[Archived] Sam Allardyce Messiah or simply a good manager?

[MarkBRFC71]

Was that the year Chelsea were beating teams 3 and 4-0 consistently? Played a lot of attractive football that year.

Mourinho has had his team playing "pretty" football this season. Typical 11 consists of Alonso, Di Maria, Ronaldo, Ozil, Benzema with Marcelo overlapping, thats 6 out 10 outfield players who are attack minded. As I've said before only against Barca he changes things around, his mentality is always to win.

There's only one team Madridistas would accept playing Allardyce-style football against (provided they didn't lose!), and that's Barca because of the rivalry and hatred. Against anyone else in La Liga the white hankies would be out pretty quickly. Have seen Madrid several times this season, and while they don't play Barca-esque football, they've played some excellent stuff. The Clasicos have in no way been representative of Madrid under Jose at all.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

Gloss over it?? IT WAS ONE RESULT!!!!!! I feel like I've entered a parallel universe where fans no longer understand the concept of freak results and the existence of thrashings. Did we not thrash Norwich/Sheff Wed/Forest when we were a top team or does my memory deceive me? The best team in the land (by quite a distance this season) is liable to thrash teams at home, please understand this!! That game means nothing as in that form Utd would have beaten us even if we'd played our best. It should be an irrelevant footnote in the case against Allardyce even by its stanchest supporters, so weak is it as an argument. For every Utd away there was 5 home wins, so who gives a damn?!

The Old Trafford surrender wasn't a capitulation in isolation. We shipped six at Arsenal and five at Chelsea. The four at Liverpool might as well have been six or seven given the pathetic nature of Rovers performance at Anfield near the end of the 09/10 season. Of course, these clubs outspend Rovers by a phenominal distance but that dosnt excuse regularly rolling over and getting your belly tickled on away days to the "big clubs".

As I said, I am not anti Alardyce by any means and to a large extent accepted his pragmatism as a price we paid for safety. I would reckon 99% of Rovers fans accepted that we played some soul crushing football under Allardyce. I think it is fairly obvious that he gave up certain games before a ball was kicked as well. That, for me, went beyond acceptable.

I suspect that you really do give a damn and hurt as much as the rest of us when Sam's Rovers bent over at Old Trafford, The Emirates and Stamford Bridge.

[tony gale's mic]

The Old Trafford surrender wasn't a capitulation in isolation. We shipped six at Arsenal and five at Chelsea. The four at Liverpool might as well have been six or seven given the pathetic nature of Rovers performance at Anfield near the end of the 09/10 season. Of course, these clubs outspend Rovers by a phenominal distance but that dosnt excuse regularly rolling over and getting your belly tickled on away days to the "big clubs".

As I said, I am not anti Alardyce by any means and to a large extent accepted his pragmatism as a price we paid for safety. I would reckon 99% of Rovers fans accepted that we played some soul crushing football under Allardyce. I think it is fairly obvious that he gave up certain games before a ball was kicked as well. That, for me, went beyond acceptable.

I suspect that you really do give a damn and hurt as much as the rest of us when Sam's Rovers bent over at Old Trafford, The Emirates and Stamford Bridge.

When we shipped six at Arsenal, we were well in the game at half time but got overpowered in the second half. When we shipped five at Chelsea, a lot of our side including quite a few of those on the pitch were struck down by flu. But we had a great display at OT last season where we deserved at least a point, and a battling point at the City of Manchester Stadium. If he honestly gave up against big teams away from home there's no way we would have seen those performances.

Did Sam sometimes set up the team poorly at the big teams away from home? Yes - this was a weak point in his reign, but ultimately I'd rather have a weak point that cost us fewer points like this one did.

Did he wilfully give games up? No, that's a totally ridiculous suggestion. How do you think those dressing room conversations went? Do you think the players were in on it too? And why did we have a couple of very good away performances against the big teams and a few ones at home too if that was his policy? Why roll over away at OT this season but not last season?

