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

[thenodrog]

Perhaps if he hadn't signed three right backs with Emerton already on the books the Board might have been more accomodating.

Do you think Emerton is good enough? Simon sorry to drag this up but regarding your judgement on right backs remind us all again where your favourite John Curtis went and what level he played after leaving us?

imo Salgado only came on the scene late and with the benefit of hindsight has proved to be a very good signing (and after we had signed Jacobsen I think on a free? and Chimbonda who was a mistake but could according to his cv play right along the back 4) Allardyce obviously at the time could only employ foresight.

[Amo]

They wouldnt be bleeding the club dry as integral members of the first team would they?

Yes, they would, because they have no resale value.

It's okay having one Galactico like Salgado on our books (who even then, had to sell our Player of the Season to budget) but to throw on Raul & Guti (who would earn even more in the PL than they are now) would be a heavy load on the wage bill for little turnover.

You talk so much rubbish.

OH NO U.

[thenodrog]

It's all Aunty, balls, uncle anyway.

If we'd signed those two they might have been good or they might have been extremely expensive flops.

Thats football. Allardyes record in the transfer market stand comparison with all but the very best. Rem even Hughes signed duds but we prefer to just rem the gud uns.

[tony gale's mic]

Yes, they would, because they have no resale value.

It's okay having one Galactico like Salgado on our books (who even then, had to sell our Player of the Season to budget) but to throw on Raul & Guti (who would earn even more in the PL than they are now) would be a heavy load on the wage bill for little turnover.

OH NO U.

For the millionth time we didn't have to sell Warnock to fund Salgado.

If you're capable of doing them, the maths simply don't add up. Warnock was, as John Williams said, sold to cover a hole in the wage budget. But that was down to the fact we're a Premier League club who get a much smaller incoming revenue compared to our rivals than anything else.

And Rovers don't just need to buy players who have resale value. We have the likes of Phil Jones, Olsson and Hoilett all of whom cost nothing and all of whom have a big resale value. All sides need a mix of youth and experience. How much resale value did Okocha, Djorkaeff, Campo et al provide? And where did they propel Bolton to?

On one hand you complain about Sam playing "hoofball" yet on the other hand you criticise his decision to bring genuine class and creativity into the side in the form of Raul which arguably would have changed our style of play for the better.

It's hard to know what you really expected. Sam to play attractive football with a squad full of players bereft of flair and creativity whilst still maintaining/improving our excellent league record, or for him to produce the money out of nowhere to buy a young player with resale value who has the flair and creativity to improve the side.

[thenodrog]

Those are all top-class managers who have won trophies at the highest level. Ego = justified.

Allardyce's only the centre of his own universe.

You are just being personal and malicious Topman in attempts to score silly little points.

Any manager who has spent ten years managing in the Prem is a top top manager. It is a rough tough unforgiving environment which has resulted in many casualties who are never heard of again, and with an average appointment of approx just 2-2.5 years! Tell you what you name some that have SERVED MORE TIME than Allardyce other than Fergy and Wenger. Off the top of my head I'd say Allardyce must be in the top 4/5. AND NO BAD MANAGER COULD EVER ACHIEVE THAT.

[patrickvalery]

Pages and pages of arguing about the virtues of our previous boss. Bad blood running at an all time high, certainly since i've been on here. And the funny thing is, i don't think one person has said that Sam Allardyce is / was or ever could be a bad manager.

I don't understand why we can't let this go. Its like watching a 24hr Question Time.

[Gav]

Raul's success with Schalke both in the Bundesliga and the Champions' League shows it's highly likely he wouldve been a great addition to the squad.

Not sure how Raul would have enjoyed running the channels and controlling the ball around his ears.

Allardyce needs to shut his mouth, slagging off the club for not backing him financially, is it any wonder.

[tony gale's mic]

Not sure how Raul would have enjoyed running the channels and controlling the ball around his ears.

