The Big Sammon Thread

[CumbrianRam]

I thought he was talking about the players NC inherited..

My mistake, reading comprehension fail.

[shepshedram]

Davies hit the ground running, promotion first season, got us organised and winning within a few months.

 

Clough has had 5 years and 80+ players...... big difference.

Davies certainly got us winning early on that season but surely you remember how poor we were after losing in the cup (to Plymouth if my memory is correct) for the rest of that season?   After looking like favourites for automatic promotion we limped into the play-offs.   Now don't get me wrong, the Soton & West Brom games were brilliant for so many reasons, but we should already have been up.   I think Forest would say they were excellent until Xmas in Davies's first full season with them then they dropped off the pace to finish third - fortunately they bottled it against Blackpool in the play offs.

 

If you're looking for patterns history suggests Billy gets you there or thereabouts, then apart from with us, he fails to achieve the final goal.

 

Clough's pattern with Burton was slow progress...similar pattern at Derby, in my opinion, if you factor in the mess left behind by Jewell & Davies.  

 

We can argue about whether Clough is good enough to move us further forwards but surely there is merit in steady development based on sound foundations, rather the Davies model which may have short term gains, but in our case left us well on the way to the most embarrassing, feckless season in history - and we were Davies's only play-off success in 5 attempts!

[Bris Vegas]

Davies certainly got us winning early on that season but surely you remember how poor we were after losing in the cup (to Plymouth if my memory is correct) for the rest of that season?   After looking like favourites for automatic promotion we limped into the play-offs.   Now don't get me wrong, the Soton & West Brom games were brilliant for so many reasons, but we should already have been up.   I think Forest would say they were excellent until Xmas in Davies's first full season with them then they dropped off the pace to finish third - fortunately they bottled it against Blackpool in the play offs.

 

If you're looking for patterns history suggests Billy gets you there or thereabouts, then apart from with us, he fails to achieve the final goal.

 

Clough's pattern with Burton was slow progress...similar pattern at Derby, in my opinion, if you factor in the mess left behind by Jewell & Davies.  

 

We can argue about whether Clough is good enough to move us further forwards but surely there is merit in steady development based on sound foundations, rather the Davies model which may have short term gains, but in our case left us well on the way to the most embarrassing, feckless season in history - and we were Davies's only play-off success in 5 attempts!

 

Our last 12 games of the BD season read..

 

Won 6 Drew 3 Lost 3 GD plus 7

 

Our last 12 games under NC last season read..

 

Won 5 Draw 2 Lost 5 GD plus 1

 

We were never poor towards the end under BD.. We just weren't as good as before.. Remember in February we won 6 on the bounce, it was always going to be tough to replicate that but we entered the playoffs in top 4 form..

[Bris Vegas]

It's also harsh to say we limped into the playoffs.. As we didn't, we were on decent form but just gout outpointed by 2 teams on better form.. For the last 12 games..

 

Sunderland W10 D1 L1 (31 points)

Birmingham W7 D1 L4 (22 points)

Derby W6 D3 L3 (21 points)

 

From 12 games that's a strong run in from 3 sides.. Sunderland were phenomenal towards the end and really ook it by the scruff of the neck.. If anything looking back we were a little unlucky with that run..

[RodleyRam]

It's easy to pick up on little stats like that..

Derby under BD scored 29 away goals whilst last season under NC only scored 22.. Our GD for away games last season was -18, where as under BD it was plus 2.. That's a massive difference..

I've mentioned a fair few times that NC's Derby County away record has to be the most negative over the past 20 years.. Whilst everyone naturally attacks at home, you can really tell a teams approach due to their away games.. And Derby under NC have been so negative over the past 5 years..

It's also worth mentioning that BD's side failed to score in only 9 games that season.. Last season we failed to score in 10..

Although neither is as bad as the season before.. A whopping 16 games..

It's a good job a fair few last minute goals saved our bacon last season.

By the way I'm not saying either one is more attacking than the other.. Just how it's easy to find the stats you want and ingnore the rest to back up an arguement..

So... *takes advanced course in mathematics* this season's 'negative' football produced 65 goals, whereas the more attacking BD side that had arguably more resources and better access to players managed 62 goals... maybe someone should see what stats there are on attempts on goal and possession to see how they compare too, I'm going to put a tenner on last season being more 'attacking' on those variables as well as more goals scored...

No-one's saying that we don't need to be better away but I'm really struggling to see that our failure to achieve promotion last season was because of negative tactics stemming from the manager. There's clearly a bit of a lack of confidence away from home, which I think has led to problems in either box but I just don't believe we go out looking to shut up shop and be negative week in week out.

To me it's quite simple we need to be tighter at the back and more clinical in front of goal, that doesn't really come much down to tactics, which I happen to think (having played at a decent enough level) are over emphasised in the modern game, it comes down to quality of players available and as this thread is about how 'awful' Sammon is, as opposed to how awful Nigel is maybe we should get back to debating him and how he's going to bang in 20 goals next season with Nigel's total football approach...

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Seems to me there about six or seven posters on here who don't rate Nigel Clough and will never be won over (short of promotion maybe). One or two of the six or seven amazingly don't even seem to like Derby County. As a consequence we seem to pretty much regurgitate the same old stuff only in different guises.

 

As an exiled Ram I only ever signed up to this to get the latest Derby info. Now I'm addicted to this rubbish...................................

[McRamFan]

This is going to be controversial cos I know people like to rewrite history, and only the really honest amongst you will admit I'm being honest, Nigel Clough's teams play less attacking football than the Billy Davis promotion team!

 

Possession is NOT the same as attacking/positive football. When we had Stead, Lupoli, Barnes, Oakley, Pesc etc we attacked a lot more and were a lot more positive for longer in the game than we do now under Clough. Yes, Billy often shut up shop, but NEVER protested a draw (only a lead), and never for the length of time that Clough's team does.

 

 

Please tell me who your supplier is?

 

You cannot compare this squad to the squad BD had in the promotional season.  We flucked the play off and fluked the final, trust me both Southampton and WBA should have won, I was at all 3 matches, and by winning we all saw how crap BD really is.  He is the big bully in primary school, however the weedy excuse in seniors.

 

Jim Smith provided the last Derby County team that had the ability to attack and score goals, NC inherited a bunch of free loading wannabes such as hulse, bywater, commons etc who all thought that they where bigger and better than the club.  Now we have players who want to play for the shirt and not to be prissy spoilt sissy boys.

[CumbrianRam]

Jim Smith provided the last Derby County team that had the ability to attack and score goals, NC inherited a bunch of free loading wannabes such as hulse, Welsh no8,  Alby, bywater, commons etc who all thought that they where bigger and better than the club.  Now we have players who want to play for the shirt and not to be prissy spoilt sissy boys.

Fixed it for you.

 

The goals from Hulse kept us up for two seasons and Commons kept us in 2010/11 for his performances in the first half of that season.

[Mostyn6]

Did you include the 35 or so ne'erdowells who were here when he arrived, because I would not pay a single one of them in washers. 

 

He inherited more than what Davies inherited!

 

When you consider that Clough extended the contracts of Bywater, Leacock, Savage and Pearson, relied on the goals of Hulse, Commons and Steve Davies, whilst also relying heavily on McEveley and Green for two seasons, that's not a bad lot to be left with. 

[eddie]

He inherited more than what Davies inherited!

 

When you consider that Clough extended the contracts of Bywater, Leacock, Savage and Pearson, relied on the goals of Hulse, Commons and Steve Davies, whilst also relying heavily on McEveley and Green for two seasons, that's not a bad lot to be left with. 

 

All of whom were no doubt on contracts we could not afford.

[ramblur]

So... *takes advanced course in mathematics* this season's 'negative' football produced 65 goals, whereas the more attacking BD side that had arguably more resources and better access to players managed 62 goals... maybe someone should see what stats there are on attempts on goal and possession to see how they compare too, I'm going to put a tenner on last season being more 'attacking' on those variables as well as more goals scored...

No-one's saying that we don't need to be better away but I'm really struggling to see that our failure to achieve promotion last season was because of negative tactics stemming from the manager. There's clearly a bit of a lack of confidence away from home, which I think has led to problems in either box but I just don't believe we go out looking to shut up shop and be negative week in week out.

To me it's quite simple we need to be tighter at the back and more clinical in front of goal, that doesn't really come much down to tactics, which I happen to think (having played at a decent enough level) are over emphasised in the modern game, it comes down to quality of players available and as this thread is about how 'awful' Sammon is, as opposed to how awful Nigel is maybe we should get back to debating him and how he's going to bang in 20 goals next season with Nigel's total football approach...

Couldn't agree more.Whatever system you employ,the quality of the players deployed will have a massive effect on the success of such system.

[Mostyn6]

All of whom were no doubt on contracts we could not afford.

 

 

not sure that's relevant when the issue we were discussing was quality of players inherited.

[rynny]

He inherited more than what Davies inherited!

When you consider that Clough extended the contracts of Bywater, Leacock, Savage and Pearson, relied on the goals of Hulse, Commons and Steve Davies, whilst also relying heavily on McEveley and Green for two seasons, that's not a bad lot to be left with.

I think these were the players Clough thought could/would perform and be worth the money they were receiving or would take a pay cut and be stop gaps whilst he got rid of the bigger wasters that were on the books. It would have been impossible to clear every player and replace them with who he wanted straight away.

[May Contain Nuts]

There is a BIT of a history re-write going on.

