New: Manager or not

[AdamRam]

5 minutes ago, RamNut said:

What happened in the past is irrelevant. Whether it was here or in Holland.

we have an opportunity to build a new young side based on a small group of academy players who have achieved great things at that level. We need to tighten up at the back and forge a new cutting edge. We have the advantage that the new core has played together for years. I would love this to be the foundation going forward. In the short term we can add Rooney and a few senior players into the mix, but ffs drop those players who have repeatedly failed to deliver and let’s move on. 

 

                   Roos

bogle.  Evans.  Bielik.   Lowe 

                  Bird

        Knight.    Sibley

new.        New.          New 

And if they aren't good enough ?

[cannable]

12 hours ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

Right..

So change the system to one that the players you have,at this time,can play, ffs.

That's what being a manager is about.....managing what you have in the most effective way.

Good grief.

No wonder we struggle.

 

 

What players do we have?! A midfield of kids that want to play football!

A defence that can’t play! 

Our wingers are bank!

[Rev]

I'm beginning to miss Pearson, at least everyone wanted him out.

[Archied]

15 hours ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

The football is absolutely toothless at the minute..I can't quite fathom how we have dialled the goals out of such,formerly, fantastic and prolific strikers of jack and Chrissie....

However,I hated the football of rowett in the the previous season with a passion.

I can only hope,that with cocu's pedigree,he will somehow get the midfield in,that those two deserve(surely Rooney will be a massive part in that) and we become somewhere near as fluent as we were back in 2014/15,which was the epitome of the Derby football I crave.

Please let January be the start of that return to the Derby way.

And if not,we get in a manager who can save us from the ignominy of league 1 before it's too late.

 

The goals had been gone from Chrissy long long before cocu arrived

[May Contain Nuts]

34 minutes ago, GrimsbyRam said:

I don't follow - 10 of the 11 played in the first leg that won the game.  Plus I just compared Rowett's last team to Lampard's last and Cocu's most recent (as per the previous poster).

The only difference being the Championship's top scorer!  Fair enough if you're just following somebody else's criteria in choosing which line-up to present as an example, but it's not an accurate representation of the season as a whole.

The point is that whilst you're correct that the team you named technically were (mostly) the ones who dragged us over the line and got us into the play-offs on the final day of the season and beat Fulham in the first half of the play-off semis, we wouldn't have been in that position at all had that been the team we'd breen using over the course of the entire season.

4 minutes ago, GrimsbyRam said:

But we finished in the playoffs with a very average squad as they played as a team and knew their roles.

How well did they play as a team and know their roles from January to April?

We finished in the play-offs, but our form from January onwards was pretty awful and but for a late-season change in formation to three at the back using Cameron Jerome as a very direct focal point we would have continued to drop away. I don't remember too many fans being happy with our organisation and desire during that spell? I do remember us looking just as clueless and hopeless as we do at the minute.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

I have been derided before saying that Jerome would have been a useful player in the squad last season (an certainly this).

He had not been playing at Norwich before he joined us (as they needed him off wage bill and were “encouraging” him to go) so initially in his poorer performances we were having to do the usual loan/new signing thing of getting players fit and in form/used to the system.

[Ellafella]

1 hour ago, i-Ram said:

For the record my edit was simply to insert the word ‘said’ which I initially overlooked, not to alter something you pointed out. I am as disinterested in your pedantry as I am your pomposity. I have however much enjoyed our brief discourse, but l must now return to my Sun crossword. Have a good day Buddy.

Technically I believe you mean “un-interested” rather than “disinterested”.
{https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/disinterested-versus-uninterested}

Enjoy the rest of your day - I have also enjoyed our little spat thanks. ?

[RoyMac5]

6 minutes ago, Dean (hick) Saunders said:

I have been derided before saying that Jerome would have been a useful player in the squad last season (an certainly this).

Who on earth do you think would be setting Jerome up?

[JfR]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Who on earth do you think would be setting Jerome up?

Hamer

[AdamRam]

The more posts I see about getting Cocu out, the more I feel he needs more time. I'm not saying he is going to be a success, however there are so many reasons as posted that support that rationale and for me far outweigh sacking him at this moment in time.

