So now we know

[canarydan23 4,060]

11 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

Posters can be Mr hindsight and claim we shouldve stuck with Farke

It's not really hindsight though, is it. Plenty were questioning his sacking at the time as well as Smith's appointment. This thread is evidence of that.

And Smith has an ok Championship record, 9th, 10th, 9th with Brentford (who would improve significantly soon after his departure) and a 5th with Aston Villa, who he overtook when they were 2 points behind Norwich with a more favoured and valuable squad and ended 18 points behind Norwich. Oh, and Aston Villa would improve significantly soon after his departure.

And for all his improvements, which have been fleeting and not consistent, he's still averaged a PPG that would see us firmly bottom of the EPL in the majority of seasons. Only a handful more than Farke managed two seasons ago but as we know, that was a squad that had £250,000 spent on it.

It'll be something we'll never get to find out, but I think Brentford away was a turning point that we missed the fruits. If Farke was given the Southampton and Wolves home games and the Newcastle away game (an abject performance) then I think he'd have matched or bettered Smith's scores and really built some momentum.

As it is, we're flailing around with odd starting elevens, not starting games until half time and losing to teams who simply cannot buy a win. And not just losing, being comprehensively outplayed by teams in dreadful form. Given the opportunity and context of the season, the recent Brentford and Leeds games were much more embarrassing than being annihilated by Chelsea and Man City.

Sacking Farke may have been right (I don't think it was personally).

Appointing Smith never was.

[sonyc 5,492]

36 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Sacking Farke may have been right (I don't think it was personally).

Appointing Smith never was.

What made me curious (or maybe I ought to say, sceptical) was that when Webber sacked Daniel, I assumed he had a plan. That he had one or two (even three) lined up. He seems to be the sort that claims his thinking is long term. Am I right in thinking I've read that from him?

Yet, he himself has stated that when he heard Dean S was available, he couldn't turn down the opportunity. So, that is either sheer luck on his part...or I'm beginning to think, it's Webber who moved away from his plan (which he must have  balanced all the risks beforehand. Well beforehand). Knee jerk you might say?

I'm not a Dean Smith hater etc but Daniel Farke was far more suited to our strategy (build, be patient, develop youth, develop the infrastructure, pay your way and fund sustainably). Some posters agree with that. I can only assume Dean S has bought into that. Reading his comments since he arrived, I think that's correct. Yet, it feels an awkward fit.

The Bodo Glimt fella was possibly not a runner at the time. But if we were going to change the manager then he would have fitted the bill, given his background and his apparent football philosophy. We might even have waited until he was free. The timing was strange.

Dean Smith is an odd one, given that he has been round the houses a bit with an experienced Shakespeare as main coach.

I hope Smith is given a chance next season. I dislike lots of changes at the top. Given the Championship is odds on (96% chance of relegation before the Leeds match) for us, it may well be that we have to have a season for re-adjustment - like Farke had in his first season.

But....I can't get over very easily my view that Farke was our Wenger. He had an ideology, an identity, he was part of the Norwich way if you like. There was something uniting about him and an eternal vision. You don't get this often. And when we were lucky when we did, Webber jettisoned. I get that we (I mean our club) needed to do something after such a poor start. But we have potentially lost something greater.

It's a metaphor for modern football and the money game, instant success. Webber's decision (let's say it was a full board decision) was very 'Premier League'. A league I want us always to aspire to, to get towards, to be able to compete in. Yet, it's a league that I also hate with a passion. It certainly isn't anything much to do with competition, with sport itself. It's mainly to do with money. That's the bottom line.

Edited March 14, 2022 by sonyc

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

57 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

It's not really hindsight though, is it. Plenty were questioning his sacking at the time as well as Smith's appointment. This thread is evidence of that.

And Smith has an ok Championship record, 9th, 10th, 9th with Brentford (who would improve significantly soon after his departure) and a 5th with Aston Villa, who he overtook when they were 2 points behind Norwich with a more favoured and valuable squad and ended 18 points behind Norwich. Oh, and Aston Villa would improve significantly soon after his departure.

And for all his improvements, which have been fleeting and not consistent, he's still averaged a PPG that would see us firmly bottom of the EPL in the majority of seasons. Only a handful more than Farke managed two seasons ago but as we know, that was a squad that had £250,000 spent on it.

It'll be something we'll never get to find out, but I think Brentford away was a turning point that we missed the fruits. If Farke was given the Southampton and Wolves home games and the Newcastle away game (an abject performance) then I think he'd have matched or bettered Smith's scores and really built some momentum.

