Quality

[minesahartington]

13 hours ago, Jourdan said:

Well, no they weren't.

But at the end of the day, fans respond to intent. And I'm sure Wassall would get us playing a more attractive and logical brand of football almost instantly.

Personally I'd rather draw 2-2 or 3-3 away from home than lose time and time again.

I just think Cocu might have the vision, but is it actually aligned with the rest of the club?

The under 18s and under 23s are earning rave reviews for their fearless, attractive, winning style of football. Those teams produce football in no way similar to what we've seen from Cocu's.

 

Cocu will soon put an end to that nonsense 

[RamNut]

2 minutes ago, LeedsCityRam said:

The players arent confused, they're just not good enough.

Phillip Cocu’s Random tactical formation generator. Roll a dice and play one of the following six formations.

 

433 with a holding midfielder and two wide men and one up front

442 with a diamond, a holding midfielder, a no.10, no wingers, and two up front

442 with a flat midfield, two wide men, and two up front

4231 with two holding midfielders and a no10, and one up front

541 with three at the back, two wing backs, a holding midfielder, a no10, and one up front

4141 A flat back four, no wing backs, a holding midfielder, a no10 and one up front 

 

If they’re not confused, they certainly should be.

 

 

[richinspain]

33 minutes ago, RamNut said:

Phillip Cocu’s Random tactical formation generator. Roll a dice and play one of the following six formations.

 

433 with a holding midfielder and two wide men and one up front

442 with a diamond, a holding midfielder, a no.10, no wingers, and two up front

442 with a flat midfield, two wide men, and two up front

4231 with two holding midfielders and a no10, and one up front

541 with three at the back, two wing backs, a holding midfielder, a no10, and one up front

4141 A flat back four, no wing backs, a holding midfielder, a no10 and one up front 

 

If they’re not confused, they certainly should be.

 

 

Is it random though? I haven't got a clue, but I would hope that he has. His previous record suggests that he has. I don't know why he "tinkers", except when there are injuries, but again I hope that he does. He has constantly spoken of a long term plan and vision. Hopefully this is all part of it. Part of him getting to know the players he has that can take that plan forward. I had hoped to see improvement over the season, up to now we've had odd glimpses. I do however believe that he should be given time to implement the plan. How much time? I suppose for me that this time next year we should be seeing those signs. If this season really is a case of taking a step back, pressing reset, and then moving on, then I for one am prepared to accept it. After all what is the other option? We sack Cocu, bring in a new manager half way through the season who may get lucky with the "bounce", or more probably does exactly the same as the last one who had that opportunity (Rowett)?

[Rammy03]

15 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

Do you genuinely believe that or are you just on the wind up? Serious question. 

I for one believe that cocu is not getting the best out of the players we have. Most if not all played under lampard and were great, now look at them. We should be doing better than we are with the players we have and given the quality and tightness of the league this season, why not push for top 6?

[sage]

13 hours ago, Duracell said:

He's only undroppable on the assumption he can be fit enough to play 90 minutes 46 times a season, which is unrealistic given his recent seasons.

That's part of the problem. With everyone fit and available, we can pick a starting XI that can win every home game and make a decent fist of it away from home with confidence. I'd say good enough for just outside the top 6.

Every team has to deal with injuries and other variables, but we've been particularly hard hit this season. The disjointed pre-season on and off the field set us up for that.

With hindsight, our play-off hopes were dashed the moment Chelsea fannied us about and we decided to play a few pub teams a week later than everybody else as preparation. The fact we were still doing two different teams in the 90 in our one competitive friendly speaks volumes of that.

The only player who is consistently available and fit enough to be picked is Tom Lawrence, when he's not suspended or driving into his team-mates. Possibly Waghorn too. Hardly the recipe for a cohesive plan and system for Cocu is it?

Did he need to be rested for2 games?

[RoyMac5]

5 hours ago, LeedsCityRam said:

Is it Cocu's fault that defenders arent doing the basics? That the midfield isnt strong enough to dominate games? 

And yet he keeps moving them about, getting them to play in unfamiliar roles. I hope he's good at rebuilding squad & player confidence, we might collapse otherwise.

[Archied]

6 hours ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

The only drivel is from defeatest fans who have decided that we cannot win a game without mason mount in the side.

Whilst we have a weakened midfield there is no reason to not expect decent football from the players we have available.....we are far,far from the strongest side in the division this year but we are far from the weakest either and in my opinion and with good coaching and management,we should be doing far better than we are.

