Tom glick on the train to palace!!!

[DerbyBoy7]

Lets just remember he is just the media face of it all and its not his money hes just the one that has to take all the ****

[RamNut]

Interesting that he said to you Fielding situation was an oversight. How come Clough said on Radio Derby, they knew about it? :confused:

...because he didn't want to look like a mug who hadn't done his homework.

.skysports.com/10/08/218x298/NigelCloughDerby201011_2486021

[The Ram]

...because he didn't want to look like a mug who hadn't done his homework.

.skysports.com/10/08/218x298/NigelCloughDerby201011_2486021

Interesting if true, would mean he lied on Radio when asked, not sure I like that (if true) he's gone down in my opinion. :frown:

[WilkoRam]

I'm not sure how many fans feel they have superior knowledge of how to manage a football club. I think they rather have an opinion on if Nigel is doing a good job or not based on what they see. Surely there's no difference between this and your standpoint of GSE not investing and making more cutbacks. Do you have superior knowledge on how to run a football club? Or how you think the PM is doing, a police officer is doing, a TV interviewer, an actor, film maker, etc.

People won't agree on everything. Some think the blame is all GSE, some that it's all Nigel, some that it's a mixture and others actually don't see any problem. I fall into category 3 and I think it's a category that is growing. A lot of people were fully behind Nigel and saw the issue as all GSE but the more time that has gone on the more question marks have risen against Nigel's suitability for the role. Nothing to do with anyone sitting behind a computer thinking "I'd get us promoted" because they've played too much FM.

Re the thread. Glick seems like a good person and has been left to be the face of GSE to Derby fans. Not an enviable task under the circumstances as he'll get the brunt of any fallout towards the board.

[Alph]

I'm not sure how many fans feel they have superior knowledge of how to manage a football club. I think they rather have an opinion on if Nigel is doing a good job or not based on what they see. Surely there's no difference between this and your standpoint of GSE not investing and making more cutbacks. Do you have superior knowledge on how to run a football club? Or how you think the PM is doing, a police officer is doing, a TV interviewer, an actor, film maker, etc.

People won't agree on everything. Some think the blame is all GSE, some that it's all Nigel, some that it's a mixture and others actually don't see any problem. I fall into category 3 and I think it's a category that is growing. A lot of people were fully behind Nigel and saw the issue as all GSE but the more time that has gone on the more question marks have risen against Nigel's suitability for the role. Nothing to do with anyone sitting behind a computer thinking "I'd get us promoted" because they've played too much FM.

Re the thread. Glick seems like a good person and has been left to be the face of GSE to Derby fans. Not an enviable task under the circumstances as he'll get the brunt of any fallout towards the board.

Good post.

[Duracell]

Duracell, if he didn't we'd be down already. By this comment do I take it that you're another fan who knows more about football management than the people who do it for a living?

Let's not turn this into another Clough doesn't know what he's doing thread, eh.

I'm not saying I know more about football management than Clough. What he did at Burton Albion was outstanding. What he did with his first two seasons with us was ok.

I was just challenging your notion that you can't expect Clough to do anything with the tools he has, or we can't criticise him for what he does with the resources he has, however limited they may be.

[The Ram]

I'm not sure how many fans feel they have superior knowledge of how to manage a football club. I think they rather have an opinion on if Nigel is doing a good job or not based on what they see. Surely there's no difference between this and your standpoint of GSE not investing and making more cutbacks. Do you have superior knowledge on how to run a football club? Or how you think the PM is doing, a police officer is doing, a TV interviewer, an actor, film maker, etc.

People won't agree on everything. Some think the blame is all GSE, some that it's all Nigel, some that it's a mixture and others actually don't see any problem. I fall into category 3 and I think it's a category that is growing. A lot of people were fully behind Nigel and saw the issue as all GSE but the more time that has gone on the more question marks have risen against Nigel's suitability for the role. Nothing to do with anyone sitting behind a computer thinking "I'd get us promoted" because they've played too much FM.

Re the thread. Glick seems like a good person and has been left to be the face of GSE to Derby fans. Not an enviable task under the circumstances as he'll get the brunt of any fallout towards the board.

This is where I have a problem with anyone at the helm of my club DCFC. :frown: They are paid handsomely to do a job and for me Glick is not worth the £500,000 per year he gets.

Fans often go OTT about how difficult it is. Utter ********! What would be more difficult is doing my job on £15,000 per year :mad:

[PeteDerby]

...because he didn't want to look like a mug who hadn't done his homework.

.skysports.com/10/08/218x298/NigelCloughDerby201011_2486021

What was Uttox Ram saying about Clough haters grabbing any stick to beat him with....?

Managers don't do the deals any more bud, that one's squarely in TG's court.

