For once back the manager

[cheron85]

5 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

But that income may be covering previous years expenditure.

We already know that circa  £4.5m has been re-invested.

The rest could quite feasibly be covering this year's amortisation of the players we spanked cash on over the last 2 seasons. 

Could be - But Rowett saying today that we're close to a deal on a new signing suggests not

I assume the money we've spent so far is from the Hughes fee

[Jimbo Ram]

17 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yes I've read the article again, the same one I already posted up, can you point me to anywhere in the article where GR makes any promises?

 

You are digging yourself a bigger and bigger hole G Star Ram, what don't you understand about his comments? Do you want someone to explain it to you? It is there in black and white. No one said anything about promises but referred to the quote he made about bringing in a very, very high quality replacement which for some reason you have disputed and bizarrely still are. Maybe Lawrence is that replacement.....

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

You are digging yourself a bigger and bigger hole G Star Ram, what don't you understand about his comments? Do you want someone to explain it to you? It is there in black and white. No one said anything about promises but referred to the quote he made about bringing in a very, very high quality replacement which for some reason you have disputed and bizarrely still are. Maybe Lawrence is that replacement.....

Nobody said anything about promises? Have a read back through the thread...it is there in black and white to steal a phrase.

[Sexydadbod]

17 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Nobody said anything about promises? Have a read back through the thread...it is there in black and white to steal a phrase.

What was the need for Rowett to say it in the first place then knowing that fans would hang onto his words? Think you're being a bit pedantic with this. He may not have said "I promise I will get a top,top player to replace Ince" but he all but inferred it.

[Wolfie]

8 minutes ago, McLovin said:

What was the need for Rowett to say it in the first place then knowing that fans would hang onto his words? Think you're being a bit pedantic with this. He may not have said "I promise I will get a top,top player to replace Ince" but he all but inferred it.

We get frustrated when the club says nothing & when they do, some of us make 2+2=7 and then use it as a stick to beat the manager & club with. It's not GR's fault that we jump to conclusions.

I don't bother with any of the pre-match interviews with manager & players because they're all just so bland & you never actually get to find anything out.

[G STAR RAM]

24 minutes ago, McLovin said:

What was the need for Rowett to say it in the first place then knowing that fans would hang onto his words? Think you're being a bit pedantic with this. He may not have said "I promise I will get a top,top player to replace Ince" but he all but inferred it.

He was being interviewed by the DET, I doubt that a 'no comment' response would have gone down too well!

I did already admit that my point was slightly pedantic but when I saw a post slating GR for 'failing to deliver on promises' I thought I was making a valid point.

[Premier ram]

The title of this thread says it all for me , we have to give a manager time to do the job eventually , Rowett was the best available manager at the time we needed one , he has a huge job to do with clearing the decks of overpaid , long contracted, unwanted players , its not going to happen in one window, starting tonight get behind Gary and the team and just maybe it might be the start of our great club turning the corner and getting back on track

[Mistaram]

On 13/08/2017 at 19:18, G STAR RAM said:

No he didn't. 

Oh yes he did at least 4times 

[G STAR RAM]

8 minutes ago, Mistaram said:

Oh yes he did at least 4times 

I've posted up what he said already.

If you see it as a promise fine.

I see it as him saying he was going to look for a very very high quality replacement, if available.

[ramsbottom]

I sat through Saturday's awfulness, but I'm not blaming GR, well I am slightly, but it's not really his fault.  As I keep saying over & over, his hands are tied by previous managers & our chairman/DoF splurging stupid money and mediocre signings.  Since mel took over, only Carson, Ince & arguably Baird/Johnson have been good signings.  The rest are either square pegs in round holes, or simply not good enough to begin with.  And nobody wants them when they're on at least £15k a week, the kind of clubs who could be improved by Butterfield or Blackman, can't afford them...

Now, where I'm slightly blaming GR, is the regression back to 4-3-3, we can't play it with the players we have, especially the midfield, the movement just isn't their.  Things perked up on Saturday (and at Sunderland) when we switched to 4-2-3-1.  I know he wants us solid, and with Huddlestone and Butterfield/Bryson as the two, we got bypassed a little, but at least we got some movement & players closer to Martin.  I'd rather go down swinging than preying the opposition makes a mistake when not tracking our very predictable runs...

