Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
21 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

I don't buy the PSR thing.

 

The club are trying to save face. Even though it was right to sack Cooper, they were panned by the wider football community and everyone knew getting this duffer in was a massive risk (lad's got a great aura, mind)

 

It would just confirm to the football world their ineptitude if they sack him now with such an abject record. They'd be made to look foolish. 

 

They're desperate for this to work out so they can say "see, it was the right call," even if that means keeping him on into next season for a Championship push. 

 

It's all about perception. 

 

I reckon there is a clause that he gets the full 3 year pay off if sacked before we are relegated.

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, kenny said:

I reckon there is a clause that he gets the full 3 year pay off if sacked before we are relegated.

each finishing position is worth approximately £3.1 million based on the distribution of merit that’s £6.2m they are risking 

Edited by HankMarvin
  • Like 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, studentofthegame said:

I think comparing what they did with the same set of players is more apt than comparing results with two separate sides

Cooper had 10 points in 12 games, RVN has 7 in 17, 0.83ppg vs 0.41ppg
Cooper 1.25 goals per game and 1.92 conceded per game

RVN 0.53 goals per game and 2.35 conceded per game
RVN has 15.46xg and 34.40xga in 17 games

Cooper had 14.29xg and 28.61xga in 12 games

The only argument you can make in favour of RVN is that we have allowed a little less xga per game (2.02 vs 2.38), but that hasn't translated into anything meaningful as we are conceded 0.43 more per game under him than under Cooper

The football was dire under Cooper, but he was without a doubt getting more out of this squad than RVN is

 

I am not arguing that Cooper was the messiah, but quite clearly he was far more competent than RVN is, I could at least trick myself into believing we had a chance in games under Cooper, I can't even convince myself we might score a goal under RVN

As has already been said, Cooper as Bad, but RVN is worse which I didn't think would be possible.

Posted
13 minutes ago, Happy Fox said:

Top is utterly clueless and incompetent that’s all there for all to see, hope he sells the club the useless donut.

I have to agree, he was a spoilt kid who had the club purchased for him by dad. Polo, horse racing and now marriage are more fun than running a business, taken his eye off the prize for sure.

 

 60% of businesses built by parents and inherited by their kids fail. I’m all in now for him selling the club to someone with hunger and ambition.

  • Like 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, teblin said:

As has already been said, Cooper as Bad, but RVN is worse which I didn't think would be possible.

Cooper was limited but pragmatic, RVN is limited and not pragmatic.

  • Like 3
Posted
25 minutes ago, studentofthegame said:

The only argument you can make in favour of RVN is that we have allowed a little less xga per game (2.02 vs 2.38), but that hasn't translated into anything meaningful as we are conceded 0.43 more per game under him than under Cooper

That wouldn’t be in his favour either as the failure to shore up the defence has come at a cost of 58% reduction in goals scored per match on average 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Cooper was limited but pragmatic, RVN is limited and not pragmatic.

He was but we had so many shots against us we were lucky it lots of games. They are both bad don’t let how bad RVN is cloud that. RVN is worse I agree.

  • Like 2
Posted

I was encouraged 2 or 3 matches in but he's ****ing dreadful isn't he.

 

If i had to guess I'd say he's gone on 1st July for PSR reasons 

Posted

Should’ve got me in. I’ve taken up FM24 again in my disdain with LCFC and got the Gibraltar Lions into the Champions League proper

Posted
18 minutes ago, teblin said:

He was but we had so many shots against us we were lucky it lots of games. They are both bad don’t let how bad RVN is cloud that. RVN is worse I agree.

Cooper got 15 goals scored and 10 points from 12 PL games with this sorry squad. I wouldn’t say that’s bad. Even a very strong manager would struggle to hit one point per game on average with this lot.

Posted
21 minutes ago, teblin said:

He was but we had so many shots against us we were lucky it lots of games. They are both bad don’t let how bad RVN is cloud that. RVN is worse I agree.

RVN is Cooper without luck basically 

  • Like 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Sly said:

I think we’re set for a major overhaul.

 

With so many players set to leave or be sold on the cheap, we’ll basically have a brand new setup.