As it is, we're flailing around with odd starting elevens, not starting games until half time and losing to teams who simply cannot buy a win. And not just losing, being comprehensively outplayed by teams in dreadful form. Given the opportunity and context of the season, the recent Brentford and Leeds games were much more embarrassing than being annihilated by Chelsea and Man City.

Sacking Farke may have been right (I don't think it was personally).

Appointing Smith never was.

Wow thats harsh on Smith. Have you looked into his history or are you choosing to just try and paint as negative a picture as possible? As with Farke and many other managers/teams, some context is often required rather than just sweeping generalised statements.

He laid the foundations for Brentford to become the 'darlings' they are today. He instilled their attractive passing style, and he did it on a tight budget. Much like Farke with Norwich or Frank at Brentford (but minus Buendia, Pukki, Mbuemo or Toney) he played lovely football and had success. This goes against those arguing about poor football we play now. NO, he is trying to get the best out of an extremely limited squad. He gets better football out of better squads. Wait and see what happens next season for proof.

He took over Villa when they were 14th. They were virtually in the play offs when Grealish got injured for a couple of months. Before anyone says you shouldn't rely on one player....Imagine losing Emi for that period of time? And remember we were apparently completely useless without him and never won a game. So surely credit to Smith for not letting them drop completely out of the picture until his return when they then stormed up the league - and deservedly won the play offs.

He brings through youth, he plays to the strengths he has rather than naively, stubbornly and foolishly try and play one way. Has a track record of improving talent and is known as a well respected and liked leader.

Hes far from perfect and he really didnt need to take on the challenge of us. But we got the best option at the time in my opinion and a fantastic leader for the best chance at another immediate return to the PL.

Edited March 14, 2022 by Fiery Zac

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

30 minutes ago, sonyc said:

I'm not a Dean Smith hater etc but Daniel Farke was far more suited to our strategy (build, be patient, develop youth, develop the infrastructure, pay your way and fund sustainably). Some posters agree with that. I can only assume Dean S has bought into that. Reading his comments since he arrived, I think that's correct. Yet, it feels an awkward fit.

Thats literally what Smith was doing at Brentford.

 

30 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Knee jerk you might say?

I agree it was odd if he didnt have a plan, but thats a damning verdict on just how bad things were at the time. We were far more of an embarrasment then than we are now - which again speaks volumes. A change had to happen and Webber gambled that even with no clear frontrunner at time of sacking, someone would be available and be appointed who we would be a better option than Farke.

I have no evidence at all but for such an un-webber like decision to be made by him, the issues must have been more than just results and performances. Issues with his leadership, lost the dressing room etc. Something else was going on. Farke was his man. To sack him, without a definite succession plan, shows major problems within the squad.

Edited March 14, 2022 by Fiery Zac

[canarydan23 4,060]

44 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

Wow thats harsh on Smith. Have you looked into his history or are you choosing to just try and paint as negative a picture as possible? As with Farke and many other managers/teams, some context is often required rather than just sweeping generalised statements.

He laid the foundations for Brentford to become the 'darlings' they are today. He instilled their attractive passing style, and he did it on a tight budget. Much like Farke with Norwich or Frank at Brentford (but minus Buendia, Pukki, Mbuemo or Toney) he played lovely football and had success. This goes against those arguing about poor football we play now. NO, he is trying to get the best out of an extremely limited squad. He gets better football out of better squads. Wait and see what happens next season for proof.

He took over Villa when they were 14th. They were virtually in the play offs when Grealish got injured for a couple of months. Before anyone says you shouldn't rely on one player....Imagine losing Emi for that period of time? And remember we were apparently completely useless without him and never won a game. So surely credit to Smith for not letting them drop completely out of the picture until his return when they then stormed up the league - and deservedly won the play offs.

He brings through youth, he plays to the strengths he has rather than naively, stubbornly and foolishly try and play one way. Has a track record of improving talent and is known as a well respected and liked leader.

Hes far from perfect and he really didnt need to take on the challenge of us. But we got the best option at the time in my opinion and a fantastic leader for another immediate return to the PL.

Am I being harsh? Or are you being a bit kind? He did nothing better than a good job at Brentford. Remember, they were the team that lost out to Middlesbrough for the right to get taken to town by us at Wembley that season having finished 5th the season before Dean Smith took over. It's a bit of a stretch to say he laid the foundations, credit for that should go to Mark Warburton or even Uwe Rosler. 

And there squad was ridiculous for that level. Despite the injury, Jack Grealish still played in 35 league games, which you might want to note was 1 more league game than Emi Buendia played in for us that season. Without him, Smith had to make do with the likes of Yannik Bolasie, El Ghazi, Kodjia and Tammy Abrahams. Dean Smith was the last person in that league who could complain about availble resources, particularly when it was widely reported they were almost certainly in breach of FFP rules and would have been in major trouble had they not won the playoffs. 

