Clough Poll

[metalblade]

Care to explain why you think it's ridiculous?
Rather than just posting stupid emoji.
It's a forum.

Jesus wept, do you need it to be explained ?

 

[Lane Ender]

Care to explain why you think it's ridiculous?
Rather than just posting stupid emoji.
It's a forum.

20 pts off second place says it all.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Jesus wept, do you need it to be explained ?

I'm interested in your explanation.
It's a forum.

I'll keep it simple. Clough raised our expectations by being so successful at the end of last season. True or False?

 

[metalblade]

I'm interested in your explanation.
It's a forum.

I'll keep it simple. Clough raised our expectations by being so successful at the end of last season. True or False?

Sorry buddy I neither have the time or inclination to go round in circles with you but I will say this, we have a 15 page thread right here which will adequately explain why claiming that Clough is being punished for last seasons success is a ridiculous thing to say. If you want to turn a blind eye to the failings of Clough all through the past season fine do so whatever anyone else says will not change your mind, by your logic Nigel better not ever win the league or he will be sacked the season after as punishment.

 

[secretchief]

It's an interesting point.
If Clough had taken over last season, got knocked out early in the cup and scraped together enough points to finish lower mid-table. Most fans would have said "job done, at least we didn't go down".

It's only because we went on that incredible run of 10 straight wins, that we shot up the table and reached the cup semi.

If you sack Clough now he would be effectively being punished for being great last season.

It's easy to forget how bad we actually were before Clough came in. One win in sixteen matches was it?

Sure, but didn't he also get 17 points from his first 14 games? Hovering just above relegation form. It balanced out.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

You are pretending not to understand so you can make a point.

If you have a personal conviction that Clough shouldn't be fired, or should have another chance, or whatever, that's fine. I accept it. Of course.

You are selectively choosing to count Weir's record as part of Clough's in the previous season so you can claim Clough has made progress. It's dishonest.

The issue is not whether Clough has made progress from Weir (he has), but whether Clough has improved on his own achievements last year. He hasn't.

But this has gone, consigned to the history books.

We need to look forwards and hopefully enjoy next season.

2019 will be even better.

 

[Rodley]

I just desperately hope he plays two up front; I think Done and O'Grady / Davies/ AN Other is some serious firepower in this division!!

 

[Blade58]

I disagree. I think I've been quite clear on this.

The only stat in regards of progress that counts is finishing higher in the league, and we did.

Whilst that is correct, when dissected, it doesn't quite stand up imo

Clough came in when second from bottom (with less points than the top teams) and in the 31 games he had up until the end of the season he managed to climb to 7th

This season, he started with a level playing field (all teams on zero points) and had 46 games to manage a whopping two places higher

I don't see that as progress

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Because improved league position is always the target, never points per game.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

playing like brazil

Didn't Brazil lose 7-1 to Germany in the World Cup semi-final?

We have to aim higher than this.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Because improved league position is always the target, never points per game.

Indeed. Case in point being the points total at the bottom of the Premier League, where a team might potentially have stayed up with 34 points, or at worst 37 points, both fewer than our 38 points under Warnock. Position is always more important than points.

That being said, given the teams in the league this season compared to last, it was in my view an easier division. Wolves and Brentford were both better teams than Bristol City in my mind. So arguably, you would expect a much better position than what we reached due to the lack of standout teams as their were the season we finished 7th.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Whilst that is correct, when dissected, it doesn't quite stand up imo

Clough came in when second from bottom (with less points than the top teams) and in the 31 games he had up until the end of the season he managed to climb to 7th

This season, he started with a level playing field (all teams on zero points) and had 46 games to manage a whopping two places higher

I don't see that as progress

Desparately stumbling from manager to manager isn't progress either.

Stability is very important, we just have to hope, and in some sense it is hope, that we aren't stabilised in Division 3.

Our best bet is to establish a solid foundation and progress from there.

Change the manager yet again, which has repercussions throughout the club, and we are building on shifting sands.

Worst case scenario is Clough doesn't deliver, then we really could be in for an extended period below stairs.

 

[robbiez666]

Desparately stumbling from manager to manager isn't progress either.

Stability is very important, we just have to hope, and in some sense it is hope, that we aren't stabilised in Division 3.