Based on recent results and performances I admit I would struggle to create a valid argument that he is going to succeed, and maybe it's more in hope than anything else however I just have a feeling that with a bit of luck on the injury front, a couple of good additions to the squad to compliment along the white pele we will turn the corner.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Who on earth do you think would be setting Jerome up?

Arguably (as I’m sure some will) with striker like Jerome it could be easier for our less than gifted midfield of this season as he has the pace and strength to make more of a lower quality pass.

(Jerome had achieved multiple promotions after all)

[GrimsbyRam]

1 hour ago, Coconut said:

How well did they play as a team and know their roles from January to April?  

 

 

You question me about being selective and then select a fourth month period?  (A period, from the graphic, where we only lost 6 out of 21 games).  They played well enough over a season to finish top six (factually).  It was terrible football (which I did not enjoy watching) but in comparison yes he got results.  Over half a season under Cocu we are playing equally as bad football wise but with results (getting spanked more often than not away) which mean we are just above the relegation zone.   

[May Contain Nuts]

1 hour ago, GrimsbyRam said:

You question me about being selective and then select a fourth month period?  They played well enough over a season to finish top six (factually).  It was terrible football (which I did not enjoy watching) but in comparison yes he got results.  Over half a season under Cocu we are playing equally as bad football wise but with results (getting spanked more often than not away) which mean we are just above the relegation zone.   

The reason I haven't just looked at it in terms of the season as a whole is that the squad we were putting out in the 5 months prior to that (it was actually more like 5.5 months /3.5 months but we're splitting hairs) had a few key differences (add Russell, Winnall & a fit Ledley), so is less relevant to the comparison.

"They played well enough over a season" assumes that the players available throughout the season were largely the same, but those 3 had been a big part in us picking up points, especially Ledley who made a massive difference to our team, he came in and we went on a run which got us the majority of the points which carried us through until the end of the season. He got injured and our form dropped back off a cliff. He didn't have the same impact when he came back into the team a few months later, sadly.

There was a clear difference in performances before and after the January transfer window. We got 48 points before the turn of the year, 27 points after. Take that to the end of the transfer window and it's a 56/19 split!

Rowett had half a season with the squad, a full pre-season and 2 transfer windows he'd had chance to plan properly for, and the squad we ended up with at the end of his reign was one which only just scraped into the play-offs and for the most part performed no better than the one we have now, and it did have a stand-out player - Vydra! We made the most of him and he delivered.

We don't currently have anyone I'd trust to take on that mantle, even if we did spend the entire season making plans around them.

Another reason for selecting a 4 month period is that Cocu's only had a 5 month period. You're not happy with me for judging the 2017/18 team on a poor 4 month spell but because Cocu's had a poor 5 months in charge then that's it, he has to go!? Hmmm, I can't get on board with that.

I'm fully aware where we are this season, and how worried some people are about it, but I'm also fully aware of how little time and opportunity Cocu's actually had to get things right, and how worn out and broken down most of the tools he's been given to fix things with are!

[leamram]

2 hours ago, reverendo de duivel said:

I'm beginning to miss Pearson, at least everyone wanted him out.

This is my favourite post of the year.

I'm amazed at the divide of opinions on in or out

[GrimsbyRam]

7 minutes ago, leamram said:

This is my favourite post of the year.

I'm amazed at the divide of opinions on in or out

It is very interesting.  

From my perspective, I am 'out' and I work on what I am seeing on the pitch.  As a season ticket holder, I drive a 200 mile round trip to watch very poor football.  I am struggling to motivate myself every game at the moment to watch the team I have followed since I was 6.  I do not have any excitement at 2pm when the team news is announced as its always a disappointment.  Half the players turn up with the same attitude. 

In relation to people wanting him to remain, this is partly based on his reputation (if it was someone like Nathan Jones he would have been gone by now) and partly because of what they hope the future will be. There is no evidence to show that he will. It is possible that he will improve us in due course but it is more probable based on experience that somebody like Chris Hughton would.

The younger players are the positive but Knight, Sibley, Bogle and Lowe were all likely to be pushing to play this season.  After all, Lampard put Knight on the bench in the play-offs (very high pressured matches). In a way I am concerned that Sibley has not had more game time and it would frustrate the hell out of me if he decides on Monday to use one of Dowell, Paterson, Jozefzoon ahead of him.