Yeah, because Allardyce has no experience whatsoever of fitting classy flair players into unfashionable northern football teams.

[47er]

Why on earth should Sam "shut his mouth? He lives in a free country, he's no longer our manager, why can't he say what he likes?

Anyway, the club didn't back him financially, sold our best players over successive years and then sacked him because the football wasn't attractive enough! If Sam feels aggrieved and wants to talk about it, I don't blame him.

[Gav]

Why on earth should Sam "shut his mouth? He lives in a free country, he's no longer our manager, why can't he say what he likes?

Anyway, the club didn't back him financially, sold our best players over successive years and then sacked him because the football wasn't attractive enough! If Sam feels aggrieved and wants to talk about it, I don't blame him.

I live in a free country, I can say what I like.

[47er]

I live in a free country, I can say what I like.

But Sam can't?

[Gav]

But Sam can't?

Good to hear you supporting the Messiah in his quest to hammer the club, says much about the teacher and pupil don't you think

[Amo]

For the millionth time we didn't have to sell Warnock to fund Salgado.

If you're capable of doing them, the maths simply don't add up. Warnock was, as John Williams said, sold to cover a hole in the wage budget. But that was down to the fact we're a Premier League club who get a much smaller incoming revenue compared to our rivals than anything else.

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/120513/Salgado-the-man-for-Sam

Sam says that Salgado wasn't budgeted for and hopes he doesn't have to sacrifice one of his stars (Warnock) to fund the deal.

A week after signing Salgado, Warnock was gone.

Coincidence, much?

And if the wage budget was already in the red, then Salgado's arrival only sealed Warnock's fate even more.

And Rovers don't just need to buy players who have resale value. We have the likes of Phil Jones, Olsson and Hoilett all of whom cost nothing and all of whom have a big resale value.

Like I said, we could (just about) afford someone like Salgado on our books, but three former-Galacticos would be a heavy and unnecessary strain on the wage bill.

How much resale value did Okocha, Djorkaeff, Campo et al provide? And where did they propel Bolton to?

Short-term success which lumbered Bolton with a squad of ageing stars, on inflated wages, past their best.

Allardyce could see the writing on the wall, which is why he got out when he did.

On one hand you complain about Sam playing "hoofball" yet on the other hand you criticise his decision to bring genuine class and creativity into the side in the form of Raul which arguably would have changed our style of play for the better.

It all depends at what cost those players would be. Raul & Guti are class players but they are expensive short-term signings with no guarantee of success in the PL - someone of Salgado's character is better suited to English football.

It's hard to know what you really expected. Sam to play attractive football with a squad full of players bereft of flair and creativity whilst still maintaining/improving our excellent league record, or for him to produce the money out of nowhere to buy a young player with resale value who has the flair and creativity to improve the side.

Sam managed to play decent enough football when he wanted to - in the denouement of last season and vs. Chelsea (with Venky's watching on). That's all I was asking for - to see some variety in our play, instead of the methodical and increasingly banal percentage-game.

[Amo]

You are just being personal and malicious Topman in attempts to score silly little points.

Oh, give over.

You're making a ridiculous comparison and I'm calling you out for it.

[tony gale's mic]

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/120513/Salgado-the-man-for-Sam

Sam says that Salgado wasn't budgeted for and hopes he doesn't have to sacrifice one of his stars (Warnock) to fund the deal.

A week after signing Salgado, Warnock was gone.

Coincidence, much?

And if the wage budget was already in the red, then Salgado's arrival only sealed Warnock's fate even more.

£35,000 a week wages are standard Premier League first team wages. It's not like we were paying Salgado astronomical wages. In fact I'd wager Warnock was on about the same amount. Then there's the matter of the £7 million transfer fee.

Like I said, do the maths, they just don't add up.

35,000 a week wages over a 2 year contract add up to a shade over £3.5 million - half of what we recieved for Warnock.