[deryck guyler's spoon]

When we shipped six at Arsenal, we were well in the game at half time but got overpowered in the second half. When we shipped five at Chelsea, a lot of our side including quite a few of those on the pitch were struck down by flu. But we had a great display at OT last season where we deserved at least a point, and a battling point at the City of Manchester Stadium. If he honestly gave up against big teams away from home there's no way we would have seen those performances.

Did Sam sometimes set up the team poorly at the big teams away from home? Yes - this was a weak point in his reign, but ultimately I'd rather have a weak point that cost us fewer points like this one did.

Did he wilfully give games up? No, that's a totally ridiculous suggestion. How do you think those dressing room conversations went? Do you think the players were in on it too? And why did we have a couple of very good away performances against the big teams and a few ones at home too if that was his policy? Why roll over away at OT this season but not last season?

It could be argued that we got away with it a few times away at the top four under Allardyce, all too often going down by a couple of goals when offering next to nothing by way of having a go at the opposition.

This has got the potential to develope into one of those circular discusions that are plaging the forum at the moment. The point I'm trying to make is that whilst Allardyce was a very effective manager for us he wasn't the miracle worker some make him out to have been. Obviously, some of our football during his tenure was awful but ,in addition I believe that the arch pragmatist targetted winnable matches and those he didn't think we had a chance in. He then sent out teams with different approaches which isnt the best if you have just forked out the thick end of 200 quid for tickets and travel.

I think some on the forum and this thread in particular are deifying Allardyce as part of of an anti Kean/Venkys agenda. Allardyce was very effective without doubt but he had one or two glaring deficiecies.

[John]

It could be argued that we got away with it a few times away at the top four under Allardyce, all too often going down by a couple of goals when offering next to nothing by way of having a go at the opposition.

This has got the potential to develope into one of those circular discusions that are plaging the forum at the moment. The point I'm trying to make is that whilst Allardyce was a very effective manager for us he wasn't the miracle worker some make him out to have been.

When we finished 10th, Sam was being put forward for manager of the year by some media outlets (couple of papers & Football 365 who hate him was even one of them). It really was a superb achievement and one which we should have all been proud of - miracle worker is quite a strong term however to finish much higher than 10th would simply not be realistic. Just look at how much we have spent in recent years and look at how much little attacking quality our squad contains (we can see that clearly today as we have little creative/flair qualities and also lack goals).

Sam commented himself that he wanted to sort out our away form calling it Jekyll & Hyde (in comparison with our home form) - I am sure with the ability to purchase better quality players he would have likely improved our away results record.

[tony gale's mic]

It could be argued that we got away with it a few times away at the top four under Allardyce, all too often going down by a couple of goals when offering next to nothing by way of having a go at the opposition.

This has got the potential to develope into one of those circular discusions that are plaging the forum at the moment. The point I'm trying to make is that whilst Allardyce was a very effective manager for us he wasn't the miracle worker some make him out to have been. Obviously, some of our football during his tenure was awful but ,in addition I believe that the arch pragmatist targetted winnable matches and those he didn't think we had a chance in. He then sent out teams with different approaches which isnt the best if you have just forked out the thick end of 200 quid for tickets and travel.

I think some on the forum and this thread in particular are deifying Allardyce as part of of an anti Kean/Venkys agenda. Allardyce was very effective without doubt but he had one or two glaring deficiecies.

The fact remains that plenty of people peddle this myth that Sam wilfully "gave up" in away games against the top teams when a) there's evidence of a few games where he definitely couldn't have done, and b ) it's a completely nonsensical concept which would require the eleven players on the pitch to be in on it too.

I know against United people held up Sam picking a couple of inexperienced players as some sort of evidence of this, but what about when he picked Phil Jones against Chelsea?

I don't think anyone would deny that away games against the big teams was one of Sam's deficiencies. But there's a difference between it being something which was an honest mistake, and something that he wilfully neglected. If people are going to make arguments against the last manager, they should at least stick to things that are fact rather than fiction.

[SD4E]

The fact remains that plenty of people peddle this myth that Sam wilfully "gave up" in away games against the top teams when a) there's evidence of a few games where he definitely couldn't have done, and b ) it's a completely nonsensical concept which would require the eleven players on the pitch to be in on it too.

