The One Good Thing From Roeder's Legacy

[Matt Morriss 69]

I hated the man for a) robbing us of watching Hucks in his twilight and b) of falling out of love with NCFC.But if there''s one thing from the Roeder legacy, perhaps the only good thing he has done, its the players he has brought in.I have been so impressed with Clingan, i think he is without doubt the best player we have signed since Huckerby. Hoolahan is a great signing, his goal v Saints was the best NCFC ''high'' ive experienced since the 2-1 home win over Newcastle in the prem, or the Boro 4-4, whichever was last that season. And finally Carl Cort.Everyone laughed when we signed him and even Roeder said it was a gamble. And even a few days ago when i posted that Cort is looking like he might make an impact in the last couple of months, the next post was the typical ''you dont know what your talking about''.Well i know what i saw when we played Charlton in the cup, and i know my football. Cort being the only positive to come of the game, and last night proved what i thought. Lets hope he can stay fit.As much as i hated Roeder he did one thing very well, the players he brought in.

[The Horse 0]

I have to agree with that. Whilst previous managers signings have been heavily questioned I don''t think anyone can doubt the quality Roeder brought in with such limited funds.

[John 0]

Totally agree.In that respect Roeder was probably the most astute manager we''ve ever had in my opinion. Bringing in Hoolahan and Bell (i know he''s gone, but despite putting in a few below par performances, there''s no doubt he has talent in bundles, and bringing him in could of potentially been a master stroke if things went well) was a display of unexpected brilliance in my opinion. Clingan on a free cannot be questioned as one of the best pieces of bussines we''ve made in over a decade. And players like Stefanovic, Pattison, and Cort we''re smart moves, and all still have a lot more to offer us.In terms of Glenn Roeder''s transfer dealings, they were of absolute brilliance if you ask me.Just a shame he couldn''t do anything else well.....

[Mook 0]

Add to that Pattison (who''s limited but an excellent squad member) and Stefanovic (incredibly unlucky with his injury).

[missing in action? 0]

well if you look at glenn and grantthey both made good signingsgrant: marshall, and a few others who have suddenly excaped my mind!!!and glenn got in clingan, patty, stefo, who are all class.

[O.T.B.C 1]

GR stuck with Croft and improved his fitness.

Also, he kept us up, surely thats the biggest legacy he left behind [:D]?

Agree with Clingfilm, Stevo and Hoola plus we saw some good players on loan like Ched and Lita who impressed us.

[John Boubepo 0]

For me the main legacy was the board finally realised employing a total @hole doesn''t work, this has resulted in them employing not just a manager but a whole management team with the character to actually manage - bonus! thank you Mr Roeder, sometimes being the biggest @hole in the world has it''s dividends, well not for you but for the rest of us it clearly does!

[Branston Pickle 4,152]

For me, Roeder would be ideal as a chief scout or Academy manager or something, where he has to look out for talent rather than necessarily dealing with the players direct.  I''m sure we''ve all heard enough stories about him being a bit of a tosser, but he can see a decent signing: getting Taylor and Patty in straight away helped us big-time last season, then Clingan, Hoolahan, Dejan and Bell were all good signings, and most of the loans were decent enough (Troy and Koroma apart).

[JJ 0]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]For me, Roeder would be ideal as a chief scout or Academy manager or something, where he has to look out for talent rather than necessarily dealing with the players direct.  I''m sure we''ve all heard enough stories about him being a bit of a tosser, but he can see a decent signing: getting Taylor and Patty in straight away helped us big-time last season, then Clingan, Hoolahan, Dejan and Bell were all good signings, and most of the loans were decent enough (Troy and Koroma apart).[/quote]

Have heard it more than once from Newcastle fans that they preferred him when he had a youth team role rather than as manager.

 

[Camuldonum 0]

His approach didn''t work with your particular group of players and if you look around you''ll see rather a lot of managers currently out of work whose approach didn''t work either....some of which you hoped would be the Norwich choice.