Bringing someone on a free at the age of 33 and them letting them go after a couple of years of very good performances is exactly the same as bringing in a 27 year old for £4 million and selling them for £4 million after a couple of years. Only the first option carries considerably less risk than the second option.

Like I said, we could (just about) afford someone like Salgado on our books, but three former-Galacticos would be a heavy and unnecessary strain on the wage bill.

What? £35,000 a week wages? Look around and see some of the quoted wages for players who play week-in, week out for Premier League clubs. I doubt you'll find many who aren't either on that much already (or a lot more) or who are instructing their agents to renegotiate their contracts.

Short-term success which lumbered Bolton with a squad of ageing stars, on inflated wages, past their best.

Allardyce could see the writing on the wall, which is why he got out when he did.

Simply not true.

Short term success? Their success lasted for four seasons (if we discount promotion and the seasons Sam won two relegation battles) and led to them having the best Premier League record over those four seasons outside of the top 4.

What ageing stars were they lumbered with? Okocha left in 2006, a year before Sam did. Ivan Campo left in 2008 after 5 years of service and 141 league games. Djorkaeff left in 2004 after playing two seasons. Hierro spent one season there. N'Gotty left before Allardyce did too.

So which ageing stars on inflated wages did Sam leave at the club? He usually brought them in for free on one or two year deals, kept them for as long as they were any good so they were very much worthy of their wages, and then let them go after that. Sam left because he couldnt take the club any further with the funds available, which he couldnt really since breaking into the top 4 (the next logical step) would always be a bridge too far.

It all depends at what cost those players would be. Raul & Guti are class players but they are expensive short-term signings with no guarantee of success in the PL - someone of Salgado's character is better suited to English football.

The German league is a lot closer to our league in style to the Spanish or Italian leagues but Raul is doing great there. Guti might be in an inferior league but he's still a class player with great touch. You can't say anything 100% but bringing someone who has that much quality into a midfield bereft of it is likely to be hugely beneficial to our team, especially when you look at his track record with similar players at Bolton

Sam managed to play decent enough football when he wanted to - in the denouement of last season and vs. Chelsea (with Venky's watching on). That's all I was asking for - to see some variety in our play, instead of the methodical and increasingly banal percentage-game.

Sam was capable of changing his tactics to adjust to the situation. But this season overall the football wasn't as bad as you claim it was. The home wins against Villa and Everton we played some nice stuff. Hell even in the game which sealed his fate (the Bolton game) we played some decent stuff in the first half before falling away in the second. If you watch a season of Manchester United, a season of Everton, a season of Wigan etc you'll always find games where they play a different gameplan to usual, but with most clubs their basic set up will be similar across most matches because chopping and changing styles week to week is bad for the team.

And yes, in our case our basic set up wasn't pretty. But it got excellent results, and without players of creativity or flair we would have been playing away from our strengths if we'd changed things significantly.

[John]

The negatives people usually attribute to Sam in these debates are usually over exaggerated IMO because they dislike him (like the "hoofball", it was never as bad as some like to make out).

[John]

If looking at player ability alone, Sir Alex Ferguson commented over the weekend that he considered signing Raul last summer.

[Amo]

£35,000 a week wages are standard Premier League first team wages. It's not like we were paying Salgado astronomical wages. In fact I'd wager Warnock was on about the same amount. Then there's the matter of the £7 million transfer fee.

So why wasn't Warnock sold in the summer? There didn't seem to be any urgency to sell him then. If there was always a shortfall to be filled, why did he just happen to leave shortly after Salgado arrived?

It's obvious to me that the board weren't happy at overbudgeting on Salgado that they felt the need recoup some of that money by selling Warnock.

Bringing someone on a free at the age of 33 and them letting them go after a couple of years of very good performances is exactly the same as bringing in a 27 year old for £4 million and selling them for £4 million after a couple of years. Only the first option carries considerably less risk than the second option.

No, it doesn't. And you've just invented a random scenario with no substance in order to make some vague point.