Our best bet is to establish a solid foundation and progress from there.

Change the manager yet again, which has repercussions throughout the club, and we are building on shifting sands.

Worst case scenario is Clough doesn't deliver, then we really could be in for an extended period below stairs.

Sticking with a manager is always preferable to frequent changing if you have confidence he's the right manager. Last season came in and largely worked with players already there. This season he's brought in 20 odd, been allowed to get rid of anyone he doesn't want and had a full pre-season. We all know how we've ended up. Ignore the cup and ignore the points. Is he likely to change his tactics? He's made some schoolboy errors of judgement.

If he's willing to learn and change then there would be a reasonable argument to give him another season unless someone spectacular is available. I've seen no sign or indication that he'll change as yet.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

no sign or indication that he'll change as yet.

The team we put out at Swindon is the most obvious (and bizarrely reassuring) evidence that he's willing to change. Sometimes radically. McGahey was on the bench ffs: Bashambauer was staying in midfield - no matter what. 5-5 from "Negative" Nigel.

There have been (ill-fated) flirtations with 4-4-2.

Work on corners. Where are the Floaters?

Acknowledgement of the need for real - rather than makeshift - CHs.

Whether this and other examples are (anything like) enough remains to be seen, but inflexibility is a charge that doesn't stick imo.

 

[secretchief]

So league position is the only relevant metric to judge progress, and the number of points gained - the determining factor of league position, mind you - should be ignored.

Points per game ratios are meaningless and irrelevant in making comparative evaluations about whether a team is improving under a given manager.

I am going to leave this thread now. I am needed back on planet earth.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

So league position is the only relevant metric to judge progress, and the number of points gained - the determining factor of league position, mind you - should be ignored.

Points per game ratios are meaningless and irrelevant in making comparative evaluations about whether a team is improving under a given manager.

I am going to leave this thread now. I am needed back on planet earth.

Points (or PPG - essentially the same thing of course) do not in themselves determine league position. 90 points does not win the League for instance.

Afaict neither points (see above) nor League position (see below) determine whether a manager is making progress.

First you have to define progress:

1. Promotion at all costs with a team of mercenaries on short term contracts or loans with a strong prospect of relegation next season. But next season is the distant future so who cares? We've progressed up the League (for now).
2. A focus on youth development set up, a new pitch, a different playing style (which some think might not be fully developed ), but no promotion (yet). We've progressed to a sustainable future (hopefully), but in a way that's hard to quantify.
3. Something else.

Two people can argue all day long that we have or have not made progress and both be right if they're talking about different ideas of progress.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Interesting reading the list of managers we've appointed and parted company with. Wilson stands out for me as a puzzling state of affairs, but probably, given the way United go about things, not that surprising. Also Porterfield, maybe time clouds my memory, but I never realised he had a 10-years contract. Just shows how times have changed. Looking at Silent Blade's list of managers, we appear to have either chosen poorly or for reasons that were reactive rather than considered, and without a greater overall view of the type of manager we'd benefit from.

I was recently criticised as being part of a 'pro-Clough' group. A silly comment at best, but amongst those who feel let down, not once have I seen a carefully arrived at choice of who might take over if Clough leaves the club. Not that I'm surprised by this. The fury expressed by some seems to have replaced any semblance of considered thinking, and for them it's enough that we get rid, without a thought for who should replace Clough. I can't help but wonder why anyone is surprised at the attempts United have made to appoint a truly decent manager, this is a problem that lies within United's four walls, and it's the fans, short of information and clarity, who are left to draw conclusions based on little or nothing.

 

[Silent Blade]

Also Porterfield, maybe time clouds my memory, but I never realised he had a 10-years contract. Just shows how times have changed.

After our relegation in 1981, Martin Peters resigned and so did our chairman John Hassall. Director Reg Brealey then took over as our new chairman. He was very ambitious and a 10 year contract offer persuaded Ian Porterfield to come to us despite that he had just got Rotherham promotion to the 2nd division. It had meant Porterfield dropping down two divisions!

 

[secretchief]

Points (or PPG - essentially the same thing of course) do not in themselves determine league position. 90 points does not win the League for instance.