[;)]

[John Boubepo 0]

Can''t despute he brought some good players in but he brought a total of 22 player to CR, I would guess for every good player there were 2 possibly 3 bad ones, add to that the few good players he brought in didn''t ever play for him and you have a pretty naff manager, that''s before you take his arrogance, poor man-management skills and lack of tactical knowledge into account

[IRN-BRU 0]

Don''t underestimate Lee Clarks influence on the signings. From what I heard Clingan came in on his recommendation.

[Branston Pickle 4,152]

I think that is a rather bad exaggeration to suggest Roeder''s record was that poor.  No manager has a perfect record, and I wouldn''t for one minute suggest that Roeder''s was, but all his permanent signings were/are good, as were most of his loans.  This is how I would categorise his signings:

Good: Taylor, Pattison, Kennedy, Dejan, Clingan, Lita, Hoolahan, Bertrand, Cort (if y''day anything to go by), Evans,

Undecided: Nelson (never been used), Omozusi (played well sometimes, badly sometimes), Bates (not enough of a chance), Grounds (jury out, but Gunn is still playing him), Gibbs (came good towards the end but wasn''t a good start, hence in the "undecideds"),

Bad: Troy, Koroma (though he got injured so not really given a chance), Sib (carrying an injury a lot of the time, but looked pants), Lupoli (he is in this category because he should have either been used more or not brought here - surely Roeder knew what sort of player he was.  He didn''t seem to, hence it was a bad signing in my book)

That''s all I can remember off the top of my head, but that is 19 and it definitely not a bad record. 

IMO it wasn''t the signings that were the problem, more that he seemed to be an arrogant so and so, didn''t get the players to play well often enough, riled supporters (and it seems several ex-players), seemed to hold grudges/treated some players badly (eg Lappin), let Hucks go in a poor way, and so on.

[plan b 0]

i dont know why but this post reminds of a scene from ''the life of brian''"what did the romans ever do for us?"

[Branston Pickle 4,152]

See what you mean....though we''re only really arguing about one particular element of his tenure - I think we are all agreed that the rest of it was pretty crap in the end.   IMO Roeder did improve the squad he inherited, yet was incapable of making them play well enough - but everyone is entitled to their view.

[Paul Argent 0]

Saved us from being in L1 by replacing PG. Huckerby should still had another 12 Months, even as a sub.

[Clever Farke 75]

We had the dream team all along, they just had to swap jobs. Roeder head of recruitment and Gunny manager.

[TheCardinal 0]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

See what you mean....though we''re only really arguing about one particular element of his tenure - I think we are all agreed that the rest of it was pretty crap in the end.   IMO Roeder did improve the squad he inherited, yet was incapable of making them play well enough - but everyone is entitled to their view.

[/quote]Totally right. [Y] Since Worthington left, we''ve had a manager who couldn''t pick a decent player if he was standing next to Lionel Messi but could motivate and get a team working hard and a manager who could pluck a top talent from obscurity but couldn''t get him to play for love no money.If you could combine the two - and I will affectionatly call this fictional being Peten Roeant - you''d have a top manager! 

[venta icenorum 0]

[quote user="TheMarshmallowMonkey"][quote user="Branston Pickle"]

See what you mean....though we''re only really arguing about one particular element of his tenure - I think we are all agreed that the rest of it was pretty crap in the end.   IMO Roeder did improve the squad he inherited, yet was incapable of making them play well enough - but everyone is entitled to their view.

[/quote]

Totally right. [Y]

Since Worthington left, we''ve had a manager who couldn''t pick a decent player if he was standing next to Lionel Messi but could motivate and get a team working hard and a manager who could pluck a top talent from obscurity but couldn''t get him to play for love no money.

If you could combine the two - and I will affectionatly call this fictional being Peten Roeant - you''d have a top manager! 
[/quote]

I don''t think in the end there was much difference between Roeder and Grant. Grant made some good signings too - Russell and Marshall spring to mind,although he also brought in far more very average players. Grant still had much of Worthy''s team left as well including a central midfield of Safri and Etuhu. Having dismantled that partnership he lost the plot, and we began to see, for instance, Spillane and Rossi Jarvis in the same midfield etc etc. In the end it was also his public criticism of players and his impatience (with Safri for instance) that made him unpopular with fans and players and cost him his job.

