Why Adams should go now! Next season is too late..

[Rattly Noise]

Any new guy would get time.

No he wouldn't. There's no manager out there that all the fans would agree on, so unless we storm the league there'll be some that's on his back from day one (and by day one I mean pre-season). That's football.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Tisdale looks like he would be an ideal appointment, apart from he isn't a big enough name for the fans.

 

[Toronto Blade]

funny thing is though pullis got stoke promoted by filling the team with loan players ,i think that is something we need to get away from

Yes but Stoke brought in good giants we preferred a collection of poor midgets.

 

[alcoblade]

Can't agree, I'm stick of the long direct football which a lot of our fans seem to demand.
We went for Adams over the footballing option, please if we do replace him lets not do it again.

There are decent options in league one and two. RDM and Clark are out of our reach.

A friend of mine had a great shout for Paul Tisdale. Looking at his record he could be a great shout to work alongside Pembo but the fans wouldn't have it.

We should go for whatever delivers success. It makes ZERO difference what style of football we play if it's successful. If we play like Wimbledon of old and win the premier league, 33,000 will turn up and watch. If we play like Brazil and fall to the conference, 3,300 will turn up and watch.

UTB

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

It matters to me Alco, which is why I want managers who have had relative success playing a particular way.

Why take so much time getting our academy players to play with the ball on the ground and keep possession, if we are just going to try and get it into the opponents half quickly and pressurise the play?

I like the way the academy lads try and play the ball from the back, and I don't want to see that knocked out of them.

 

[Rattly Noise]

It matters to me Alco, which is why I want managers who have had relative success playing a particular way.

You are but one man though Bob. The only thing that fills a football ground is success... not pretty football. Wrong I know but that's the way it is.

 

[alcoblade]

It matters to me Alco, which is why I want managers who have had relative success playing a particular way.

Why take so much time getting our academy players to play with the ball on the ground and keep possession, if we are just going to try and get it into the opponents half quickly and pressurise the play.

Fair point. I'm pointing out that you are in a very tiny minority if success on the pitch doesn't enormously outweigh the purity of the football. Further, putting style above success would be financial suicide too.

UTB

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I don't necessarily agree, although who says they have to be exclusive to each other. I think if we played good passing football in the Championship we would average around the same mark we got when we were fighting it out for the playoffs.


Apparently Mickey was not going to play pretty football but keep us up, we seem to have gotten the worst of both worlds.

The likes of Tisdale would give us the style of play, and if his record is to be believed he also gets results.

 

[alcoblade]

You are right about Adams. Though I didn't have a problem with the style a lot of the time. But I did expect him to keep us up, and he failed miserably.

UTB

 

[tyneblade]

Can't agree, I'm stick of the long direct football which a lot of our fans seem to demand.
We went for Adams over the footballing option, please if we do replace him lets not do it again.

There are decent options in league one and two. RDM and Clark are out of our reach.

A friend of mine had a great shout for Paul Tisdale. Looking at his record he could be a great shout to work alongside Pembo but the fans wouldn't have it.

I don't think the style of football is the issue here. Whatever way we might want to play the club is in a complete mess and needs rebuilding first. That sort of job always needs a strong character and obvious leader to impose discipline and organisation then set out a plan. That will build the confidence needed to get us out of the rut we've fallen in, only then we can play the sort of football the manager wants. Seems to me that Adams' career has consistently faltered on the leadership and discipline points and, much as i like him, he should go.

 

[ZoneManWilf]

We should go for whatever delivers success. It makes ZERO difference what style of football we play if it's successful. If we play like Wimbledon of old and win the premier league, 33,000 will turn up and watch. If we play like Brazil and fall to the conference, 3,300 will turn up and watch.

UTB

It's pretty rare though that in 2011 decent teams don't play at least some form of decent football also, possession of the ball is extremely important in modern football. There are not many top 5 Premiership (or Championship for that matter), who hoof it.

 

[Rattly Noise]

It's pretty rare though that in 2011 decent teams don't play at least some form of decent football also, possession of the ball is extremely important in modern football. There are not many top 5 Premiership (or Championship for that matter), who hoof it.

