The instability thing

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

All this criteria actually fits with Clough ,( with the exception of tactics and being able to adapt ) , but unfortunately we are in the wrong league for him to have succeeded.

Yes, the Southern League Premier Division (Burton), The Conference Premier (Burton), the Championship (Derby) and Division One (Blades) were all the 'wrong leagues' for Clough and his utter failure in all of them had nothing to do with him. Wrong leagues, you see. I'm sure if he managed a Premier League side, he'd fly and prove us all wrong. :rolleyes:

Clough had taken on his lessons learnt from this season , but has not been able to put them into practice with getting the sack.

I'm sorry, but where do you get this idea from?
 
Last edited:

Yes, the Southern League Premier Division (Burton), The Conference Premier (Burton), the Championship (Derby) and Division One (Blades) were all the 'wrong leagues' for Clough and his utter failure in all of them had nothing to do with him. Wrong leagues, you see.



I'm sorry, but where do you get this idea from?

graf ,

Did we give Clough a chance , that what i am getting at.

.Do we know what is actual remit was. Was it promotion , stability or both.

He had admitted the CB situation .

I feel we should have given him another season .

Do we blame the managers or the team that picks them . You cannot sack the board.

UTB
 
I think the last one we employed was good enough to get us out of this division given another season. Whoever takes over now is unlikely to get us up at the first time of asking anyhow (not been done for us in 30+ years). We can argue long into the night about who what where why and when but the fact is some stability and not sacking at stupid times of the season (3 games in, 5 games to go sort of thing) would be a start. Sacking someone with the foresight to have been looking at other options would be another good idea.

Thing for me is we keep sacking managers but none of them have actually made us any better. You can keep blaming the manager or you could look at the person employing them who is the one making the biggest mistake.
The problem is is the first sentence though. "I think"......I think it's a lot less likely with a manager who's done it once is 17 years (or whatever it is.)

Id believe Nigel Adkins will do it. I'm far less convinced that Clough will.

Of course, it's all about percentages.

UTB
 
It's a sobering thought that the only managers to give us anything to shout about since the halcyon days of Currie and Woodward et al are Bassett and Warnock. I missed Porterfield because that was one season in division 4. Both men and Porterfield to some extent were given time. The only other who potentially could have was Spackman who had us playing great football, had a good team but was let down massively by the board at the time.
 
The problem is is the first sentence though. "I think"......I think it's a lot less likely with a manager who's done it once is 17 years (or whatever it is.)

Id believe Nigel Adkins will do it. I'm far less convinced that Clough will.

Of course, it's all about percentages.

UTB

Adkins you may have a point, Parkinson less so
 
It's a sobering thought that the only managers to give us anything to shout about since the halcyon days of Currie and Woodward et al are Bassett and Warnock. I missed Porterfield because that was one season in division 4. Both men and Porterfield to some extent were given time. The only other who potentially could have was Spackman who had us playing great football, had a good team but was let down massively by the board at the time.
If any manager in our recent history had spent the money Clough had, and returned such a rubbish 3rd division team, they would not have been given much time. Maybe until Christmas, but not more than 2 years.

Other than the fact we are shite, and keep employing shite managers in the face of statistics that warn you so, nothing much has changed.

Employing Adkins will be a change. I'm yet so get the fuss over Robinson.

UTB
 
Personally I think any manager should be given two summer transfer windows to mould a team. The obvious caveat being if they show Robson/Weir suicidal tendencies.

One below par season isn't reason to tear up the plan and start again.


Perhaps, but i also think three transfer windows is plenty for the board to have a good idea of what the 4th might be like.
 
It's a sobering thought that the only managers to give us anything to shout about since the halcyon days of Currie and Woodward et al are Bassett and Warnock. I missed Porterfield because that was one season in division 4. Both men and Porterfield to some extent were given time. The only other who potentially could have was Spackman who had us playing great football, had a good team but was let down massively by the board at the time.

I may have gotten it wrong but didn't Porterfield also get us up to Division 2 at the time? You can't miss a bloke out just because the promotion was out of Division 4. If you knew the mess we were in at the time it wasn't a bad achievement. Bringing back Edwards (why the hell we sold him in the first place is another great mystery), getting Colin Morris and Bob Hatton in also helped greatly.
 