So no, I don't particularly give an enormous amount of credit for Dean Smith stopping the wheels coming off in Grealish's absence, particularly in a comparison with Farke who was actually without his star man for one more game than Smith was without his, and still massively outscored him by 18 points despite a massive disparity in wage budgets in Smith's favour.

He failed to get Brentford into the playoffs, something which they managed the season before Smith's appointment and something his successor managed, and was comprehensively outperformed by Farke in his Championship season with Aston Villa despite a comparative embarrassment of riches (and wage budget).

None of this is conjecture or opinion and it's worrying typing it. We are in a proper pickle and there is little evidence to suggest Smith can get us out of it.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

I would hope Dean Smith gets the same time to build a team as Daniel Farke had.... that first season..

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

5 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Am I being harsh? Or are you being a bit kind? He did nothing better than a good job at Brentford. Remember, they were the team that lost out to Middlesbrough for the right to get taken to town by us at Wembley that season having finished 5th the season before Dean Smith took over. It's a bit of a stretch to say he laid the foundations, credit for that should go to Mark Warburton or even Uwe Rosler. 

And there squad was ridiculous for that level. Despite the injury, Jack Grealish still played in 35 league games, which you might want to note was 1 more league game than Emi Buendia played in for us that season. Without him, Smith had to make do with the likes of Yannik Bolasie, El Ghazi, Kodjia and Tammy Abrahams. Dean Smith was the last person in that league who could complain about availble resources, particularly when it was widely reported they were almost certainly in breach of FFP rules and would have been in major trouble had they not won the playoffs. 

So no, I don't particularly give an enormous amount of credit for Dean Smith stopping the wheels coming off in Grealish's absence, particularly in a comparison with Farke who was actually without his star man for one more game than Smith was without his, and still massively outscored him by 18 points despite a massive disparity in wage budgets in Smith's favour.

He failed to get Brentford into the playoffs, something which they managed the season before Smith's appointment and something his successor managed, and was comprehensively outperformed by Farke in his Championship season with Aston Villa despite a comparative embarrassment of riches (and wage budget).

None of this is conjecture or opinion and it's worrying typing it. We are in a proper pickle and there is little evidence to suggest Smith can get us out of it.

Smith went in and got them promoted, dont care how 'ridiculous' the squad was, that same season, after Bruce football. Farke needed a season of overhaul before achieving that. Im not downplaying Farkes achivement, it was incredible. But credit where its due, Smith handled the expectation and egos very well indeed.

I stand by my comments about Brentford. Rosler - haha.

16 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Jack Grealish still played in 35 league games

No he didn't. He played in 31.

 

24 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

you might want to note was 1 more league game than Emi Buendia played in for us that season

No, Emi played in 37 league games for us that season.

 

28 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

comprehensively outperformed by Farke in his Championship season

Really? Smith lost 7 in his time that season, one of which being against us on the last day where Smith rotated to prepare for the play offs. Farke lost 6. Yes more games for Farke but hardly 'comprehensively outperformed' is it - particularly without his star man for 6 games less than Farke was without his.

Remember, as so many like to, we didnt win without Emi. So 6 more draws or losses and Farkes record vs Smiths doesnt look quite so comprehensive does it.

He had to turn around a hugely disappointing Bruce side that sat 14th, under a lot of expectation due to players wages and quality in relatively short period of time. To do that, without Grealish for part of it, is very impressive imo. And yes very harsh of you to think so poorly of Smiths past, and just comes across as reactionary to our current predicament.

38 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

None of this is conjecture or opinion

Yes it was

 

39 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

We are in a proper pickle and there is little evidence to suggest Smith can get us out of it.

Yes we are, but there is plenty of evidence, overwhelmingly straightforward evidence. Just seems youve already made up your mind.

I could be wrong and it could be a disaster next season. But im simply pointing out he has a good track record and is a good appointment for us, particularly when in the championship. I like to be positive, and theres plenty in Smiths past to make me feel good about our future.

[canarydan23 4,060]

I stand corrected on the stats, I was including playoffs and cup games for Grealish. But Emi started 34 and came on in three matches. All of Grealish's were starts and he was rarely substituted off. In terms of minutes on the pitch, I suspect they have pretty similar totals.

2 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

Really? Smith lost 7 in his time that season, one of which being against us on the last day where Smith rotated to prepare for the play offs. Farke lost 6. Yes more games for Farke but hardly 'comprehensively outperformed' is it - particularly without his star man for 6 games less than Farke was without his.