 

[leamram]

3 minutes ago, GrimsbyRam said:

It is very interesting.  

From my perspective, I am 'out' and I work on what I am seeing on the pitch.  As a season ticket holder, I drive a 200 mile round trip to watch very poor football.  I am struggling to motivate myself every game at the moment to watch the team I have followed since I was 6.  I do not have any excitement at 2pm when the team news is announced as its always a disappointment.  Half the players turn up with the same attitude. 

In relation to people wanting him to remain, this is partly based on his reputation (if it was someone like Nathan Jones he would have been gone by now) and partly because of what they hope the future will be. There is no evidence to show that he will. It is possible that he will improve us in due course but it is more probable based on experience that somebody like Chris Hughton would.

The younger players are the positive but Knight, Sibley, Bogle and Lowe were all likely to be pushing to play this season.  After all, Lampard put Knight on the bench in the play-offs (very high pressured matches). In a way I am concerned that Sibley has not had more game time and it would frustrate the hell out of me if he decides on Monday to use one of Dowell, Paterson, Jozefzoon ahead of him.

 

I agree,its the lack of positives that worries me, if I could see a game plan and i actually thought the right players coming in could change it round and turn us into a force, i may be more positive,but I would very surprised if it did....I hope to be proven wrong.

 

[AdamRam]

40 minutes ago, Coconut said:

The reason I haven't just looked at it in terms of the season as a whole is that the squad we were putting out in the 5 months prior to that (it was actually more like 5.5 months /3.5 months but we're splitting hairs) had a few key differences (add Russell, Winnall & a fit Ledley), so is less relevant to the comparison.

"They played well enough over a season" assumes that the players available throughout the season were largely the same, but those 3 had been a big part in us picking up points, especially Ledley who made a massive difference to our team, he came in and we went on a run which got us the majority of the points which carried us through until the end of the season. He got injured and our form dropped back off a cliff. He didn't have the same impact when he came back into the team a few months later, sadly.

There was a clear difference in performances before and after the January transfer window. We got 48 points before the turn of the year, 27 points after. Take that to the end of the transfer window and it's a 56/19 split!

Rowett had half a season with the squad, a full pre-season and 2 transfer windows he'd had chance to plan properly for, and the squad we ended up with at the end of his reign was one which only just scraped into the play-offs and for the most part performed no better than the one we have now, and it did have a stand-out player - Vydra! We made the most of him and he delivered.

We don't currently have anyone I'd trust to take on that mantle, even if we did spend the entire season making plans around them.

Another reason for selecting a 4 month period is that Cocu's only had a 5 month period. You're not happy with me for judging the 2017/18 team on a poor 4 month spell but because Cocu's had a poor 5 months in charge then that's it, he has to go!? Hmmm, I can't get on board with that.

I'm fully aware where we are this season, and how worried some people are about it, but I'm also fully aware of how little time and opportunity Cocu's actually had to get things right, and how worn out and broken down most of the tools he's been given to fix things with are!

And not to forget Rowett bombed Martin out as not being deemed good enough, yet two years later the same player is used as a stick to beat Cocu for as being better than the the player he brought in to replace him ?

[GrimsbyRam]

46 minutes ago, Coconut said:

The reason I haven't just looked at it in terms of the season as a whole is that the squad we were putting out in the 5 months prior to that (it was actually more like 5.5 months /3.5 months but we're splitting hairs) had a few key differences (add Russell, Winnall & a fit Ledley), so is less relevant to the comparison.

"They played well enough over a season" assumes that the players available throughout the season were largely the same, but those 3 had been a big part in us picking up points, especially Ledley who made a massive difference to our team, he came in and we went on a run which got us the majority of the points which carried us through until the end of the season. He got injured and our form dropped back off a cliff. He didn't have the same impact when he came back into the team a few months later, sadly.

There was a clear difference in performances before and after the January transfer window. We got 48 points before the turn of the year, 27 points after. Take that to the end of the transfer window and it's a 56/19 split!

