Which manager gave the Blades the best football?

[tomtheblade]

Which manager, since Bassett left, has given us the best football?

Since Bassett because for the majority of this time we have been in the Championship, so the playing field is relatively even for the managers involved.

People are always making the point that Blackwell brings an unattractive playing style, so who gave us the type of football we'd like to see more of?

 

[JJ Sefton]

Youve missed Thompson off the list.

 

[Latters]

I said Kendall. I liked the attacking 5-3-2 with Vass and Quinny I running down the wings and getting decent crosses in. Gave us some great performances. Sunderland on Vass's debut springs to mind.

 

[LouTheBlade]

I said Kendall. I liked the attacking 5-3-2 with Vass and Quinny I running down the wings and getting decent crosses in. Gave us some great performances. Sunderland on Vass's debut springs to mind.

I agree with you about Vas and Quinny mate but that wasn't Kendall's team. Spackman bought Borbokis - Kendall left after the 96 playoff final and Borbokis didnt join until later that summer for the new season.....

But I do agree that team played the best football, thats why I voted for Spackman. I preferred his brand of football as it was entertaining but we mixed it up a bit.

Kendall was good but a bit too tippy tappy for my liking - trying to walk the ball into the net. I would expect we had a better goal to game ratio under spackman but havent seen the stats - I bet someone comes up with some now though

 

[tomtheblade]

I missed Thompson off because he was caretaker manager for half a season and didn't get the chance to impose his own playing style on the club with a preseason or anything similar.

But if you think he gave us the best football then by all means post him as a reply and say why

 

[JJ Sefton]

I agree with you about Vas and Quinny mate but that wasn't Kendall's team. Spackman bought Borbokis - Kendall left after the 96 playoff final and Borbokis didnt join until later that summer for the new season.....

Indeed. I think the Sunderland home game was Spackman's first game in charge.

 

[Latters]

I agree with you about Vas and Quinny mate but that wasn't Kendall's team. Spackman bought Borbokis - Kendall left after the 96 playoff final and Borbokis didnt join until later that summer for the new season.....

But I do agree that team played the best football, thats why I voted for Spackman. I preferred his brand of football as it was entertaining but we mixed it up a bit.

Kendall was good but a bit too tippy tappy for my liking - trying to walk the ball into the net. I would expect we had a better goal to game ratio under spackman but havent seen the stats - I bet someone comes up with some now though

Fair enough, in which case I'd like to change my vote!

 

[LouTheBlade]

Indeed. I think the Sunderland home game was Spackman's first game in charge.

It certainly was, I think we all loved that team - I believe it lined up something like this;

GK: Alan Kelly/Simon Tracey (whoever was fit)
RWB: Vas Borbokis
LWB: Wayne Quinn
CB: Paul McGrath
CB: David Holdsworth
CB: Carl Tiler
CM: Dane Whitehouse
CM: Graham Stuart/Nicky Marker
CM: Don Hutchinson
ST: Brian Deane
ST: Jan Aage Fjortoft

That team would have gone from strength to strength had it been left alone. They played the best football without doubt. Closest to it was the season of the two cup semi finals (only because of the players).

 

[Wards]

come on, which plank voted for Blackwell?

 

[Pierre's PC]

Voted for AH purley because of the footballing force of nature that was Axel Smeets

 

[Pinchy]

I agree with you about Vas and Quinny mate but that wasn't Kendall's team. Spackman bought Borbokis - Kendall left after the 96 playoff final and Borbokis didnt join until later that summer for the new season.....

But I do agree that team played the best football, thats why I voted for Spackman. I preferred his brand of football as it was entertaining but we mixed it up a bit.

Kendall was good but a bit too tippy tappy for my liking - trying to walk the ball into the net. I would expect we had a better goal to game ratio under spackman but havent seen the stats - I bet someone comes up with some now though

Spackman didn't buy Borbokis. He'd never heard of him! It was Charles Green. Spackman was an appalling manager. He demonstrated as much by his lack of backbone at BDTBL and subsequent disastrous tenure at Barnsley. He then sank without trace. Don't waste your vote.

The true answer, apart from Kendall's first half-season, is none of the above!

 

[LouTheBlade]

come on, which plank voted for Blackwell?

:lol: You will never get them to own up. I am pro Blackwell to be honest but I would never suggest his football is the best. Its too direct to be considered attractive.

I want to know who voted for Warnock, his football was the most one dimensional ive ever seen. It involved getting the ball out wide at every opportunity, then if that didnt work.....get the ball out wide again.....plan C? Get the ball out wide. Then if it really wasnt working - just bang it up in the air.

Warnock was a good manager but not what I would call tactically astute. I can't imagine why anyone voted for his regime.

 

[LouTheBlade]

Spackman didn't buy Borbokis. He'd never heard of him! It was Charles Green. Spackman was an appalling manager. He demonstrated as much by his lack of backbone at BDTBL and subsequent disastrous tenure at Barnsley. He then sank without trace. Don't waste your vote.

The true answer, apart from Kendall's first half-season, is none of the above!

All fond memories then?.......

Who was Charles Green? (Genuine question). Well Borbokis joined Spackman's team - regardless of who signed him.

I disagree that Spackman was an appalling manager - having said that I never suggested he was an amazing one. I merely think the team he had played the best football. Probably because he inherited a good team from Kendall and added more very good players to it (Deane, Borbokis etc.). We were a good side while he was there and scored plenty of goals.

I doubt many managers would show a lot of 'backbone' when 4 of his best players were sold under his feet. If memory serves Deane, Fjortoft, Hutchinson and Tiler were all sold before he departed.

Barnsley were in terminal decline when Spackman joined them so I dont devalue his credentials because of that.

