Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Making Plans

To all those who said they'd give AN 10 games

Recommended Posts

As explained on another thread he''s been given a 10 game extension but he''ll probably be Neil Adams because that''s how the universe works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since playing those in form he''s flying, great to see the entire squad playing for a place again.

It was great to see Thompson and both Murphy''s on the pitch for game time......the future is there to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He''s doing ok. Noting more. Seems to have learnt a bit but to be honest we are still not playing well regularly and I put our league position down more to the fact we have very good players at this level rather than any managerial excellence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Credit where credit is due we are putting points on the board and the squad still looks as if it can improve. There is competion and the quality of the bench today was excellent. There will be bad days but even if we lose on Wednesday an average of 2 points a game has to be top end of expectations and the manager gets the flack when things go wrong he should be congratulated when results go well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s really difficult if the manager isn''t credited when his team''s top of the league. The alternative is to suggest he''s a puppet and give all the glory to Delia.....
(Or Ed Balls)[;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jim Smith"]He''s doing ok. Noting more. Seems to have learnt a bit but to be honest we are still not playing well regularly and I put our league position down more to the fact we have very good players at this level rather than any managerial excellence.[/quote]

Wow - ridiculous comment.

''Doing ok''? We''re top of the league, he literally couldn''t be doing any better position wise.

Your comment around our players completely ignores the fact that he has developed the Murphy''s and a few other youngsters and put faith in them (something another manager may not have done). Without Murphy''s goals this season we wouldn''t be in as good a position.

If you think our team will get us out of this league irrespective of the manager, you really are naive, we have no right to just expect we''ll be promoted, there are plenty of managers who have had good teams and failed. Really hope fans like yourselves stop waiting for a poor result as an opportunity to slate Neil. It''s really not constructive and actually just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
Really thought Jim was a balanced poster, but clearly not. Wonder if he thinks CL winning Benitez/Matteo have much managerial excellent and/or good players?

Seriously, anyone not giving Neil credit considering the development of our younger players, the strength of our squad, and the fact we''re top after nearly a quarter of the season should probably take a long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
hard look in the mirror and wonder if their prejudices are colouring their judgement and turning their posts into parody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He seems to truly grasp Championship football. And I will back him all the way and back him again in the PL if we get back. Every manager faces the ten game rule when things are not going well. It is not a hate thing. It is his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the last couple of decades the root cause of the underperformance has been the board. An exceptional manager (ie Lambert) managed to haul us up with some very canny buys in the transfer market, but this was his on his own initiative rather than working to a board-level strategy.My point is that if the board can get things right with things like transfer strategy (mainly age), giving the youth a chance and consistency of how we play, then we''d be less reliant on quality of manager. Alex Neil is not perfect in lots of ways, but he''s easily good enough for what we want to achieve.Those in the peanut gallery who (erroneously) think it''s all about the manager maybe ought to think a bit harder about what non-managerial factors contributed our long decline since Mike Walker was sacked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="93vintage"]For the last couple of decades the root cause of the underperformance has been the board. An exceptional manager (ie Lambert) managed to haul us up with some very canny buys in the transfer market, but this was his on his own initiative rather than working to a board-level strategy.My point is that if the board can get things right with things like transfer strategy (mainly age), giving the youth a chance and consistency of how we play, then we''d be less reliant on quality of manager. Alex Neil is not perfect in lots of ways, but he''s easily good enough for what we want to achieve.Those in the peanut gallery who (erroneously) think it''s all about the manager maybe ought to think a bit harder about what non-managerial factors contributed our long decline since Mike Walker was sacked.[/quote]

What is the boards transfer strategy and (assuming that you do know what it is and are not talking b*llocks) what is wrong with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Tbf, what fan in their right mind would think that a "perfect" manager, would a) end up at Norwich, and b) stick around to force a "dynasty"?

Alex Neil is a very honest, young manager, who is learning fast, and in my opinion shows maturity beyond his years. Not to mention that he''s already got us promoted once, and now has us sitting at the top of the league containing Champions League winning managers and hugely rich squads.

What more do people expect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like it''s an extension to the holiday period and prior to the window opening.