I don't really know what to do with this. Smith lost 7 in 34, Farke lost 6 in 46. That is a pretty comprehensive outperforming. And as we know, it's points that count, and Farke only had 2 more than Smith when he joined Aston Villa. By the end of the season he had 18 more points than Smith. That, again, is a pretty comprehensive outperforming, there's no other way to spin that.

And I'm not sure what your issue is with Rosler's Brentford record, he turned them from a mid-table League One team to 3rd in League One and left them well-placed to be promoted, which they eventually were that season under Warburton. In terms of where Brentford were at the start of his tenure and to where they were when he left, he had a better record than Dean Smith.

Dean Smith's Championship record is no better than good. In fact, Steve Bruce had a better win % in the previous season when Villa came 4th than Smith managed in his 34 games in charge.

Edited March 14, 2022 by canarydan23

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

 

35 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Farke only had 2 more than Smith when he joined

And a whole season to integrate his way of playing and get his team together.

EDIT: I didnt make enough of this.... Farke had a whole season and the start of that one with his squad. Smith had about 10 days until his first game. The point you make is strenuous at best.

 

You dont rate Smith that highly, thats up to you.

One things for certain, hes got a team promoted from the championship during his 'good' record. I'd take that.

Shame so many others would rather simply get rid because hes inherited a group of poor PL standard players, had a covid and injury ravaged xmas (where other teams didnt as they simply postponed their games) and we're not now playing the Farke way that got overrun week after week (and season after season) in the PL. He more than deserves the chance that Farke got and get his opportunity to show what he can do with his own team and ideas. No? After all, Farkes first season was incredibly poor - should we have sacked him after his first season? After all he had more games than Smith has had now to prove his worth.

Edited March 14, 2022 by Fiery Zac

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

 

And a whole season to integrate his way of playing and get his team together.

 

You dont rate Smith that highly, thats up to you.

One things for certain, hes got a team promoted from the championship during his 'good' record. I'd take that.

Shame so many others would rather simply get rid because hes inherited a group of poor PL standard players, had a covid and injury ravaged xmas (where other teams didnt as they simply postponed their games) and we're not now playing the Farke way that got overrun week after week (and season after season) in the PL. He more than deserves the chance that Farke got and get his opportunity to show what he can do with his own team and ideas. No? After all, Farkes first season was incredibly poor - shoukd we have sacked him after his first season? After all he had more games than Smith has had now to prove his worth.

Hasn't Smith admitted it was an error playing those games? Other teams managed to get games postponed or shifted but he made the decision to battle through and must accept the consequences for that poor managerial decision.

He arguably does deserve a chance, but I don't really care what an individual at the club deserves, I care about what is best for the club and, despite the fact that it's a corrupt, cheat-ridden establishment that can no longer feasibly call itself a sport, being in the EPL is what's best for the club. And I've seen nothing to suggest that Smith has much hope of getting us back.

On the plus side, every club that Dean Smith has departed, whether through choice or being sacked, has gone on to do very well soon after he left. Walsall ended up finishing 3rd after Smith left after several mid-table finishes in previous Smith seasons (though they were admittedly 4th when he left for Brentford). We all know what happened to Brentford after Smith left and we're all witnessing Aston Villa's meteoric rise after giving Smith the old heave-ho. There is a pattern there, and we could benefit from it.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

Ok, agree to disagree. When the argument is reduced to we should get rid of him and then we'll have success because his previous clubs have (arguably), i give up. Yes, it had nothing to do with money or his development of the club, changes that were built upon that helped them improve (or signing world class players like Coutinho - i wonder who we'll get when Smith leaves). No he was useless and getting rid will automatically mean we get promoted again. Sigh.

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

Ok, agree to disagree. When the argument is reduced to we should get rid of him and then we'll have success because his previous clubs have (arguably), i give up. Yes, it had nothing to do with money or his development of the club, changes that were built upon that helped them improve (or signing world class players like Coutinho - i wonder who we'll get when Smith leaves). No he was useless and getting rid will automatically mean we get promoted again. Sigh.

I've never said useless. I said "good" several times. I don't think "good" will be enough, nor do I think a manager with 1 promotion in 7 attempts in the football league is a good bet for what many are suggesting is a season in which we simply have to get promoted straight back. Nor do I think a manager in charge of a squad that had £100-150 million spent on it should be needing a technology failure to help his side stay in the Premier League by a whisper. And whilst it is an improvement on Farke's 11 games (of which over a quarter were against the country's best three sides) this season, a points per game total of 0.66 this season is pretty dreadful, regardless of the state of the squad. And never being in a must-win relegation clash against a woefully out of form team is a pretty dreadful thing to happen once, but twice in eight days?

