Gary Rowett says Tweaks in January

[Mr Tibbs]

53 minutes ago, McLovin said:

So passing side to side and backwards when against teams who play defensive is entertaining and successful? No wonder we didn't get promoted under him. Look we had some brilliant moments under him but I'm fed up of reading views like he was the messiah because of his "great football", we have played some good football at times under Rowett too but at least we get it to the front man quicker than we did under McClaren. What got us to Wembley under McClaren was our ability to grind out results in that Wembley season. Of course people remember results such as the 5-0 against forest but there were far many moments under McClaren where we had to grind out results. Many suggest that we played great football all the time under him when the reality was we played the same in many moments as we have under Rowett.

Seems like you're being the selective one to me Macca. 

There are loads (14 other games where we scored 3 or more to be exact) that are very much in my memory. You could have listed **** loads of games. We ground out some great wins but it was front foot football. People remember that season because over 60% of it was good to watch and tearing teams apart. I don't see any need to deny that fact. 

Let's give GR to the end of the season to compare both fairly on the football front, not quite anywhere near those levels at the moment IMO. It's not the be all and end all as we're seeing right now. 

[MackworthRamIsGod]

On 07/12/2017 at 18:42, EulogyForEvolution said:

To be fair, I think the change in opinion might be to do with our league position. 

It's going well, and since that quote we have seen Ledley become indispensable and Weimann to get into the swing of things. 

I imagine he was wanting a CM and winger when he said that January will be a big window.

Or down to the fact he talks out his arse? 

[Alph]

1 hour ago, sage said:

How many goals dis we concede under McClaren in the Wembley season?

How many in the next season before Eustace got injured.

Pretty sure we were in the top 6 of not the top 3 meanest defences in the division.

Pesky facts.

You're wasting your time. He vanishes when you pull him up on stuff and the bores out another thread. I think he needs the attention.

[sage]

26 minutes ago, Alpha said:

You're wasting your time. He vanishes when you pull him up on stuff and the bores out another thread.

 

I think he needs the attention.

Yes but so do I.

Thank you for quoting me.xxx

[Alph]

1 hour ago, McLovin said:

So passing side to side and backwards when against teams who play defensive is entertaining and successful? No wonder we didn't get promoted under him. Look we had some brilliant moments under him but I'm fed up of reading views like he was the messiah because of his "great football", we have played some good football at times under Rowett too but at least we get it to the front man quicker than we did under McClaren. What got us to Wembley under McClaren was our ability to grind out results in that Wembley season. Of course people remember results such as the 5-0 against forest but there were far many moments under McClaren where we had to grind out results. Many suggest that we played great football all the time under him when the reality was we played the same in many moments as we have under Rowett.

Not true at all mate. 

Nobody called him the messiah. We set several records under him. That's a fact. Including the most points in a season. We got promoted with less points. 

Nobody said we played great football all the time. Neither did anyone say he was the messiah. That's you making up a point of view so you can argue and discredit it. 

Like I said. How else do you break down teams who sit deep? How may sideways passes do Chelsea play against a parked Burnley. How many did Man City play the other night. It was Clement that liked the pointless passing. You have to work openings. Or hoof into the penalty box. Nobody passes through a competent team intent on not conceding do they? 

We scored 84 goals that season. More than Leicester. And finished with a +32 GD. We scored a further 6 in the play offs. 

84 goals. +32GD and 85pts. Not entertaining or successful? Who you measuring it against? 

Even the following season included 5-0 win over Wolves, 5-1 Fulham, 3-0 at Reading, 4-0 at Brum, 4-1 Bolton, 4-0 Blackpool and 5-2 Fulham in the cup. 

We scored 85 goals that season. 77pts and a +29 GD

We were knocked out cups by Chelsea twice and Reading when we had 10 men.

Not bad for sideways and backwards passing. 

I'm taking nothing away from Rowett but I'm not letting people write alternative history. 

Next comes the "didn't get promoted though did we". To which the answer is no. Neither have we with the A-Z master plan of Clement, Pearson or Rowett (yet). The guys with a plan B. 