That's the point though isn't it. Only the top teams can play it because you need to be a top footballer otherwise you're not going to be able to pass, save or shoot as well. Even top players are inconsistent so we shouldn't expect all that much from our players.

 

[alcoblade]

Very few teams play a style that can easily be defined as "hoof". Wimbledon were the exception. Stoke are the extreme today.

Chelsea under Mourinho - apparently didn't play with enough style. They went in search and fucked it up. History, and their fans, will judge Mourinho as their top manager of the era. Warnock and Bassett would be ours over the last 40 years. Both playing direct football.

The best teams will always play the most pleasing football - for the reasons highlighted by Rattly.

UTB

 

[bladeinspaceandtime]

Stoke's success is more down to having an owner, Peter Coates, who, like McCabe, claims to be a fan but who, unlike McCabe, has consistently backed the club financially and is more interested in success on the pitch than outside business interests.

Thats just it, McCabe finally twigged that he was getting nowhere using Sheffield United (and the other clubs he fannied around with) as a way of furthering his property empire (and in the process line his pockets). Thats why he's taken his wallet and pissed off sulking.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

That's the point though isn't it. Only the top teams can play it because you need to be a top footballer otherwise you're not going to be able to pass, save or shoot as well. Even top players are inconsistent so we shouldn't expect all that much from our players.

Bolton play good football, Blackpool play good football. Good football doesn't just have to be with big budgets team with lower budgets can still compete with similar budgeted teams who play more direct football.

 

[raul]

If there was a relegaton/propmotion play-off as in days of yore, who'd fancy us right now against Sampton or Hudds?

 

[alcoblade]

Bolton play good football, Blackpool play good football. Good football doesn't just have to be with big budgets team with lower budgets can still compete with similar budgeted teams who play more direct football.

Agreed. And we'd all rather see controlled football than hoof. But first and foremost you have to win games. We need to escape England's third division and hopefilly one day become a force to be reckoned with. We're now starting from a low base with no financial muscle. Adding an extra spec of "we need to do it in style" just wouldn't be sensible.

To repeat - for 99.9% of supporters it's about winning games. And I suspect 99% of the remaining 0.1% are just kidding themselves otherwise.

UTB

 

[ZoneManWilf]

The argument is chicken and egg though.

Do the better teams become better because they see possession of the football as an important issue to their pattern of play, and hence build their team around it? There are plenty of recent examples of decent passing teams in the championship who didn't build their teams with a massive budget (Burnley, Blackpool, Reading, Swansea).

Good passing teams set-up that way are better teams, because in this day and age it is a more effective way of trying to play attacking football. IMO we need to move away from this 'it doesn't matter what style of football we're playing' because it's self perpetuating to us having poor teams. It's a big change in culture for ths football club though and I don't think we as a fanbase can do it.

Personally I don't think Warnock was totally a long ball merchant either, Blackwell inherited his defensive philosophy, but then ignored how Warnock prioritised wing play when trying to attack teams.

---------- Post added at 05:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:39 PM ----------

To repeat - for 99.9% of supporters it's about winning games. And I suspect 99% of the remaining 0.1% are just kidding themselves otherwise.

UTB

Its not about wanting to 'do it in style', it's that doing it with a passing philosophy is actually more condusive to decent teams in 2011.

 

[alcoblade]

The argument is chicken and egg though.

Do the better teams become better because they see possession of the football as an important issue to their pattern of play, and hence build their team around it? There are plenty of recent examples of decent passing teams in the championship who didn't build their teams with a massive budget (Burnley, Blackpool, Reading, Swansea).

Good passing teams set-up that way are better teams, because in this day and age it is a more effective way of trying to play attacking football. IMO we need to move away from this 'it doesn't matter what style of football we're playing' because it's self perpetuating to us having poor teams. It's a big change in culture for ths football club though and I don't think we as a fanbase can do it.

Personally I don't think Warnock was totally a long ball merchant either, Blackwell inherited his defensive philosophy, but then ignored how Warnock prioritised wing play when trying to attack teams.

---------- Post added at 05:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:39 PM ----------


Its not about wanting to 'do it in style', it's that doing it with a passing philosophy is actually more condusive to decent teams in 2011.