 

We almost knew a squad turnover like Burnley did when they went down a few years ago and bring in 15 new players. 

Wishful thinking that.

Only 3 out of contract.

The rest of the dross have at least a year, no one will touch them and if there is interest they wont move because of the wages they are on.

You need togetherness in the championship and this club certainly does not have everyone pulling together.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

RVN is Cooper without luck basically 

No, that's not true nor fair..

 

Cooper chopped and changed every week. He commanded no respect. But the chaos theory at least created different outcomes..

 

The Dutchman does no such thing. The same kamakazi line up and selection of reserve players (and sub reserve players) every single week 

Posted
2 minutes ago, stevostadium said:

Wishful thinking that.

Only 3 out of contract.

The rest of the dross have at least a year, no one will touch them and if there is interest they wont move because of the wages they are on.

You need togetherness in the championship and this club certainly does not have everyone pulling together.

It won't be easy to shift them, but it's not quite as bleak as this. The players will have clauses in their contracts that reduce their salaries in the Championship, which may make them more inclined to stay. Plus a number of them have been here a few years and have either low or no book value, which means we can accept lower fees without making a PSR loss. We won't get rid of as many of them as most of us would like, but I suspect a fair few will leave the building.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, studentofthegame said:

I think comparing what they did with the same set of players is more apt than comparing results with two separate sides

Cooper had 10 points in 12 games, RVN has 7 in 17, 0.83ppg vs 0.41ppg
Cooper 1.25 goals per game and 1.92 conceded per game

RVN 0.53 goals per game and 2.35 conceded per game
RVN has 15.46xg and 34.40xga in 17 games

Cooper had 14.29xg and 28.61xga in 12 games

The only argument you can make in favour of RVN is that we have allowed a little less xga per game (2.02 vs 2.38), but that hasn't translated into anything meaningful as we are conceded 0.43 more per game under him than under Cooper

The football was dire under Cooper, but he was without a doubt getting more out of this squad than RVN is

 

I am not arguing that Cooper was the messiah, but quite clearly he was far more competent than RVN is, I could at least trick myself into believing we had a chance in games under Cooper, I can't even convince myself we might score a goal under RVN

Some of us warned pragmatic was needed (which yes translates to less fashionable football).  It has played out that way of course.  Even those of us supporting Cooper would have understood the manager change if it was a sensible appointment like Moyes.  But instead Top just did a man child on the whim change to a manager that he thought was "cool" whilst we were out of relegation and scoring goals.

Edited by Chrysalis
Posted
1 hour ago, Lionator said:

Cooper was limited but pragmatic, RVN is limited and not pragmatic.

Cooper was also more unpredictable. I doubt he really knew what he wanted to do which left everyone guessing.

 

It seemed like a negative at the time.

Posted
2 minutes ago, kenny said:

Cooper was also more unpredictable. I doubt he really knew what he wanted to do which left everyone guessing.

 

It seemed like a negative at the time.

Or fans didnt understand, pragmatic means not being predictable and changing things from game to game if needed, we also know he gave players freedom, less tactical lock in.  Unpredictable teams are also harder to play against.

Posted
1 minute ago, Chrysalis said:

Or fans didnt understand, pragmatic means not being predictable and changing things from game to game if needed, we also know he gave players freedom, less tactical lock in.  Unpredictable teams are also harder to play against.

I think we were easy to play against. It just took the opposition manager the first 15 minutes to figures us out which compared to the current set-up looks positive.

Posted
40 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

No, that's not true nor fair..

 

Cooper chopped and changed every week. He commanded no respect. But the chaos theory at least created different outcomes..

 

The Dutchman does no such thing. The same kamakazi line up and selection of reserve players (and sub reserve players) every single week 

Not sure if a team that won’t attack, won’t try to score, and only had one shot attempt last night can be described as kamikaze. :P

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, kenny said:

I think we were easy to play against. It just took the opposition manager the first 15 minutes to figures us out which compared to the current set-up looks positive.

Still 15 mins beats nothing right?
In my view we far easier to play against now.  Too predictable and trying to play in a way above our squad's quality level.

Edited by Chrysalis
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...