If we are going to change the manager it needs to be done now.

[Ginger Gnome]

may as well let the incumbent who knows the issues try again

Is there any evidence that he does know the issues though?

He wanted to assess the squad when he first took over, but never seemed to actually decide what his best side was and randomly chops and changes. Much of Clough's criticisms were down to having no central defenders and putting square pegs in round holes, but Adkins still uses Basham in defence sometimes and has resorted to a winger in central midfield, a striker at wing-back and Sammon as a footballer. He appeared to have no prior knowledge of the strengths of the squad before he took over and doesn't have much more of a clue about them 9 months later.

 

[Harry's Game]

Is there any evidence that he does know the issues though?

He wanted to assess the squad when he first took over, but never seemed to actually decide what his best side was and randomly chops and changes. Much of Clough's criticisms were down to having no central defenders and putting square pegs in round holes, but Adkins still uses Basham in defence sometimes and has resorted to a winger in central midfield, a striker at wing-back and Sammon as a footballer. He appeared to have no prior knowledge of the strengths of the squad before he took over and doesn't have much more of a clue about them 9 months later.

But with no money is anyone else going to do any better next season? I doubt it

 

[Pittsburg Blade]

He was also consulted before the club announced the 10% cut in season tickets.Doasnt look like Adkins is in danger to me

I agree. Adkins is building the foundations for a long stay a la Arsene Wenger.
The U-18 and U-21s are sorted, now onto the Senior team.
McCabe has finally seen the folly of the hiring-firing policy and he's finally got the right man.
(Pittsburg prepares to be blown out of the sky)

 

[finlaytheblade]

I agree. Adkins is building the foundations for a long stay a la Arsene Wenger.
The U-18 and U-21s are sorted, now onto the Senior team.
McCabe has finally seen the folly of the hiring-firing policy and he's finally got the right man.
(Pittsburg prepares to be blown out of the sky)

Not by me or any other blade who looks at the bigger picture.Its obvious we have changed direction and Adkins brief is to get more from our academy, allied to shrewd signings of experienced but hungry
players.He will choose his signings
carefully as recent failure suggests
lack of loans in the window( as he says they have to be the right ones)
means his targets were not available,
that's better than just bringing in players just to placate a frustrated fan base.There o's a plan in place(my opinion) which revolves around our young players of which we have some real potential. His initial transfer activity)( summer) was based on quick squad assessment and later found it was well short of the quality required to play the kind of football he believes in.I beleave the owners feel they have got the right man this time and will give him the time and money to make the plan work.The right signings allied to our young players is how we are going to go.

 

[1889]

We shouldn't sack him. I could see some potential v Oldham & id give him next season as long as we are around top 6

I agree, we played well against Oldham, but Oldham are a Division 2 team and I think that was probably the potential you saw

 

[Sean Thornton]

This hits the nail pretty firmly on the head. You need to base judgements on managers on they're performance alone, absolutely nothing else. To use what has happened in the past to form opinions on whether to sack managers is an amateur way to run a football club, because if they do as I predict and don't sack him because we've sacked too many managers in the past then what will happen is they will be taking those (right or wrong) decisions to sack previous managers to invariably force them into making a wrong decision in not sacking him without realising. To use an analogy, mobile phones works pretty well where the phone is the manager and the owner is the board.

Wilson - You choose a decent phone and it's performing pretty well. For some reason you decide to replace it. This is not the fault of the phone but the fault of the phone owner for replacing a phone that didn't need replacing.

Weir - You choose a cheap phone that hasn't really been proven to work before. It transpires to be extremely faulty so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing a phone they knew might be faulty.

Clough - You choose another phone, a big improvement on the previous phone but in the following year starts to really underperform, so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing the wrong phone.

Napkins - You're fed up choosing shit phones from the previous 2 so you go all out and blow it all for the latest new iPhone. Very surprisingly and against the odds, it starts performing remarkably badly, even worse than the previous one. This is purely the fault of the phone for being shit and not the fault of the phone owner.

Now, you don't just not replace it and put up with a terrible phone because you've been a shit phone owner in the past and chosen phones that don't work. Even though you did everything you could this time to choose a phone that would work by going for the most expensive, you accept you have been unlucky for once in choosing yet another faulty one and get it replaced.

Undoubtedly the best, most succinct, analogy ever.


Apart from the fact if a new phone is no good you get it changed under warranty. Other than that though, spot on.

 

[finlaytheblade]

I agree, we played well against Oldham, but Oldham are a Division 2 team and I think that was probably the potential you saw

Oldham away record is good enough for the top six there home record is shocking.Since Sheridan came in they had improved 1defeat in 7. They are what this division is all about so in my eyes it was a very good ( if at times patchy) performance against a team battling to stay up.Crewe the same today but you can bet they will up there game as all teams do at the Lane,having said that it's no excuse for not beating they

 

[raul]

Oldham away record is good enough for the top six there home record is shocking.Since Sheridan came in they had improved 1defeat in 7. They are what this division is all about so in my eyes it was a very good ( if at times patchy) performance against a team battling to stay up.Crewe the same today but you can bet they will up there game as all teams do at the Lane,having said that it's no excuse for not beating they

Could you forward this to Mr Adkins? It might cut the post match interview down a bit and give WHF a bit of free time this evening.

