TommyPowell Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 1 hour ago, curtains said: The fans views could bring Rowett down with some Derby fans Clough ,McClaren ,Clement Wassall, Pearson , McClaren and now Rowett is getting the treatment. Are you seriously suggesting that fans caused the sacking of those managers?Lets examine the evidence. Clough was got rid of as a condition of Mel buying the club Mclaren seduced by Newcastle Clements in my opinion thought he was still in Spain went on an expensive buying spree then couldnt produce Wassel as never anything but a temp manager Pearson committed suicide by loaning out Martin Mclaren Just couldnt reproduce his magic So nothing to do with supporter pressure just Mel exercising his judgement as owner Exactly the same as Rowett will be. I personally would like Will to stay but its not my choice and im confident GR i will spend the cash from the sale/sales well SO RELAX THE FUTURES BRIGHT THE FUTURES ROWETT l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Curtains - what do you think Rowett's philosophies are, as I have read so many conflicting views and quotes I'm not sure I know. The consensus views I suppose (or those I see most often) are.... - high press from the front - harder running/greater athleticism in midfield - balls into channels - defenders who defend - effort equals selection But he's also had words like "hoofball" "pragmatic" etc ascribed to him - and a default formation of 4-2-3-1. What is true and what isn't I don't know. Guess we have to wait until seasons start to find out. But I would contend that until we know what his philosophies are its going to be difficult to tell if hes changed them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 There's one person alone responsible for the ludicrous turnover of managers in the last few years and that is Mel Morris. His recruitment process appears to be fundamentally flawed. He has brought in managers with a multitude of different philosophies and plans for the team, but not demonstrated the testicular fortitude to back his own decisions by giving any of them the necessary time to implement their plans. All we ever hear is that he gave the mangers the money, but that is meaningless without time in the job. The laissez-faire approach with the chequebook juxtaposed with the ultra autocratic approach to results is a complete mismatch and will never work. This is the reason we have a squad of overpaid, incompatible players. This is the reason we are now having to sell our academy talents at a cut price to balance the books. Whilst I can't be certain, I'm pretty sure that I will despise what Rowett has planned for the club, but it's time for Mel Morris to show the courage of his convictions and actually back the guy with time, which is ultimately more important than any sum of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 26 minutes ago, HantsRam said: Curtains - what do you think Rowett's philosophies are, as I have read so many conflicting views and quotes I'm not sure I know. The consensus views I suppose (or those I see most often) are.... - high press from the front - harder running/greater athleticism in midfield - balls into channels - defenders who defend - effort equals selection But he's also had words like "hoofball" "pragmatic" etc ascribed to him - and a default formation of 4-2-3-1. What is true and what isn't I don't know. Guess we have to wait until seasons start to find out. But I would contend that until we know what his philosophies are its going to be difficult to tell if hes changed them. I was referring to if he has to backtrack on selling Hughes. He is going to get hammered on this if he plays a more pragmatic style of football which would be a complete contradiction on Steve McClarens style of play which was always trying to be on the front foot and building from the goalkeeper back to front. Rowett is more safety first and get the ball forward quicker. I'm not criticising McClaren just saying they have different management philosophies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 23 minutes ago, curtains said: I was referring to if he has to backtrack on selling Hughes. He is going to get hammered on this if he plays a more pragmatic style of football which would be a complete contradiction on Steve McClarens style of play which was always trying to be on the front foot and building from the goalkeeper back to front. Rowett is more safety first and get the ball forward quicker. I'm not criticising McClaren just saying they have different management philosophies You need to change the title of the thread then. And in answer to your new question, he won't. He needs to raise some cash for incomings and nobody is stupid enough to pay good money for Butterfield, Blackman, Camara (hence the free) Vydra & Anya. Mel appeasing his managers has left us up the creek... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 56 minutes ago, Anon said: There's one person alone responsible for the ludicrous turnover of managers in the last few years and that is Mel Morris. His recruitment process appears to be fundamentally flawed. He has brought in managers with a multitude of different philosophies and plans for the team, but not demonstrated the testicular fortitude to back his own decisions by giving any of them the necessary time to implement their plans. All we ever hear is that he gave the mangers the money, but that is meaningless without time in the job. The laissez-faire approach with the chequebook juxtaposed with the ultra autocratic approach to results is a complete mismatch and will never work. This is the reason we have a squad of overpaid, incompatible players. This is the reason we are now having to sell our academy talents at a cut price to balance the books. Whilst I can't be certain, I'm pretty sure that I will despise what Rowett has planned for the club, but it's time for Mel Morris to show the courage of his convictions and actually back the guy with time, which is ultimately more important than any sum of money. To be fair, unless you had access to the interview process I cannot see how you can comment on what philosophies the managers had/have. Out of all of the appointments I would say only Pearson was a clear anomaly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grantona Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 No player is bigger than the club - not even Will Hughes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfb Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I am inclined to agree in principle with Anon, MM is the issue, I was a supporter of him at 1st as most were but slowly that support has been eroded as he hired and fired with such regularity. One must question his selection technique? As I have said before I don't want Will Hughes sold, especially for what seems to me as a 'modest fee ', MM stated some time ago that his vision was to be in the Prem with 2 or 3 home grown players in the squad, by selling our best home grown player has his vision on that changed too ? I have watched the likes of Bournemouth and Watford grow using very different but consistent strategies, and watch us seemingly stutter season after season, while we were unlucky against qpr, some even then felt not going up was a blessing as we were under prepared, (which to be fair wasnt under Mel). So for me, it's becoming MM's 'hands on' approach which may be why managers falter, rather than fan pressure, seemingly either because they were not right for the job, or they fell out with MM, or they deviated with what was agreed during the selection process , either way the buck stops with MM and until he settles on a strategy and a managers vision of the way forwards I can't see much change. Sorry Curtains I've not answered your question directly, but I've addressed it in a way I thought appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PodgeyRam Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said: Did he? He didn't. We reverted back to 433 once he was suspended and Powell realised that blockheads 442 system would get us nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Oh look another curtains thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 56 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: To be fair, unless you had access to the interview process I cannot see how you can comment on what philosophies the managers had/have. Out of all of the appointments I would say only Pearson was a clear anomaly. I can surmise what their philosophies were based on the way they set their teams up to play and the players they brought into the club. I see very few consistencies between our managers in this regard, other than McClaren and Wassall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Anon said: I can surmise what their philosophies were based on the way they set their teams up to play and the players they brought into the club. I see very few consistencies between our managers in this regard, other than McClaren and Wassall. Thats called hindsight though. Mel said PC bought into The Derby Way philosophy during the interview process but then very quickly deviated from it, in this instance what does MM do? Pearson was a weird one, the fans were demanding he was appointed harking back to how his Leicester team that destroyed us playing great attacking football...yet a lot also seemed to fear that he would be set in his ways and have to dismantle a relatively successful set up. Other than this I am not sure what other managers you are referring to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 2 hours ago, PodgeyRam said: He didn't. We reverted back to 433 once he was suspended and Powell realised that blockheads 442 system would get us nowhere. Correct! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 15 hours ago, G STAR RAM said: Thats called hindsight though. Mel said PC bought into The Derby Way philosophy during the interview process but then very quickly deviated from it, in this instance what does MM do? Pearson was a weird one, the fans were demanding he was appointed harking back to how his Leicester team that destroyed us playing great attacking football...yet a lot also seemed to fear that he would be set in his ways and have to dismantle a relatively successful set up. Other than this I am not sure what other managers you are referring to? Right, but I have to use hindsight precisely because I don't know what is said in the interviews. If I can't comment on managerial philosophies because I'm not privy to the interview process and I also can't comment using hindsight, then I'm a little bit stuck. I