Managerial Replacements

[Fox1norfolk]

1 hour ago, Chelmofox said:

Have you actually watched how Corberan sets up?

Next season is all about survival and I agree with a previous post tippy tappy football we have been playing will get us relegated. Our squad simply don’t have the same level of technical skills as the likes of Man City. We need a very experience manager who can grind out results with a slightly more conventional style of playing. Moyes has all the Premier League experience ,a safe pair of hands for the first season and assuming we survive, then reflect on where we are. Moyes would get my vote.

[lcfcbluearmy]

6 minutes ago, smudger63 said:

I don't think alot of the people who wanted the ball to go forward quicker, were talking in terms of just hoofing it long, they were wanting the ball to be passed quicker and with more purpose, instead of playing the ball through the line, and beating the press, which is the whole reason for playing out from the back, but then slowing it down, passing sideways, or even back again, and letting the opposing players get back behind the ball again.

That was the main frustration in my opinion.

 

Exactly this

Edited 5 June by lcfcbluearmy

[S1DDO]

37 minutes ago, Saxondale said:

This is absolutely bang on.

 

Whoever is appointed, the old “FORWARD! QUICKER!” codgers are going be disappointed, because they don’t seem to understand that the game of football has moved on since the mid 80s.

I’m pretty sure we played this way in 15/16 season, worked pretty well 

[Jon the Hat]

17 minutes ago, SB87_LCFC said:

Given how left field Claudios appointment was are we missing something? There are quite a few names already mentioned who are out there in terms of highly unlikely but there are one or two available at the minute that may jump at a club in the Premier League like Leicester and have a track record in other leagues in Europe, in a similar way to Glasner at Palace, 

 

Lucien Favre

Jorge Sampaoli

Quiqe Setien 

Conceicao was a name we had been linked with years back and I wanted him then as a young up and coming coach. Given things you read though we may have dodged a bullet. 

 

On the English coaches available leaves a lot to be desired - Lampard, Scott Parker and Will Still notable names, the latter I’d be on the fence about, 9th place with Reims in Ligue 1 last year. If we were to go for a young English coach, Gary O’Neil has done a great job with Wolves and didn’t do bad at Bournemouth either. 
 

IMO I don’t know why we don’t offer it Poch for a year, bloke was tossed aside by Chelsea despite showing his qualities to turn things around, if we’re serious, why not?

Poch quit.

[ronnup]

1 minute ago, S1DDO said:

I’m pretty sure we played this way in 15/16 season, worked pretty well 

 

This argument relies on having peak Vardy, Mahrez, and more importantly Kante being able to do miracles at ball recovery and recycling play.

 

It won't happen again 

[boosmanana]

What people actually want is for every single pass to be played forward and for every single pass to connect with it's intended target and for us to score every single time we go forward, none of which are remotely possible

[Scotch]

12 hours ago, Mendi said:

 

That time I reported was right but top changed his mind.

 

Let's hope we get a good manager in.

No, it wasn't. Stop talking crap. You specifically said on numerous occasions that the club were talking with MON and even made comments about how people should thank you for your info. MON has since come out and said he was never in any contact with anyone at the club about taking over. 

 

I don't get what you gain from talking nonsense. 

[SB87_LCFC]

7 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Poch quit.

Well to be factually correct yeah
 

 

[indierich06]

5 minutes ago, Fox1norfolk said:

Next season is all about survival and I agree with a previous post tippy tappy football we have been playing will get us relegated. Our squad simply don’t have the same level of technical skills as the likes of Man City. We need a very experience manager who can grind out results with a slightly more conventional style of playing. Moyes has all the Premier League experience ,a safe pair of hands for the first season and assuming we survive, then reflect on where we are. Moyes would get my vote.

Again, have you seen how Corberan's teams play, or are you just basing 'tippy tappy' on an assumption?

 

https://breakingthelines.com/tactical-analysis/carlos-corberans-tactical-set-up-at-west-brom

This shows you how he literally sets up to counter the likes of Maresca.

[Babylon]

45 minutes ago, Saxondale said:

This is absolutely bang on.

 

Whoever is appointed, the old “FORWARD! QUICKER!” codgers are going be disappointed, because they don’t seem to understand that the game of football has moved on since the mid 80s.

I find this sort of stuff incredibly frustrating, whereby wanting to play with a bit more tempo somehow equates to a person being a dinosaur who yearns for the ball to be pumped 50ft into the sky at every opportunity. 

 

I'm all for passing football, but a prerequisite for that is to have movement. I'm sick of watching us, and there is so little movement when we're on the ball, which invariably leads to just plodding the ball about at the back. I'm also sick of certain "passing football" coaches when then drum every ounce of spontaneity out of players, to the point of not wanting to take risks, to not take on a player, to not make a run, even when it's blindingly obvious, they are the better moves to make, they check back and make an easy pass.