Rowett had half a season with the squad, a full pre-season and 2 transfer windows he'd had chance to plan properly for, and the squad we ended up with at the end of his reign was one which only just scraped into the play-offs and for the most part performed no better than the one we have now, and it did have a stand-out player - Vydra! We made the most of him and he delivered.

We don't currently have anyone I'd trust to take on that mantle, even if we did spend the entire season making plans around them.

Another reason for selecting a 4 month period is that Cocu's only had a 5 month period. You're not happy with me for judging the 2017/18 team on a poor 4 month spell but because Cocu's had a poor 5 months in charge then that's it, he has to go!? Hmmm, I can't get on board with that.

I'm fully aware where we are this season, and how worried some people are about it, but I'm also fully aware of how little time and opportunity Cocu's actually had to get things right, and how worn out and broken down most of the tools he's been given to fix things with are!

We lost 11 all season. Cocu has lost 9 already.  I really do not think that we had as bad a season as you make out.  

Even losing the players from last year, we should be in the top 10.  

As for the transfer window. He was backed.  He brought players in from the premier (Everton and Brighton).  He has a bigger net spend that Lampard. He sanctioned Paterson when I could have told him he is no better than Jamie Ward. He allowed Carson to leave (I do not buy what people are saying about his wages being an issue on the basis of what was freed up in the summer).  He would have been better using the Rooney money on getting a decent young loan player for the season.

I really want to be proven wrong but I just can't see it.

[May Contain Nuts]

7 minutes ago, GrimsbyRam said:

It is very interesting.  

From my perspective, I am 'out' and I work on what I am seeing on the pitch.  As a season ticket holder, I drive a 200 mile round trip to watch very poor football.  I am struggling to motivate myself every game at the moment to watch the team I have followed since I was 6.  I do not have any excitement at 2pm when the team news is announced as its always a disappointment.  Half the players turn up with the same attitude. 

In relation to people wanting him to remain, this is partly based on his reputation (if it was someone like Nathan Jones he would have been gone by now) and partly because of what they hope the future will be. There is no evidence to show that he will. It is possible that he will improve us in due course but it is more probable based on experience that somebody like Chris Hughton would.

The younger players are the positive but Knight, Sibley, Bogle and Lowe were all likely to be pushing to play this season.  After all, Lampard put Knight on the bench in the play-offs (very high pressured matches). In a way I am concerned that Sibley has not had more game time and it would frustrate the hell out of me if he decides on Monday to use one of Dowell, Paterson, Jozefzoon ahead of him.

 

You see, I agree with a lot of the sentiment here.

I don't think Hughton would be doing anything more though, and he hasn't got a history of bringing youth/academy players through - as that is high on the list of Morris' priorities it's probably a reason he wasn't considered for the job.

The backbone of his Brighton team was a strong, dominant defender (Lewis Dunk, Matt Clarke would fit) a strong, tough tackling midfield (Bielik would do, I'm not sure on the direct comparison at Brighton), a creative midfielder who can play centrally and wide (Knockaert vs Lawrence, I mean, come on) and a big centre forward who can score headers, is dominant in the air and a reasonable tidy player to boot (Glenn Murray vs Chris Martin - maybe prime Martin would suit him but even then he's not a player you can lump it forward to or a player who heads in set pieces)

Also like Cocu he sets his teams up to counter the style of the opposition, he's just got a lot more experience of that in this league than Cocu, hence why we brought in a Hughton protege (Rosenior, who's experience of coaching has been under Hughton) to try to help out. It's the reason his Brighton team (after a transfer window) was so effective, but it's why when they reached the Premier League their fans got fed up of his negative tactics - when everybody is a better team than you then your only option is to stop them playing, and you don't have the option to impose youselves on them.

Again though, Hughton isn't the right fit because he'd ignore the academy. You might be OK with thta as long as the first team performs, but that's not where we want to go as a club.

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, Coconut said:

Again though, Hughton isn't the right fit because he'd ignore the academy. You might be OK with thta as long as the first team performs, but that's not where we want to go as a club.

What if the Academy products aren't good enough? Where will we go as a Club? This constant re-iterating of we must bring through youth only works if there are youth good enough to compete. At the minute most of the youth competes for a spot at least on the bench because Cocu deems the squad not to be better.