Bringing back Edwards (why the hell we sold him in the first place is another great mystery).

Fully agree, we signed the injury prone Steve Finnieston and then got rid of Edwards. Edwards would have converted many of Sabella's intelligent through balls
 
I may have gotten it wrong but didn't Porterfield also get us up to Division 2 at the time? You can't miss a bloke out just because the promotion was out of Division 4. If you knew the mess we were in at the time it wasn't a bad achievement. Bringing back Edwards (why the hell we sold him in the first place is another great mystery), getting Colin Morris and Bob Hatton in also helped greatly.

Tis' true Bladesway that Porterfield did get us back in the old 2nd, although by the skin of our teeth relying on Hull not to beat Burnley by 3 goals. I enjoyed those years on the whole too but I left him out because he spent a lot of cash by 3rd and 4th division standards in those days to get us to the 2nd. There were some great memories from that era, beating Oldham (a good team at the time) 5-1 away, Portsmouth 3-0 away and beating Grimsby 5-1 in the League Cup with Edwards scoring a hat-trick after coming on as sub! (to name just a few)

I thought at the time that Porterfield got a raw deal after the team had finished 7th but his teams, although capable of some good results, were too soft and quite easily got battered a few times too. However, I'd take that team anyday over the present one!
 
Tis' true Bladesway that Porterfield did get us back in the old 2nd, although by the skin of our teeth relying on Hull not to beat Burnley by 3 goals. I enjoyed those years on the whole too but I left him out because he spent a lot of cash by 3rd and 4th division standards in those days to get us to the 2nd. There were some great memories from that era, beating Oldham (a good team at the time) 5-1 away, Portsmouth 3-0 away and beating Grimsby 5-1 in the League Cup with Edwards scoring a hat-trick after coming on as sub! (to name just a few)

I thought at the time that Porterfield got a raw deal after the team had finished 7th but his teams, although capable of some good results, were too soft and quite easily got battered a few times too. However, I'd take that team anyday over the present one!

Aye, remember it well. I was at Turf Moor that evening and when they went 2-0 up thought that was it. Think they had a goal disallowed and remember a certain Brian Marwood playing for them. Hull were a good side and battered Burnley that evening.

Happy days but you were right about Porterfields soft touch side. He didn't treat Edwards too well either.
 
I've had the same "signature" below for some months. Smart arse that I am.:)

Not a lot to ask though.
 
Perhaps it was the chat about the plans for that which ended his tenure?

I suspect this is probably true.

"So, Nigel, what went wrong last season?"

"Nothing much, just a bit unlucky"

"Right..."

I would think most people would have second thoughts about him continuing if that was how it were played out.
 

Fully agree, we signed the injury prone Steve Finnieston and then got rid of Edwards. Edwards would have converted many of Sabella's intelligent through balls

I know it has stiff competition with the sale of Beattie and the two Kyles, amongst others, but having recently read King Keith's book I do wonder whether the sale of Edwards by Haslam was the dumbest player sale of my lifetime, especially, when combined with his replacement by Steve Finneston, who makes James Wallace's appearance record look semi-respectable.

To take this thread on a tangent, I know Haslam had a good track record with Luton and a brief to wheel and deal and raise money but with hindsight, it's readily apparent he'd completely lost it.

The best example is his striker sales. In 1978 and 1979 United had 5 promising young forwards. Haslam sold them and and by and large replaced them with crap, which was a key reason we went down in 1979. Here are the 4 players and the number of league goals they scored after we sold them:

Simon Stainrod: 130 goals
Bobby Campbell: 158 goals
Keith Edwards: 199 goals (luckily, 114 were for us, after we re-signed him)
Imre Varadi - 147 goals
Ian Benjamin - 124 goals

Varadi and Benjamin were sold for big fees after a handful of games and goals, but the other 3 had track records as goalscorers.

This is staggering incompetence. What did Haslam think he was doing?
 