I have not seen anything from Smith either here or in his previous roles to suggest he'll do the job we need him to do next season. It was a stupid appointment and demonstrably a failed one if we're to believe what we're told (that it was an appointment made to keep us up). I'd love to be wrong, but under Smith I think we'll finish anywhere between 5th (which would equal his Championship PB) and 12th, whereas we have the potential to challenge for top two with the right man at the helm.

[canarybubbles 1,915]

Wow, this thread shows how divided we are on the issue on Smith. I'm in the camp that says he's mediocre and we'll finish mid-table next season at best, but I understand the arguments of those who say he'll have us at or near the top next season.

He's here to stay, though. If we lost every single game that's left, we wouldn't sack him.

[shefcanary 2,388]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

Hasn't Smith admitted it was an error playing those games? Other teams managed to get games postponed or shifted but he made the decision to battle through and must accept the consequences for that poor managerial decision.

I think this is why Smith was so angry with the Hanley position.  Having played the good guy over that period before Xmas, for the EPL to turn around and rule Hanley out even though asymptomatic must have brought it home to Smith how much he has been played (and potentially that he is now stuck at "lil' ole Norwich", the club "not wanted by the EPL").  

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

2 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

 

And a whole season to integrate his way of playing and get his team together.

EDIT: I didnt make enough of this.... Farke had a whole season and the start of that one with his squad. Smith had about 10 days until his first game. The point you make is strenuous at best.

 

You dont rate Smith that highly, thats up to you.

One things for certain, hes got a team promoted from the championship during his 'good' record. I'd take that.

Shame so many others would rather simply get rid because hes inherited a group of poor PL standard players, had a covid and injury ravaged xmas (where other teams didnt as they simply postponed their games) and we're not now playing the Farke way that got overrun week after week (and season after season) in the PL. He more than deserves the chance that Farke got and get his opportunity to show what he can do with his own team and ideas. No? After all, Farkes first season was incredibly poor - should we have sacked him after his first season? After all he had more games than Smith has had now to prove his worth.

So you don't think Deano, when interviewed, didn't say that he could turn things around and was going to change our style and new background staff will help etc? Of course he did.

Otherwise, if he had been given a free pass then there would have been no need to sack DF who has certainly won things better than the EFL Trophy.

Of course he will be here next season but I sense that many who felt we could bounce straight back with DF don't feel the same way with Deano. Admittedly he has players of apparent less ability but he doesn't seem to be generating much belief in even with additions, of turning this around so that next season we dominate once again.

He did spend a lot of money in his first full season and arguably Douglas Luiz is the only real success whereas ones like Wesley were probably complete disasters.

Of course he might not have been responsible for their signings as he probably will not at Norwich.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Get rid of Webber, offer Farke the DoF job. 

[OnDaBall 137]

5 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Get rid of Webber, offer Farke the DoF job. 

Didn't Farke say that Tzolis had the potential to be one of the best wingers in the world?

Maybe we need someone with better judgement as DoF.

[Clint 221]

This is not saying we should have kept Farke or we should sack Smith but I am very concerned about our inability under Smith to start playing until halftime.

This is a point I have raised before but the only match I can recall where we were even remotely good first half was Everton. A few other matches we’ve been ok at best but the rest we’ve been an absolute shambles until half time. 
 

Why is this? 

[Van wink 2,994]

8 hours ago, sonyc said:

What made me curious (or maybe I ought to say, sceptical) was that when Webber sacked Daniel, I assumed he had a plan. That he had one or two (even three) lined up. He seems to be the sort that claims his thinking is long term. Am I right in thinking I've read that from him?

Yet, he himself has stated that when he heard Dean S was available, he couldn't turn down the opportunity. So, that is either sheer luck on his part...or I'm beginning to think, it's Webber who moved away from his plan (which he must have  balanced all the risks beforehand. Well beforehand). Knee jerk you might say?

I'm not a Dean Smith hater etc but Daniel Farke was far more suited to our strategy (build, be patient, develop youth, develop the infrastructure, pay your way and fund sustainably). Some posters agree with that. I can only assume Dean S has bought into that. Reading his comments since he arrived, I think that's correct. Yet, it feels an awkward fit.

The Bodo Glimt fella was possibly not a runner at the time. But if we were going to change the manager then he would have fitted the bill, given his background and his apparent football philosophy. We might even have waited until he was free. The timing was strange.

Dean Smith is an odd one, given that he has been round the houses a bit with an experienced Shakespeare as main coach.

