Steve McClaren was a better option than Tony Pulis - a preemptive strike.

[danthebeast]

So we all know what went down last Saturday, we lost to our biggest rivals and decided to sack our then manager Nigel Clough.

 

Was it the right time? Could it have been done better? Should it have been done at all??

 

These are all topics of discussion that have been debated seemingly to death on this forum since last Saturday so I wont tread back over that well trodden ground. But one thing was clear come Sunday, there were two stand out candidates are far as the bookies were concern.

 

Steve McClaren and Tony Pulis.

 

There were other names on the list but they were either never likely to be under consideration (Paulo Di Canio, Gary Rowett) or were highly unlikely to take the job should they be offered it (Eddie Howe, Martin O'Neil) so in reality it boiled down to these two men.

 

Now when you look at it at face value it seem's like an easy decision right??

 

One is a manager who took over a bang average midland's Championship side and converted them into a mid table Premiership team that have reached an F.A. Cup final and have even played in Europe.

 

The other is a man who (and this is judging him as the guy in charge, Head Coach/Manager/whatever. He picks the first 11 etc...) had early success at Middlesborough and success at FC Twente but did poorly with England, Failed at Wolfsburg, Failed at his second stint at Twente and we all know how his stint at Forest went. 

 

But if you look a little deeper there was really only one man to choose out of these two. Tony Pulis achievements at Stoke were fantastic BUT they were achieved by his team playing a particular 'style' of football. Now it's not worth debating whether this was entertaining or whatever because that misses the point.

 

We cant play that way.

 

He played a very flat, deep lying back four which usually consisted of four center backs (due to there height, strength and presence). Two ball winning central midfielders (basically hard tackling barstewards who get stuck in). sometimes two out and out wingers, sometimes he'd stick Big John Walters out wide left (for the long diagonal ball so he can beat his full back to the header and knock it on for a pacy striker) and usually a couple of target men up top (unless Walters is on the wing, then he might go for a bit of pace with a target man next to him)

 

They'd fly into challenges and press hard when trying to regain possession (not a bad thing), once in possession they'd move move the ball forward very directly, either pumping it up to the two giant's up top, smashing it out wide to Big John Walters on the wing or if playing with Etherington and Pennant (for instance) get it out to the wing's so they can bomb down the line and float the crosses over to the big men pilling in the box.

 

As far as I can see it, our fullbacks wouldn't fit into this style of play, our  central midfielders wouldn't fit into this style of play and (Conor Sammon as a possible exception) our forwards wouldn't fit into this style of play

 

Meaning that either a) Tony Pulis would have to change his method's and try and combine the defensive quality's of his Stoke side with the slick passing game we currently play(and there's no evidence he'd even be willing to try this, let alone that he could make it work). Or b) Completely change the squad that we've just spent years building to fit his tried, tested and undoubtabley successful method's.

 

Both would take a lot of time, both would require season's of work before we could get to a point where he was happy with what he had. We've just spent 5 year's watching one man completely overhaul the squad and work with them for hours on the training pitch to get to where were at. Do we want to wait another 4/5 season's before we can say "Ok, now were set for a push for the top "?? Do the Board???

 

No.

 

Steve McClaren is a VERY highly rated coach who has already come out publicly and stated that there will not be a massive change in style of play or change of personnel. He has been given the job on the basis that he can take what we have and with one or two tweaks, and a better class of coaching, make us a side in and around those top 6 spots this season. With the aim being were back in the Prem by the end of his two and a half year deal.

 

I'm going with the belief that the board are fed up with waiting, they don't want Derby County to be stuck in the middle of the Championship for the next few seasons. They want us up (probably so they can flog us and try and get some of there money back, which is fair enough) and have decided that Steve McClaren can get us there faster than Clough or Pulis.

 

Are they right?? It's a big gamble. The whole reason I've just wrote this seemingly never ending wall of text is because I know how supporters will react if, god forbid, we lose to Dirty Leed's tomorrow. Or we go 3/4 games without a win. "Oh we should have got Pulis in innit, this 'wally with a brolly' is fookin rubbish"

 

All I ask is for supporters to think before they react, seriously the forum's been full of threads about Cloughy ever since the sacking. The last thing we need is million and one threads asking "Why did we hire McClaren instead of Pulis"

 

Anyway, none of this will be relevant because after his first 45 mins in the job I'm convinced were gonna go undefeated all season and win the league setting record's along the way 

UP THE RAMS!!!!!