I did think the 'yeah we know about that' comment weird, but dismissed it as a). not wanting to show Glick up or b). playing on words meaning we knew about that before Gibbo brought it up.

Either way, it's TG's department.

[PeteDerby]

I'm not saying I know more about football management than Clough. What he did at Burton Albion was outstanding. What he did with his first two seasons with us was ok.

I was just challenging your notion that you can't expect Clough to do anything with the tools he has, or we can't criticise him for what he does with the resources he has, however limited they may be.

He has done something - keep us up!

You seem to forget that when he arrived, under Jewell we were looking pretty certain for the drop.

Since then, we had a season where more than half the team were sidelined and he kept us up.

This year we've lost our only goalscorers and creator in chief - and he (looks like) he's kept us up.

Despite raising more than he's spent and cutting the wage bill down by 50%, he's managed to stop us being as **** as we were when we had another £8million on the wage bill.

Personally, I call that 'doing something with the resources he has'.

[Duracell]

He has done something - keep us up!

You seem to forget that when he arrived, under Jewell we were looking pretty certain for the drop.

Since then, we had a season where more than half the team were sidelined and he kept us up.

This year we've lost our only goalscorers and creator in chief - and he (looks like) he's kept us up.

Despite raising more than he's spent and cutting the wage bill down by 50%, he's managed to stop us being as **** as we were when we had another £8million on the wage bill.

Personally, I call that 'doing something with the resources he has'.

Not quite sure where you're coming from in arguing like this with me, I largely agree with you! :confused:

The reason why I said "ok", stopping short of good, is how sour it's beginning to become. He got us to fourth in this league. This season. We were absolutely sublime. Ok, we had one or two different faces in that side, but within months we were in the worst run out of all 92 league teams. I find it staggering how we lost it. Whether it's Clough's fault or not, that wasn't down to investment. Something was/is wrong. Clough seems to know its there and describes it as a confidence issue, which I agree with. My concern about his managerial abilities is that he can identify a problem very well but not the solution. Why do we continue to concede in the last fifteen minutes of games? Why do good players sign for us and become crap? Why do we hit last-ditch defend mode when we score away from home despite the tactic reaping very few rewards?

It's those two questions that challenge the success of the Clough regime. Lee Croft, Tomasz Cywka, Ben Davies, Steven Bywater - a few once decent players who don't look like good players playing poorly, they just plain look like players out of their depth. I am, of course, talking as a relative football illiterate, but all the same, the signs look worrying. And even though I don't know much about football, I understand that in any job, you have to learn. I'm not convinced Clough is learning many lessons because we keep having to go over the same issues time and time again; and yet the man seems to intelligent in interviews.

[PeteDerby]

This season. We were absolutely sublime. Ok, we had one or two different faces in that side, but within months we were in the worst run out of all 92 league teams. I find it staggering how we lost it. Whether it's Clough's fault or not, that wasn't down to investment. .

Whack! (as Clough senior was prone to say). Stop right there son beause this really is a key point. Of COURSE it was down to the investment issue.

1. the loan players went back. If we'd had perm signings they couldn't have done. The fact we were (are!) reliant on loans is because of the lack of funds for decent, experienced perm signings.

2. The perm signings have largely promising youngsters, not experienced pros at this level. It is widely recognised that 'kids' let their heads drop when the going gets tough - which is exactly what happened when Fielding, Kuqi, Moore and then Commons went.

If we'd had the budget to sign enought established championship players, so we weren't over-reliant on 'kids', then we'd have seen a different outcome.

So, you see, all the big issues boil down to a lack of investment in enough quality talent.

[Bris Vegas]

Whack! (as Clough senior was prone to say). Stop right there son beause this really is a key point. Of COURSE it was down to the investment issue.

1. the loan players went back. If we'd had perm signings they couldn't have done. The fact we were (are!) reliant on loans is because of the lack of funds for decent, experienced perm signings.

2. The perm signings have largely promising youngsters, not experienced pros at this level. It is widely recognised that 'kids' let their heads drop when the going gets tough - which is exactly what happened when Fielding, Kuqi, Moore and then Commons went.

If we'd had the budget to sign enought established championship players, so we weren't over-reliant on 'kids', then we'd have seen a different outcome.

So, you see, all the big issues boil down to a lack of investment in enough quality talent.

Can you at least admit that when we had Kuqi at CF instead of Moore, Brayford at RB, Green at AM, a front 3 of Bueno, Commons and Green, Fielding in goal and Moxey at left back we were actually looking pretty good?

Can you at least admit NC made one of the biggest errors of his managerial career at DCFC breaking up all the promosing partnerships we ever had?

Can you at least admit that NC doesn't have a backbone and instead of sticking to the good football that brought us our best results in the past 3 years or so he's gone back to hoofball/survival football that gets you nowhere but a lower midtable ie 17th or below finish?