 

[Esablade]

This hits the nail pretty firmly on the head. You need to base judgements on managers on they're performance alone, absolutely nothing else. To use what has happened in the past to form opinions on whether to sack managers is an amateur way to run a football club, because if they do as I predict and don't sack him because we've sacked too many managers in the past then what will happen is they will be taking those (right or wrong) decisions to sack previous managers to invariably force them into making a wrong decision in not sacking him without realising. To use an analogy, mobile phones works pretty well where the phone is the manager and the owner is the board.

Wilson - You choose a decent phone and it's performing pretty well. For some reason you decide to replace it. This is not the fault of the phone but the fault of the phone owner for replacing a phone that didn't need replacing.

Weir - You choose a cheap phone that hasn't really been proven to work before. It transpires to be extremely faulty so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing a phone they knew might be faulty.

Clough - You choose another phone, a big improvement on the previous phone but in the following year starts to really underperform, so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing the wrong phone.

Napkins - You're fed up choosing shit phones from the previous 2 so you go all out and blow it all for the latest new iPhone. Very surprisingly and against the odds, it starts performing remarkably badly, even worse than the previous one. This is purely the fault of the phone for being shit and not the fault of the phone owner.

Now, you don't just not replace it and put up with a terrible phone because you've been a shit phone owner in the past and chosen phones that don't work. Even though you did everything you could this time to choose a phone that would work by going for the most expensive, you accept you have been unlucky for once in choosing yet another faulty one and get it replaced.

I suspect the 'owners' have failed to top up...and furthermore sold the GPU in the summer..

 

[Barney]

Undoubtedly the best, most succinct, analogy ever.


Apart from the fact if a new phone is no good you get it changed under warranty. Other than that though, spot on.

Can't decide on the sarcasm involved here, but I'll take it any way.

 

[Dnblade]

This hits the nail pretty firmly on the head. You need to base judgements on managers on they're performance alone, absolutely nothing else. To use what has happened in the past to form opinions on whether to sack managers is an amateur way to run a football club, because if they do as I predict and don't sack him because we've sacked too many managers in the past then what will happen is they will be taking those (right or wrong) decisions to sack previous managers to invariably force them into making a wrong decision in not sacking him without realising. To use an analogy, mobile phones works pretty well where the phone is the manager and the owner is the board.

Wilson - You choose a decent phone and it's performing pretty well. For some reason you decide to replace it. This is not the fault of the phone but the fault of the phone owner for replacing a phone that didn't need replacing.

Weir - You choose a cheap phone that hasn't really been proven to work before. It transpires to be extremely faulty so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing a phone they knew might be faulty.

Clough - You choose another phone, a big improvement on the previous phone but in the following year starts to really underperform, so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing the wrong phone.

Napkins - You're fed up choosing shit phones from the previous 2 so you go all out and blow it all for the latest new iPhone. Very surprisingly and against the odds, it starts performing remarkably badly, even worse than the previous one. This is purely the fault of the phone for being shit and not the fault of the phone owner.

Now, you don't just not replace it and put up with a terrible phone because you've been a shit phone owner in the past and chosen phones that don't work. Even though you did everything you could this time to choose a phone that would work by going for the most expensive, you accept you have been unlucky for once in choosing yet another faulty one and get it replaced.

Your analogy had me in stitches there Barney.,have a like...a mobile phone analogy in a Football post...Classic.

 

[Ecco1889]

We're not though, so it doesn't.

I'm not so sure Pete if we lose today,let's hope for a good showing this afternoon

 

[Sean Thornton]

Can't decide on the sarcasm involved here, but I'll take it any way.

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

This hits the nail pretty firmly on the head. You need to base judgements on managers on they're performance alone, absolutely nothing else. To use what has happened in the past to form opinions on whether to sack managers is an amateur way to run a football club, because if they do as I predict and don't sack him because we've sacked too many managers in the past then what will happen is they will be taking those (right or wrong) decisions to sack previous managers to invariably force them into making a wrong decision in not sacking him without realising. To use an analogy, mobile phones works pretty well where the phone is the manager and the owner is the board.

Wilson - You choose a decent phone and it's performing pretty well. For some reason you decide to replace it. This is not the fault of the phone but the fault of the phone owner for replacing a phone that didn't need replacing.

Weir - You choose a cheap phone that hasn't really been proven to work before. It transpires to be extremely faulty so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing a phone they knew might be faulty.

Clough - You choose another phone, a big improvement on the previous phone but in the following year starts to really underperform, so you get it replaced. This is the fault of the phone for being faulty but more so the fault of the phone owner for choosing the wrong phone.

Napkins - You're fed up choosing shit phones from the previous 2 so you go all out and blow it all for the latest new iPhone. Very surprisingly and against the odds, it starts performing remarkably badly, even worse than the previous one. This is purely the fault of the phone for being shit and not the fault of the phone owner.

Now, you don't just not replace it and put up with a terrible phone because you've been a shit phone owner in the past and chosen phones that don't work. Even though you did everything you could this time to choose a phone that would work by going for the most expensive, you accept you have been unlucky for once in choosing yet another faulty one and get it replaced.

David Ross and Charles Dunstone as new owners of the club , but with name change . Carphone Warehouse United.

UTB

 

[Barney]

View attachment 16655

 

[Jostein's Bandage]

I agree with the point. I'd have sacked him months ago, but i do think a decision should be made now and be stated publicly.
It's not a vote of confidence, it's about planning. If the board came out and said "this season's been a total balls-up, we're planning for next season and Adkins is 100% the man who is going to be in charge of that regardless of the results in the remainder" then that is clear. No room for ifs, buts or coconuts. It's clear the play offs are virtually impossible, either he's going to be here next season or he isn't.