believed Mel when he initially gave this line about Clement, but then he went on to make the exact same mistakes with Pearson. There comes a point where I have to ask myself, who is the constant in all this turmoil? Is it really easier for most people to believe that numerous employees, Clement, Pearson, Rush, McClaren are all liars who have attempted to undermine the club out of self interest, or could it be that Mel Morris is a paranoid autocrat with a spectacularly low patience threshold? The managerial appointments swing between extremes. We go from high intensity, attack minded football under McClaren, to slow build continental pragmatism under Clement, to Wassall's high intensity attacking with an added emphasis on moving the ball forwards even faster, to Pearson's defence first hoof it down the channels, back to McClaren's system, to Rowett's defence first then counter. Players required to play these systems effectively differ wildly. Is it any wonder that someone like Dawkins failed to flourish under Clement? That Shackell became useless once McClaren returns because he can't pass? That a ball playing midfielder like Hughes is surplus to requirements under Rowett's style? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 18 minutes ago, Anon said: Right, but I have to use hindsight precisely because I don't know what is said in the interviews. If I can't comment on managerial philosophies because I'm not privy to the interview process and I also can't comment using hindsight, then I'm a little bit stuck. I believed Mel when he initially gave this line about Clement, but then he went on to make the exact same mistakes with Pearson. There comes a point where I have to ask myself, who is the constant in all this turmoil? Is it really easier for most people to believe that numerous employees, Clement, Pearson, Rush, McClaren are all liars who have attempted to undermine the club out of self interest, or could it be that Mel Morris is a paranoid autocrat with a spectacularly low patience threshold? The managerial appointments swing between extremes. We go from high intensity, attack minded football under McClaren, to slow build continental pragmatism under Clement, to Wassall's high intensity attacking with an added emphasis on moving the ball forwards even faster, to Pearson's defence first hoof it down the channels, back to McClaren's system, to Rowett's defence first then counter. Players required to play these systems effectively differ wildly. Is it any wonder that someone like Dawkins failed to flourish under Clement? That Shackell became useless once McClaren returns because he can't pass? That a ball playing midfielder like Hughes is surplus to requirements under Rowett's style? But you seem to be saying that using hindsight that the managerial appointments are wrong and that's the same thing that Mel is doing surely when sacking them? As I said, other than the Pearson appointment, I can't really moan about any of the other appointments. Even the Pearson appointment was met with much glee from a large majority of fans who believed we needed to move away from our 4-3-3 and give something new a try. If you are going to be mentioning individual players roles in your assessment of Mel's tenure does that mean you are happy for him to get involved in team affairs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: But you seem to be saying that using hindsight that the managerial appointments are wrong and that's the same thing that Mel is doing surely when sacking them? People paid lots of dosh at the top of companies are employed to get appointments right. Hindsight is too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 22 hours ago, ramsbottom said: Why would we want a manager that changes his working practices just because a few keyboard warriors don't like how he's doing things??? GR's remit is to win enough games to ensure promotion from this division, he strikes me as the type of bloke who doesn't give a f*** about upsetting a few people along the way... I don't believe most people aren't up in arms about Hughes actually being sold, they're up in arms about the price... Why does not liking the way Rowett is doing things make someone a keyboard warrior? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: People paid lots of dosh at the top of companies are employed to get appointments right. Hindsight is too late. The difference being the employees are paid big sums of money, in our case the employee is using his money. Which of Mel's appointments did you disagree with? Is a managerial appointment only correct if it ends with promotion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BathRam72 Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 The sad thing is. If GR makes wholesale changes to the team and fails some will be on his back for doing so. Sadly the same people would be on his back if he kept the same line up and failed and they would be moaning he hasn't done anything. Give the man some credit, at least he is going to do it his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab a dab doo Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 Hindsight is a wonderful thing. If we could all look into the future we would never be wrong in any decision we make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.