Or let me guess, all that was the boards fault? Clough was a genius to get this side to 4th, but when he made all the mistakes, the board are at fault...

[G STAR RAM]

Whack! (as Clough senior was prone to say). Stop right there son beause this really is a key point. Of COURSE it was down to the investment issue.

1. the loan players went back. If we'd had perm signings they couldn't have done. The fact we were (are!) reliant on loans is because of the lack of funds for decent, experienced perm signings.

2. The perm signings have largely promising youngsters, not experienced pros at this level. It is widely recognised that 'kids' let their heads drop when the going gets tough - which is exactly what happened when Fielding, Kuqi, Moore and then Commons went.

If we'd had the budget to sign enought established championship players, so we weren't over-reliant on 'kids', then we'd have seen a different outcome.

So, you see, all the big issues boil down to a lack of investment in enough quality talent.

I'm not sure where the blame lies on this one. If the management team know that the budget for signings is relatively low then they have to make sure that their scouts and network of contacts are identifying feasible targets. NC states that he knows that we need 6 proven Championship quality players yet how many of these were we linked with in the last transfer window?

And please don't tell me proven Championship quality players are not available to the manager with the budget that he appears to have had in the January transfer window.

[newtonram]

Whack! (as Clough senior was prone to say). Stop right there son beause this really is a key point. Of COURSE it was down to the investment issue.

1. the loan players went back. If we'd had perm signings they couldn't have done. The fact we were (are!) reliant on loans is because of the lack of funds for decent, experienced perm signings.

2. The perm signings have largely promising youngsters, not experienced pros at this level. It is widely recognised that 'kids' let their heads drop when the going gets tough - which is exactly what happened when Fielding, Kuqi, Moore and then Commons went.

If we'd had the budget to sign enought established championship players, so we weren't over-reliant on 'kids', then we'd have seen a different outcome.

So, you see, all the big issues boil down to a lack of investment in enough quality talent.

I know Tom Glick reasonably well and overall I would say he is a genuine guy - and by the way I am by no means a board supporter.

By his own admission TG would admit he (and the board) have made mistakes but my view of him is that he is pretty switched on and a quick learner. The Fielding issue was an 'oversight' - whether the blame lies at NC's door or the Club Secretary is irrelevant, it was an administration error by the Club.

However, personally I would not put all of the blame for the club's consistently poor performances down just to a lack of investment. What I have also witnessed at most matches over the past 2 1/4 years is a lack of coaching, tactics, poor subsitutions, and general bad management.

It was Clough's decision to bring Savage back from the reserves and make him captain, it was also his decision to extend his contract. It was Clough's decision to sell Hulse and Moxey and not offer Commons a new contract last season, when he would probably have signed it. It is Clough's decision to loan Varney out to Blackpool

It was Clough's decision to buy, Croft, Moxey, Porter, Martin, Roberts, Anderson, Davies, Buxton, Pringle.

It is Clough's decison to pay a significant loan fee for Bueno and not play him very often. It has been Clough's decison to loan Ward and Robinson with permanent deals agreed for next season.

In my opinion he has had sufficient backing in the transfer market to make a far greater impression in the Championship than he has to date.

Not everything is the fault of the Board Pete...

And finally, ask TG what he thinks of the people Clough has surrounded himself with? Again, Clough's decision and he should stand or fall by his decisions.

[PeteDerby]

Can you at least admit that when we had Kuqi at CF instead of Moore, Brayford at RB, Green at AM, a front 3 of Bueno, Commons and Green, Fielding in goal and Moxey at left back we were actually looking pretty good?

Can you at least admit NC made one of the biggest errors of his managerial career at DCFC breaking up all the promosing partnerships we ever had?

Can you at least admit that NC doesn't have a backbone and instead of sticking to the good football that brought us our best results in the past 3 years or so he's gone back to hoofball/survival football that gets you nowhere but a lower midtable ie 17th or below finish?

Or let me guess, all that was the boards fault? Clough was a genius to get this side to 4th, but when he made all the mistakes, the board are at fault...

Your memory probably isn't very good, Bris, because I was one of the loudest critics of Clough at dropping Kuqi in favour of Moore and leaving out Savage at Leicester. A mate of mine at Leicester said that they couldn't believe their luck when they saw the team sheet and I said as much on here.

Even then I'll concede that I don't know the real reasons why he did that. Sure, it could have been bad judgement, or it could just as easily have been Kuqi's £15K per week wage demands which totally ruled him out of being any sort of long-term solution, therefore there was no point in carrying on with him.

If we'd had the budget to properly replace Hulse as our main striker, then we wouldn't be having this debate.

Managers make mistakes every week and at every level. I doubt you're advocating sacking the manager every time he gets a selection wrong, so do some thinking on that point.