Afaict neither points (see above) nor League position (see below) determine whether a manager is making progress.

First you have to define progress:

1. Promotion at all costs with a team of mercenaries on short term contracts or loans with a strong prospect of relegation next season. But next season is the distant future so who cares? We've progressed up the League (for now).
2. A focus on youth development set up, a new pitch, a different playing style (which some think might not be fully developed ), but no promotion (yet). We've progressed to a sustainable future (hopefully), but in a way that's hard to quantify.
3. Something else.

Two people can argue all day long that we have or have not made progress and both be right if they're talking about different ideas of progress.

Yes, someone would have to be mad to dispute these things. They're not at issue in this instance though, where it is being maintained that points per game totals should be completely ignored because the league table tells us everything we need to know.

I mean, it may be that we scored more goals this season under Clough than last season, or conceded less. I don't know, I haven't looked it up (my guess is that we BOTH scored more per game and conceded more).

If I found out we scored more then I'd have to admit that objectively, that would represent progress (and there might be all sorts of reasons for it).

I wouldn't just say it should be ignored because it doesn't happen to confirm my opinion.

But perhaps I'm making too much of it. As I said, I'm back on planet earth. It just appeared an odd thing to claim.

 

[super_pig]

Didn't Brazil lose 7-1 to Germany in the World Cup semi-final?
We have to aim higher than this.

i believe it is an idiom

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

i believe it is an idiom

Yes but even Brazil haven't played like Brazil for over 30 years.

 

[super_pig]

ok my bad.. how about barcelona

 

[chesblade]

Clough anyday over Darren ferguson (see rumors section ) this would be going backwards

 

[blade too long]

better the devil you know , not a great starting point
we seem to suffer from player loss ,
ched cost us big time
now Baxter takes himself out and losing brayford at 1-0 up , lost our shape completely
means a 5th of the team we should have gone with was taken out

Clough said it was a long term strategy , lets hope he meant 2 seasons

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

better the devil you know , not a great starting point
we seem to suffer from player loss ,
ched cost us big time
now Baxter takes himself out and losing brayford at 1-0 up , lost our shape completely
means a 5th of the team we should have gone with was taken out

Clough said it was a long term strategy , lets hope he meant 2 seasons

Putting all rumours and speculation to one side , its good to see that Clough , has not had the dreaded vote of confidence from the board , and it appears as Carry on , Business as Usual .

Carry on Clough -

Kenneth Williams as Clough ,

Bernard Breslaw as Garner

Charles Hawtrey as Crosby

Jack Douglas as Morgan

Lesley Philips as McCabe

Jim Dale as Brannigan

Prince plays himself.

New management team sorted .

UTB

 

[Blade56]

Sothall , there is a number of mitigating circumstances for Clough , which have no doubt be tabled by him , the same as us on the forum. The simple matter is they can all be packaged into one - Excuses.

UTB

The only doubt I have about NC being a liability to SUFC is the Ched factor.

Were his hands tied?
Was he told he had to take CE on release?
Were transfer funds short of buying a striker cause we had CH?

Nah, I'm fishing for reasons, you're right there's only excuses

 

[AlBlade]

The fury expressed by some seems to have replaced any semblance of considered thinking, and for them it's enough that we get rid, without a thought for who should replace Clough.

I'm sorry, but from my perspective I think most fans who want Clough to go have put forward a great deal of considered thinking as to why Clough should go (poor transfers, dire playing style, lack of any real progress, lower points per game return, player fall outs, inability to select a consistent team, dreadful handling of the media, stubborn refusal to admit mistakes, etc. etc.). I would argue that those who want Clough to stay purely cite that sticking with a manager is always preferable (agree if the manager is any good) and that he will learn from this season and improve next season - however, where is the considered thinking that this will be the case, on what basis are we to believe Clough will learn his lessons and change?.

Clough has ended this campaign saying that we have made progress and we need to bring in 3-4 players, with the focus being on the centre halves.

