David Weir - Moving the Goalposts?

[Darren]

I'm not sure that in footballing terms 20+ years ago should be considered "recent history". The game has moved on.

Which is my point. You react to changes. You don't stick to a plam doggedly because it has proved succesful in other times and other places.

 

[Darren]

When the manager came into the chairman's office to have said say, wouldn't he be told "piss off, all this stuff about being associated with a certain playing style all the way through the club is just guff"?

No, because he wouldn't say "I think we should appoint X because he fits in with the ethos of the club", he would say "we should apppoint X because he is good at his job and will get players coming through to the first team".

 

[Sothall_Blade]

I think all managers and players need to be able to employ a variety of different tactics, formations and styles of play.
No good manager is going to play exactly the same tactics against Manchester United as they would against Cambridge United.
Tactics that are successful in the Premiership may not work in League One and vice-versa.
Often the tactics and formation may need to be tweaked mid-game dependant on the score, how long left, injuries to key players, to counter what the opposition are doing etc.

The Academy’s job therefore is surely to produce “rounded” players who have experienced many different ways of playing the game and can adapt their game accordingly.
I don’t think they will achieve that by saying every team at every level of the club are always going to play 4-2-3-1 from start to finish in every game and never deviate from “The Plan”.

Ultimately, the manager at every level needs to be trusted and given the authority to change things around as he sees fit.
I don’t believe for a minute, that Weir wasn’t given that authority. We played the way he wanted to play and he simply couldn’t make it work.

 

[Darren]

I think all managers and players need to be able to employ a variety of different tactics, formations and styles of play.
No good manager is going to play exactly the same tactics against Manchester United as they would against Cambridge United.
Tactics that are successful in the Premiership may not work in League One and vice-versa.
Often the tactics and formation may need to be tweaked mid-game dependant on the score, how long left, injuries to key players, to counter what the opposition are doing etc.

The Academy’s job therefore is surely to produce “rounded” players who have experienced many different ways of playing the game and can adapt their game accordingly.
I don’t think they will achieve that by saying every team at every level of the club are always going to play 4-2-3-1 from start to finish in every game and never deviate from “The Plan”.

Ultimately, the manager at every level needs to be trusted and given the authority to change things around as he sees fit.
I don’t believe for a minute, that Weir wasn’t given that authority. We played the way he wanted to play and he simply couldn’t make it work.

Indeed.

The Overall plan for SUFC is for the club to be in the PL or at least challenging for promotion from the 2nd tier. Given the club's resources and support that is an entirely reasonable plan. The club authorities will choose a manager who they think will achieve that plan. They obviously thought Weir would be able to do so.

Once it became clear that he was achieving the opposite to what the plan dictated, he had to go.

 

[cooperblade]

No, because he wouldn't say "I think we should appoint X because he fits in with the ethos of the club", he would say "we should apppoint X because he is good at his job and will get players coming through to the first team".

So using my example, you don't think Pulis might think "Rodgers is very good at his job but the technical, skillful players he's likely to bring through might not be best suited to my more direct style which relies on more physical attributes".

Or to look at it another way, would it be easier to bring a player into the first team who'd been playing a similar style of football in the academy than one who'd been playing a completely different style?

 

[Pedro Verde]

I think the board wanted to change ethos of the club or the way we are perceived by others into one that plays 'good football' so that good football players might want to play for the club. They didnt want to be associated with long ball tactics and employ 6ft 3in thugs to carry those tactics out, thats why Pulis never stood a chance of getting the job (he wouldnt drop down to the 3rd tier anyway)
There are obviuosly different ways / formations that enable you to play 'good football' and unfortunately Weirs way was not working. Hopefully Cloughs methods work

 

[Darren]

So using my example, you don't think Pulis might think "Rodgers is very good at his job but the technical, skillful players he's likely to bring through might not be best suited to my more direct style which relies on more physical attributes".

Or to look at it another way, would it be easier to bring a player into the first team who'd been playing a similar style of football in the academy than one who'd been playing a completely different style?

I rely on what m'learned friend Southall says above. I think it would be myopic to train up youth players to play one particular style. You have no Plan B in that respect.