I know it has stiff competition with the sale of Beattie and the two Kyles, amongst others, but having recently read King Keith's book I do wonder whether the sale of Edwards by Haslam was the dumbest player sale of my lifetime, especially, when combined with his replacement by Steve Finneston, who makes James Wallace's appearance record look semi-respectable.

To take this thread on a tangent, I know Haslam had a good track record with Luton and a brief to wheel and deal and raise money but with hindsight, it's readily apparent he'd completely lost it.

The best example is his striker sales. In 1978 and 1979 United had 5 promising young forwards. Haslam sold them and and by and large replaced them with crap, which was a key reason we went down in 1979. Here are the 4 players and the number of league goals they scored after we sold them:

Simon Stainrod: 130 goals
Bobby Campbell: 158 goals
Keith Edwards: 199 goals (luckily, 114 were for us, after we re-signed him)
Imre Varadi - 147 goals
Ian Benjamin - 124 goals

Varadi and Benjamin were sold for big fees after a handful of games and goals, but the other 3 had track records as goalscorers.

This is staggering incompetence. What did Haslam think he was doing?
Agree with you that Haslam was stupid to sell Stainrod, Edwards and Varadi. I didnt really rate Benjamin and I thought the £180K fee was very good for us. Campbell's lifestyle caused many problems and our board had enough of him like the Huddersfield board did a year earlier
 
Agree with you that Haslam was stupid to sell Stainrod, Edwards and Varadi. I didnt really rate Benjamin and I thought the £180K fee was very good for us. Campbell's lifestyle caused many problems and our board had enough of him like the Huddersfield board did a year earlier

Fair point re Campbell. He wore out his welcome everywhere save Bradford.

It's incredible though: 5 players with 100+ goals in them sold in 18 months. For comparison, in the next 36 years we've only sold 2 players (Sharp and Mendonca) who've gone on to score that many, and in each case we got them back and they failed!
 
Fair point re Campbell. He wore out his welcome everywhere save Bradford.

It's incredible though: 5 players with 100+ goals in them sold in 18 months. For comparison, in the next 36 years we've only sold 2 players (Sharp and Mendonca) who've gone on to score that many, and in each case we got them back and they failed!

To be slightly contrarian, was Edwards really all that when we sold him?

He had been in and out of the team in 77-78 and only managed 11 goals and note we sold him to 3rd Division Hull. Presumably no-one at a higher level was interested in him.

We replaced him with Finnieston who had scored 34 in 80 games (as opposed to Edwards 29 in a similar number of games) and (I think) been Chelsea's top scorer when they won promotion in 1977. With hindsight, it was, of course, a duff swap, but at the time, I think it looked reasonable. From my memory as a 11/12 year old, everyone thought Finnieston was a good signing and in signing him and Sabella, I can't recall any great outcry at Edwards leaving.

Edit: Finnieston was indeed Chelsea's top scorer in 1976-77. He got 26. Signing someone who had scored 26 goals in a promotion winning team but 2 seasons ago looks pretty ambitious.
 
To be slightly contrarian, was Edwards really all that when we sold him?

He had been in and out of the team in 77-78 and only managed 11 goals and note we sold him to 3rd Division Hull. Presumably no-one at a higher level was interested in him.

We replaced him with Finnieston who had scored 34 in 80 games (as opposed to Edwards 29 in a similar number of games) and (I think) been Chelsea's top scorer when they won promotion in 1977. With hindsight, it was, of course, a duff swap, but at the time, I think it looked reasonable. From my memory as a 11/12 year old, everyone thought Finnieston was a good signing and in signing him and Sabella, I can't recall any great outcry at Edwards leaving.

Edit: Finnieston was indeed Chelsea's top scorer in 1976-77. He got 26. Signing someone who had scored 26 goals in a promotion winning team but 2 seasons ago looks pretty ambitious.
Finnieston was out injured for most of the 1977-78 season, Chelsea were happy to take £100K for a crock. We should have had a proper medicial examination on him and I was told that we "overlooked" a lot of things
 
Just before we sold him, Edwards had broken the club record for scoring in consecutive games (8) so I would have thought it should have been plain to see for the manager that he was a young and talented goalscorer and to be fair, perhaps not so obvious to an 11 year old fan.
Agree this is one of the most disastrous bits of business in the clubs history in probably the most disastrous period in the clubs history as evidenced by both King Keiths and Kenworthy's books.