[DCFC_17]

most people would agree with the topic title, you wouldn't have needed to write a whole essay to convince eveyone

[Alph]

Agree with all that dan. Too much upheaval if Pulis came in. Assuming that when he said he doesn't see the point in pointless passing he wasn't just defending Stoke at the time?

We all assume we know how Pulis would make us play but is that how he goes about teams or did he just find it worked for Stoke and you have to play to your strengths?

In a month or two a few more managers will be available. Perhaps some good ones that we'd want. There wasn't a great deal on offer and McClaren was the best of the realistic options and the names being linked.

The options weren't great.

[Ambitious]

For me, Tony Pulis is footballing engineer - and one of the best (if not the best) the same type of manager that Billy Davies is. He knows the strengths of the players, he knows the weaknesses of the other team and he will use every tiny strength in his side to become successful - this made his scouting pretty limited, as he always had a picture in his head of how to win games once in the premier league. Not exactly pretty, but ridiculously effective - Stoke have a lot of players that just wouldn't do well in the 'free-role' sort of team and would drop off easily.

 

It's not a bad thing, I also think Sir Alex Ferguson was exactly the same in terms of this type of manager (but not as limited or rigid with his policies, but he based a team on not incredible individual talents but an incredible work-ethic and strategy for each game, making them as efficient as possible) 

 

Steve McClaren is another kettle of fish, and is in the same vein as Nigel Clough, Arsene Wenger and Brendan Rodgers in the case that they're a coach, they will look to develop players in their own right and try to mould a side to play a certain way - sometimes it's not attacking, nor defensive but it's about giving freedoms to players and letting them have a little bit of creative freedom and often as we've seen this can lead to mistakes, and it can lead to pieces of absolute brilliance (we've seen both sides not 4 days ago, and have done for years) 

 

My input is, we didn't need to change things drastically - we had everything going in the right direction in the way that we was playing, sometimes I often wondered about Cloughs limitations OFF the field, and in this day and age you sort of need a personality, or a well known respected coach to give you that 'advantage' and Clough wasn't really that - he learnt his trade at Burton, and did well and came here and did well (for me), and he was a well respected player but I sort of wondered about the glass ceiling we had above our heads, now for me this didn't stand much of an issue because we wasn't spending the money to make it an issue - so I was contempt with scouting close to home, and picking up lads from around the area, but at the same time you sort of think IF WE DID get promoted then what? there isn't many championship players that could play in the premier league straight away, and the ones that could are worth a lot more because they're star players down here. So, what would have Clough done then? I just didn't think he had that in mind - and, any promotion would have been for nothing because we were being run like a lower championship side, keeping things nice and simple. So, we've got in a manager with the same personality in many ways as Clough, who'll probably look to just carry on the good work and just add a few bits to the game - what he does add is a relatively big name, with connections in different countries and has been on the international stage. He seems like a guy who genuinely does what people want, yet, everyone is quick to jump on his back when it all goes tits up! 

 

'Drop Beckham' 'No one has the balls to drop beckham' 'over-rated **** playboy'

McClaren comes in and drops Beckham..

'Why did you drop Beckham' 'England Legend' 'You've cost us the euros' 

 

Even when he was at Forest, the players he had signed their fans were going absolutely nuts (at the time) Matt Derbyshire was no mug, he was a player from the champions league who'd proven himself in the level above, Ishmael Miller was always thought as a promising player, Andy Reid was a forest legend, who'd been playing premier league football, he brought in Boateng as back up like we did with Eustace and Greening who again, had been playing fairly regularly in a top half premier league side. 

 

The fact of the matter is, he had the character and name to bring them players here. In hindsight they were all poor, poor signings and the wrong fit for the club but I don't doubt that in many professional peoples eyes we've made a step up for our club. I think Paul Simpson is a major asset - he has had failures as manager but coming from a similar background to Clough, he has achieved more - even through PNEs turbulent times he only missed out on the play-offs by goal difference, so he adds that 'clough..esc' factor. 

 

As for Pulis, I think short term we'd have probably had a hybrid of what made us and stoke good - and, it would have been fantastic but I think in the long run, it would have erased the impact of what Clough had done here as their coaching styles are different. Which you could argue was the problem when McClaren took over a billy davies team, changing a whole mentality of a side so stable would have been a bad decision IMO. 

[eddie]

I'm tired of this.

 

We have a new manager - no-one else counts any more.