The reality is also that only a small percentage of youth players will make the first team and the ones that do will probably break through after the current manager has left. The ones that don't make the first team, we like to sell on. There won't be much market for them if they can only play one way. It would not make any kind of sense to make the youth team play in the same way as the current manager likes the first team to play

 

[Darren]

I think the board wanted to change ethos of the club or the way we are perceived by others into one that plays 'good football' so that good football players might want to play for the club. They didnt want to be associated with long ball tactics and employ 6ft 3in thugs to carry those tactics out, thats why Pulis never stood a chance of getting the job (he wouldnt drop down to the 3rd tier anyway)
There are obviuosly different ways / formations that enable you to play 'good football' and unfortunately Weirs way was not working. Hopefully Cloughs methods work

It's be said before, but does anyone really care a flying fuck how we are percieved by others?

The other reality is that if we are not in the PL, 95% of fans will have no idea what sort of football we play and won't give a tinker's cuss for us. If we are in the PL, we will all be so ecsatic that none of us (except Pinchy) if all our players are 6'3 thugs.

As for players, harsh reality no.3 is that they will go where the money is. A Good Third Division player, faced with the choice between Crawley on £750 a week and SUFC on £2500 a week is not going to go for the former because they play "better football".

 

[Pedro Verde]

It's be said before, but does anyone really care a flying fuck how we are percieved by others?

The other reality is that if we are not in the PL, 95% of fans will have no idea what sort of football we play and won't give a tinker's cuss for us. If we are in the PL, we will all be so ecsatic that none of us (except Pinchy) if all our players are 6'3 thugs.

As for players, harsh reality no.3 is that they will go where the money is. A Good Third Division player, faced with the choice between Crawley on £750 a week and SUFC on £2500 a week is not going to go for the former because they play "better football".

My comments with regard to how we are perceived were mainly aimed at people within the game, not other clubs fans. I think the club are thinking ahead as we are going to need a different calibre of player if we aim to do well in the Championship and aim to reach the PL. Other clubs will be in competition for these higher quality players I know they may well end up going for the big money but they may well come for the manager and style of football. We had problems last time we were in the PL attracting high quality players (I know some of it was down to budget) but Robson was able to attract players that would probably not have played for Warnock, this was down to how Robson was perceived in the game
I think playing in the PL with 6'3 thugs is outdated and wouldnt get you much success even Stoke have recognised that

 

[Darren]

My comments with regard to how we are perceived were mainly aimed at people within the game, not other clubs fans. I think the club are thinking ahead as we are going to need a different calibre of player if we aim to do well in the Championship and aim to reach the PL. Other clubs will be in competition for these higher quality players I know they may well end up going for the big money but they may well come for the manager and style of football. We had problems last time we were in the PL attracting high quality players (I know some of it was down to budget) but Robson was able to attract players that would probably not played for Warnock, this was down to how Robson was perceived in the game
I think playing in the PL with 6'3 thugs is outdated and wouldnt get you much success even Stoke have recognised that

Robson was able to attract these players because he could pay them top wages. Nothing more nothing less. Beattie would have played under Warnock had Warnock been able to offer him the money Robson did.

Do we have any evidence of any player who refused to sign for United because they didn't like the ethos under NW?

 

[Pedro Verde]

The wages probably helped but given a choice Robson or Warnock I would guess Beattie and others would have chosen Robson. Warnock is out of his depth when dealing with high quality players has he ever kept a club in the PL ?
Warnock is excellent at getting average players to perform above their skill level. Higher skilled players given the opportunity to play for Jol, Hughes, Laudrup etc would choose them over Warnock 99% of the time

 

[Pinchy]

Isn't is just as possible to say that your preferred style, endless tedious passes across the box, can also be a random reaction to random events giving rise to random football?

PS If you think that Sheffield United fans are the only fans in the country who want to see their team move the ball forwards now and then you aren't really in a position to play the 'parochial' card.

That isn't, as I'm quite sure you realise, my preferred style. Why would it be? I believe, as I have said many times on here, in Passing with Purpose. The way successful teams play the game; often referred to by professionals as 'the right way'

Who, outside of Jurassic Lane, would not want that but rather have Hoofing with Hopelessness?

 

[alcoblade]

The debate is still held at hoof V tip tap level. One end of the spectrum or the other. I doubt many if any other clubs have such debate, because they know it's not a robust plan to put yourself at these extremes.

Young, skillful athletic players will be able to play the way 90% of managers want them to play. If they can't, you can sell them.

Our biggest problem has been employing incompetent managers like Robson who bought players who were massively overpriced, old and unsellable. Weir who was downright incompetent but to be fair that was hard to predict, and Backwell who bored everyone into submission to such a level that we've spent years trying to wash ourselves of the stain, and lost sight of reality along with it.

