May??

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Woodwardfan said:
One final word about David Weir.

He's a football man through and through. A distinguished player and leader. He captained his club for years and his country.

He had a bad start at Bramall Lane but inherited a shocking squad in a terrible state of mind. He lost McDonald after one game.

Nobody should judge any manager on a handful of games, that should be obvious. On joining our club the prince had money to invest and understandably didn't fancy a rookie manager spending it. All perfectly reasonable and Weir was a victim of circumstances.

Since he left us he has enjoyed big success as Assistant Manager at Brentford and now Rangers. He is not a passenger at those clubs, just along for the ride.

The man has great qualities and I have no doubt he will make a successful manager before long.
Click to expand...

Some people are just better off as a Number 2. Steve McLaren looks like the obvious example.
 



blade.i.am said:
The significance of this season is another car crash in League 1. Sadly, it really does feel like early 80s, dropping into League 2 might be a better option for long term progression than yet another season in League 1 treading water.
Click to expand...
that's just wishful thinking and nostalgia cos the Div 4 title was the last thing we won. Dropping down now might not have the happy ending you are after.
 
Weir was without any doubt the worst manager we have ever seen managing the Blades.
I have no doubt that he would have relegated us to the 4th tier if for some strange reason we had kept him until the end of the season.
 
Woodwardfan said:
Fair(ish) comment re Rangers but bear in mind he was rated enough to be appointed for the job and his manager wanted him there with him again.

Also you just cannot say the same about Brentford, either in L1 or the Championship; brilliant efforts there by all concerned, in fact we'd have been proud to have achieved half as much over the same period.
Click to expand...
If assistant managers had any influence over results Bryan Robson would have got us promoted.
 
Woodwardfan said:
So what? Seriously, I can't think of a bigger "wet lettuce". Convince me otherwise please.
Click to expand...
You were praising Weir's work as a number two at Brentford and Rangers and my impression was that you thought this in some way indicated he might have been a good manager for us, given time.

My point is that a number two has little influence over a team's results because the manager picks the team and tactics, buys the players etc. If a number two did influence the team then we would have been promoted under Brian Kidd because he has been one of the most succesful number twos around. Therefore, his success as Warburton's assistant has no bearing on his ability as a manager.
 
BushBlade said:
You were praising Weir's work as a number two at Brentford and Rangers and my impression was that you thought this in some way indicated he might have been a good manager for us, given time.

My point is that a number two has little influence over a team's results because the manager picks the team and tactics, buys the players etc. If a number two did influence the team then we would have been promoted under Brian Kidd because he has been one of the most succesful number twos around. Therefore, his success as Warburton's assistant has no bearing on his ability as a manager.
Click to expand...


Fair enough Bush, but I have an inkling that Weir has a bit more about him than Kidd.

Time will tell for Weir. Kidd will retire a rich man for writing down the substitutions to convey to the 4th Official for Man City and being the "token Brit" on the coaching staff. Has anybody ever seen Pelligrini or Mancini before him actually talk about the performance with Kidd during a game?
 
Woodwardfan said:
Fair enough Bush, but I have an inkling that Weir has a bit more about him than Kidd.

Time will tell for Weir. Kidd will retire a rich man for writing down the substitutions to convey to the 4th Official for Man City and being the "token Brit" on the coaching staff. Has anybody ever seen Pelligrini or Mancini before him actually talk about the performance with Kidd during a game?
Click to expand...

Brian Kidd is a legend among assistant managers.
The managers he has assisted is like a who's who of football managers.
Alex Ferguson
Terry Venables.
Sven-Göran Eriksson
Neil Warnock
Roberto Mancini
Weir is light years away from that calibre.
 
Hunkerby said:
Brian Kidd is a legend among assistant managers.
The managers he has assisted is like a who's who of football managers.
Alex Ferguson
Terry Venables.
Sven-Göran Eriksson
Neil Warnock
Roberto Mancini
Weir is light years away from that calibre.
Click to expand...


OK Hunkerby, you believe what you believe. I can honestly say that I have never heard Kidd make an impression on me whenever he has interviewed at Blackburn or on other odd occasions and I have never seen him do anything other than the "startled rabbit with a non-plussed, quizical look" on his face when sitting alongside any of those managers. At Bramall Lane I can see him with his arm across the top of the dugout, not giving any input or support to Robson who similarly stood " like a startled rabbit, mesmerised" by everything that was not going to plan in front of him on the pitch. Certainly Kidd didn't take any of the pressure away from Robson in his short time with us. Mind you, Robson did appoint the man, but what judgement did Robson have in those days?