I hope Smith is given a chance next season. I dislike lots of changes at the top. Given the Championship is odds on (96% chance of relegation before the Leeds match) for us, it may well be that we have to have a season for re-adjustment - like Farke had in his first season.

But....I can't get over very easily my view that Farke was our Wenger. He had an ideology, an identity, he was part of the Norwich way if you like. There was something uniting about him and an eternal vision. You don't get this often. And when we were lucky when we did, Webber jettisoned. I get that we (I mean our club) needed to do something after such a poor start. But we have potentially lost something greater.

It's a metaphor for modern football and the money game, instant success. Webber's decision (let's say it was a full board decision) was very 'Premier League'. A league I want us always to aspire to, to get towards, to be able to compete in. Yet, it's a league that I also hate with a passion. It certainly isn't anything much to do with competition, with sport itself. It's mainly to do with money. That's the bottom line.

Good post sonyc, indeed Farke did have an identity that fitted perfectly with City and the project/ philosophy we had been told we had embarked upon. We played some terrific football under him which as a fan  was great to watch. Also seeing young promising pros being given a chance and seeing their development as players was a joy and an integral part of our modern identity. For me he was really hard done by and it was the wrong decision to get rid of him, a knee jerk reaction rather than a strategic move. Whether we would have gained more points in the EPL under him, rather that Smith, we will never know but if we do go down we will be in a far worse place without him at the start of next season. This is not about disliking Smith, far from it, it’s about the decision we made.

[Van wink 2,994]

I think we do know now!

[lake district canary 4,531]

On 14/03/2022 at 11:21, sonyc said:

What made me curious (or maybe I ought to say, sceptical) was that when Webber sacked Daniel, I assumed he had a plan. That he had one or two (even three) lined up. He seems to be the sort that claims his thinking is long term. Am I right in thinking I've read that from him?

Yet, he himself has stated that when he heard Dean S was available, he couldn't turn down the opportunity. So, that is either sheer luck on his part...or I'm beginning to think, it's Webber who moved away from his plan (which he must have  balanced all the risks beforehand. Well beforehand). Knee jerk you might say?

I'm not a Dean Smith hater etc but Daniel Farke was far more suited to our strategy (build, be patient, develop youth, develop the infrastructure, pay your way and fund sustainably). Some posters agree with that. I can only assume Dean S has bought into that. Reading his comments since he arrived, I think that's correct. Yet, it feels an awkward fit.

The Bodo Glimt fella was possibly not a runner at the time. But if we were going to change the manager then he would have fitted the bill, given his background and his apparent football philosophy. We might even have waited until he was free. The timing was strange.

Dean Smith is an odd one, given that he has been round the houses a bit with an experienced Shakespeare as main coach.

I hope Smith is given a chance next season. I dislike lots of changes at the top. Given the Championship is odds on (96% chance of relegation before the Leeds match) for us, it may well be that we have to have a season for re-adjustment - like Farke had in his first season.

But....I can't get over very easily my view that Farke was our Wenger. He had an ideology, an identity, he was part of the Norwich way if you like. There was something uniting about him and an eternal vision. You don't get this often. And when we were lucky when we did, Webber jettisoned. I get that we (I mean our club) needed to do something after such a poor start. But we have potentially lost something greater.

It's a metaphor for modern football and the money game, instant success. Webber's decision (let's say it was a full board decision) was very 'Premier League'. A league I want us always to aspire to, to get towards, to be able to compete in. Yet, it's a league that I also hate with a passion. It certainly isn't anything much to do with competition, with sport itself. It's mainly to do with money. That's the bottom line.

Only just seen this, but sums it up perfectly for me.

[ged in the onion bag 854]

On 14/03/2022 at 11:21, sonyc said:

What made me curious (or maybe I ought to say, sceptical) was that when Webber sacked Daniel, I assumed he had a plan. That he had one or two (even three) lined up. He seems to be the sort that claims his thinking is long term. Am I right in thinking I've read that from him?

Yet, he himself has stated that when he heard Dean S was available, he couldn't turn down the opportunity. So, that is either sheer luck on his part...or I'm beginning to think, it's Webber who moved away from his plan (which he must have  balanced all the risks beforehand. Well beforehand). Knee jerk you might say?

I'm not a Dean Smith hater etc but Daniel Farke was far more suited to our strategy (build, be patient, develop youth, develop the infrastructure, pay your way and fund sustainably). Some posters agree with that. I can only assume Dean S has bought into that. Reading his comments since he arrived, I think that's correct. Yet, it feels an awkward fit.

