Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 2:42:59 GMT
No, I disagree. We're not where we are because we've had a string of poor managers since administration. We're where we are because the club has never truly gotten back in its feet since that day, and you can never hope to have a good team on the pitch if you're in such a black hole off it... We shouldn't forget that Jim struggled in his second spell, just like all the others. We were in the relegation zone when he left. We could get Pep Guardiola in and it wouldn't change a thing. Do not base Gannon on his second spell .....many negative things were going on by Snapr towards Gannon which made his job near impossible. Snape wanted Jim to resign rather than to be sacked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 9:10:20 GMT
So it looks like we have got two camps. The 'anyone but Gannon but I can't come up with an alternative' camp. That'll be the group snape founded. And the 'Gannon because there isn't anyone close to doing what he did the second time he was here (never mind the first) apart from Lord' camp. That's because apart from Gannon we've only had one other manager who looks like he won't get us relegated in the last eight years. None of snapes anti Gannon brigade can come up with even a moderately successful manager 'at this level' that's available. I knew nobody could name someone who would accept a job offer from McKnob but the Gannon naysayers are a determined bunch but they failed miserably as expected. As things stand it's Gannon or Lord or nobody. If you are in snapes anybody but Gannon camp then I think you need to go and have a word with yourself because that is the sort of attitude that got us where we are now, isn't it? and likewise, the pro-Gannon camp are unwilling to accept that their hero did a mediocre job second time around, and all this 'he is the greatest ever' gets rather annoying, given the on pitch performances / falling out with a whole squad he led last season. As York Hatter has said, and I alluded to earlier, the problems are at board level, not at managerial level, but Jim isn't the answer to our problems, much as you would like to think.
|
|
|
Post by heatonhatter on Dec 8, 2013 10:00:59 GMT
So it looks like we have got two camps. The 'anyone but Gannon but I can't come up with an alternative' camp. That'll be the group snape founded. And the 'Gannon because there isn't anyone close to doing what he did the second time he was here (never mind the first) apart from Lord' camp. That's because apart from Gannon we've only had one other manager who looks like he won't get us relegated in the last eight years. None of snapes anti Gannon brigade can come up with even a moderately successful manager 'at this level' that's available. I knew nobody could name someone who would accept a job offer from McKnob but the Gannon naysayers are a determined bunch but they failed miserably as expected. As things stand it's Gannon or Lord or nobody. If you are in snapes anybody but Gannon camp then I think you need to go and have a word with yourself because that is the sort of attitude that got us where we are now, isn't it? For a start, saying that anyone who doesn't think the sun shines out of Jim Gannon's back-side is in "Snape's camp" makes you sound like a WUM. Are you? Because it's obviously bollocks just designed to wind people up. You keep banging on about Gannon being a success in his 2nd stint here. Personally, I don't regard bottom four of the BSP as a success. And if you insist on putting people into a "camp", then how about the "stick with Alan Lord" camp that you've conveniently forgotten about in your ill thought-out rant? Many people just want stability back at this club, to give us a chance of building a successful team. I didn't want Gannon sacked, but he was and we should move on. We have a manager who's improved the team since he came in. Let's see where he can take us, rather than continually getting all misty-eyed over Jim Gannon, shall we?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 10:20:45 GMT
As things stand it's Gannon or Lord or nobody. If you are in snapes anybody but Gannon camp then I think you need to go and have a word with yourself because that is the sort of attitude that got us where we are now, isn't it? No, I disagree. We're not where we are because we've had a string of poor managers since administration. We're where we are because the club has never truly gotten back in its feet since that day, and you can never hope to have a good team on the pitch if you're in such a black hole off it... We shouldn't forget that Jim struggled in his second spell, just like all the others. We were in the relegation zone when he left. We could get Pep Guardiola in and it wouldn't change a thing. of course Jim struggled, not surprising when the players wage budget was £773,916 in 2011-12 season and it was revised down to 450,000 in 2012/13 season and further cuts were enforced
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 10:28:22 GMT
So it looks like we have got two camps. The 'anyone but Gannon but I can't come up with an alternative' camp. That'll be the group snape founded. And the 'Gannon because there isn't anyone close to doing what he did the second time he was here (never mind the first) apart from Lord' camp. That's because apart from Gannon we've only had one other manager who looks like he won't get us relegated in the last eight years. None of snapes anti Gannon brigade can come up with even a moderately successful manager 'at this level' that's available. I knew nobody could name someone who would accept a job offer from McKnob but the Gannon naysayers are a determined bunch but they failed miserably as expected. As things stand it's Gannon or Lord or nobody. If you are in snapes anybody but Gannon camp then I think you need to go and have a word with yourself because that is the sort of attitude that got us where we are now, isn't it? and likewise, the pro-Gannon camp are unwilling to accept that their hero did a mediocre job second time around, and all this 'he is the greatest ever' gets rather annoying, given the on pitch performances / falling out with a whole squad he led last season. As York Hatter has said, and I alluded to earlier, the problems are at board level, not at managerial level, but Jim isn't the answer to our problems, much as you would like to think. you'd do a mediocre job if you had no support from your chairman and kept having your playing budget cut. Forget all the bollox that Snape fed about its his team he has had the money. No he didn't he got no backing and publicly denigrated
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 10:44:14 GMT
The WUMs are the anybody but Gannon, walking around with their fingers in their ears making silly nar nar noises when asked for a viable alternative. The only suggestion so far is Lowe who looks to me like another one hit wonder who only gets the nod over Bogie because he's local.
As for comparing his first and second spell well there isn't much in it. The first season he saved us from relegation and the second season after 25 games we had around 30 points, although the first time we were much further behind the eventual champions.