Whilst he has made a good living out of football since his good playing career, I have known leaders in business who have surrounded themselves with "Yes Men" and I think Kidd is one of those. Obviously he must put the cones out well and writes the shirt numbers down well, I must concede.
 
startled rabbit with a non-plussed, quizzical look, that sums up david weir exactly,i have never seen a worse manager of any club ever.
 
Woodwardfan said:
OK Hunkerby, you believe what you believe. I can honestly say that I have never heard Kidd make an impression on me whenever he has interviewed at Blackburn or on other odd occasions and I have never seen him do anything other than the "startled rabbit with a non-plussed, quizical look" on his face when sitting alongside any of those managers. At Bramall Lane I can see him with his arm across the top of the dugout, not giving any input or support to Robson who similarly stood " like a startled rabbit, mesmerised" by everything that was not going to plan in front of him on the pitch. Certainly Kidd didn't take any of the pressure away from Robson in his short time with us. Mind you, Robson did appoint the man, but what judgement did Robson have in those days?

Whilst he has made a good living out of football since his good playing career, I have known leaders in business who have surrounded themselves with "Yes Men" and I think Kidd is one of those. Obviously he must put the cones out well and writes the shirt numbers down well, I must concede.
Click to expand...
But despite all that he is still regarded as a good coach and a good number two. So by saying Weir is a good number two, it just means he's good at putting out the cones and shouting 'well done Mac'. It doesn't in any way prove that he has the necessary qualities to be a manager.

And Kidd was appointed by Warnock.
 
BushBlade said:
But despite all that he is still regarded as a good coach and a good number two. So by saying Weir is a good number two, it just means he's good at putting out the cones and shouting 'well done Mac'. It doesn't in any way prove that he has the necessary qualities to be a manager.

And Kidd was appointed by Warnock.
Click to expand...


It's my opinion and hunch he will make a good manager before long - I said no more than that - just an opinion, not a fact.:rolleyes: Added to that I only made the comments because of all the vitriol and smart-arse comments about him on here.
 



Woodwardfan said:
One final word about David Weir.



Since he left us he has enjoyed big success as Assistant Manager at Brentford and now Rangers. He is not a passenger at those clubs, just along for the ride.

The man has great qualities and I have no doubt he will make a successful manager before long.
Click to expand...

That was the comment I was responding to.
 
Woodwardfan said:
Fair enough Bush, but I have an inkling that Weir has a bit more about him than Kidd.

Time will tell for Weir. Kidd will retire a rich man for writing down the substitutions to convey to the 4th Official for Man City and being the "token Brit" on the coaching staff. Has anybody ever seen Pelligrini or Mancini before him actually talk about the performance with Kidd during a game?
Click to expand...

But he's damn good with them cones and bibs!
 
Woodwardfan said:
One final word about David Weir.

He's a football man through and through. A distinguished player and leader. He captained his club for years and his country.

He had a bad start at Bramall Lane but inherited a shocking squad in a terrible state of mind. He lost McDonald after one game.

Nobody should judge any manager on a handful of games, that should be obvious. On joining our club the prince had money to invest and understandably didn't fancy a rookie manager spending it. All perfectly reasonable and Weir was a victim of circumstances.

Since he left us he has enjoyed big success as Assistant Manager at Brentford and now Rangers. He is not a passenger at those clubs, just along for the ride.

The man has great qualities and I have no doubt he will make a successful manager before long.
Click to expand...

Weir is not a manager - he is a good number 2 :o

A bit of a regurgitation from a previous post of mine but this is how I see it.
Weir typified the new order of things whereby the rookie managers complete their UEFA A badge and in doing so believe the propaganda that there is only one successful style of football. However, none of them realise that the particular style of football is suited to World Class players (or top tier players). It's formulaic at best and utterly clueless and arrogant besides that. The guys that set the curriculum have no idea about the Clog Dance of the third division in England. It doesn't compute because there is such a lack of physical contact in the top tiers (interpretations of the laws have seen to its decline as the teams with the small, skilful players have lobbied for this to be all but outlawed).

This propensity for young coaches (and those older ones that feel they are "progressive") is to believe there is only one way to play. What that does is play into the top clubs hands in two ways. 1. If a top team plays a lower level team in a cup competition and they both play the passing game it's almost inevitable that the top team will prevail as their superior quality will make the difference, and 2. If there is a player that shows the ability to cope better with this short passing, side ways style, the top teams adopt, then they will be snapped up, ready prepared for the top leagues. The coaching courses teach the way in which football is played at the top level. That's why you see the likes of Weir, Dunn, Johnson - and Adkins think they have to play that way in the third tier. The more canny managers would aspire to that but have a dose of reality in that the style you play has to suit a) the ability of the players you have, and b) the opposition you have to overcome to achieve a promotion - if that is a hard physical slog then you have to be equipped to handle that.