 

Have a structure but allow some freedom within it, be pragmatic and don't expect players not good enough to do a certain thing, to do a certain thing!!!

[Matt]

14 minutes ago, ronnup said:

 

This argument relies on having peak Vardy, Mahrez, and more importantly Kante being able to do miracles at ball recovery and recycling play.

 

It won't happen again 

Ok, and the argument against possession based football is its expensive to get the tools (players) suited to playing that way, an expense we are not allowed to afford, so neither way is ideal and we need to find a half way house rather than going balls deep down one route.

[ozleicester]

There are more than two "tactical options"

[Matt]

Just now, ozleicester said:

There are more than two "tactical options"

Nah but if you don’t like possession based football you’re a dinosaur still living in the 80’s and 90’s and you just want it hoofed forward.

 

There are simply no other options!

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

Dunno about all the rest but one thing I do know is I was absolutely bored to the core watching us play last season. Few sparks of really good stuff but fleeting, we wouldn’t stay up playing like that and would often take a total battering. We need a pragmatic manager who can get the best out of what we’ve got, whatever that looks like.

[indierich06]

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

Ok, and the argument against possession based football is its expensive to get the tools (players) suited to playing that way, an expense we are not allowed to afford, so neither way is ideal and we need to find a half way house rather than going balls deep down one route.

What do we do with the players we invested in last summer in order to try and play this way? I don't think we have the 'right' players to perfectly implement any one style to be honest. Do you think we've got the pace, the finishers and the workrate in the squad to play even half as well as we did in 15/16? 

 

People assume that possession/technical-based footballer is 'harder', and that other ways of playing are 'easier' - it's nonsense. You employ the style that suits that players you have, or something approximating that, and we've spent quite a lot investing in players who play a certain way and are used to a certain style. The board aren't going to throw the baby out with the bathwater, chasing some type of football that we don't have the players for and goes against what we're actually trying to build - well, they might do, they've made plenty of stupid decisions before.

[lcfcbluearmy]

26 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Poch quit.

No he didn't if he had quit they would have said he resigned and he would have received no compensation. Mutual consent means that an agreement had been reached by both sides that it wasn't right for him to stay any longer which basically means they paid him off/ sacked him

[jayfox26]

12 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I find this sort of stuff incredibly frustrating, whereby wanting to play with a bit more tempo somehow equates to a person being a dinosaur who yearns for the ball to be pumped 50ft into the sky at every opportunity. 

 

I'm all for passing football, but a prerequisite for that is to have movement. I'm sick of watching us, and there is so little movement when we're on the ball, which invariably leads to just plodding the ball about at the back. I'm also sick of certain "passing football" coaches when then drum every ounce of spontaneity out of players, to the point of not wanting to take risks, to not take on a player, to not make a run, even when it's blindingly obvious, they are the better moves to make, they check back and make an easy pass.

 

Have a structure but allow some freedom within it, be pragmatic and don't expect players not good enough to do a certain thing, to do a certain thing!!!

Spot on this. I don't think anybody wants to see long ball football hoofed up to a big lump but we also don't want 500 passes a game between our keeper and defenders. There are many different styles of play these days but alot of the time, the "Pep style" of football is incredibly boring. Cant knock the success he has had but alot of his disciples, like Enzo, want to copy exactly what he does and when you don't have the players/finances that Man City have, it's not so easy to get right. Personally I'd just like a manager that can change things up a bit, and we will certainly need that on the prem. 

[Matt]

1 minute ago, indierich06 said:

What do we do with the players we invested in last summer in order to try and play this way? I don't think we have the 'right' players to perfectly implement any one style to be honest. Do you think we've got the pace, the finishers and the workrate in the squad to play even half as well as we did in 15/16? 

 

People assume that possession/technical-based footballer is 'harder', and that other ways of playing are 'easier' - it's nonsense. You employ the style that suits that players you have, or something approximating that, and we've spent quite a lot investing in players who play a certain way and are used to a certain style. The board aren't going to throw the baby out with the bathwater, chasing some type of football that we don't have the players for and goes against what we're actually trying to build - well, they might do, they've made plenty of stupid decisions before.

Not sure I agree with any of that but that’s just personal opinion.

 

Infact I’ve made the point quite recently the remit and direction instructed by the board to incoming managers over the last 7 years have very much been to play a possession based style.

 

Yet our largely our transfer incomings have been the total opposite to that not fitting that direction of style at all and rather more suited to our “old” style.

[Dahnsouff]

14 minutes ago, Matt said:

Nah but if you don’t like possession based football you’re a dinosaur still living in the 80’s and 90’s and you just want it hoofed forward.