I know against United people held up Sam picking a couple of inexperienced players as some sort of evidence of this, but what about when he picked Phil Jones against Chelsea?

I don't think anyone would deny that away games against the big teams was one of Sam's deficiencies. But there's a difference between it being something which was an honest mistake, and something that he wilfully neglected. If people are going to make arguments against the last manager, they should at least stick to things that are fact rather than fiction.

Big Sam signed goulon. Enough said.

[rebelmswar]

Can we just put this to bed once and for all?

He can not be the Messiah as he is God.

[chris]

the Messiah is my sister

[rebelmswar]

the Messiah is my sister

Jesusia?

Send her my regards.

[beerwins]

Sam is very good at what he does but what he does can can be easily countered provided you have the correct team to do that, the tactics he uses are very simple, play long ball to the target man who holds it up to bring in the the other players either on the wings or the attacking midfielder.

The other attacking players usually get the ball and make an attack or if they have no chance of an attack they win a free kick where the ball is pumped into the box for the biggest man to win and score ( the reason Samba was made captain in my book ) , if you play the likes of Stoke who are very strong in the air or at Old trafford where every decision goes to the home team you are scuppered.

Sam however was very much all for one way of football and that becomes very predictable, we have 10 free kicks outside of the area and 10 crosses to the biggest chap, we have 10 goal kicks and 10 of them are pumped in the area, it all becomes very obvious for the opposing team to work out.

The way Sam set us up may well have been due to the players and budget but I guess we will never know, his targets were rumoured to have been Crouch and Nzogbia would they altered his playstyle? Sam paid 6 mill for Kalinic that no-one seems to be able to get him to play right where Di Matteo paid 1 mill for Odemwingie who is causing all kinds of problems for defences in the prem league.

I am in no way critising Sam, he gets points simple as and that was very much needed at the time Rovers employed him but the fact that he as remained unemployed for so long with clubs in dire need of points just goes to show you that he is very uncomprimising in his tactics and sometimes owners just want that bit more.

If you really want to answer the question Messiah or good manager then compare him to Pulis who plays a very similar style but knows how to mix it up a bit with players like Etherington and Fuller, Sam was very strict in the ammount of creative players he had in the team at one time which made us very one dimensional.

He is second to none when it comes to knowing how to win points but when it comes to having a plan b and mixing it up to win points he is the worst, writing games off before they have begun is bad for morale but winning games at home is good for morale.

No wonder we have such a difference of opinion on here.

[tony gale's mic]

Sam is very good at what he does but what he does can can be easily countered provided you have the correct team to do that, the tactics he uses are very simple, play long ball to the target man who holds it up to bring in the the other players either on the wings or the attacking midfielder.

Can't be that easily countered, otherwise we wouldnt have been better than half of the league whilst he was around. All of whom played varying styles of play.

Maybe, looking at the record we had, you might want to rephrase that as "Sam is very good at what he does, but what he does can be easily countered if you've spent several times as much on your team and have better players".

The way Sam set us up may well have been due to the players and budget but I guess we will never know, his targets were rumoured to have been Crouch and Nzogbia would they altered his playstyle? Sam paid 6 mill for Kalinic that no-one seems to be able to get him to play right where Di Matteo paid 1 mill for Odemwingie who is causing all kinds of problems for defences in the prem league.

His targets WERE Raul, Guti and Charlie Adam. No rumours here, pretty much documented fact. I think it's likely they wouldve needed modifications in our play to fit them in, just like similar players at Bolton changed their playing style.

If you really want to answer the question Messiah or good manager then compare him to Pulis who plays a very similar style but knows how to mix it up a bit with players like Etherington and Fuller, Sam was very strict in the ammount of creative players he had in the team at one time which made us very one dimensional.

Tony Pulis has been bankrolled by Peter Coates in a way that Sam never was. £20 million net spend the season after promotion. £15 million net spend the following summer. £5-7 million net spend last summer. And still we finished ahead of Stoke last season and likely wouldve done the same again this season.

Sam wasn't strict in the amount of creative players he had, the budget was strict. He wanted to bring in several creative players (such as the players I mentioned earlier) but the budget wouldnt allow it.