That''s fair, but even so I, as a fully paid up member of the happies, still harbour that sneaking fear that the wheels could come off at any time.

The boy''s done good so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately we live in an age where if things don''t go well for a team even for a short time, people get uppity about the manager.  Very little leeway is given to them.  It''s stupid and it''s everything that is wrong with football.  AN has earned the right to manage us and develop us for as long as he wants imo.  Coming in and dragging us back to the top of the league like he did in our promotion season, ok he is learning and made mistakes in the prem, but has us back at the top of the league again, having built a squad deeper in quality than imo we have ever seen. For the moment he has silenced the doubters. They''ll be back at the next blip or defeat........if there is one......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"AN has earned the right to manage us and develop us for as long as he wants imo."

What? I like AN but a good six months doesn''t give him unlimited rope and I really hope nobody in the board room thinks like this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93vintage wrote: "Those in the peanut gallery who (erroneously) think it''s all about the manager maybe ought to think a bit harder about what non-managerial factors contributed our long decline since Mike Walker was sacked."
Since Mike Walker was sacked? He wasn''t sacked, either in 1994 or 1998. In 1994 he walked out having been lured away by Everton, and in 1998 he resigned. 
Re. your post generally, when people talk about a club''s "decline" they tend to think only about decline on the pitch, ignoring altogether the importance of the supporting infrastructure. The pressure is always to assign all available funds to the playing staff whereas just as essential is to maintain the infrastructure necessary to ensure maximum effectiveness of your investment in players. Same applies when a club is relegated; there is constant complaining on here about poor recruitment and transfer dealings, player fitness, etc, etc, from people simultaneously demanding we pay huge sums for players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TCCANARY"]What is the boards transfer strategy and (assuming that you do know what it is and are not talking b*llocks) what is wrong with it?[/quote]I''ve said many times before that we''ve bought too many older players, particularly since Lambert left.As to the board''s transfer strategy, it seems to have been setting a budget, letting the football board decide who to buy, getting as much value as possible and not selling our best players. Since the Alex Neil became manager the football board seems to no longer exist, and he appears to decide on who to buy after consulting with scouts, coaches etc.We''ve gone from the traditional manager model to a football board model and back again, but seem to have missed both the age issue and the (related) fact that we''re not seeing enough coming back in terms of sales.The football board wasn''t a bad idea per se, originally it was

supposed to safeguard against a manager having too much power (ie Hughton). However

it was poorly implemented and we haven''t found the middle ground whereby

everyone is working to a sound board-led transfer strategy.I think our new Chief Exec might guide things more to my liking, perhaps pointing out to the manager the financial consequences of trying to buy too many finished articles, ie getting less back and having to spend more often to replace. Buying Oliveira instead of McCormack seems to me like a bullet dodged.Similar to other strategies such as consistency of playing style, general transfer strategy should be directed from the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="westcoastcanary"]Since Mike Walker was sacked? He wasn''t sacked, either in 1994 or 1998. In 1994 he walked out having been lured away by Everton, and in 1998 he resigned. [/quote]I was obviously referring to his second spell and I''m pretty sure he was sacked (you might be thinking of Rioch?).
[quote user="westcoastcanary"]Re. your post generally, when people talk about a club''s "decline" they tend to think only about decline on the pitch, ignoring altogether the importance of the supporting infrastructure. The pressure is always to assign all available funds to the playing staff whereas just as essential is to maintain the infrastructure necessary to ensure maximum effectiveness of your investment in players. Same applies when a club is relegated; there is constant complaining on here about poor recruitment and transfer dealings, player fitness, etc, etc, from people simultaneously demanding we pay huge sums for players.[/quote]I agree about the declining infrastructure, it has been a marker of our overall decline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="93vintage"][quote user="TCCANARY"]What is the boards transfer strategy and (assuming that you do know what it is and are not talking b*llocks) what is wrong with it?[/quote]I''ve said many times before that we''ve bought too many older players, particularly since Lambert left.As to the board''s transfer strategy, it seems to have been setting a budget, letting the football board decide who to buy, getting as much value as possible and not selling our best players. Since the Alex Neil became manager the football board seems to no longer exist, and he appears to decide on who to buy after consulting with scouts, coaches etc.We''ve gone from the traditional manager model to a football board model and back again, but seem to have missed both the age issue and the (related) fact that we''re not seeing enough coming back in terms of sales.[/quote]
But the football board have concentrated on youth quite a lot, and this season we''re starting to see the fruition of it. Category 1 status in the academy, FA Youth Cup win and made some money by selling the ''nearlys'' like McGeehan.
We''ve also got both Murphy''s in our first team, with Thompson starting to play more too. Most of our money in the last transfer window went on a young Alex Pritchard. Brady is still relatively young, Canos was another young player we''ve purchased. We''ve got other young prospects like McGrandles and Godfrey too.
If anything, we''re doing exactly what you think we should be doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Hoegsar