Weir did not understand that - he persevered with a puritan style of play, thinking that it would prove to be successful over time. What he failed to see is that the quality of player at this level can be comfortable pissing about with the ball at the back and across the pitch when they are not under any pressure or have to do anything remotely offensive but as soon as you introduce the opposition, physicality, harassment, effort and commitment the capability of the players at this level to do something outstanding, to complete a precise and accurate passing move, to create space and exploit it, is way below the aptitude required to execute the plan effectively. You only have to look at FA Cup upsets to see this sort of situation in action. An accomplished team is turned over by a group of players, seemingly far lower in ability and skill, because their commitment, desire, togetherness and physicality knock the "pure" footballers out of kilter. You try yo play like a Prem side in the third division, without the quality and without matching the effort of the opposition and you will see a record of 10 games played and one win (against 10 men - a team that only just scraped third division survival in the last game of the season). Weir never recognised that - he should have done - that was his inexperience at this level since his whole career before then had been at the top of the Scottish and English game.
 
Last edited:
Kenilworth said:
Weir is not a manager - he is a good number 2 :eek:

A bit of a regurgitation from a previous post of mine but this is how I see it.
Weir typified the new order of things whereby the rookie managers complete their UEFA A badge and in doing so believe the propaganda that there is only one successful style of football. However, none of them realise that the particular style of football is suited to World Class players (or top tier players). It's formulaic at best and utterly clueless and arrogant besides that. The guys that set the curriculum have no idea about the Clog Dance of the third division in England. It doesn't compute because there is such a lack of physical contact in the top tiers (interpretations of the laws have seen to its decline as the teams with the small, skilful players have lobbied for this to be all but outlawed).

This propensity for young coaches (and those older ones that feel they are "progressive") is to believe there is only one way to play. What that does is play into the top clubs hands in two ways. 1. If a top team plays a lower level team in a cup competition and they both play the passing game it's almost inevitable that the top team will prevail as their superior quality will make the difference, and 2. If there is a player that shows the ability to cope better with this short passing, side ways style, the top teams adopt, then they will be snapped up, ready prepared for the top leagues. The coaching courses teach the way in which football is played at the top level. That's why you see the likes of Weir, Dunn, Johnson - and Adkins think they have to play that way in the third tier. The more canny managers would aspire to that but have a dose of reality in that the style you play has to suit a) the ability of the players you have, and b) the opposition you have to overcome to achieve a promotion - if that is a hard physical slog then you have to be equipped to handle that.

Weir did not understand that - he persevered with a puritan style of play, thinking that it would prove to be successful over time. What he failed to see is that the quality of player at this level can be comfortable pissing about with the ball at the back and across the pitch when they are not under any pressure or have to do anything remotely offensive but as soon as you introduce the opposition, physicality, harassment, effort and commitment the capability of the players at this level to do something outstanding, to complete a precise and accurate passing move, to create space and exploit it, is way below the aptitude required to execute the plan effectively. You only have to look at FA Cup upsets to see this sort of situation in action. An accomplished team is turned over by a group of players, seemingly far lower in ability and skill, because their commitment, desire, togetherness and physicality knock the "pure" footballers out of kilter. You try yo play like a Prem side in the third division, without the quality and without matching the effort of the opposition and you will see a record of 10 games played and one win (against 10 men - a team that only just scraped third division survival in the last game of the season). Weir never recognised that - he should have done - that was his inexperience at this level since his whole career before then had been at the top of the Scottish and English game.
Click to expand...


That is a good post making a general point about modern coaches but to suggest that Weir was a slave to that doctrine is a false premiss; he only managed us for 13 games after all !!

To suggest he would keep doing the same things forever is bizarre.

Weir was embarking on a culture change and that was his brief. He may well have persisted with it regardless of results, nobody knows that. I happen to think he would and I also think we would have been in danger of being relegated. I also think it might have turned out much better than the state than we are now despite the extra investment from the prince, but we'll never know of course. I would love us to have a lean and mean, young, mobile, pacey squad hungry to challenge at higher tiers of the league.

Weir has learned a lot since he left us. It really is bizarre to write him off as a perpetual No.2 and slave to a single way of playing.
 
A culture change is more than a change in style of play, it also encompasses a change in attitude, professionalism and dedication.
Although Weir attempted a change in playing style I believe our culture regressed in its effectiveness during his tenure.
This may well have been due to his inexperience in management.
If he has learned a lot then he may well get another chance at another club but it's likely to be at a club where he has worked as the number 2 for a manager who has moved on.
 