Dyche didn't get promoted with Watford. Howe didn't with Burnley. Pep didn't win the league with Man City and Rowett lost 2 play offs with Burton. Proven failures? Exactly

[needles]

44 minutes ago, Alpha said:

Not true at all mate. 

Nobody called him the messiah. We set several records under him. That's a fact. Including the most points in a season. We got promoted with less points. 

Nobody said we played great football all the time. Neither did anyone say he was the messiah. That's you making up a point of view so you can argue and discredit it. 

Like I said. How else do you break down teams who sit deep? How may sideways passes do Chelsea play against a parked Burnley. How many did Man City play the other night. It was Clement that liked the pointless passing. You have to work openings. Or hoof into the penalty box. Nobody passes through a competent team intent on not conceding do they? 

We scored 84 goals that season. More than Leicester. And finished with a +32 GD. We scored a further 6 in the play offs. 

84 goals. +32GD and 85pts. Not entertaining or successful? Who you measuring it against? 

Even the following season included 5-0 win over Wolves, 5-1 Fulham, 3-0 at Reading, 4-0 at Brum, 4-1 Bolton, 4-0 Blackpool and 5-2 Fulham in the cup. 

We scored 85 goals that season. 77pts and a +29 GD

We were knocked out cups by Chelsea twice and Reading when we had 10 men.

Not bad for sideways and backwards passing. 

I'm taking nothing away from Rowett but I'm not letting people write alternative history. 

Next comes the "didn't get promoted though did we". To which the answer is no. Neither have we with the A-Z master plan of Clement, Pearson or Rowett (yet). The guys with a plan B. 

Dyche didn't get promoted with Watford. Howe didn't with Burnley. Pep didn't win the league with Man City and Rowett lost 2 play offs with Burton. Proven failures? Exactly

Word.

[Dimmu]

7 hours ago, Alpha said:

Not true at all mate. 

Nobody called him the messiah. We set several records under him. That's a fact. Including the most points in a season. We got promoted with less points. 

Nobody said we played great football all the time. Neither did anyone say he was the messiah. That's you making up a point of view so you can argue and discredit it. 

Like I said. How else do you break down teams who sit deep? How may sideways passes do Chelsea play against a parked Burnley. How many did Man City play the other night. It was Clement that liked the pointless passing. You have to work openings. Or hoof into the penalty box. Nobody passes through a competent team intent on not conceding do they? 

We scored 84 goals that season. More than Leicester. And finished with a +32 GD. We scored a further 6 in the play offs. 

84 goals. +32GD and 85pts. Not entertaining or successful? Who you measuring it against? 

Even the following season included 5-0 win over Wolves, 5-1 Fulham, 3-0 at Reading, 4-0 at Brum, 4-1 Bolton, 4-0 Blackpool and 5-2 Fulham in the cup. 

We scored 85 goals that season. 77pts and a +29 GD

We were knocked out cups by Chelsea twice and Reading when we had 10 men.

Not bad for sideways and backwards passing. 

I'm taking nothing away from Rowett but I'm not letting people write alternative history. 

Next comes the "didn't get promoted though did we". To which the answer is no. Neither have we with the A-Z master plan of Clement, Pearson or Rowett (yet). The guys with a plan B. 

Dyche didn't get promoted with Watford. Howe didn't with Burnley. Pep didn't win the league with Man City and Rowett lost 2 play offs with Burton. Proven failures? Exactly

I've been missing this Alpha.

[PodgeyRam]

12 hours ago, Alpha said:

Not true at all mate. 

Nobody called him the messiah. We set several records under him. That's a fact. Including the most points in a season. We got promoted with less points. 

Nobody said we played great football all the time. Neither did anyone say he was the messiah. That's you making up a point of view so you can argue and discredit it. 

Like I said. How else do you break down teams who sit deep? How may sideways passes do Chelsea play against a parked Burnley. How many did Man City play the other night. It was Clement that liked the pointless passing. You have to work openings. Or hoof into the penalty box. Nobody passes through a competent team intent on not conceding do they? 

We scored 84 goals that season. More than Leicester. And finished with a +32 GD. We scored a further 6 in the play offs. 

84 goals. +32GD and 85pts. Not entertaining or successful? Who you measuring it against? 

Even the following season included 5-0 win over Wolves, 5-1 Fulham, 3-0 at Reading, 4-0 at Brum, 4-1 Bolton, 4-0 Blackpool and 5-2 Fulham in the cup. 

We scored 85 goals that season. 77pts and a +29 GD

We were knocked out cups by Chelsea twice and Reading when we had 10 men.

Not bad for sideways and backwards passing. 

I'm taking nothing away from Rowett but I'm not letting people write alternative history. 

Next comes the "didn't get promoted though did we". To which the answer is no. Neither have we with the A-Z master plan of Clement, Pearson or Rowett (yet). The guys with a plan B. 

Dyche didn't get promoted with Watford. Howe didn't with Burnley. Pep didn't win the league with Man City and Rowett lost 2 play offs with Burton. Proven failures? Exactly

I think I love you

[Sexydadbod]

13 hours ago, Alpha said:

Not true at all mate. 

Nobody called him the messiah. We set several records under him. That's a fact. Including the most points in a season. We got promoted with less points. 

Nobody said we played great football all the time. Neither did anyone say he was the messiah. That's you making up a point of view so you can argue and discredit it. 

Like I said. How else do you break down teams who sit deep? How may sideways passes do Chelsea play against a parked Burnley. How many did Man City play the other night. It was Clement that liked the pointless passing. You have to work openings. Or hoof into the penalty box. Nobody passes through a competent team intent on not conceding do they? 

We scored 84 goals that season. More than Leicester. And finished with a +32 GD. We scored a further 6 in the play offs. 

84 goals. +32GD and 85pts. Not entertaining or successful? Who you measuring it against? 

Even the following season included 5-0 win over Wolves, 5-1 Fulham, 3-0 at Reading, 4-0 at Brum, 4-1 Bolton, 4-0 Blackpool and 5-2 Fulham in the cup. 

We scored 85 goals that season. 77pts and a +29 GD

We were knocked out cups by Chelsea twice and Reading when we had 10 men.

Not bad for sideways and backwards passing. 

I'm taking nothing away from Rowett but I'm not letting people write alternative history. 

Next comes the "didn't get promoted though did we". To which the answer is no. Neither have we with the A-Z master plan of Clement, Pearson or Rowett (yet). The guys with a plan B. 

Dyche didn't get promoted with Watford. Howe didn't with Burnley. Pep didn't win the league with Man City and Rowett lost 2 play offs with Burton. Proven failures? Exactly

Sorry but I didn't find his football particularly entertaining all the time. We played well when teams came and attacked us and we destroyed them because they left so much space in behind but when teams clicked on to this and sat back, it was so boring to watch because he had no idea to break them down. Yes we have faced this problem undee Rowett too but at least he encourages them to get it forward whereas under McClaren, there were so many occasions, especially in his second season where we passed it backwards and sideways with no idea of how to break teams down. Yes other teams face this problem but at least they have a game plan, whereas with McClaren it was because he didn't know what to do-hence why he is still unemployed at the moment because clubs know he isn't a very good manager. He may be a good coach and help players impove individually but I had the feeling(like with Wassall) that he had no idea what he was doing a lot of the time and relied heavily on Paul Simpson.

I'm no Harry Redknapp apologist but McClaren was clueless at Wembley and had no idea what to do when QPR and defended(which resulted in him losing his composure and making the wrong subs in my opinion) The championship has also improved a lot since that season with more money in circulation. 

[Sexydadbod]

Appreciate what he did but people should stop comparing Rowett with him as the league is far more competitive than it was back then. 