The Bodo Glimt fella was possibly not a runner at the time. But if we were going to change the manager then he would have fitted the bill, given his background and his apparent football philosophy. We might even have waited until he was free. The timing was strange.

Dean Smith is an odd one, given that he has been round the houses a bit with an experienced Shakespeare as main coach.

I hope Smith is given a chance next season. I dislike lots of changes at the top. Given the Championship is odds on (96% chance of relegation before the Leeds match) for us, it may well be that we have to have a season for re-adjustment - like Farke had in his first season.

But....I can't get over very easily my view that Farke was our Wenger. He had an ideology, an identity, he was part of the Norwich way if you like. There was something uniting about him and an eternal vision. You don't get this often. And when we were lucky when we did, Webber jettisoned. I get that we (I mean our club) needed to do something after such a poor start. But we have potentially lost something greater.

It's a metaphor for modern football and the money game, instant success. Webber's decision (let's say it was a full board decision) was very 'Premier League'. A league I want us always to aspire to, to get towards, to be able to compete in. Yet, it's a league that I also hate with a passion. It certainly isn't anything much to do with competition, with sport itself. It's mainly to do with money. That's the bottom line.

Well said, pretty accurate observations here, such a shame things couldn’t click into place as we needed.    Timing is everything… promoted too soon first time, possibly too late the second with us losing the best players…….His flaw was still evident though, just like we have players that couldn’t step up to the EPL level, Farke was exposed too.   He had a whole first EPL season to identify which games to sacrifice our approach in favour of pragmatism but he just couldn’t force himself to compromise when we really needed it…. Our first 4 fixtures demanded that the bus was parked so did Chelsea away, yet he continued cavalier, we got ripped to pieces, lost all confidence and with it any will to compete.

Like you, think Farke may be better suited, but he was undone by his own stubbornness?   Wenger was obstinate too, I recall.   Interesting how quickly the identity and soul has been lost and whilst Smith deserves the time, I do fear he will be desperate for promotion rather than a patience with development approach and consequently we won’t be ready to step up again!   They don’t seem to be learning lessons.
 

 

 

[ricardo 7,347]

On 14/03/2022 at 11:21, sonyc said:

 

But....I can't get over very easily my view that Farke was our Wenger. He had an ideology, an identity, he was part of the Norwich way if you like. There was something uniting about him and an eternal vision. You don't get this often. And when we were lucky when we did, Webber jettisoned. I get that we (I mean our club) needed to do something after such a poor start. But we have potentially lost something greater.

This. 👍

[Jim Smith 2,314]

Jury is still out for me on Smith and I feel like thats probably the case with many of our fans. Its so difficult to form a view because our performances have been so inconsistent really. There was a clear, initial improvement in my view, particularly in relation to our work off the ball which i always felt was a problem at this level under Farke. But then ever since that little run was ended and we got a couple of injuries the performances have been all over the place. We've played really well in patches, often when losing games against tough(ish) opponants but then we've also been desperately disappointing in a few games against rivals I would have expected much better in. I've seen him make some tactical switches during games that have clearly worked but there's been a couple of awful team selections and also some subs that have taken our momentum away. Its been a real mixed bag.

I guess ultimately when you have defenders and midfielders who make the sort of errors ours are prone to making then its going to undermine a lot of what you do.

He seems a good guy and very happy to give him a season with a squad that is more his own next season. I worry though that a section of our fans have not quite taken to him and at the sort of reaction that might lead to if we don't go well in the first part of next season. 

[Nuff Said 5,089]

2 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

Jury is still out for me on Smith and I feel like thats probably the case with many of our fans. Its so difficult to form a view because our performances have been so inconsistent really. There was a clear, initial improvement in my view, particularly in relation to our work off the ball which i always felt was a problem at this level under Farke. But then ever since that little run was ended and we got a couple of injuries the performances have been all over the place. We've played really well in patches, often when losing games against tough(ish) opponants but then we've also been desperately disappointing in a few games against rivals I would have expected much better in. I've seen him make some tactical switches during games that have clearly worked but there's been a couple of awful team selections and also some subs that have taken our momentum away. Its been a real mixed bag.

I guess ultimately when you have defenders and midfielders who make the sort of errors ours are prone to making then its going to undermine a lot of what you do.

He seems a good guy and very happy to give him a season with a squad that is more his own next season. I worry though that a section of our fans have not quite taken to him and at the sort of reaction that might lead to if we don't go well in the first part of next season. 

 

[Van wink 2,994]

Could anyone explain to me how sacking Farke after a win away at our relegation rivals and appointing Dean Smith,  fits in with a strategy to move the club forward and how it fitted with our well publicised and agreed development plan?

