with their players and the media? Because in that case, two of the three you've mentioned fit the "Derby Way" perfectly.

No way do I want a Billy Davies - he is one of the reasons we've been stuck in this league for so long. "No-nonsense" is fine, but results-at-all-costs is not.

That kind of football suggests your only ambition is to get promoted. I'd happily wait another 5 years to get promoted if it meant we had a chance to stay up and aim for domestic cups and European football once we were promoted.

I'm just not interested in becoming another West Brom, treading water in the Premier League.

[Mostyn6]

35 minutes ago, Duracell said:

No way do I want a Billy Davies - he is one of the reasons we've been stuck in this league for so lon

I don't expect such absolute nonsense from one as intelligent as yourself!

[Duracell]

1 minute ago, Mostyn6 said:

I don't expect such absolute nonsense from one as intelligent as yourself!

You don't think our 11 point season has anything to do with the subsequent painstakingly slow rebuild following our relegation?

[sage]

3 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

I don't expect such absolute nonsense from one as intelligent as yourself!

However, I did expect such nonsense from you.

[Mostyn6]

15 minutes ago, Duracell said:

You don't think our 11 point season has anything to do with the subsequent painstakingly slow rebuild following our relegation?

no, you can rebuild a team in a couple of seasons. Davies left in 2007 FFS! Not one player had a 9 year contract.

14 minutes ago, sage said:

However, I did expect such nonsense from you.

crawl back under your rock

[sage]

10 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

no, you can rebuild a team in a couple of seasons. Davies left in 2007 FFS! Not one player had a 9 year contract.

crawl back under your rock

 

[Duracell]

11 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

no, you can rebuild a team in a couple of seasons. Davies left in 2007 FFS! Not one player had a 9 year contract.

Of course not. But it resulted in the board being thrifty, and "two seasons" became five.

It's as much Jewell's fault as it was Clough but if you look at our timeline of the past 9 years and why we haven't gone up, it starts with the summer of 2007. That doesn't mean it's Billy Davies' fault that Keogh sliced it to Zamora, or he's the reason we didn't turn up vs Hull. But the past 9 years would have been very different if it wasn't for that season.

It's surprisingly difficult to suddenly stop being feckin ****.

[Mostyn6]

3 minutes ago, Duracell said:

Of course not. But it resulted in the board being thrifty, and "two seasons" became five.

not sure how you work that out given the board in charge when Davies started the 07/08 season was a totally different board to that at the end of the January transfer window in 2008.

The board that hardly gave Davies anything to spend in the PL (Gadsby, Horton, Marples, Amott? Uncle Mel?) cashed in and sold to the Americans after Davies left. Totally unlinked.

That's like suggesting Mandaric deserves credit for Leicester winning the PL

[Duracell]

12 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

not sure how you work that out given the board in charge when Davies started the 07/08 season was a totally different board to that at the end of the January transfer window in 2008.

The board that hardly gave Davies anything to spend in the PL (Gadsby, Horton, Marples, Amott? Uncle Mel?) cashed in and sold to the Americans after Davies left. Totally unlinked.

That's like suggesting Mandaric deserves credit for Leicester winning the PL

The American board weren't such tight arses immediately after our relegation. We spent a fair bit. It was after Jewell squandered it that they got very thrifty. Yes, everything changed both behind the scenes and in the dugout in those couple of seasons, but the whole thing was a catalogue of mismanagement that started in 2007. I don't understand how you can completely disconnect Davies from everything.

Our crisis in 1984, did that spring up overnight? Is it completely unconnected with what happened in the late 1970s?

[Mostyn6]

1 minute ago, Duracell said:

The American board weren't such tight arses immediately after our relegation. We spent a fair bit. It was after Jewell squandered it that they got very thrifty. Yes, everything changed both behind the scenes and in the dugout in those couple of seasons, but the whole thing was a catalogue of mismanagement that started in 2007. I don't understand how you can completely disconnect Davies from everything.

Our crisis in 1984, did that spring up overnight? Is it completely unconnected with what happened in the late 1970s?

I don't disconnect everything, but there is a cut off. Davies influence ended the minute his last signing left the club IMO.

He cannot be linked financially, as his achievement as manager earned us more money than we spent, we had parachute payments which more than covered his 'liability' if you like. It was however Jewell that squandered about £20m on 23 players in 2008.

The fact that Nigel Clough extended contracts of, and relied on about 5 Davies signings would suggest that Davies didn't leave things as badly as Clough apologists like to pretend. I can fully understand criticism of Jewell. But Davies, should have been let off the hook within a couple of years of leaving. If not, then essentially you are saying Clough is a failure. Clough gets credit for halting the slide etc, turning the club around etc. Well, either he did, thus removing the ghosts of Davies and Jewell, or he didn't and is a failure.

Your reference to 70s and 80s is one I cannot comment on. I only know vaguely what happened.

[davenportram]

6 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

 

 

The fact that Nigel Clough extended contracts of, and relied on about 5 Davies signings would suggest that Davies didn't leave things as badly as Clough apologists like to pretend.

 

necessity not choice. Noone wanted to buy/pay enough wages for Davies signings to leave before the end of their contracts meaning some were paid off. Also the sheer number of players that would have needed to be bought to replace the ***** of Davies and Jewell meant Clough couldn't just get rid straight away. They may have been crap but the ones kept were the best we had at the time, and in positions it would have been extremely expensive to buy or bring in replacements.

 

 

[Duracell]

7 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

I don't disconnect everything, but there is a cut off. Davies influence ended the minute his last signing left the club IMO.

He cannot be linked financially, as his achievement as manager earned us more money than we spent, we had parachute payments which more than covered his 'liability' if you like. It was however Jewell that squandered about £20m on 23 players in 2008.

The fact that Nigel Clough extended contracts of, and relied on about 5 Davies signings would suggest that Davies didn't leave things as badly as Clough apologists like to pretend. I can fully understand criticism of Jewell. But Davies, should have been let off the hook within a couple of years of leaving. If not, then essentially you are saying Clough is a failure. Clough gets credit for halting the slide etc, turning the club around etc. Well, either he did, thus removing the ghosts of Davies and Jewell, or he didn't and is a failure.

Your reference to 70s and 80s is one I cannot comment on. I only know vaguely what happened.

Think we're talking at crossed wires here, I'm not talking about influence, or ghosts left behind. Merely that his tenure was the start of some of the most forgettable years the club has ever seen - the first dominoe of mediocrity. If Davies had been sufficiently arsed, we needn't have appointed Paul Jewell, and by extension gone through the Clough years...

That might come across as me blaming Davies for the appointment of Jewell. That would be silly. But without Davies and his chronic mismanagment which created a hole we plugged with a horny, cardiganned Scouser, we never would have had to appoint Clough, and the pro/anti Nigel debate doesn't exist.

I'm talking about causality here. Not influence. The bullet that killed  Franz Ferdinand only hit one person, but it doesn't mean it has nothing to do with World War I.