[Sexydadbod]

McClaren was the right manager at that time, Rowett is the right man this time. It's not going to be as "fluid" as it was under McClaren as this is a completely different team under different circumstances. If you are concerned about watching good football all the time, watch Man City. Rowett's trying to build a team to suit the players with available to him using 4-2-3-1 as did McClaren with 4-3-3. There is no "Derby way", the vast majority of the last 20 years has involved boring football so Rowett shouldn't be judged for his alleged "boring football"

[rynny]

22 minutes ago, McLovin said:

Sorry but I didn't find his football particularly entertaining all the time. We played well when teams came and attacked us and we destroyed them because they left so much space in behind but when teams clicked on to this and sat back, it was so boring to watch because he had no idea to break them down. Yes we have faced this problem undee Rowett too but at least he encourages them to get it forward whereas under McClaren, there were so many occasions, especially in his second season where we passed it backwards and sideways with no idea of how to break teams down. Yes other teams face this problem but at least they have a game plan, whereas with McClaren it was because he didn't know what to do-hence why he is still unemployed at the moment because clubs know he isn't a very good manager. He may be a good coach and help players impove individually but I had the feeling(like with Wassall) that he had no idea what he was doing a lot of the time and relied heavily on Paul Simpson.

I'm no Harry Redknapp apologist but McClaren was clueless at Wembley and had no idea what to do when QPR and defended(which resulted in him losing his composure and making the wrong subs in my opinion) The championship has also improved a lot since that season with more money in circulation. 

You say we had no idea how to break teams down yet we only failed to score in 8 out of the 54 games we played in 14/15 season. Which was less than Watford (9), Norwich (10), Middlesbrough (15), Brentford (12), Ipswich (10) and Wolves (10), so basically all the top 7 above us bar Bournemouth (4)

[Sexydadbod]

17 minutes ago, rynny said:

You say we had no idea how to break teams down yet we only failed to score in 8 out of the 54 games we played in 14/15 season. Which was less than Watford (9), Norwich (10), Middlesbrough (15), Brentford (12), Ipswich (10) and Wolves (10), so basically all the top 7 above us bar Bournemouth (4)

What about the context of each game? A team might have been open at the start of the game but as the game went on sat deeper and more compact such as qpr at Wembley? I don't like looking at stats to much because they can be spun into any argument such as possession stats does not always mean that a team much controlled the game.

[Ellafella]

17 hours ago, FindernRam said:

But we only faced Burton and didn't exactly rip them to pieces. Watch the top teams anywhere and the quick ball in the channel is what frightens defences-and its better to watch.

We had 5 clear chances that we should've taken. 

[Mr Tibbs]

1 hour ago, McLovin said:

Sorry but I didn't find his football particularly entertaining all the time. We played well when teams came and attacked us and we destroyed them because they left so much space in behind but when teams clicked on to this and sat back, it was so boring to watch because he had no idea to break them down. Yes we have faced this problem undee Rowett too but at least he encourages them to get it forward whereas under McClaren, there were so many occasions, especially in his second season where we passed it backwards and sideways with no idea of how to break teams down. Yes other teams face this problem but at least they have a game plan, whereas with McClaren it was because he didn't know what to do-hence why he is still unemployed at the moment because clubs know he isn't a very good manager. He may be a good coach and help players impove individually but I had the feeling(like with Wassall) that he had no idea what he was doing a lot of the time and relied heavily on Paul Simpson.

Obviously you’re entitled to your opinion but that post is so fabricated. 

Everybody you have replied to has dealt in facts. 

What the hell is half of your post based on? No idea how to break them down? No game plan? Success down to Simmo? 

What the actual **** mate. 

Just revisit Alpha’s post again, it literally ticks them all off. For somebody that didn’t know what he was doing he did ok, which ever way you try and dress it up. 

The only people that are over the top about Steve McClaren are weirdly the ones trying to lie about how bad of a manager he was here. Odd thing to do for a Derby County fan with no visual impairment IMO. 

[Sexydadbod]

25 minutes ago, Mr Tibbs said:

Obviously you’re entitled to your opinion but that post is so fabricated. 

Everybody you have replied to has dealt in facts. 