At the end of the 2011/12 season Clough was Derby manager, fans were pissed off that they had only finished 12th, however, Clough stated that 12th was satisfactory, they had improved, and what they needed for the following season was more firepower. So to address the firepower issue Clough signed Conor Sammon, whose record at Wigan was played 32 scored 1 (his career average was less than a goal every 5 games). Unsurprisingly Sammon didn't get off to the best of starts, scoring 2 in 16, however Clough said he was happy because of his work rate (even keeping Nathan Tyson out of the starting 11 who had a better strike rate). Sammon finished the season with 9 goals from 47 appearances. At the end of the season Derby finished 10th, Clough again citing progress and knowing what he needed to do to improve the squad however in September the following season he was sacked with Derby in 14th - the club appointed McLaren and Derby finished 3rd.

In 5 seasons under Clough, Derby finished no higher that 10th, if league position is the only barometer of success (as some have claimed) is this successful when another manager came in and achieved 3rd place instantly? So it must follow that it isn't always the case that sticking with a manager is always preferable.

My opinion is that I don't see anything in NC's time at Sheffield United, or at any of his previous clubs, to indicate that he does learn from his mistakes; or that when he identifies a problem he does anything to address it. As for who could replace NC, previous posters have listed potential candidates (Adkins, Lambert, Wharbuton, Evans, etc) all of whom come with baggage, and the pro's and cons of each are discussed in other threads however, every single one of them has a track record of getting teams promoted from League 1.

 

[MobileBlade]

I'm sorry, but from my perspective I think most fans who want Clough to go have put forward a great deal of considered thinking as to why Clough should go (poor transfers, dire playing style, lack of any real progress, lower points per game return, player fall outs, inability to select a consistent team, dreadful handling of the media, stubborn refusal to admit mistakes, etc. etc.). I would argue that those who want Clough to stay purely cite that sticking with a manager is always preferable (agree if the manager is any good) and that he will learn from this season and improve next season - however, where is the considered thinking that this will be the case, on what basis are we to believe Clough will learn his lessons and change?.

Clough has ended this campaign saying that we have made progress and we need to bring in 3-4 players, with the focus being on the centre halves.

At the end of the 2011/12 season Clough was Derby manager, fans were pissed off that they had only finished 12th, however, Clough stated that 12th was satisfactory, they had improved, and what they needed for the following season was more firepower. So to address the firepower issue Clough signed Conor Sammon, whose record at Wigan was played 32 scored 1 (his career average was less than a goal every 5 games). Unsurprisingly Sammon didn't get off to the best of starts, scoring 2 in 16, however Clough said he was happy because of his work rate (even keeping Nathan Tyson out of the starting 11 who had a better strike rate). Sammon finished the season with 9 goals from 47 appearances. At the end of the season Derby finished 10th, Clough again citing progress and knowing what he needed to do to improve the squad however in September the following season he was sacked with Derby in 14th - the club appointed McLaren and Derby finished 3rd.

In 5 seasons under Clough, Derby finished no higher that 10th, if league position is the only barometer of success (as some have claimed) is this successful when another manager came in and achieved 3rd place instantly? So it must follow that it isn't always the case that sticking with a manager is always preferable.

My opinion is that I don't see anything in NC's time at Sheffield United, or at any of his previous clubs, to indicate that he does learn from his mistakes; or that when he identifies a problem he does anything to address it. As for who could replace NC, previous posters have listed potential candidates (Adkins, Lambert, Wharbuton, Evans, etc) all of whom come with baggage, and the pro's and cons of each are discussed in other threads however, every single one of them has a track record of getting teams promoted from League 1.

Derby County spend on player wages during this period:

2009-10 - £16.4m (Turnover £29.7m) - Pos 14
2010-11 - £13.2m (Turnover £18.1m) - Pos 19
2011-12 - £13.0m (Turnover £17.2m) - Pos 11
2012-13 - £12.1m (Turnover £15.4m) - Pos 10

 

[bornablade]

I'm sorry, but from my perspective I think most fans who want Clough to go have put forward a great deal of considered thinking as to why Clough should go (poor transfers, dire playing style, lack of any real progress, lower points per game return, player fall outs, inability to select a consistent team, dreadful handling of the media, stubborn refusal to admit mistakes, etc. etc.). I would argue that those who want Clough to stay purely cite that sticking with a manager is always preferable (agree if the manager is any good) and that he will learn from this season and improve next season - however, where is the considered thinking that this will be the case, on what basis are we to believe Clough will learn his lessons and change?.