Were you at the Derby game against Preston?...in that game we played better than I have seen for the past few seasons...slick,one touch football that was a joy to behold.With that example of how we can play,when managed properly,we are capable of being top six easily.

Cocu got the balance and mix right finally but then failed to maintain it,dabbled with the set up again and has returned us back to step 1 again,looking totally lost and confused on the field.

 

You say we are far from the strongest side and far from the weakest ,,,,, well that’s what our position in division reflects,,

this will please you but Martin is about the only one that has a first touch and can pass a ball but to be fair he has his limitations over the last few years ,

yes we swing from good performances to absolute dire and to me that reflects very much the quality of players we have who are not capable of producing any level of consistency,

do I have concerns over cocu and think we could be a bit better ?     Yep , but I’m trying to give a bit of time and balance to form a proper view

[kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong]

24 minutes ago, Archied said:

You say we are far from the strongest side and far from the weakest ,,,,, well that’s what our position in division reflects,,

this will please you but Martin is about the only one that has a first touch and can pass a ball but to be fair he has his limitations over the last few years ,

yes we swing from good performances to absolute dire and to me that reflects very much the quality of players we have who are not capable of producing any level of consistency,

do I have concerns over cocu and think we could be a bit better ?     Yep , but I’m trying to give a bit of time and balance to form a proper view

We all are,I hope,mate.

I personally don't want him moved on (yet) but I do want to see more of him fitting round pegs into round holes and coming to the realisation that this isn't a dutch premiership side.

i.e play to the teams strengths and start using a settled side where partnerships,trust and understanding may develop as a result.

I only want to see the performance of the team improving,the results will come later.

We were starting to see that but the piece's gave been thrown into the air again clearly causing confusion and despondency within the ranks.

 

[Archied]

38 minutes ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

We all are,I hope,mate.

I personally don't want him moved on (yet) but I do want to see more of him fitting round pegs into round holes and coming to the realisation that this isn't a dutch premiership side.

i.e play to the teams strengths and start using a settled side where partnerships,trust and understanding may develop as a result.

I only want to see the performance of the team improving,the results will come later.

We were starting to see that but the piece's gave been thrown into the air again clearly causing confusion and despondency within the ranks.

 

Got to say I’m wondering about his coaching staff being added to  (Rosenior) and whether this has an effect on what we are seeing in terms of us appearing to be more into picking teams each week based on the opposition style rather than building our own style and working on it ,,

theres also a big difference in sounding good as a pundit and actually doing the job at management /coaching level and does the Rooney coaching thing muddy the waters more? Who knows but it’s a nagging feeling I’ve had from the start,

I’m a firm believer that football is football and if you can build a good side then they will do well wherever they play

[Jourdan]

13 hours ago, CornwallRam said:

Wassall is lucky to be in a job at all. He's had a decade in charge of a youth set up that is more highly resourced than any in England outside the big 6. In that time we've produced 3 regular first team starters, two of whom were at the club when Wassall joined and the other was signed as a 16 year old. 

When you look at the irritating success of the Forest youth set up, with a fraction of our resources,  you really have wonder where Mel's millions have gone.

I know that the junior teams are doing well enough, but ultimately the youth set can only be judged on its effectiveness in producing talent to either sell or play for the first team. 

Assuming that Wassall's main duties are football related, rather than operational, he's been an abject failure. 

I think that’s very harsh.

Would you also say Chelsea’s Academy set up has been a failure?

Until recently, very few of their young players broke through, despite a huge investment in their youth set up.

That doesn’t mean they weren’t producing good players, does it?

At the end of the day, doesn’t a player’s progression from the youth teams to the first team boil down to the first team manager and their willingness to play young players?

Would the likes of Michael Dawson and Jermaine Jenas have broken through at Forest if Paul Hart hadn’t been in charge at the time and knew what these players were capable of?

So Wassall could be producing the best young players in the country but if the manager doesn’t see them as part of his picture, what will it matter?

[LeedsCityRam]

2 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

And yet he keeps moving them about, getting them to play in unfamiliar roles. I hope he's good at rebuilding squad & player confidence, we might collapse otherwise.

His background may be the reason why. Dutch footballers are taught to play in a number of different positions to improve their knowledge of the game. That approach was also the bedrock of Total Football.

Clearly if it's not working, it's not working but he wont have been the only person to wonder whether Bogle could play higher up the pitch.

And of course hes still not been here that long so will still be experimenting to some extent.

[CornwallRam]

49 minutes ago, Jourdan said:

I think that’s very harsh.