As for the rest, well, we don't know the circumstances behind each and every change. We don't watch them in training and aren't party to the team talks about the main threats of the opposition.

I've heard fans slagging off Barker this season and trying to put that down to Clough's lack of tactical nouse or man-management ability, when all along it's down to him carrying an injury all season.

I'm not sure what you mean about 'not having a backbone'? If you mean a spine to the team, then I refer you to an inability to sign Fielding, an inability to sign a centre forward, then injuries / loss of form of players capable of partnering Barker in defence. It's looked a lot stronger since the lad from Liverpool came in.

If you're talking about Clough as a person not having a backbone, then you clearly you know nothing about the man.

[PeteDerby]

And please don't tell me proven Championship quality players are not available to the manager with the budget that he appears to have had in the January transfer window.

Are you having a laugh? Do you put your fingers in your ears when the manager and assistant manager are being quizzed on radio about spending decent money on proven players?

[PeteDerby]

However, personally I would not put all of the blame for the club's consistently poor performances down just to a lack of investment. .

Nobody is suggesting it is, but I have yet to work with any kind of business where they was not a direct line between the quality of talent and performance.

I'll repeat again that I've always felt Clough's Achillies Heel was his backroom team. therfore was mightly relieved to see Metgod come in.

As for the purchases, well, I'd have taken Croft any day of the week for a starter. There are thousands of cases in football since I started watching in the late 60's of clubs bringing in players that don't work out. It happens.

As for the quality of the purchases in general, if your budget means you're having to grub aorund in the bargain basement, then you're more likely to get faulty goods than a gem that somehow every other club has overlooked.

I remember being distraught when Clough senior sold Willie Carlin - thought he was absolutely mad. We're too far removed to understand the bigger picture.

Varney is on a fortune and isn't that good. If you're job description says half the wage budget, what are you going to do? Keep him to shut a few fans up?

Porter? Given the choice between, say, him, Hooper or Nugent, I would put my house on Clough making Porter 3rd on the list. But you make the most out of the money you've got at your disposal. £600K for a player with a good fitness and goal record isn't a bad gamble. Due to injury though it looks like his career is over. Clough's bad judgement or just bad luck?

I could go on but what's the point? It's all been debated time and time again. The root cause is lack of cash to sign the players that can perform to the level that will meet with GSE's stated ambitions for the club; hence fans' expectations.

Everything else is just opinions on tactics, based on everyones own paradigms. As the saying goes, though, the map is not the territory!

[Day]

I could go on but what's the point? It's all been debated time and time again. The root cause is lack of cash to sign the players that can perform to the level that will meet with GSE's stated ambitions for the club; hence fans' expectations.

I don't see any link between board and fans expectation at all. The boards expectations for this season was to finish higher than last season with a mid table finish, whilst the fans seem to expect alot more than that, we're Derby County and we should be in the Premiership apparently.

It's ok saying the root cause is a lack of cash but:

1) We don't know what Clough exactly has to play with

2) Clough likes his English based players, is he expecting too much money

3) Is the scouting network up to scratch, are we looking in the right places for players, for example abroad maybe?

Blackpool, they got to the Premiership with spending very little. Norwich City currently in 2nd, how much have they spent this season?..not alot is the answer, so what's the difference...the manager?

http://www.skysports.com/football/transfers/0,20367,11687_11709_201103,00.html

If the cash isn't there the loan system is, are we making the most of that when you look at the players other Championship clubs have been loaning in. I'm not talking about Leicester and Yakubu but the likes of Lansbury at Norwich, Keogh at Bristol City, Mattock at Sheff Utd and so on...

[SillyBilly]

Kuqi and Clough fell out.

[Duracell]

Whack! (as Clough senior was prone to say). Stop right there son beause this really is a key point. Of COURSE it was down to the investment issue.

1. the loan players went back. If we'd had perm signings they couldn't have done. The fact we were (are!) reliant on loans is because of the lack of funds for decent, experienced perm signings.

2. The perm signings have largely promising youngsters, not experienced pros at this level. It is widely recognised that 'kids' let their heads drop when the going gets tough - which is exactly what happened when Fielding, Kuqi, Moore and then Commons went.

If we'd had the budget to sign enought established championship players, so we weren't over-reliant on 'kids', then we'd have seen a different outcome.

So, you see, all the big issues boil down to a lack of investment in enough quality talent.

I know PeteDerby, I've been watching football long enough now not to be told the affects of losing losing loan signings.

But that doesn't equate to 2 wins in 20 after one of the best runs we've had this side of millenium. That doesn't explain the difference. Something else went on.

Every football league club has to cope with losing significant players going back to their parent club. But do they all face a run of 2 wins in 20?