Kenilworth said:
Weir is not a manager - he is a good number 2 :eek:

A bit of a regurgitation from a previous post of mine but this is how I see it.
Weir typified the new order of things whereby the rookie managers complete their UEFA A badge and in doing so believe the propaganda that there is only one successful style of football. However, none of them realise that the particular style of football is suited to World Class players (or top tier players). It's formulaic at best and utterly clueless and arrogant besides that. The guys that set the curriculum have no idea about the Clog Dance of the third division in England. It doesn't compute because there is such a lack of physical contact in the top tiers (interpretations of the laws have seen to its decline as the teams with the small, skilful players have lobbied for this to be all but outlawed).

This propensity for young coaches (and those older ones that feel they are "progressive") is to believe there is only one way to play. What that does is play into the top clubs hands in two ways. 1. If a top team plays a lower level team in a cup competition and they both play the passing game it's almost inevitable that the top team will prevail as their superior quality will make the difference, and 2. If there is a player that shows the ability to cope better with this short passing, side ways style, the top teams adopt, then they will be snapped up, ready prepared for the top leagues. The coaching courses teach the way in which football is played at the top level. That's why you see the likes of Weir, Dunn, Johnson - and Adkins think they have to play that way in the third tier. The more canny managers would aspire to that but have a dose of reality in that the style you play has to suit a) the ability of the players you have, and b) the opposition you have to overcome to achieve a promotion - if that is a hard physical slog then you have to be equipped to handle that.

Weir did not understand that - he persevered with a puritan style of play, thinking that it would prove to be successful over time. What he failed to see is that the quality of player at this level can be comfortable pissing about with the ball at the back and across the pitch when they are not under any pressure or have to do anything remotely offensive but as soon as you introduce the opposition, physicality, harassment, effort and commitment the capability of the players at this level to do something outstanding, to complete a precise and accurate passing move, to create space and exploit it, is way below the aptitude required to execute the plan effectively. You only have to look at FA Cup upsets to see this sort of situation in action. An accomplished team is turned over by a group of players, seemingly far lower in ability and skill, because their commitment, desire, togetherness and physicality knock the "pure" footballers out of kilter. You try yo play like a Prem side in the third division, without the quality and without matching the effort of the opposition and you will see a record of 10 games played and one win (against 10 men - a team that only just scraped third division survival in the last game of the season). Weir never recognised that - he should have done - that was his inexperience at this level since his whole career before then had been at the top of the Scottish and English game.
Click to expand...
No, it's much simpler than that; he signed some turkeys. Part of his brief was to rebuild the team after the departure of the five short term/loan players and he brought in Taylor, McGinn, Brandy, Cuvelier, Baxter and some kids like McGinty and Johns.
He also made some poor decisions, such as having everyone back at corners, and appeared dour and a poor man manager; he didn't treat Porter very well.
In short, he didn't display any of the qualities needed as a manager. He could have been on the best coaching course on the world or he could have gone on none, it wouldn't have made him a good manager.
 
Hunkerby said:
A culture change is more than a change in style of play, it also encompasses a change in attitude, professionalism and dedication.
Although Weir attempted a change in playing style I believe our culture regressed in its effectiveness during his tenure.
This may well have been due to his inexperience in management.
If he has learned a lot then he may well get another chance at another club but it's likely to be at a club where he has worked as the number 2 for a manager who has moved on.
Click to expand...
Rangers. At some point Warburton will move back south and Weir will probably take over at Ibrox. And if he can't succeed there...
 
BushBlade said:
Never heard that. Either way, it was well before Robson.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was. I watched one training session at Shirecliffe one Friday morning towards the end of the 2006-07 season. It looked like Kidd had his hands tied behind him and wait for Warnock or McCall to allow him to do some coaching
 
BushBlade said:
My point is that a number two has little influence over a team's results because the manager picks the team and tactics, buys the players etc.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that Brian Clough never had the same success after he parted company with Peter Taylor in 1982.
 
blade.i.am said:
The significance of this season is another car crash in League 1. Sadly, it really does feel like early 80s, dropping into League 2 might be a better option for long term progression than yet another season in League 1 treading water.
Click to expand...
yes Ive considered having my leg amputated to ease the chill blanes in my toes
its a similar scenario and as clever a plan
 



You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GymClassHero
Make Ben Mee Captain.
Replies
16
Views
1K
Nedski
Nedski
R
Utter Dog Meat
Replies
4
Views
717
3Cheers4Ramirez
3Cheers4Ramirez
R
That Jay McEveley moment
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
Kenworthy’s Tash
Kenworthy’s Tash
FH Team
Interviews with staff & players in Girona
Replies
0
Views
712
FH Team
FH Team
Silkblade
The new owners are letting us down!
5 6 7
Replies
209
Views
17K
Snake
S

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom