MadAmster

The 2nd one harps back to the Tin Man's testimonial when thousands of 'Gers came and mixed with the Derby faithful. A bond was born that day.

Just going by the stats...
352 goals in 599 matches in 2 spells with Derby and one with M'boro in between at an average of a goal every 1.7 matches.
28 goals for England in 23 matches, that's 1.21 goals per game. That's a record that doesn't look like it would ever get broken by anybody making a minimum of 10 games for England.
Averages like that he'd be £200M+ these days. 
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you, Steve Bloomer.

What's changed though? Same threadbare squad now running out of steam which may or may not be down to the physical requirements of the Head Coach. Same lack of effectiveness around the opponent's box. Same lack of reacting to an opponent's change of shape/personnel.
We have what we have and we know why we have that. People bemoan us not getting a striker and a right back in during the January window. Why did that happen? I don't know but the answer is probably that Warne couldn't find good enough player, for free, who fits the picture he has in his head of the type of player/person he wants. Names were bandied about but the club didn't go for them. If they don't fit PWs work rate wants and/or don't show the  right character traits, he aint gonna sign em. Simple.
It is what it is, we are where we are and we might, or might not, make the playoffs. Whatever happens, I'll be paying my £200 a year for RamsTV. Paying another £500+ a game to fly over to watch between 5 and 8 games during the season. 
Moan? I don't think I do that but I do say what I think and, occasionally, offer a possible solution.
Squad numbers? Can't do much about that.
Lack of effectiveness in the final third. We could try playing 2 up top as, when I learnt football, strikers always hunted in pairs. IMO, they still should.
Lack of changing tack mid game to take account of changes the oppo make? Unfortunately I don't have the UEFA "A" badge... 😉
If it doesn't happen this season, it will happen next..... or the one after. I mean, at 69 I've got all the time in the world to see us back in the Premier League 😉

Just going by the stats...
352 goals in 599 matches in 2 spells with Derby and one with M'boro in between at an average of a goal every 1.7 matches.
28 goals for England in 23 matches, that's 1.21 goals per game. That's a record that doesn't look like it would ever get broken by anybody making a minimum of 10 games for England.
Averages like that he'd be £200M+ these days. 
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you, Steve Bloomer.

Woodward did worse than Bloomer with regard to goals and games. He got 23 in 29 games for England between 1903 and 1911 @ 0.8 goals per game. Bloomer 28 in 23 games between 1895 and 1907 @1.21 goals per game.
At club level Bloomer scored 352 in 599 games. 1 goal every 1.7 games. Woodward scored 97 in 244. 1 goal every 2.5 games 
myfootballfacts seems to have this wrong.

I agree I think the limit on transfer spend suits Clowes for a couple of seasons to allow him to assess and stabilize after forking out a huge sum to save the club.

Two excellent posts.  David Clowes stumped somewhere in the region of £55M to buy the club.  He prepared a business plan that paid off 100% of the football creditors and 25% of the debt too non-football creditors meaning we avoided a 15 point penalty this season, which based on out current points would see us 4 points outside the relegation zone.
He agreed to not paying transfer fees, it wasn’t imposed.  And regardless, after having spent £55M to buy the club, I suspect he wouldn’t want to pay transfer fees anyway.
And I don’t think a comparison to Wigan is appropriate.  Their previous owner wrote off something like £35M of debt, leaving them with around £10M for the new owner to settle and buy the club, including the stadium and all assets.  Not forgetting they would only have to pay 25% to non-footballing creditors, reducing that number significantly.  They owed HMRC £2.8M, we owed about 10 times that.  A totally different situation.
David Clowes is trying to change the image and reputation of the club.  It wouldn’t sit right with those outside Derby if he wrote of 75% of the money owed to HMRC and other creditors to then start paying transfer fees, etc.  No matter how small.
There’s a bigger picture and a longer game to be played, not just this season.

My understanding is that clubs exiting Administration have to come up with a 2 year business plan and the EFL has to agree to it. There's a sort of "skeleton", a blueprint. The club puts the meat on the bones. They then submit it to the EFL. The EFL then either agrees to it or requests amendments. I'm not 100% certain but I believe the plan DC submitted was accepted at the first time of asking.
The reason for the plan is to ensure the club doesn't immediately go down the same route and also to discourage others from following suit.
Using "round" figures, we paid off £20M of the £80M we owed and the rest was written off by the various creditors. MM wrote off £140M the club owed him. He also accepted £20M for Pride Park, having paid £80M for it, a loss of £60M. The screw up cost MM £200M. To his credit he's not moaned about it in public. Debit side is he shouldn't have spent twice the club's income during his tenure. That's the crux of the whole sorry mess. Income around £240M under MM, expenditure roughly twice that. 
Looking forward, there will be a review of the plan in the summer. Restrictions might, or might not be eased. I would warn people not to expect a big spending splurge when/if restrictions are eased this summer or gone next summer. That's not the Clowes way. He's shelled out £50M to get us where we are. He was said to have been worth around £250M. What he has already spent is probably the majority of his liquid assets. The rest will be tied up in stocks, shares, buildings, machinery etc. Those expecting a huge transfer fund will be very disappointed. I expect the club to make a profit this season and next. That profit will be the extent of Warne's transfer kitty. I don't believe Clowes will allow the club to spend money it doesn't have. No more gambling on reaching the promised land. We will get there when we get there and DCFC will pay its way.

My understanding is that clubs exiting Administration have to come up with a 2 year business plan and the EFL has to agree to it. There's a sort of "skeleton", a blueprint. The club puts the meat on the bones. They then submit it to the EFL. The EFL then either agrees to it or requests amendments. I'm not 100% certain but I believe the plan DC submitted was accepted at the first time of asking.
The reason for the plan is to ensure the club doesn't immediately go down the same route and also to discourage others from following suit.
Using "round" figures, we paid off £20M of the £80M we owed and the rest was written off by the various creditors. MM wrote off £140M the club owed him. He also accepted £20M for Pride Park, having paid £80M for it, a loss of £60M. The screw up cost MM £200M. To his credit he's not moaned about it in public. Debit side is he shouldn't have spent twice the club's income during his tenure. That's the crux of the whole sorry mess. Income around £240M under MM, expenditure roughly twice that. 
Looking forward, there will be a review of the plan in the summer. Restrictions might, or might not be eased. I would warn people not to expect a big spending splurge when/if restrictions are eased this summer or gone next summer. That's not the Clowes way. He's shelled out £50M to get us where we are. He was said to have been worth around £250M. What he has already spent is probably the majority of his liquid assets. The rest will be tied up in stocks, shares, buildings, machinery etc. Those expecting a huge transfer fund will be very disappointed. I expect the club to make a profit this season and next. That profit will be the extent of Warne's transfer kitty. I don't believe Clowes will allow the club to spend money it doesn't have. No more gambling on reaching the promised land. We will get there when we get there and DCFC will pay its way.

My understanding is that clubs exiting Administration have to come up with a 2 year business plan and the EFL has to agree to it. There's a sort of "skeleton", a blueprint. The club puts the meat on the bones. They then submit it to the EFL. The EFL then either agrees to it or requests amendments. I'm not 100% certain but I believe the plan DC submitted was accepted at the first time of asking.
The reason for the plan is to ensure the club doesn't immediately go down the same route and also to discourage others from following suit.
Using "round" figures, we paid off £20M of the £80M we owed and the rest was written off by the various creditors. MM wrote off £140M the club owed him. He also accepted £20M for Pride Park, having paid £80M for it, a loss of £60M. The screw up cost MM £200M. To his credit he's not moaned about it in public. Debit side is he shouldn't have spent twice the club's income during his tenure. That's the crux of the whole sorry mess. Income around £240M under MM, expenditure roughly twice that. 
Looking forward, there will be a review of the plan in the summer. Restrictions might, or might not be eased. I would warn people not to expect a big spending splurge when/if restrictions are eased this summer or gone next summer. That's not the Clowes way. He's shelled out £50M to get us where we are. He was said to have been worth around £250M. What he has already spent is probably the majority of his liquid assets. The rest will be tied up in stocks, shares, buildings, machinery etc. Those expecting a huge transfer fund will be very disappointed. I expect the club to make a profit this season and next. That profit will be the extent of Warne's transfer kitty. I don't believe Clowes will allow the club to spend money it doesn't have. No more gambling on reaching the promised land. We will get there when we get there and DCFC will pay its way.

My understanding is that clubs exiting Administration have to come up with a 2 year business plan and the EFL has to agree to it. There's a sort of "skeleton", a blueprint. The club puts the meat on the bones. They then submit it to the EFL. The EFL then either agrees to it or requests amendments. I'm not 100% certain but I believe the plan DC submitted was accepted at the first time of asking.
The reason for the plan is to ensure the club doesn't immediately go down the same route and also to discourage others from following suit.
Using "round" figures, we paid off £20M of the £80M we owed and the rest was written off by the various creditors. MM wrote off £140M the club owed him. He also accepted £20M for Pride Park, having paid £80M for it, a loss of £60M. The screw up cost MM £200M. To his credit he's not moaned about it in public. Debit side is he shouldn't have spent twice the club's income during his tenure. That's the crux of the whole sorry mess. Income around £240M under MM, expenditure roughly twice that. 
Looking forward, there will be a review of the plan in the summer. Restrictions might, or might not be eased. I would warn people not to expect a big spending splurge when/if restrictions are eased this summer or gone next summer. That's not the Clowes way. He's shelled out £50M to get us where we are. He was said to have been worth around £250M. What he has already spent is probably the majority of his liquid assets. The rest will be tied up in stocks, shares, buildings, machinery etc. Those expecting a huge transfer fund will be very disappointed. I expect the club to make a profit this season and next. That profit will be the extent of Warne's transfer kitty. I don't believe Clowes will allow the club to spend money it doesn't have. No more gambling on reaching the promised land. We will get there when we get there and DCFC will pay its way.

Just a thought. Young players who break into a team often have a good first season and then suffer "2nd season syndrome". Cashin's downturn in form started in January. One year after Rooney was "allowed" to use him due to squad size restrictions. He looked better at Posh last weekend. Hopefully, he's on his way back and his second season/year dip has ended.

My understanding is that clubs exiting Administration have to come up with a 2 year business plan and the EFL has to agree to it. There's a sort of "skeleton", a blueprint. The club puts the meat on the bones. They then submit it to the EFL. The EFL then either agrees to it or requests amendments. I'm not 100% certain but I believe the plan DC submitted was accepted at the first time of asking.
The reason for the plan is to ensure the club doesn't immediately go down the same route and also to discourage others from following suit.
Using "round" figures, we paid off £20M of the £80M we owed and the rest was written off by the various creditors. MM wrote off £140M the club owed him. He also accepted £20M for Pride Park, having paid £80M for it, a loss of £60M. The screw up cost MM £200M. To his credit he's not moaned about it in public. Debit side is he shouldn't have spent twice the club's income during his tenure. That's the crux of the whole sorry mess. Income around £240M under MM, expenditure roughly twice that. 
Looking forward, there will be a review of the plan in the summer. Restrictions might, or might not be eased. I would warn people not to expect a big spending splurge when/if restrictions are eased this summer or gone next summer. That's not the Clowes way. He's shelled out £50M to get us where we are. He was said to have been worth around £250M. What he has already spent is probably the majority of his liquid assets. The rest will be tied up in stocks, shares, buildings, machinery etc. Those expecting a huge transfer fund will be very disappointed. I expect the club to make a profit this season and next. That profit will be the extent of Warne's transfer kitty. I don't believe Clowes will allow the club to spend money it doesn't have. No more gambling on reaching the promised land. We will get there when we get there and DCFC will pay its way.

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

Penalty IMO. Not the only one we didn't get. I counted 3 times at corners where Fozzy was still in a bear hug from a defender when he tried to jump for the ball. Before the kick is taken, it's not an issue (should be but isn't) but once the kick has been taken and the bear hug is still locked on, it's a penalty.

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

Cash is a young lad experiencing 2nd season syndrome, IMO. His 1st team journey started January last year. One year on his dip started. He'll get through it. Yesterday was an improvement on his previous 3 or 4 games. Hopefully, he has now turned the corner.

Played well enough first half but failed to create concrete chances. They changed formation and brought 2 players in at HT. We did nothing to counter that. They won.
No opinion, just fact. PW will get us out of L1 but not this season. Give him the summer and January windows to build HIS squad and we probably won't see this Bielsa like dip.

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

You might be surprised to find that there are people posting on here who fit that description. Where I will  agree with you is that fans do tend to be reactive. The good run saw everybody delighted and upbeat. the downturn has them saddened. Their reactions are results driven. 
Should the downturn be a surprise? Probably not.
We have, in quantity, a paper thin squad. Warne's game requires a lot of hard work on the training ground and masses of it on match day. The squad is a mixed bag of kids and wrinklies. The glue that keeps teams together tends to be a nucleus of 24 to 29 year olds and we don't have them. It's quite possible that, just as Bielsa's L**ds teams used to, the players have run out of steam. If that's the case then how/why did that happen? Several coaching badgeless fans have commented that we seem to be slow, at best, in reacting to opposition changes in personnel/formation. If true, in which direction should the finger be pointed? Are some players being dishonest in maybe not saying they need a rest? Some of the older ones maybe. The problem being that there isn't always a ready made replacement.
In most things, the truth tends to lie somewhere in the middle. In this discussion, it's either all PWs fault or none of it is. IMO, circumstances carry a share, the players carry a share and the coaching staff, including PW, carry a share. Coaches can only work with what they are given. At one club, I was coaching the reserve side. I had, on paper, 19 players at my disposal. At training (2 evenings a week) due to shift work, injury, illness and life in general, I'd have between 5 and 8 players at any given session. The missing players were in 2 groups. Those missing for the reasons given and those called up to train with the 1st team because they were shorthanded for the same reasons. How do you coach your team in things they need to learn/change? You can't. I was also hamstrung with the club strategy and the Dutch players intransigence. 433 was the style. My 19 had 3 keepers, half a dozen defenders, 1 striker and the rest were all midfield players. 433 was never going to work. I tried to get them to change but the collective always has strength. Come Christmas we were bottom. I called a meeting. I'd gained permission from the club to change formation as neither the club nor I was prepared to go down. First question from me to the players was "do you want to relegate?". They didn't. 433 was obviously not working. I asked them to give me the chance to rescue the season. They agreed. Sounds daft, the coach asking the players, but this is the Netherlands and things work differently here. I got them to go 4141 with a flat back 4 rather than the diamond usually seen over here. First game after the 6 week winter break, we were away at the team in 2nd place. Sickness, injury and work saw me with just 11 players plus myself (aged 53). The training sessions had worked and we, despite me having to come on in the 10th minute, won 1-0. We stayed up. The players approached the committee in the summer, they wanted to go back to 433. I was relieved of my duties. They went down the next season. 

Last few games he's been off it but prior to that he's been excellent IMO. That said, my opinion won't be everybody else's or that would make for a right boring forum.