[Boycie]

I have a good feeling about our new head coach. The whole set up looks relaxed and professional.

Looking at the footage of him meeting the players in the dressing room pre match, him striding down the corridor waiting a second before going in, he genuinely seems to get respect from the players.

He's an ex England manager ffs, he's not a shitehalk if they thought he was good enough.

[nfb]

For me, Tony Pulis is footballing engineer - and one of the best (if not the best) the same type of manager that Billy Davies is. He knows the strengths of the players, he knows the weaknesses of the other team and he will use every tiny strength in his side to become successful - this made his scouting pretty limited, as he always had a picture in his head of how to win games once in the premier league. Not exactly pretty, but ridiculously effective - Stoke have a lot of players that just wouldn't do well in the 'free-role' sort of team and would drop off easily.

 

It's not a bad thing, I also think Sir Alex Ferguson was exactly the same in terms of this type of manager (but not as limited or rigid with his policies, but he based a team on not incredible individual talents but an incredible work-ethic and strategy for each game, making them as efficient as possible) 

 

Steve McClaren is another kettle of fish, and is in the same vein as Nigel Clough, Arsene Wenger and Brendan Rodgers in the case that they're a coach, they will look to develop players in their own right and try to mould a side to play a certain way - sometimes it's not attacking, nor defensive but it's about giving freedoms to players and letting them have a little bit of creative freedom and often as we've seen this can lead to mistakes, and it can lead to pieces of absolute brilliance (we've seen both sides not 4 days ago, and have done for years) 

 

My input is, we didn't need to change things drastically - we had everything going in the right direction in the way that we was playing, sometimes I often wondered about Cloughs limitations OFF the field, and in this day and age you sort of need a personality, or a well known respected coach to give you that 'advantage' and Clough wasn't really that - he learnt his trade at Burton, and did well and came here and did well (for me), and he was a well respected player but I sort of wondered about the glass ceiling we had above our heads, now for me this didn't stand much of an issue because we wasn't spending the money to make it an issue - so I was contempt with scouting close to home, and picking up lads from around the area, but at the same time you sort of think IF WE DID get promoted then what? there isn't many championship players that could play in the premier league straight away, and the ones that could are worth a lot more because they're star players down here. So, what would have Clough done then? I just didn't think he had that in mind - and, any promotion would have been for nothing because we were being run like a lower championship side, keeping things nice and simple. So, we've got in a manager with the same personality in many ways as Clough, who'll probably look to just carry on the good work and just add a few bits to the game - what he does add is a relatively big name, with connections in different countries and has been on the international stage. He seems like a guy who genuinely does what people want, yet, everyone is quick to jump on his back when it all goes tits up! 

 

'Drop Beckham' 'No one has the balls to drop beckham' 'over-rated **** playboy'

McClaren comes in and drops Beckham..

'Why did you drop Beckham' 'England Legend' 'You've cost us the euros' 

 

Even when he was at Forest, the players he had signed their fans were going absolutely nuts (at the time) Matt Derbyshire was no mug, he was a player from the champions league who'd proven himself in the level above, Ishmael Miller was always thought as a promising player, Andy Reid was a forest legend, who'd been playing premier league football, he brought in Boateng as back up like we did with Eustace and Greening who again, had been playing fairly regularly in a top half premier league side. 

 

The fact of the matter is, he had the character and name to bring them players here. In hindsight they were all poor, poor signings and the wrong fit for the club but I don't doubt that in many professional peoples eyes we've made a step up for our club. I think Paul Simpson is a major asset - he has had failures as manager but coming from a similar background to Clough, he has achieved more - even through PNEs turbulent times he only missed out on the play-offs by goal difference, so he adds that 'clough..esc' factor. 

 

As for Pulis, I think short term we'd have probably had a hybrid of what made us and stoke good - and, it would have been fantastic but I think in the long run, it would have erased the impact of what Clough had done here as their coaching styles are different. Which you could argue was the problem when McClaren took over a billy davies team, changing a whole mentality of a side so stable would have been a bad decision IMO. 

 

I presume u meant content, but it did make me smile....

[uttoxram75]

Impressed with his "team". Simmo still fondly thought of by many and Eric very highly rated and respected in football. I suppose Sam had in mind the Derby connection as well with Steve.

 

Does anyone else feel that Steele is slightly more than just a goalkeeping coach? He always seemed close to SAF and is maybe seen as a wise head to have around the place.