Incidentally, despite Edwards regularly falling out with Porterfield, they remained friends and of course Keith went on to rejoin him at Aberdeen, unlike McEwan, who he couldn't stand and had no respect for at all.
 
Just before we sold him, Edwards had broken the club record for scoring in consecutive games (8) so I would have thought it should have been plain to see for the manager that he was a young and talented goalscorer and to be fair, perhaps not so obvious to an 11 year old fan.
Agree this is one of the most disastrous bits of business in the clubs history in probably the most disastrous period in the clubs history as evidenced by both King Keiths and Kenworthy's books.

Incidentally, despite Edwards regularly falling out with Porterfield, they remained friends and of course Keith went on to rejoin him at Aberdeen, unlike McEwan, who he couldn't stand and had no respect for at all.

But he must have only played under Mcewan for 2 months?
 
Was the back end of my first full season going so all a bit vague. Think it was always on the cards that Keith was going anyway wasn't it? I'm sure we arranged a friendly against Seville to try and flog him to them!
 
Was the back end of my first full season going so all a bit vague. Think it was always on the cards that Keith was going anyway wasn't it? I'm sure we arranged a friendly against Seville to try and flog him to them!

Very true, part of a double deal that would have seen both Keith and Colin Morris join Seville. Only fell through because Seville sacked their manager before the transfer could take place.

Edwards was unsettled during the later stages of his blades career, mainly due to being made the scapegoat and left out whenever the team lost a couple of games, then he'd come back and score again!

I will always fondly remember the League Cup tie in about 1985 or 86 against Everton, who I think were League Champions at the time and Neville Southall was an awesome keeper, yet Edwards scored twice against him in a 2-2 draw at the Lane including one where he took the ball round him and tapped it in - a truly great finisher, if he was one on one, you expected him to score every time.
 
Very true, part of a double deal that would have seen both Keith and Colin Morris join Seville. Only fell through because Seville sacked their manager before the transfer could take place.

Edwards was unsettled during the later stages of his blades career, mainly due to being made the scapegoat and left out whenever the team lost a couple of games, then he'd come back and score again!

I will always fondly remember the League Cup tie in about 1985 or 86 against Everton, who I think were League Champions at the time and Neville Southall was an awesome keeper, yet Edwards scored twice against him in a 2-2 draw at the Lane including one where he took the ball round him and tapped it in - a truly great finisher, if he was one on one, you expected him to score every time.

It was early in the 1984-5 season. Edwards got one, not two. A Morris pen was the other goal.

Edwards finished coolly but was about 10 yards offside when he got the ball!
 
So as the season ended in 2005, we'd just lost our last home game to Millwall, warnock was being followed by a tv crew filming him for a fly on the wall sky documentary about him and us. It was the final part in the documentary which eventually ended with United missing on the top 6, albeit in the championship. 'Destination premiership' was again hitting the brakes and the locals weren't happy. Warnock having stabilised the rot in several years had little to spend, his methods not always everyone's cup of tea. Yet he survived the summer which followed and he took us up the next year. It's not been good since.

Warnock had his doubters, he generally had a good season followed by a poor rebuilding season. He was the last manager to stay longer than two seasons. Two full seasons. Blackwell, Wilson and Clough all reached and lost out in the play off lottery, Wilson made it almost a full season after his loss, Blackwell managed the summer and Clough just weeks. Warnock somehow, after two semis and a play off final in the same season, kept his job.

Going into the 10th anniversary season since our last promotion season, we find ourselves managerless again, sure we've got the summer to bring in a new manager, let him sort out the squad and push us into another promotion season or so we'll be told. We've been told this approximately every other season since Warnock left and we look exitedly ahead to a promotion push! The consistency of the inconsistent United, sacking managers when we've not reached that goal.