 

[Grecian2000]

Voted Kendall. Took a Bassett team and got it passing in a week (the Bert Weedon of football). That half season was like going back to the John Harris era.

I think Spackers team played really well but some would say Willie Donachie had a lot to do with that.

Just thinking back to those days makes me want to weep thinking of the tedious lump ball we now accept as "our way".

 

[bartman]

Voted Kendall. Took a Bassett team and got it passing in a week (the Bert Weedon of football). That half season was like going back to the John Harris era.
I think Spackers team played really well but some would say Willie Donachie had a lot to do with that.

Just thinking back to those days makes me want to weep thinking of the tedious lump ball we now accept as "our way".

Agree re Kendall's first few month but his last few months was awful especially bearing in mind the players he had.(Huddersfield away anyone ?)

 

[shorehamview]

I voted for Warnock. How many of the others got us promoted?

After all, it's results based. Pretty football gets no points.

 

[Grecian2000]

I voted for Warnock. How many of the others got us promoted?

After all, it's results based. Pretty football gets no points.

No manager in the clubs history has been given as long to do so.

 

[shorehamview]

No manager in the clubs history has been given as long to do so.

He still did it though.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Well the best football I've seen from a Blades team was under Furphy, which was pre-Harry!

Since then, Kendall did a good transformation of the style, Spackman tried to carry that on but got shafted by the board and everyone after that was trying to do it with a very limited or non-existant budget.

 

[tomtheblade]

Well the best football I've seen from a Blades team was under Furphy, which was pre-Harry!

Since then, Kendall did a good transformation of the style, Spackman tried to carry that on but got shafted by the board and everyone after that was trying to do it with a very limited or non-existant budget.

Robson and Blackwell most definitely didn't have a non-existent budget.

Warnock can be given credit in this area because he really did have almost no money for most of his time in charge.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Robson and Blackwell most definitely didn't have a non-existant budget.

Warnock can be given credit in this area because he really did have almost no money for most of his time in charge.

I discounted those two on the grounds that Robson was a complete arse-wipe and shouldn't be included in the history books as ever managing the club, because he didn't. As for Blackwell, he had a bit of money for some of his first full season but that was soon curtailed (Beattie sale) when it became obvious the expenditure was way too high. It's been trim the wage bill since!

 

[Wards]

I can appreciate the football under Wazznock because in the main, he didn't have a pot to piss in. The side of 02/03 played some decent stuff given the majority of his signings that year were freebies and the like (onoura, Allison, Yates etc).

It's hard to warm to the style of Blackwell and Robson (lot of long ball) when in fact they've had the resources to put together teams with talented individuals. They should have/be got/getting more out of those players.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Robson?

Is allowed to vote for himself??

 

[Ollessendro]

I went for Howard. I thought for a year he got us playing some really decent stuff. It tailed off towards the end (probably in line with him starting to drink again!?) but in terms of ppure football I though he was best. He also got some really average players (Mitch ward springs to mind) palying out of there skin. If I remember rightly he brought in Katchouro, Devlin, Don Hutchinson and Andy Walker (and maybe Graeme Stuart).

Pinchy has a point about Warnock. He was the only one to get us promoted. and we actually played some decent football under Warnock. The promotion season (and 2002/2003) we played a real good mixture of direct and passing football. It's not just about passing. Even Man U boot at long at times. It's about being able to do both, to actualll play football when you need to.

 

[tomtheblade]

No love for Brucie then.

If you look at the stats, it's kind of easy to see why Spackman and Kendall are winning. Their teams had some good players in them, played some nice football, but won a lot of games as well. In terms of win % of these managers, they come 2nd and 3rd respectively. Blackwell is top with 48%.

Interestingly, Warnock is bottom of the win % table(yes, below Heath), had some of our poorest table positions in 10th, 13th and 16th (albeit rescuing us after Heath) but obviously also got us promoted and gave us 2 great seasons of football in the champ. He was also with us the longest time and had, on the most part, the least amount of money.

This tells me that we really do care about good football, because Blackwell comes in for a lot of stick despite his record, but despite his win record Warnock is rated fairly well.

 

[alcoblade]

I voted for Warnock. How many of the others got us promoted?

After all, it's results based. Pretty football gets no points.

so did I. And as a critic of Blackwell that takes some explaining. As SV says, he got us promoted. On top of that, his sides knew how to attack. Football isn't just "passing" or "direct". Warnock's teams knew how to attack. Blackwell's teams don't, IMHO.

Spackman didn't hack it long enough for me to rate, and I think a degree of myth has developed over his tenure. We were by no means certs for promotion when Deane and Fjortoft were sold, yet history has been re written so that we were. For some reason, I've forgotten most of Kendall's reign, which says a lot. But credit must go to him for getting a Bassett side to play ANY football.....


UTB

 

[tomtheblade]

Spackman didn't hack it long enough for me to rate, and I think a degree of myth has developed over his tenure. We were by no means certs for promotion when Deane and Fjortoft were sold, yet history has been re written so that we were.

I agree, i think there's a little bit of 'Jfk' syndrome with Spackman, in that there's a certain rose-tinted nostalgia which takes over when looking back on something which was cut down in its prime.

 

[bricktop]

The sad thing is about the Spackman reign is that the break even figure was 17-18,000 and only 14,000 could be bothered to turn out and watch them

 

[shorehamview]

so did I. And as a critic of Blackwell that takes some explaining. As SV says, he got us promoted. On top of that, his sides knew how to attack. Football isn't just "passing" or "direct". Warnock's teams knew how to attack....

Exactly. Remember the promotion season? We never knew when we were beaten, even when we got pasted. We attacked until the final whistle. Warnock got us up - everybody else since Bassett didn't.

 

[marko1889]

went for warnock, 03 season sticks out, sum great footy and hard to beat.. loads good goals too remember UTB