 

Whatever happens I just pray they don't lumber us with a Dennis Wise/Joke Kinnear/David Pleat type of "Sporting Director".

[May Contain Nuts]

Impressed with his "team". Simmo still fondly thought of by many and Eric very highly rated and respected in football. I suppose Sam had in mind the Derby connection as well with Steve.

 

Does anyone else feel that Steele is slightly more than just a goalkeeping coach? He always seemed close to SAF and is maybe seen as a wise head to have around the place.

 

Whatever happens I just pray they don't lumber us with a Dennis Wise/Joke Kinnear/David Pleat type of "Sporting Director".

 

On the face of it McLaren/Simpson doing everything except the keepers, with Steele just on the keepers seems a bit... unbalanced? So I imagine Steele will do more than focus on keepers.

[eddie]

On the face of it McLaren/Simpson doing everything except the keepers, with Steele just on the keepers seems a bit... unbalanced? So I imagine Steele will do more than focus on keepers.

 

Perhaps the recruitment is not complete?

[May Contain Nuts]

There is that, just nobody has said anything about bringing in more backroom staff to this point, aside from the Technical Director role of course - but on the coaching front there have been no hints that there's more to come.

 

In a Rams Player interview McLaren does say we've got a good medical staff, so I think they might be sticking around.

[Gary Teale]

Just Steve Mc and Simo are enough. Burley did most of the coaching himself and so did Clough.

Isnt that the reason of this new stucture we want in place? Steve Mc out there coaching and someone else doing the admin and other stuff that takes there time up

[rezner]

Impressed with his "team". Simmo still fondly thought of by many and Eric very highly rated and respected in football. I suppose Sam had in mind the Derby connection as well with Steve.

 

Does anyone else feel that Steele is slightly more than just a goalkeeping coach? He always seemed close to SAF and is maybe seen as a wise head to have around the place.

 

Whatever happens I just pray they don't lumber us with a Dennis Wise/Joke Kinnear/David Pleat type of "Sporting Director".

 

 

I'm pretty sure he was at the match on Tuesday.

[May Contain Nuts]

By that logic, Tony Pulis is our manager.

[pej1956]

So we all know what went down last Saturday, we lost to our biggest rivals and decided to sack our then manager Nigel Clough.

 

Was it the right time? Could it have been done better? Should it have been done at all??

 

These are all topics of discussion that have been debated seemingly to death on this forum since last Saturday so I wont tread back over that well trodden ground. But one thing was clear come Sunday, there were two stand out candidates are far as the bookies were concern.

 

Steve McClaren and Tony Pulis.

 

There were other names on the list but they were either never likely to be under consideration (Paulo Di Canio, Gary Rowett) or were highly unlikely to take the job should they be offered it (Eddie Howe, Martin O'Neil) so in reality it boiled down to these two men.

 

Now when you look at it at face value it seem's like an easy decision right??

 

One is a manager who took over a bang average midland's Championship side and converted them into a mid table Premiership team that have reached an F.A. Cup final and have even played in Europe.

 

The other is a man who (and this is judging him as the guy in charge, Head Coach/Manager/whatever. He picks the first 11 etc...) had early success at Middlesborough and success at FC Twente but did poorly with England, Failed at Wolfsburg, Failed at his second stint at Twente and we all know how his stint at Forest went. 

 

But if you look a little deeper there was really only one man to choose out of these two. Tony Pulis achievements at Stoke were fantastic BUT they were achieved by his team playing a particular 'style' of football. Now it's not worth debating whether this was entertaining or whatever because that misses the point.

 

We cant play that way.

 

He played a very flat, deep lying back four which usually consisted of four center backs (due to there height, strength and presence). Two ball winning central midfielders (basically hard tackling barstewards who get stuck in). sometimes two out and out wingers, sometimes he'd stick Big John Walters out wide left (for the long diagonal ball so he can beat his full back to the header and knock it on for a pacy striker) and usually a couple of target men up top (unless Walters is on the wing, then he might go for a bit of pace with a target man next to him)

 

They'd fly into challenges and press hard when trying to regain possession (not a bad thing), once in possession they'd move move the ball forward very directly, either pumping it up to the two giant's up top, smashing it out wide to Big John Walters on the wing or if playing with Etherington and Pennant (for instance) get it out to the wing's so they can bomb down the line and float the crosses over to the big men pilling in the box.

 

As far as I can see it, our fullbacks wouldn't fit into this style of play, our  central midfielders wouldn't fit into this style of play and (Conor Sammon as a possible exception) our forwards wouldn't fit into this style of play

 

Meaning that either a) Tony Pulis would have to change his method's and try and combine the defensive quality's of his Stoke side with the slick passing game we currently play(and there's no evidence he'd even be willing to try this, let alone that he could make it work). Or b) Completely change the squad that we've just spent years building to fit his tried, tested and undoubtabley successful method's.

 

Both would take a lot of time, both would require season's of work before we could get to a point where he was happy with what he had. We've just spent 5 year's watching one man completely overhaul the squad and work with them for hours on the training pitch to get to where were at. Do we want to wait another 4/5 season's before we can say "Ok, now were set for a push for the top "?? Do the Board???

 

No.

 

Steve McClaren is a VERY highly rated coach who has already come out publicly and stated that there will not be a massive change in style of play or change of personnel. He has been given the job on the basis that he can take what we have and with one or two tweaks, and a better class of coaching, make us a side in and around those top 6 spots this season. With the aim being were back in the Prem by the end of his two and a half year deal.

 

I'm going with the belief that the board are fed up with waiting, they don't want Derby County to be stuck in the middle of the Championship for the next few seasons. They want us up (probably so they can flog us and try and get some of there money back, which is fair enough) and have decided that Steve McClaren can get us there faster than Clough or Pulis.

 

Are they right?? It's a big gamble. The whole reason I've just wrote this seemingly never ending wall of text is because I know how supporters will react if, god forbid, we lose to Dirty Leed's tomorrow. Or we go 3/4 games without a win. "Oh we should have got Pulis in innit, this 'wally with a brolly' is fookin rubbish"

 

All I ask is for supporters to think before they react, seriously the forum's been full of threads about Cloughy ever since the sacking. The last thing we need is million and one threads asking "Why did we hire McClaren instead of Pulis"

 

Anyway, none of this will be relevant because after his first 45 mins in the job I'm convinced were gonna go undefeated all season and win the league setting record's along the way 

UP THE RAMS!!!!!

Whatever happens, for the first time in 4 years I have some optimism. Mclaren needs to be given some time, but this week all the right things have been said. The team he has bought in look good and I know he is an excellent coach. He clearly loves the club and can't wait to get started. It would be great to start off with a win against dirty Leeds, but whatever, we should all get behind him. COYR

[loweman2]

I'm pretty sure he was at the match on Tuesday.

 

im afraid he was !!!

"a/img593/2091/xdjl" alt="xdjl">

[LLS-Ram]

Hi all, new to the forum so don't be too harsh haha!

 

On Steve McClaren though, I am confident that he will make a positive impact. I do disagree with how the sacking of Clough was done, and I think that's the general feeling with most, but the board wants the club to move forward and I don't think people can deny that McClaren is a step-forward from Clough. 

 

Not too sure about David Pleat though. I  would feel that the board is rushing the appointment a bit if it was to be him. I'm assuming that this 'technical director' role is to help with signings, contacts etc., so the earliest this may start to make a difference is the January window I'm guessing? Surely they should still be looking around for possible candidates??

[pej1956]

Hi all, new to the forum so don't be too harsh haha!

 

On Steve McClaren though, I am confident that he will make a positive impact. I do disagree with how the sacking of Clough was done, and I think that's the general feeling with most, but the board wants the club to move forward and I don't think people can deny that McClaren is a step-forward from Clough. 

 

Not too sure about David Pleat though. I  would feel that the board is rushing the appointment a bit if it was to be him. I'm assuming that this 'technical director' role is to help with signings, contacts etc., so the earliest this may start to make a difference is the January window I'm guessing? Surely they should still be looking around for possible candidates??

Without being too harsh  Yep they should look around, but the good thing is that with the sacking of Clough they have decided to re-structure how things are run. It isn't just a one in one out. We do need an experienced man with European knowledge.

[LLS-Ram]

Without being too harsh  Yep they should look around, but the good thing is that with the sacking of Clough they have decided to re-structure how things are run. It isn't just a one in one out. We do need an experienced man with European knowledge.

 

Haha cheers! I agree we do need an experienced man, but is David Pleat still involved in this side of football? If he is, then by all means he wouldn't be that bad an appointment, but he has been heavily involved with punditry recently. 

[eddie]

I've got a feeling that if David Pleat was going to be the DoF, he would have been appointed by now.