Having a plan to not pitch yourself at the extremes ( swinging from both being exactly what we've just done) should be the way. Then get managers in who've proved they can do it at a relative level, rather than looking at the top and curve fitting backwards in the way Swansea are used as the latest fad. Leicester and Palace are previous examples that Dazzler identified.

It's not the rocket science that we're making it.

UTB

 

[oldblade]

That isn't, as I'm quite sure you realise, my preferred style. Why would it be? I believe, as I have said many times on here, in Passing with Purpose. The way successful teams play the game; often referred to by professionals as 'the right way'

Who, outside of Jurassic Lane, would not want that but rather have Hoofing with Hopelessness?

I knew you were a politician. Your posts are just a series of sound bites. "Passing with Purpose", "Hoofing with Hopelessness", "Jurassic Lane".

 

[Darren]

The wages probably helped but given a choice Robson or Warnock I would guess Beattie and others would have chosen Robson. Warnock is out of his depth when dealing with high quality players has he ever kept a club in the PL ?
Warnock is excellent at getting average players to perform above their skill level. Higher skilled players given the opportunity to play for Jol, Hughes, Laudrup etc would choose them over Warnock 99% of the time

They would have chosen who ever offered them the most wages. In the theoretical event of Robson and Warnock both wanting to sign them at exactly the same wages, they might have chosen Robson, but given that this is purely in the realms of theory, it need not worry us.
,

 

[JJ Sefton]

That isn't, as I'm quite sure you realise, my preferred style. Why would it be? I believe, as I have said many times on here, in Passing with Purpose.

So does everyone else. The difference is that the purpose I want to see is scoring goals, the purpose you want to see is how many times we can knock the ball from Cherry Street to John Street and back.

 

[Darren]

The debate is still held at hoof V top tap level. One end of the spectrum or the other. I doubt many if any other clubs have such debate, because they know it's not a robust plan to put yourself at these extremes.

Young, skillful athletic players will be able to play the way 90% of managers want them to play. If they can't, you can sell them.

Our biggest problem has been employing incompetent managers like Robson who bought players who were massively overpriced, old and unsellable. Weir who was downright incompetent but to be fair that was hard to predict, and Backwell who bored everyone into submission to such a level that we've spent years trying to wash ourselves of the stain, and lost sight of reality along with it.

Having a plan to not pitch yourself at the extremes, swinging from both being exactly what we've just done, should be the way. Then get managers in who've proved they can do it at a relative level, rather than looking at the top and curve fitting backwards in the way Swansea are used as the latest fad. Leicester and Palace are previous examples that Dazzler identified.

It's not the rocket science that we're making it.


UTB

I recall that Charlton were the model in the early 2000's. Until they got relegated in 2007.

 

[TC10]

If there was one style of play or formation that was more successful than others then,surely, everyone would play that way.
The fact that there isn't speaks volumes. Whatever the style, if you can't afford, or can't attract the best exponents of that style, the you have to adapt to survive, to change your style to combat the superiority of the opposition, whatever their style, to nullify them.

We have seen plenty of that over the years and probably the best recent(ish) example is the PL game at home v Arsenal just before New Year when the Arsenal aristocrats were harried , rushed, pushed and bullied ( legally) into a glorious defeat in an atmosphere and performance that was probably as stirring an occasion as we have seen for years.

With regard to DW, well he may have been able to talk the talk but, when it came to walking the walk, he was like a toddler stumbling from one piece of furniture to the next before hitting the floor

His intransigence, his inability to change and his 'real live' FIFA 14' experiment he carried out at SUFC reaped him the reward he deserved.

Man up Weir- you had a great opportunity- you screwed up. Time to stop bleating before you erode the good wishes you went with.

 

[alcoblade]

The fact that there isn't speaks volumes. Whatever the style, if you can't afford, or can't attract the best exponents of that style, the you have to adapt to survive, to change your style to combat the superiority of the opposition, whatever their style, to nullify them.

Yep, the mighty Rotherham did it against us within 90 minutes, to unravel Pinchy's nonsense football. But we need a grand plan lasting 10 years before we can move forward, it seems.

UTB

 

[oldblade]

Our biggest problem has been employing incompetent managers like Robson who bought players who were massively overpriced, old and unsellable. Weir who was downright incompetent but to be fair that was hard to predict, and Backwell who bored everyone into submission to such a level that we've spent years trying to wash ourselves of the stain, and lost sight of reality along with it.
UTB

Like many others I found that when Blackwell was our manager match days were not very enjoyable - even when we won, which unlike now, happened quite a lot. However, more recent events have made me realise I would rather we were boring and in the second tier than interesting and in the third tier.