Clough has ended this campaign saying that we have made progress and we need to bring in 3-4 players, with the focus being on the centre halves.

At the end of the 2011/12 season Clough was Derby manager, fans were pissed off that they had only finished 12th, however, Clough stated that 12th was satisfactory, they had improved, and what they needed for the following season was more firepower. So to address the firepower issue Clough signed Conor Sammon, whose record at Wigan was played 32 scored 1 (his career average was less than a goal every 5 games). Unsurprisingly Sammon didn't get off to the best of starts, scoring 2 in 16, however Clough said he was happy because of his work rate (even keeping Nathan Tyson out of the starting 11 who had a better strike rate). Sammon finished the season with 9 goals from 47 appearances. At the end of the season Derby finished 10th, Clough again citing progress and knowing what he needed to do to improve the squad however in September the following season he was sacked with Derby in 14th - the club appointed McLaren and Derby finished 3rd.

In 5 seasons under Clough, Derby finished no higher that 10th, if league position is the only barometer of success (as some have claimed) is this successful when another manager came in and achieved 3rd place instantly? So it must follow that it isn't always the case that sticking with a manager is always preferable.

My opinion is that I don't see anything in NC's time at Sheffield United, or at any of his previous clubs, to indicate that he does learn from his mistakes; or that when he identifies a problem he does anything to address it. As for who could replace NC, previous posters have listed potential candidates (Adkins, Lambert, Wharbuton, Evans, etc) all of whom come with baggage, and the pro's and cons of each are discussed in other threads however, every single one of them has a track record of getting teams promoted from League 1.

A lot of points there. With regards to McLaren's success at finishing third - it seems that every new manager vastly improves a side when they arrive. It's called the honeymoon period. Just look at McLaren's performance ( based on league position) in this past season.

I find the 66% vote for Clough quite staggering. Reading the posts on forums, listening to Football Heaven over the past month or so I would've expected the result of this poll to be exactly opposite to how it's turned out.

The general election is over, the people have spoken and I now feel it's time for all those who didn't succeed in their argument to leave it be and move on.

 

[Cyprus Blade]

Personally I am less than convinced by NC's long term suitability for Sheffield United Football Club. The best I could say is that he might take us up, equally it would not surprise me if he didn't. At the time of his appointment I believed and still believe he was the best we could have got and represented an improvement on Weir (hard not to be). Events have moved on and I have come to the conclusion that the club either give NC the year or get rid now. If we get rid we have to have someone "better" lined up. In financial terms the short term cheaper option is to keep him, whether this is true for the longer term very much depends on whether he delivers promotion. The longer he is here the more expensive it becomes to dig him, his staff and his purchases out.

I cannot see the merit of the "give him till xmas" or "the first 10 games" arguments because of the impact on the transfer budget and club finances. I doubt that anyone taking over mid-season would be entirely happy with the players brought in by NC (if he goes it will be because of inadequate results). In addition the likely resultant staffing changes will be incredibly disruptive so I think, if he gets to spend the summer transfer budget, it would be difficult for an incoming manager to effect too much change and another season would go by the by. And I want to see us out of this division next season more than anything. The irony is that the thing that NC messed up most (the spine of the side) may be the thing that saves him mid-season as I think he is going to have to spend the budget/hit the FFP ceiling to get the spine right (he needs 5 or 6 quality players GK, 2/3 CH's, CM, CF) - if he isn't got rid of during the next couple of weeks.

Hopefully, the situation will become clear very soon, before the better eligible transfer targets are snapped up. I believe a delay will prove costly to our promotion chances so my view is that the Board have a back him or sack him decision to make in the next 10 days or so. If JP had not made the comments he did then I would not be looking for some indication from the Board in respect of changes. But make those comments he did and so the issue is left hanging.

If the decision is to sack him we will do ourselves no favours if we end up in a hiatus whilst the replacement is sourced and appointed. Until there is a statement by the Board, or simply there are announcements that NC has signed player X and player Y, I don't believe we have certainty over the shape of the front office and footballing side next season. Personally I think there will be some changes somewhere (not necessarily the manager), mainly because of JP's comments before the playoffs.

It needs putting to rest so that the club can move forward.

UTB