What the hell is half of your post based on? No idea how to break them down? No game plan? Success down to Simmo? 

What the actual **** mate. 

Just revisit Alpha’s post again, it literally ticks them all off. For somebody that didn’t know what he was doing he did ok, which ever way you try and dress it up. 

The only people that are over the top about Steve McClaren are weirdly the ones trying to lie about how bad of a manager he was here. Odd thing to do for a Derby County fan with no visual impairment IMO. 

Where did I say that he was poor here? All I said his football wasn't as amazing as people say it was just as an excuse to criticise Rowett. Much of the football was the same as it is now. The "great football" only came when teams were naive by opening up against us but when we were against solid teams, it was just as "dull" as it is now. 

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing

[Turnstile]

1 hour ago, McLovin said:

McClaren was the right manager at that time, Rowett is the right man this time. It's not going to be as "fluid" as it was under McClaren as this is a completely different team under different circumstances. If you are concerned about watching good football all the time, watch Man City. Rowett's trying to build a team to suit the players with available to him using 4-2-3-1 as did McClaren with 4-3-3. There is no "Derby way", the vast majority of the last 20 years has involved boring football so Rowett shouldn't be judged for his alleged "boring football"

Rowett will be judged by the fans. 6/7000 already staying away from 32000 mac1 gates. to keep a full house fans need to be entertained ,not bored to death.

[Alph]

2 hours ago, McLovin said:

Appreciate what he did but people should stop comparing Rowett with him as the league is far more competitive than it was back then. 

How is it? Some teams have got better and some worse. Same as every league every year.

Who was comparing him to Rowett?

[Mr Tibbs]

20 minutes ago, McLovin said:

Where did I say that he was poor here? All I said his football wasn't as amazing as people say it was just as an excuse to criticise Rowett. Much of the football was the same as it is now. The "great football" only came when teams were naive by opening up against us but when we were against solid teams, it was just as "dull" as it is now. 

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing

We’re all saying he was pretty good here. You’re arguing against that. If you’re not trying to say he’s poor then why don’t you just agree with what everybody is saying and cut the crap. 

You’re basically discrediting Maccas style and impressive win percentage here down to the fact that other teams let us do that. Load of bum cum! 

Not seen one amazing football comment either. Again, a couple more over the top comments from someone who’s putting the football down... not the other way around. Add that to messiah and all the other buzz words you keep throwing in, nobody else is. 

 

[Alph]

42 minutes ago, McLovin said:

Where did I say that he was poor here? All I said his football wasn't as amazing as people say it was just as an excuse to criticise Rowett. Much of the football was the same as it is now. The "great football" only came when teams were naive by opening up against us but when we were against solid teams, it was just as "dull" as it is now. 

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing

Not as amazing as who said? 

So your complaint is that we struggled to break down teams and score lots of goals when they parked the bus? 

Well Yeah, it's a pretty **** parked bus when you can pass through it. I'll remind you of this when an elite team like Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern or Man City are passing sideways against a team that cost just a fraction of their price. I'll ask you why they're passing sideways and backwards.

I'm guessing Chelsea are doing similar against West Ham? 

We scored over 80 goals in each season. Scoring more than 3 on many many occasions. 

"At least Rowett tries to get players forward".. have a think about that. The full back was Craig Forsyth as it is now. The other was Cyrus Christie and Andre Wisdom. So you don't recall Christie getting forward no?

We played with 1 DM. We now play with 2. 

We're now a counter attacking team. We were nothing like that back then.

You complain about comparisons but you're the one making them. You complain his football is overrated and then call it "great" at times. And you credit Simpson. But Rowett's staff just put out cones?

Over 80 goals in each season. +60GD over the two. 6 in the play offs. But the football was dull in general, yes?

Yeah, nostalgia is a wonderful thing. Selective memory isn't bad either. 

I'm sure when Man City lost and Barca drew over the last week that the approx 800 passes they made each were all forwards? Well, I suppose the gap between them and their opponents is much tighter than your Derby v Bournemouth in 2015.