So are we setting our targets too high? Certainly not, big club, big resources, big expectation and big names coming in. We should be the first side that the bookies shorten the odds on over the summer for promotion. It's not arrogance, we'd expect nothing less than to be in the running. It doesn't work like that though.

4-4-2, 4-5-1, short passes, youth, experience, long ball, managers with their arms folded, animated managers... We've tried the lot. So we're told that we need to take a different direction, get the new manager in, that's the way we'll do it. But we've tried everything in the last ten years. We lost Derek Dooley not long after that promotion to the Premier League and since then we've lost the 'footballing man' at the club, the voice of reason, the man in the managers corner.

What have we learnt in 10 or even 20 years? We've learnt that the two managers that took us to the top division did so with time. This is not a cry for Bassett or Warnock, far from it, but giving time.

Right now I've lost faith in Phipps et al. They're no doubt desperate for success and profits from United, but like the McCabe era before, they find simple solutions in paying off and binning managers. Whilst I like Phipps, Baki and the prince, the focus seems to have been pleasing the empty vessels on Facebook and Twitter, perhaps I'm being harsh.

So if we've learnt one thing in ten years, perhaps it's that we need stability. The next manager whomever it may be, must firstly be that right choice, it's too late for Clough, but we need to set out the club ethos, have a plan and stick too it. But most importantly - get some fucking stability into the club and stick with the manager. It's the one thing we've not tried in ten years, so please, please let's give it a go.

You never know it might work....

Some important points here Swiss, which the club hierarchy would be wise to dwell on.

Many posters have supported the idea of stability, qualified with the need for "the right manager." How do we know whether we've picked "the right manager" unless we give him/her time to prove or disprove that notion? If anyone has a validated profile for what "the right manager" actually consists of, it would be fascinating to see. Interestingly, 'having previously won promotion from Div 3' (a desirable quality for many) is not a common factor for managers of teams promoted from our division in recent years.

My recollection is that a large majority of Blades on social and mainstream media seemed happy with Clough's appointment, so presumably saw him as "the right manager." Two thirds of supporters on the two most popular Blades forum wanted stability and Clough to be allowed to start next season. This was, in part, justified by the amount of finance and belief invested by the club in Project Clough. Despite some scary errors of judgement, many also believed he had built a squad that wasn't far from being capable of gaining automatic promotion next season. The board however, viewed things differently and had clearly lost patience given their explicit and stated expectation of promotion being achieved in 2014/15.

It is an interesting change in dynamic that sees supporters as a more patient group than a board of directors and, as you suggest, evidence that "profit" is the key driver here and not necessarily building a club for the longer term. To be fair to The Prince, he made his motivations clear from the outset and so nobody, least of all Cloughie, should be surprised at where we are today.

Personally, I find the whole process of continuous rebuilding tiresome and frustrating. I want a manager and players I can relate to and connect with and not the merry go round we've had to endure post-Warnock. That's not to say managers are not ultimately accountable for results (especially when they have as much control as Cloughie supposedly had) but I do want to feel we've given the present incubent a fair opportunity to succeed.

Finally, your "lost faith" in Phipps comment. I would argue he's substantially improved club PR since his arrival and has at least appeared as though he is 'a man with a plan with a club on a mission'. Like Cloughie he's also made some schoolboy errors; not least his flawed judgement in implying his own job security was linked to Cloughie succeeding - evidently not the case! But in the name of stability, I'm prepared to give Jim a bit more time to learn from his mistakes...........
 

Just before we sold him, Edwards had broken the club record for scoring in consecutive games (8) so I would have thought it should have been plain to see for the manager that he was a young and talented goalscorer and to be fair, perhaps not so obvious to an 11 year old fan.
Agree this is one of the most disastrous bits of business in the clubs history in probably the most disastrous period in the clubs history as evidenced by both King Keiths and Kenworthy's books.

Incidentally, despite Edwards regularly falling out with Porterfield, they remained friends and of course Keith went on to rejoin him at Aberdeen, unlike McEwan, who he couldn't stand and had no respect for at all.

Actually, that was the season before he was sold 76-77. In the 2nd half of 77-78, Edwards only scored 4 goals, just before he was sold.
 

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