 

Nigel Clough's job when he first came in was NOT to drastically reduce the wage bill and entirely replace the squad, his first half-season task was to keep us up after Jewell went, to get a squad that did involve some quality performing better, to get them to push up the table for a proper go the next season - yes, he did have to trim a bit of fat from the edges, as with any relegated Premiership team, but that wasn't the focus.

 

Nor was it, I seem to recall, the focus in his first full season - the talk was not of cost cutting at this stage, we were still on our 'global brand' mission, the expectation was still that we could get promoted quickly without a total rebuild - it was only when Clough's first full season in charge looked to have failed to bring about instant (or any) success that we decided we could no longer go down the same route, we (/Clough/'The Board')) came to the conclusion that most of these players weren't worth their salt and the REAL cost cutting / clearout / replacement started.

[eddie]

not sure that's relevant when the issue we were discussing was quality of players inherited.

 

Totally relevant.

 

Your original point was that "in Clough's time he has used x players", implying that he is thrashing around trying to work out what his best side is at any moment in time and ought to have done better with what resources were available to him.

 

I'm simply stating that the ones here when he rolled up all had to be shipped out as quickly as possible without doing any more damage, i.e. consolidating our position in the championship post-Jewell / BD and reducing the wage bill from the astronomical figure that applied at the same time. Not only that, much of the squad he inherited were tarred with the '11 points' brush and were completely shot, a point that is born out by the fact that none of that group went on to register any real sort of success after leaving Derby. Plenty of other clubs have had to go through the same scenario, and most of them have been far less successful in retaining their league position.

[Ambitious]

There is a BIT of a history re-write going on.

 

Nigel Clough's job when he first came in was NOT to drastically reduce the wage bill and entirely replace the squad, his first half-season task was to keep us up after Jewell went, to get a squad that did involve some quality performing better, to get them to push up the table for a proper go the next season - yes, he did have to trim a bit of fat from the edges, as with any relegated Premiership team, but that wasn't the focus.

 

Nor was it, I seem to recall, the focus in his first full season - the talk was not of cost cutting at this stage, we were still on our 'global brand' mission, the expectation was still that we could get promoted quickly without a total rebuild - it was only when Clough's first full season in charge looked to have failed to bring about instant (or any) success that we decided we could no longer go down the same route, we (/Clough/'The Board')) came to the conclusion that most of these players weren't worth their salt and the REAL cost cutting / clearout / replacement started.

Cloughs first summer saw us drop a big chunk of wage and make over 2 million pound in transfer fees

 

Tito went for 1.5million

Dickinson for 300k

Nyatanga for 500k

Mears for 500k

 

and we brought in Shaun Barker for 900k and Moxey 300k. 

 

not to mention the 5 figure players such as Todd, Sterjovski, Carroll, Clod, Albrechtsen and Barnes. (as well as the ones mentioned) all left.

 

so we did cost cut that first summer under Clough dramatically, the year later was worse and since then past 2 years have been a steady building process. 

[Mostyn6]

Totally relevant.

 

Your original point was that "in Clough's time he has used x players", implying that he is thrashing around trying to work out what his best side is at any moment in time and ought to have done better with what resources were available to him.

 

I'm simply stating that the ones here when he rolled up all had to be shipped out as quickly as possible without doing any more damage, i.e. consolidating our position in the championship post-Jewell / BD and reducing the wage bill from the astronomical figure that applied at the same time. Not only that, much of the squad he inherited were tarred with the '11 points' brush and were completely shot, a point that is born out by the fact that none of that group went on to register any real sort of success after leaving Derby. Plenty of other clubs have had to go through the same scenario, and most of them have been far less successful in retaining their league position.

 

 

No no no no no! My original point was that I don't accept that this Derby team is 'attacking'. So much so that I stated I believed that over the full 90 minutes of a game, Billy Davies' promotion team showed a lot more positive intent.

 

All comments thereafter were to counter the rather cringeworthy attempts to make excuses for why Clough might've struggled to be as positive, one being that Clough inherited a load of overpaid players... which is irrelevant (their wages that is)!

[uttoxram75]

No no no no no! My original point was that I don't accept that this Derby team is 'attacking'. 

 

You don't have to accept it. You are entitled to your opinion.

[eddie]

No no no no no! My original point was that I don't accept that this Derby team is 'attacking'. So much so that I stated I believed that over the full 90 minutes of a game, Billy Davies' promotion team showed a lot more positive intent.

 

All comments thereafter were to counter the rather cringeworthy attempts to make excuses for why Clough might've struggled to be as positive, one being that Clough inherited a load of overpaid players... which is irrelevant (their wages that is)!

 

I cringe whenever I read your posts when they are in this style. Does that make you cringeworthy?

[Mostyn6]

I cringe whenever I read your posts when they are in this style. Does that make you cringeworthy?

 

 

please stop trolling the forum!