[RodleyRam]

I watched GR's interview after the Wolves match and a few things he said concerned me a little. Mainly it was about needing to be more compact and what sounded like a nod to being more defensive and shape retaining.

To me that sounds like worrying code for 'Nigel Pearson had the right idea', let's play 8 at the back and smash it into the channels for our forwards to run on to.

The shape against Wolves wasn't right, that was obvious but if anything we were too compact and centralised. We were the home side and we never imposed ourselves on the match. Our wingers were playing either too narrow or two deep. Our midfield 3 barely left the defensive arc of the centre circle and we expected Martin to hold up the ball 6 feet above his head, with every other player watching him fail at the impossible.

I don't think being more compact would have helped us to get control of that match and it worries me that Rowett identified that as the weakness in our performance.

We have a solid back 5 and a decent DM (albeit not a destructive DM). I don't get our fixation with making every other player outside of that 6 play 10 yards deeper than they need to be. I completely understand that our wingers need to track back and support and the other two midfielders need to follow their runners blah blah but the mindset seems to be about having 10 players behind the ball.

Let the defence and DM be 'compact', let the other 5 focus on getting the ball to their feet and playing football in the opposition half. I still believe we have the ability to hurt teams with our attacking talent, we just seem to have adopted the worst of Paul Clement and Nigel Pearson's tactics. Everyone behind the ball with the only forward pass being orbital.

I have high hopes for Rowett but when he comes out with crap like we need to be more compact, alarm bells start to go off in my head.

For the record I think he needs time (a full season at least) to get things sorted as he wants them but I fear it's going to be a horribly ugly process and I'm not convinced it needs to be.

[RoyMac5]

16 minutes ago, RodleyRam said:

I watched GR's interview after the Wolves match and a few things he said concerned me a little. Mainly it was about needing to be more compact and what sounded like a nod to being more defensive and shape retaining.

To me that sounds like worrying code for 'Nigel Pearson had the right idea', let's play 8 at the back and smash it into the channels for our forwards to run on to.

The shape against Wolves wasn't right, that was obvious but if anything we were too compact and centralised. We were the home side and we never imposed ourselves on the match. Our wingers were playing either too narrow or two deep. Our midfield 3 barely left the defensive arc of the centre circle and we expected Martin to hold up the ball 6 feet above his head, with every other player watching him fail at the impossible.

Nigel Mk2?

 

[RodleyRam]

44 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Nigel Mk2?

 

No I don't think so. I think he's less stubborn and will be less of a total Trump about it. He has my backing (which ultimately counts for f*** all) and I think given time he'll make us competitive. Just don't think it'll be pretty, which makes me sad.

[cannable]

On 13/08/2017 at 17:57, europia said:

It's not inconceivable that if as you suggested, we had stuck with Clement, we would have progressed and perhaps been promoted by now. 

Awful signings, didn't understand the limitations of his players, couldn't outhink his system being worked out. 

[Angry Ram]

21 minutes ago, cannable said:

Awful signings, didn't understand the limitations of his players, couldn't outhink his system being worked out. 

But where they his signings?

[brady1993]

11 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

But where they his signings?

I guess that is the ultimate question mark and I think it's very difficult to say for sure. He definitely must have had some input and he did regularly pick players that were signed during his tenure but I'm not convinced he was the sole decision maker either.

[Chris Mills]

Boo 

[europia]

22 hours ago, cannable said:

Awful signings, didn't understand the limitations of his players, couldn't outhink his system being worked out. 

Don't totally disagree, but at the time his departure, we were only a few points off the top, if I remember correctly. 

[sunnyhill60]

Rowett would give his eye teeth for a run like Clement had from September to December.

[ramsbottom]

16 hours ago, europia said:

Don't totally disagree, but at the time his departure, we were only a few points off the top, if I remember correctly. 

In hindsight I think PC tried to be too clever week in, week out.  He couldn't stop tinkering, sometimes it pays to have a settled side for a few games.  After the Leeds game, where he needlessly rested a few players, the wheels began to fall off...