Would you also say Chelsea’s Academy set up has been a failure?

Until recently, very few of their young players broke through, despite a huge investment in their youth set up.

That doesn’t mean they weren’t producing good players, does it?

At the end of the day, doesn’t a player’s progression from the youth teams to the first team boil down to the first team manager and their willingness to play young players?

Would the likes of Michael Dawson and Jermaine Jenas have broken through at Forest if Paul Hart hadn’t been in charge at the time and knew what these players were capable of?

So Wassall could be producing the best young players in the country but if the manager doesn’t see them as part of his picture, what will it matter?

Oddly enough Chelsea's youth set up produces more players and generates more income than ours, despite having a higher bar to aim at. If that's the best defence of Wassall's results, he on very shaky ground.

Which academy would you say costs c£10m a year to run and which c£2m? The one which has produced Hughes, Hendrick and Bogle (two of whom were more young signings than academy products and a look a Hughes's record doesn't help much either), or  the one which has produced Appiah, Brereton, Cash, Worrall, Burke, Yates, Osborn, Bamford, Lascelles and Darlow?

[Jourdan]

18 hours ago, CornwallRam said:

Oddly enough Chelsea's youth set up produces more players and generates more income than ours, despite having a higher bar to aim at. If that's the best defence of Wassall's results, he on very shaky ground.

Which academy would you say costs c£10m a year to run and which c£2m? The one which has produced Hughes, Hendrick and Bogle (two of whom were more young signings than academy products and a look a Hughes's record doesn't help much either), or  the one which has produced Appiah, Brereton, Cash, Worrall, Burke, Yates, Osborn, Bamford, Lascelles and Darlow?

I see what you're saying. Why are we spending millions on the Academy if there is no pathway for the players?

Well surely the answer is that this takes time and the correct circumstances to develop - the alignment between the first team philosophy and the Academy's philosophy, for example. Something that is difficult to do if you've had eight managerial changes in six years.

Clubs like Southampton and Forest have had a good reputation for developing players through their Academy for 15-20 years. We are essentially playing catch up, hence all of the investment.

If the benchmark for Wassall having done a good job is the number of Academy products in the first team, surely that also requires for this to be a priority of the first team management. If Wassall and company are producing good players but the first team manager has different ideas, what more can he do?

You say Forest are producing a lot of players. But is the sign of a good Academy producing more players of a lower standard, or fewer but of a generally higher standard?

Most of Forest's Academy products are Championship standard or lower. When we produce a good player, they tend to rise through the ranks and play top flight football for a number of years.

[CornwallRam]

I disagree that it's the job of the first team manager to make the academy director look good by selecting sub-standard players.

Also not sure that the quality over quantity argument works. We've sold about players for about £8m, they've got more in their side and sold academy graduates for over £40m. 

I also don't think that Forest's academy is particularly exceptional. It's just irritatingly visible to Rams fans. The majority of academies produce at the levels of Forest. The exceptional thing is how poorly productive our academy is.

 

[Bubbles]

14 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

I disagree that it's the job of the first team manager to make the academy director look good by selecting sub-standard players.

Also not sure that the quality over quantity argument works. We've sold about players for about £8m, they've got more in their side and sold academy graduates for over £40m. 

I also don't think that Forest's academy is particularly exceptional. It's just irritatingly visible to Rams fans. The majority of academies produce at the levels of Forest. The exceptional thing is how poorly productive our academy is.

 

I think that will change over the next few years.

[KCG]

On 07/12/2019 at 17:42, Archied said:

We have none in our team ,, we really don’t 

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry!

[Archied]

21 minutes ago, KCG said:

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry!

Me too

[europia]

On 08/12/2019 at 12:26, Rammy03 said:

I for one believe that cocu is not getting the best out of the players we have. Most if not all played under lampard and were great, now look at them. We should be doing better than we are with the players we have and given the quality and tightness of the league this season, why not push for top 6?

Classic case of pampered players, who liked the old manager but aren't so keen on the new guy, so not bothering to put in a shift. 

[Rammy03]

1 minute ago, europia said:

Classic case of pampered players, who liked the old manager but aren't so keen on the new guy, so not bothering to put in a shift. 

Well that's just an absolute disgrace. You put the shirt on and give your all.

[RoyMac5]

11 hours ago, europia said:

Classic case of pampered players, who liked the old manager but aren't so keen on the new guy, so not bothering to put in a shift. 

The new guy has to motivate them and pick a 'winning' team.