He is second to none when it comes to knowing how to win points but when it comes to having a plan b and mixing it up to win points he is the worst, writing games off before they have begun is bad for morale but winning games at home is good for morale.

No wonder we have such a difference of opinion on here.

And as I've just said at the start of this page, we have the "Sam writes games off" myth that's peddled around here like it's some kind of fact.

Sam's tactics, along with the players performances, were found wanting on several occasions away to the big teams. But there were other occasions, both home and away against the big teams which proved that Sam doesn't just "write off" certain games. There's absolutely no proof for it and it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's not even like he fielded that weak a side against the big teams a la Mick McCarthy.

The reason why we have a difference of opinion on here is because we have one side who can see Sam as being a very good manager and someone we should have kept at all costs. And we have others, of varying opinions, who either use made up myths (Sam gave up certain games) or who compare Sam negatively with managers who spent £30 million more than us but who still finished behind us, or similar things that just defy all reasonable logic.

[47er]

This thread has a warped title anyway. No-one ever said he was the Messiah till Imy (!) put it up. So the answer to his question is------- Sam Is simply a good manager and how I wish he hadn't been booted out. All imo of course!

[Stuart]

Don't get me wrong Sam was/is a good manager for us but I'm starting to think that Venkys did him a massive favour.

Nice pay-off (presumably); nice break from football - which must be good for his health; his image as an expert has set him up nicely with pundit work, and even co-commentary; and all with his reputation intact - enhanced even.

But best of all, he's escaped having to struggle along with our ageing, fading, tired and crocked side thus turning him into this amazing world beating manager, ad infinitum.

I'll be very interested to see where he rocks up next. He's probably better off retiring!

[broadsword]

Get the feeling he was going to leave Rovers this Summer and go into international management.

It's a classic case of decide in haste, repent at leisure. Wonder whether he'll buy another villa with his compo, and what he would call it? "Villa Venky"?

[imy9]

This thread has a warped title anyway. No-one ever said he was the Messiah till Imy (!) put it up. So the answer to his question is------- Sam Is simply a good manager and how I wish he hadn't been booted out. All imo of course!

No one ever said he was the messiah...deary me it's like groundhog day with you, surely you would have learnt the error of your ways by now? Well read the opening message and if in doubt check out my sig.

[trs]

Raul should have been a Rover http://www.people.co.uk/sport/football/news/2011/04/24/allardyce-reckons-raul-should-be-a-rover-102039-23081946/

[Stuart]

From that link:

He said: “It was never a fantasy. Who would have thought at Bolton we would have brought players like Ivan Campo, Youri Djorkaeff, Fernando Hierro and Jay-Jay Okocha to the club but that’s what I am about.“

...and there it is.

[imy9]

Refers to us as a 'small' club with a 'small' budget in a extended version of that interview.

[bob fleming]

the Messiah is my sister

...ain't no king man, she's my queen. I have a dream, I've seen the light. Don't put it out, say she's alright, yeah, she's my sister.

Anyway, no he isn't. He's a good manager but the football at times was horrible. We'd be top half if he was still here though but we wouldn't all be enjoying this Barca-lite free flowing football introduced by Steve Kean.

[Stuart]

Sam should never have gone to Newcastle, Sunderland would have been much more fitting.

[yellowsubmarine]

Refers to us as a 'small' club with a 'small' budget in a extended version of that interview.

Was he not right? We are a small club with a small budget.

[imy9]

Small club can be argued to death on a seperate thread- I don't believe we are. We have the 10th biggest budget in the pl for wages, that's certainly not a small budget.

[chaddyrovers]

Chris Sutton saying Sacking Allardyce has cost Blackburn

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Sacking-Sam-Allardyce-could-cost-Blackburn-their-Premier-League-status-says-Chris-Sutton-article727204.html

[Amo]

From that link:

He said: “It was never a fantasy. Who would have thought at Bolton we would have brought players like Ivan Campo, Youri Djorkaeff, Fernando Hierro and Jay-Jay Okocha to the club but that’s what I am about.“

...and there it is.

I've said it once and I'll say it again:

Signing Raul & Guti was more about Sam Allardyce than Blackburn Rovers.