I''d agree we are now with the bringing through of younger players and signing players like Canos and Pritchard who have their best years ahead of them. However I''d agree with 93Vintage that up until this summer we haven''t.

Last season all our first team signings were at least 26 with the exception of Brady. The season before none of our first team signings were younger than 25. Any younger players over the last couple of seasons were immediately loaned out and the squad filled with ageing players that lacked much in the way of resale value.

It appears to me that the club has noticed this and is taking action to try and bring down the average age of our team. I''d expect this to continue in January with the likes of Naismith and Mulumbu moving on if we can find takers, with Maddison and Thompson preferred going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="93vintage"][quote user="TCCANARY"]What is the boards transfer strategy and (assuming that you do know what it is and are not talking b*llocks) what is wrong with it?[/quote]I''ve said many times before that we''ve bought too many older players, particularly since Lambert left.As to the board''s transfer strategy, it seems to have been setting a budget, letting the football board decide who to buy, getting as much value as possible and not selling our best players. Since the Alex Neil became manager the football board seems to no longer exist, and he appears to decide on who to buy after consulting with scouts, coaches etc.We''ve gone from the traditional manager model to a football board model and back again, but seem to have missed both the age issue and the (related) fact that we''re not seeing enough coming back in terms of sales.[/quote]
But the football board have concentrated on youth quite a lot, and this season we''re starting to see the fruition of it. Category 1 status in the academy, FA Youth Cup win and made some money by selling the ''nearlys'' like McGeehan.
We''ve also got both Murphy''s in our first team, with Thompson starting to play more too. Most of our money in the last transfer window went on a young Alex Pritchard. Brady is still relatively young, Canos was another young player we''ve purchased. We''ve got other young prospects like McGrandles and Godfrey too.
If anything, we''re doing exactly what you think we should be doing.
[/quote]During this period we''ve also bought in 4 players who are 29-30 years old. I beginning to believe that 93 Vintage has conjured up a vision of the club in his head that doesn''t exist, he''s also manufactured a ''board strategy'' and sacked poor old Mike Walker when he officially resigned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="king canary"]@Hoegsar

I''d agree we are now with the bringing through of younger players and signing players like Canos and Pritchard who have their best years ahead of them. However I''d agree with 93Vintage that up until this summer we haven''t.[/quote]
The problem is us with a limited budget in the Premier League makes it very difficult for us to spend most of our money on youngsters - typically you aim for players with Premier League experience as your best chance of staying up. 
I think the club have done it right. Last season may not have worked out but the intentions were correct - Brady was a good signing of course, but Klose and Naismith should also have been good signings.
But young players who are ready to play in a premier league relegation battle? They''re hard to find and when you do will generally cost a lot of money. With us going down it''s almost given us the opportunity to give youth a chance and decent experience ready for the Premier League.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Hoegsar

I would just like to have seen a bit more balance in our signings- not just for the team on the pitch but also our future off the pitch. Look at Redmond- sign him for £2m, sell him three years later for a profit of about £10m. Sign too many players in the 28-30 bracket and you''re going to struggle to sell them on for any real profit.

I agree younger players will generally cost more but a good scouting system that can pick up young players from across Europe will help the team and club grow. You only need to look at how well Southampton have done over the last few years to see the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×