Roeder, despite initially saying in the press that he would never publicly single out players for criticism, went on to do exactly that, countless times. He made all the same mistakes as Grant, almost like history repeating itself, and we found ourselves at the wrong end of the table again. Roeder seems to have brought more talented players in - the permanent signings of Clingan and Hoolahan were good moves, and Stefanovic could still work out well once his injury recovers. Only four of his players played last night against Wolves though, Bertrand, Grounds, Clingan and Cort. There were also three that Worthy had brought in - Doc, Drury and Croft, and four of Grant''s signings- Marshall, Semmy, Russell and Cureton. So we still rely heavily on certain dependable players who were here before Roeder''s ''tenure'' (we all know that word now). Roeder also had a few disasters in his player recruitment - Juan Velasco had to be hauled off early for being so off the pace. OJ Koroma and Troy were mystifying as was the point of Lupoli - what job was he brought here to do, surely not make our reserves look good, that post was already held by a certain S. Lappin (Grant''s forgotten signing).

Both Grant and Roeder had similar successes and failures in getting the team to ''play for them'' and in the end the failures outweighed the successes,so they had to go.

[Tetteys Jig 851]

Too right! but Roeder didn''t let them show their stregnths, because he was so strung up on his tactics, in a not-so-tactical division. I genuinely think our new Physical front 2 will help the Midfield  do more, and they''ll all perhaps score moe, and i think Leijer can only be better than snoozy. Carney looks a very useful outlet too

[USAcanary 0]

Roeder is the ideal person to shake up any club.

The trouble is, his style has only a certain shelf life until the players stop listening and he pisses off everyone.

Roeder actually was excellent in the transfer market. If he would have gotten Ameobi (or another decent striker) on loan it might have been a little different.

Roeder was right that Shola would have scored for fun in the champs.

He spent less than he brought in from outgoing transfers while actually improving the overall quality of the squad.

Not the man to take us forward but overall he did a decent job for us considering where we were when we arrived

(100% certainties to go down in NOV 07)

 

 

 

[Bobert 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"]

His approach didn''t work with your particular group of players and if you look around you''ll see rather a lot of managers currently out of work whose approach didn''t work either....some of which you hoped would be the Norwich choice.

[;)]

[/quote]

I don''t think the training is good enough. Man (and in some cases Self) Management seems to be sadly lacking. Use of english is poor ( there was a story on this Board the other night of the Wolves Manager F''ing and Blinding), presentation of reports to Directors and Shareholders are two areas that come to mind. It would be interesting to read a batch of CV''s to find out what training Managers do get..

[Budapest Canary 154]

In a way I feel sorry for Roeder. Like many above, I think he did a good job in signings on a shoestrinng budget and in cleaning up Grant''s mess. His legacy also includes using the loan market creatively (which is not necessarily a bad thing) and I also think his three year plan (if we survive year one of course) remains a realistic perspective.

In terms of signings, his poorest move (that played big part in sealing his fate) was probably the signing of Stefanovic in replacement of Shax. It was in fact a poor man''s move as it was always a gamble to rely on a 33-year old without much backup, even if he looked (was) better than Shax on short term. But to my mind it was a disaster waiting to happen. After losing Kennedy as well, and the departure of Lita he has been left without much front and back ends, and that -- coupled with his questionable motivational skills have led to him losing the plot.

Having said that, I still think that with a little more luck with injuries, and losing less silly points down to individual errors in the early season, he could have survived, and by more good summer signings he could have taken the club forward (simply on the strength of the squad) -- dispite his shortcomings in other areas. We''ll never know. But unless no big-money buyer comes in, gradual team building, and using the loan market creatively remains our best strategy to go upwards and onwards.

 

[Binky 0]

Buying great cars does not make you a racing driver. I think Roeder''s real legacy will be: Gunn, Crook, Butterworth & Deehan.