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

On 14/03/2022 at 16:15, Fiery Zac said:

Shame so many others would rather simply get rid because hes inherited a group of poor PL standard players, had a covid and injury ravaged xmas (where other teams didnt as they simply postponed their games) 

These seem to be rather similar to the points people make about Farke (poor recruitment, no pre-season) that you referred to as excuses in another thread.

To be clear, Im ambivalent about Smith. I thought sacking Farke was the wrong decision the moment I heard about it and I havent changed my mind.

Nevertheless the change was made and it IS too early to judge Smith. I can comment that I think sacking Farke was a mistake, and that Smith wasnt, in my opinion an upgrade, indeed he has a lot to even match before we can talk about him being better - most notably he has to bring players through (seems to be trying to bring Rowe on), but his first major challenge is turning a losing team back into a winning one - which Farke did with aplomb. 

Smith has to win the league in the way Farke did post relegation (no small achievement) to even be considered on a par with Farke, let alone an improvement.

Imagine he did that, then got given 11 games of the Premier League season before being sacked. In the away dressing room. After a win.

Would be a pretty sh*tty way to treat him wouldnt it?

Edited May 1, 2022 by The Great Mass Debater

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

2 hours ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

These seem to be rather similar to the points people make about Farke (poor recruitment, no pre-season) that you referred to as excuses in another thread.

To be clear, Im ambivalent about Smith. I thought sacking Farke was the wrong decision the moment I heard about it and I havent changed my mind.

Nevertheless the change was made and it IS too early to judge Smith. I can comment that I think sacking Farke was a mistake, and that Smith wasnt, in my opinion an upgrade, indeed he has a lot to even match before we can talk about him being better - most notably he has to bring players through (seems to be trying to bring Rowe on), but his first major challenge is turning a losing team back into a winning one - which Farke did with aplomb. 

Smith has to win the league in the way Farke did post relegation (no small achievement) to even be considered on a par with Farke, let alone an improvement.

Imagine he did that, then got given 11 games of the Premier League season before being sacked. In the away dressing room. After a win.

Would be a pretty sh*tty way to treat him wouldnt it?

You say the first PL season under Farke is irrelevant in the other thread. I disagree. It was a big reason Farke got 'only' 11 games this time. He continued to show his limitations in the PL. Had we shown potential when changing system then I would've argued he deserved more time but there was nothing. We were going backwards.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

16 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

You say the first PL season under Farke is irrelevant in the other thread. I disagree. It was a big reason Farke got 'only' 11 games this time. He continued to show his limitations in the PL. Had we shown potential when changing system then I would've argued he deserved more time but there was nothing. We were going backwards.

 

Oh I do understand that Farke was sacked because of his Premier League record as a whole. The point Im arguing is that is unfair. Even Webber himself stated he sent Farke to war without a gun. For me, that makes that season a write off. He did his best trying to play his brand with his championship team and a bunch of frees. We proved that in this day and age that cannot work.

So fast forward a year, another championship title for Farke, proving the unexpected Championship title two years earlier wasnt a flook and in my opinion only goes to cement Daniels credentials as a proper manager and not a chancer from Dortmund's reserves.

He enters this season more established, realising early on Farkeball needs to change. This time he's been told he's got a gun, some grenades and a bazooka (though still no tank).

Though it turns out the guns have no ammo and jam in the sand - as failure under a different manager has only gone to prove. But rather than admit our recruitment was rubbish and back the manager that had given us so much, Farke is made the scapegoat.

Baby, bathwater, the lot of it. All tossed out. And I dont think it was worth it, for Smith.

Edited May 1, 2022 by The Great Mass Debater

[Van wink 2,994]

8 hours ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

 

Oh I do understand that Farke was sacked because of his Premier League record as a whole. The point Im arguing is that is unfair. Even Webber himself stated he sent Farke to war without a gun. For me, that makes that season a write off. He did his best trying to play his brand with his championship team and a bunch of frees. We proved that in this day and age that cannot work.

So fast forward a year, another championship title for Farke, proving the unexpected Championship title two years earlier wasnt a flook and in my opinion only goes to cement Daniels credentials as a proper manager and not a chancer from Dortmund's reserves.

He enters this season more established, realising early on Farkeball needs to change. This time he's been told he's got a gun, some grenades and a bazooka (though still no tank).

Though it turns out the guns have no ammo and jam in the sand - as failure under a different manager has only gone to prove. But rather than admit our recruitment was rubbish and back the manager that had given us so much, Farke is made the scapegoat.

Baby, bathwater, the lot of it. All tossed out. And I dont think it was worth it, for Smith.

Yes indeed, and as the title says, “now we know” 👍