Statistically not much in it at the same point in each spell, mediocre both times, the crucial difference was far far less backing from the people that mattered.
What does 'wind me up' though is people claiming so and so isn't the answer and then not coming up with an option. It's like sitting down in an exam and just writing down 'the answer to question one isn't 42' and then doing the same through the paper and expect the examiner to take you seriously.
I'm in the 'Gannon AND Lord (and Ward if at all possible) but if you can come up with a sensible alternative it might work out but it hasn't so far has it' camp so if that's not sticking with Lordy it is pretty close.
|
|
|
Post by Reddish Hatter on Dec 8, 2013 10:55:20 GMT
I don't think it needs changing at the minute. Changing manager won't change anything.
I imagine that most people on here don't know of many managers to suggest. Maybe someone like Heathcote who did well at Altrincham?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 10:55:52 GMT
and likewise, the pro-Gannon camp are unwilling to accept that their hero did a mediocre job second time around, and all this 'he is the greatest ever' gets rather annoying, given the on pitch performances / falling out with a whole squad he led last season. As York Hatter has said, and I alluded to earlier, the problems are at board level, not at managerial level, but Jim isn't the answer to our problems, much as you would like to think. you'd do a mediocre job if you had no support from your chairman and kept having your playing budget cut. Forget all the bollox that Snape fed about its his team he has had the money. No he didn't he got no backing and publicly denigrated so why did he also do a mediocre job at Motherwell and a terrible job at Port Vale after leaving us? Not coincidentally, the major problem in both of those places was him falling out with half the team, and then the board, just as it was here second time around. We need stability right now, and Jim's managerial career has always been marked by falling out with people. @fred As you keep insisting on names, as well as Lowe, Jim Harvey / Graham Heathcote would be two others out of work right now I'd have above JG at present.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 11:05:05 GMT
I've no idea what's going on behind the scenes but it 'feels' like something is going on and something is going to change, maybe the demo on the 21st has caused a stir a bit like the meeting in the Cheadle End did a couple of years ago.
It might all come to nothing though, we will have to wait and see.
I think you are right, none of us know much about this level of football, I don't that's for sure. At least Heathcote is another option but, as has been pointed out, we've already got Lordy who is doing a decent job. Decent on the basis that he might well become only the second manager to save us from relegation in the last five years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 11:06:21 GMT
you'd do a mediocre job if you had no support from your chairman and kept having your playing budget cut. Forget all the bollox that Snape fed about its his team he has had the money. No he didn't he got no backing and publicly denigrated so why did he also do a mediocre job at Motherwell and a terrible job at Port Vale after leaving us? Not coincidentally, the major problem in both of those places was him falling out with half the team, and then the board, just as it was here second time around. We need stability right now, and Jim's managerial career has always been marked by falling out with people. @fred As you keep insisting on names, as well as Lowe, Jim Harvey / Graham Heathcote would be two others out of work right now I'd have above JG at present. Peterborough seemed to get on OK with him and wanted him to stay. As for falling out with the board second time round, he never fell in with them. Snape did not want him. Easy for lazy players to fall out with a strict manager who won't take any pissing about. Yes he upsets people
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 11:23:49 GMT
It's not a case of insisting on anything except to try and be positive and constructive.
I could now do what the Gannon naysayers do and just say 'no not Heathcote' and 'no not Harvey' they are not what we need, we don't need them, no no no they are not what we a re looking for no.
Do you see what I mean it doesn't really bring anything to debate does it?
Three names now if there is going to be 'change' and let's face it if there is a 'change' then it would be a surprise if we don't get a new manager, look what happened to Mathias.
There has been a bit of debate about Lowe and it's not really floating my boat, let's hear what H and H have to offer. I know their names but don't really know what they've achieved.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 12:43:48 GMT
No, I disagree. We're not where we are because we've had a string of poor managers since administration. We're where we are because the club has never truly gotten back in its feet since that day, and you can never hope to have a good team on the pitch if you're in such a black hole off it... We shouldn't forget that Jim struggled in his second spell, just like all the others. We were in the relegation zone when he left. We could get Pep Guardiola in and it wouldn't change a thing. of course Jim struggled, not surprising when the players wage budget was £773,916 in 2011-12 season and it was revised down to 450,000 in 2012/13 season and further cuts were enforced So your saying Gannon struggled because of a reduced playing budget? Well no point bringing him back again as he will struggle as if he came back now his playing budget won't be anywhere near £450,000. As you say yourself Gannon needs a big playing budget to be succesful...the club hasn't, and won't have one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 12:50:31 GMT
No I am saying he struggled because he had to reduce the playing budget and kept getting told to reduce it further. He had no support from the boardroom plus look at what he inherited.
you assume there will be no playing budget, all I will say is lets se what happens before we jump to allsorts of hypothetical conclusions
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 12:51:24 GMT
There has been a bit of debate about Lowe and it's not really floating my boat, let's hear what H and H have to offer. I know their names but don't really know what they've achieved. So Gannon is your choice not because you think he's the best possible man availible, but because of you own admission of ignorance?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2013 12:55:08 GMT
No I am saying he struggled because he had to reduce the playing budget and kept getting told to reduce it further. He had no support from the boardroom plus look at what he inherited. you assume there will be no playing budget, all I will say is lets se what happens before we jump to allsorts of hypothetical conclusions Look what he inherited? Yep he spent a load of money paying off players he couldn't get on with and brought a new lot in. The lot he would inherit now are clearly sub standard money will be needed to replace this lot. Where's the money going to come from?
|
|