[Hairy Canary 759]

I''d go with most of that although my personal view is that Kennedy and Stef are generally over-rated and overall Roeders first choice defence was worse than the one he inherited. As well as bringing in some good signings Velasco, Sib, Koroma, Gibbs, Henry and Troy were all worse than poor and Roeders insistance on playing them (except Troy) when we had better players available cost us valuable points and team spirit. 

I also feel that his decision making on letting players go was suspect. Paricularly Huckerby, Lewis, Shackle and Chadwick who would strengthen the squad if they were still here.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Roedernowhere was totally inept in nearly aspects of his job as manager of the Canaries except for signing some good players but even then he nullified these with the bad out their depth loans!

[ca 1]

[quote user="Barclayman artist formerly known as Barclayboy"]I hated the man for a) robbing us of watching Hucks in his twilight and b) of falling out of love with NCFC.

But if there''s one thing from the Roeder legacy, perhaps the only good thing he has done, its the players he has brought in.

I have been so impressed with Clingan, i think he is without doubt the best player we have signed since Huckerby. Hoolahan is a great signing, his goal v Saints was the best NCFC ''high'' ive experienced since the 2-1 home win over Newcastle in the prem, or the Boro 4-4, whichever was last that season. And finally Carl Cort.

Everyone laughed when we signed him and even Roeder said it was a gamble. And even a few days ago when i posted that Cort is looking like he might make an impact in the last couple of months, the next post was the typical ''you dont know what your talking about''.

Well i know what i saw when we played Charlton in the cup, and i know my football. Cort being the only positive to come of the game, and last night proved what i thought. Lets hope he can stay fit.

As much as i hated Roeder he did one thing very well, the players he brought in.
[/quote]

 

Yes for all his faults he did make some good signings, Clingan & Hoolahan are quality players.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="cityangel"]

[quote user="Barclayman artist formerly known as Barclayboy"]I hated the man for a) robbing us of watching Hucks in his twilight and b) of falling out of love with NCFC.

But if there''s one thing from the Roeder legacy, perhaps the only good thing he has done, its the players he has brought in.

I have been so impressed with Clingan, i think he is without doubt the best player we have signed since Huckerby. Hoolahan is a great signing, his goal v Saints was the best NCFC ''high'' ive experienced since the 2-1 home win over Newcastle in the prem, or the Boro 4-4, whichever was last that season. And finally Carl Cort.

Everyone laughed when we signed him and even Roeder said it was a gamble. And even a few days ago when i posted that Cort is looking like he might make an impact in the last couple of months, the next post was the typical ''you dont know what your talking about''.

Well i know what i saw when we played Charlton in the cup, and i know my football. Cort being the only positive to come of the game, and last night proved what i thought. Lets hope he can stay fit.

As much as i hated Roeder he did one thing very well, the players he brought in.
[/quote]

 

Yes for all his faults he did make some good signings, Clingan & Hoolahan are quality players.

[/quote]

I think Hoolahan is potentially a very great player - if not for you, for someone else.

But there again he is Irish and so am I.[W]

[tribes 0]

[quote user="BarclayChuck"]I have to agree with that. Whilst previous managers signings have been heavily questioned I don''t think anyone can doubt the quality Roeder brought in with such limited funds.[/quote]Previous managers signings include; Marshall, Otsemobar, Docherty, Drury, Croft, Russell, Fotheringham, Cureton who have all been in the team since Gunn took over.

GR made permanent signings of Clingan, Pattison and Hoolahan plus loans Bertrand and Grounds. The first two are the only decent proven permanents he has made, Cort could prove to be one, we don''t know yet. These 6 are the only ones left from GR''s dealings in transfer market.

 

 

[Nuff Said 5,973]

Wasn''t there talk that GR was in line for a Director of Football type role at Arsenal just before he joined us? I think with the benefit of hindsight this probably is the ideal role for him - able to spot talent and bring it on, but NOT responsible for tactics and motivation of the first team. Also I think his view of tactics (yes, I think he had tactics, just the wrong ones) was more suited to the Premiership than the Championship.