 

[cooperblade]

I recall that Charlton were the model in the early 2000's. Until they got relegated in 2007.

And what preceded that relegation? They abandoned the plan, ended years of continuity and changed the manager.

 

[Darren]

And what preceded that relegation? They abandoned the plan, ended years of continuity and changed the manager.

If we are looking at clubs of a similar size to United who stayed in the top division for a long period, we can cite Coventry from 1967-2001 and Southampton from 1978 to 2005.

If we want to look to emulate anyone, maybe we should be looking at them. I am not sure they had any grand masterplan though.

 

[alcoblade]

And what preceded that relegation? They abandoned the plan, ended years of continuity and changed the manager.

I think the manager left didn't he, which more goes to prove that you can't control grand plans rather than the fact that you need one. It just perspective, IMHO. A plan's fine, a grand one isn't.

UTB

 

[Selly]

And what preceded that relegation? They abandoned the plan, ended years of continuity and changed the manager.

I think what is clear is that, if one does not have a plan, then one ends up being reactive, rather than proactive.

As a consequence you end up reacting in a knee jerk fashion to anything and everything.

(Examples: sacking Warnock, sacking Blackwell, appointing Speed, appointing Adams, our use of the loan market, sacking Wilson)

When action is required, you should be looking at Evolution rather than Revolution each and every time*


*of course this is all contingent on the plan being one that actually has a fair chance of working.

 

[Silent Blade]

Since Warnock left, we've had no discernible plan. We've jumped from one style of play to another and had an enormous turnover players. This has been to the detriment of the club both on and off the pitch. The improvement in fortunes under Blackwell wasn't sustainable as we saw.

We can't continue to do this.

Our neighbours are a good example of how short-termism doesn't work. They came within a whisker of going bankrupt but seemingly haven't learnt from that and are now back to losing millions of pounds a year, having to borrow against the ground and having a team which can't improve year on year because it's built on loans. They bring in the likes of Fryatt and Wickham who will improve them for a while but who will leave them financially poorer and no better on the pitch when they inevitably return to their parent clubs.

We have to build towards next year and the year after that and the year after that whilst trying to get promotion. As much continuity as possible can only help in that regard.

I don't necessarily think we have to play the style of football that Weir favoured and I didn't disagree with the decision to sack him. I do think we're repeating the mistakes of the past though if we are left with expensive signings who can't get a game because of chopping and changing.

Our biggest mistake is that we hadnt learned from the mistakes of appointing "trainee managers", those types who had an idea of how we should play before assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the squad

 

[Bladesway]

I really don't get this.

Not wanting Sheffield United to get relegated to the Fourth Division

an expectation Champions League football.

An exaggeration perhaps but the point is SOME fans seemed to think suddenly this new investment meant we went from a season of consolidation to guaranteed promotion. Even though there have been no actual signs of this money because it came in after the transfer window shut. That is the goalposts moving. Weir failed that is without doubt but I think his point and interview was fair and reasonable, hence no need for some of the shit dished out.

 

[JJ Sefton]

An exaggeration perhaps but the point is SOME fans seemed to think suddenly this new investment meant we went from a season of consolidation...

And we weren't even getting that. Weir wasn't sacked because we weren't promotion certs, he was sacked because we were relegation certs. Unless, when he took the job, he was told "Don't worry about relegation Dave, we don't mind", he cannot in any way moan about goalposts moving.

 

[Selly]

Nail on head WalthamstowBlade

 

[Bladesway]

And we weren't even getting that. Weir wasn't sacked because we weren't promotion certs, he was sacked because we were relegation certs. Unless, when he took the job, he was told "Don't worry about relegation Dave, we don't mind", he cannot in any way moan about goalposts moving.

Oddly enough I know why he got sacked, what I am saying is things did change while he was there, hence the goalposts moving is not an incorrect statement. I don't think him failing is an issue to debate to be honest unless you are of the opinion that 13 games wasn't a fair crack of the whip.

 

[Darren]

Oddly enough I know why he got sacked, what I am saying is things did change while he was there, hence the goalposts moving is not an incorrect statement. I don't think him failing is an issue to debate to be honest unless you are of the opinion that 13 games wasn't a fair crack of the whip.

The expectations didn't change because we suddenly got more money. Had we been sitting in mid table last month he would not have been sacked. It's as simple as that.

The access to money did not mean that the club were suddenly demanding we be leading the league by 10 points. lAll this "moving the goaloposts" is pathetic bollocks.