Warnock, known for (if not totally) direct football, pilloried by many of our fans for the same thing, has just achieved his 7th promotion in 2011. Something NO other manager has bettered.

I don't think there is a convincing argument either way. I just don't think we should limit our options, given how limited they are going to be anyway.

UTB

 

[sitwell]

Bolton play good football, Blackpool play good football. Good football doesn't just have to be with big budgets team with lower budgets can still compete with similar budgeted teams who play more direct football.

Why has everyone stopped mentioning the worldbeaters called Doncaster Rovers ?

 

[lenners]

Warnock, known for (if not totally) direct football, pilloried by many of our fans for the same thing, has just achieved his 7th promotion in 2011. Something NO other manager has bettered.

I don't think there is a convincing argument either way. I just don't think we should limit our options, given how limited they are going to be anyway.

UTB

And utterly failed at the top level on the only two occasions he's got there.
Real success is nearly always built on strong footballing principles, principles which are easier to acquire with money.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Why has everyone stopped mentioning the worldbeaters called Doncaster Rovers ?

To be fair to them sitters, a team with a fraction of the wage bill most of the teams in the Championship are going to struggle as soon as they get injuries.

I know that I've also said that Donny are going to find it harder and harder. Not because of their style of play, but because they can't keep replacing the good players they lose for the same money/wage. That is why I thought SoD might have decided to move on, and I think he would have had we decided we wanted him.

 

[alcoblade]

And utterly failed at the top level on the only two occasions he's got there.
Real success is nearly always built on strong footballing principles, principles which are easier to acquire with money.

As do most managers who get teams promoted above their station. Though he made mistakes and spent poorly in the top flight, we didn't open up the wagebill until it was too late. Not that top level performance is of any relevance to where we are today.


Anyway, haven't you broken your spade yet?

UTB

 

[NEWQUAY BLADE]

WELL SAID grafikaus,100% correct in my book. we know whats required for next season,,lets get a good manager (???) then a squad of players to get out of that league,hit the ground runnining,winning games, then back to championship, then address that league when were in it. so that said, would it be that hard to get a good manager ???????? who do we think would come, more to the point who do we want ????????

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

You are but one man though Bob. The only thing that fills a football ground is success... not pretty football. Wrong I know but that's the way it is.

How come Blackwell had so many critics?

 

[alcoblade]

How come Blackwell had so many critics?

Warnock had just as many. The grass is always greener. We still saw average crowds increase by the greatest amount in living memory.

UTB

 

[lenners]

As do most managers who get teams promoted above their station. Though he made mistakes and spent poorly in the top flight, we didn't open up the wagebill until it was too late. Not that top level performance is of any relevance to where we are today.


Anyway, haven't you broken your spade yet?

UTB

Unlike some defeatist, grindingly negative posters, I know that Sheffield United's station is in the top flight of English football.
Promoted beyond our station, jeez, no wonder we wallow in shyte with that kind of attitude.
Get up off your knees man.

 

[alcoblade]

Unlike some defeatist, grindingly negative posters, I know that Sheffield United's station is in the top flight of English football.
Promoted beyond our station, jeez, no wonder we wallow in shyte with that kind of attitude.
Get up off your knees man.

With the money we were prepared to pay players then, we were above our station. Remarkably, we found the money after relegation.

I knew I'd have to simplify that statement for you.

UTB

 

[judge]

Unlike some defeatist, grindingly negative posters, I know that Sheffield United's station is in the top flight of English football.Promoted beyond our station, jeez, no wonder we wallow in shyte with that kind of attitude.
Get up off your knees man.

its not though is it ? sheffield united have spent more time outside the top flight of english football you sound like one of those pigs who still harp on about being a massive club who everyone loves and it is to your detriment

 

[lenners]

its not though is it ? sheffield united have spent more time outside the top flight of english football you sound like one of those pigs who still harp on about being a massive club who everyone loves and it is to your detriment

FFS go and look at the history books, look at the size of the city, look at what's been and clearly what is very obviously possible.
Both United and Wednesday should be in the top flight of English football, that both clubs are playing each other - again - in the third tier is an absolute disgrace to the city and to the history of both clubs.