 

There are simply no other options!

Self awareness is the first step to recovery   

[ClaphamFox]

Having listened to Dominic Wells' tactical analysis on the WYS podcast, I'm even more in the Corberan camp than I was before. However, I also don't think Cooper would be as terrible a choice as some people seem to think. It was a shame that Wells' only comment on Mark Robins was to say that he's massively overachieved at Coventry given their wage bill. It would have been interesting to hear a bit more tactical analysis on Robins. 

[Bluetintedspecs]

3 hours ago, blue army 1988 said:

I think if we appoint Corberan, then we're looking at someone who could hopefully bring us back up the season after.

If we get Cooper, they are looking to keep us in the prem 

 That's a baseless illogical comment , please explain how each occurrence, relegation  and surviving,  is solely attributable to each candidate? 

[sm1]

5 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

There are more than two "tactical options"

Exactly, look at Liverpool under Klopp. They liked to play the ball out from the back, but then didnt spend an eternity playing meaningless passes between GK and CBs. They attacked as quickly as possible with long diagonal balls from the back, hence why Pulis once highlighted in a Liverpool vs WBA game, the fact that Liverpool had played more long balls then his team. 

[Chelmofox]

1 hour ago, Fox1norfolk said:

Next season is all about survival and I agree with a previous post tippy tappy football we have been playing will get us relegated. Our squad simply don’t have the same level of technical skills as the likes of Man City. We need a very experience manager who can grind out results with a slightly more conventional style of playing. Moyes has all the Premier League experience ,a safe pair of hands for the first season and assuming we survive, then reflect on where we are. Moyes would get my vote.

Man City need the players they have to compete at the very highest level and push for trophies in every competition.  The comparison between quality of players is poor in my opinion as we need the level of players to not get relegated. Plenty of teams playing lots of different styles get dragged in at the bottom.

 

I'm not sure i agree Moyes is a safe pair of hands (i have family who are WH season ticket holders so i heard about it a lot!). Huge net spend last 2 seasons with far better squad and funds than us. 14th last season and relegation form 2nd half of this (look at 10 game form guide to see how awful they were). There is a big danger PL football has left Moyes behind, and going to a team with worse players and less funds - im not sure he has it in him. Sometimes you have to look forward, and Moyes is a backwards appointment.

 

I see nothing wrong with pragmatic possession football. Corberan has a distinctive style that is different to Enzo, and key areas are clearly influenced by Bielsa. We have to be able to compete with the teams in the bottom half of the table, and try to sh1t house wins against the top half when they either aren't on it, or the fixture congestion means they rotate their squads. I think players 'buy in' to a system, and i think Corberan offers that, and he has shown against teams like us that he is willing to play to strengths against more quality opposition.

 

Edited 5 June by Chelmofox

[Saxondale]

49 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I find this sort of stuff incredibly frustrating, whereby wanting to play with a bit more tempo somehow equates to a person being a dinosaur who yearns for the ball to be pumped 50ft into the sky at every opportunity. 

 

I'm all for passing football, but a prerequisite for that is to have movement. I'm sick of watching us, and there is so little movement when we're on the ball, which invariably leads to just plodding the ball about at the back. I'm also sick of certain "passing football" coaches when then drum every ounce of spontaneity out of players, to the point of not wanting to take risks, to not take on a player, to not make a run, even when it's blindingly obvious, they are the better moves to make, they check back and make an easy pass.

 

Have a structure but allow some freedom within it, be pragmatic and don't expect players not good enough to do a certain thing, to do a certain thing!!!

 

33 minutes ago, jayfox26 said:

Spot on this. I don't think anybody wants to see long ball football hoofed up to a big lump but we also don't want 500 passes a game between our keeper and defenders. There are many different styles of play these days but alot of the time, the "Pep style" of football is incredibly boring. Cant knock the success he has had but alot of his disciples, like Enzo, want to copy exactly what he does and when you don't have the players/finances that Man City have, it's not so easy to get right. Personally I'd just like a manager that can change things up a bit, and we will certainly need that on the prem. 

 

15 minutes ago, sm1 said:

Exactly, look at Liverpool under Klopp. They liked to play the ball out from the back, but then didnt spend an eternity playing meaningless passes between GK and CBs. They attacked as quickly as possible with long diagonal balls from the back, hence why Pulis once highlighted in a Liverpool vs WBA game, the fact that Liverpool had played more long balls then his team. 

We scored 89 goals last season. The second highest goal scorers in the league.

 

Clearly, we played with sufficient attacking intent.

[AjcW]

I remember when threads like this used to blow up after @LinekersLugs and @themightyfin posted... but they've literally both been blanked this morning