What? £35,000 a week wages? Look around and see some of the quoted wages for players who play week-in, week out for Premier League clubs. I doubt you'll find many who aren't either on that much already (or a lot more) or who are instructing their agents to renegotiate their contracts.

Raul's earning €4m per year at Schalke.

Guti's earning €2.7m per year at Besiktas.

That's about £67,000/£45,000 per week respectively. Now consider they'd earn more on the gravy train of the PL. On top of Salgado's wages, that's far too much for a club like Rovers to be realistically spending on short-term marquee signings. It would cripple us regardless of whether they were a success.

Short term success? Their success lasted for four seasons (if we discount promotion and the seasons Sam won two relegation battles) and led to them having the best Premier League record over those four seasons outside of the top 4.

Four seasons is short-term success. It certainly cannot be considered long-term success in the bigger picture. Sam got out while the going was good, because he knew his methods were proving financially unstable for Bolton. Aside from Anelka, how much resale value did Sam make from his Bolton squad?

What ageing stars were they lumbered with? Okocha left in 2006, a year before Sam did. Ivan Campo left in 2008 after 5 years of service and 141 league games. Djorkaeff left in 2004 after playing two seasons. Hierro spent one season there. N'Gotty left before Allardyce did too.

Stelios, Campo, Speed, Pedersen etc.

It's little secret that Bolton had an astronomical wage-bill and mounting debts because of all the expensive short-term players Allardyce signed, not to mention his extensive backroom staff.

The German league is a lot closer to our league in style to the Spanish or Italian leagues but Raul is doing great there.

I would disagree with that first point, but that's a new topic altogether.

And I just can't see Raul playing in an Allardyce side, sorry. It was alright signing someone like Anelka, who could run the channels and had the pace to stretch defences, but Raul wouldn't get much joy up front on his own waiting for a Pedersen special.

Guti might be in an inferior league but he's still a class player with great touch. You can't say anything 100% but bringing someone who has that much quality into a midfield bereft of it is likely to be hugely beneficial to our team, especially when you look at his track record with similar players at Bolton

And look at Sir Alex's track record, but he couldn't make Juan Veron adjust to the speed of the Premier League, and he turned out to be an expensive flop.

Sam was capable of changing his tactics to adjust to the situation.

Not really. That goes against his ethos of percentage football.

But this season overall the football wasn't as bad as you claim it was. The home wins against Villa and Everton we played some nice stuff. Hell even in the game which sealed his fate (the Bolton game) we played some decent stuff in the first half before falling away in the second.

So that's a whopping 3 games out of 17?

If you watch a season of Manchester United, a season of Everton, a season of Wigan etc you'll always find games where they play a different gameplan to usual, but with most clubs their basic set up will be similar across most matches because chopping and changing styles week to week is bad for the team.

And yes, in our case our basic set up wasn't pretty. But it got excellent results, and without players of creativity or flair we would have been playing away from our strengths if we'd changed things significantly.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda.

We have the players to mix it up and open defences without resorting to long-ball, especially when most of the PL is bog-average when you discount the elite.

The negatives people usually attribute to Sam in these debates are usually over exaggerated IMO because they dislike him (like the "hoofball", it was never as bad as some like to make out).

And likewise with those defending him - e.g. Gordon comparing him to Mourinho/Fergie/Cloughie, and TGM trying to force his opinions on everyone at every turn.

If looking at player ability alone, Sir Alex Ferguson commented over the weekend that he considered signing Raul last summer.

Sir Alex also has Michael Owen as a back-up player. That's a luxury Man. Utd can afford - we can't.

[tony gale's mic]

So why wasn't Warnock sold in the summer? There didn't seem to be any urgency to sell him then. If there was always a shortfall to be filled, why did he just happen to leave shortly after Salgado arrived?

It's obvious to me that the board weren't happy at overbudgeting on Salgado that they felt the need recoup some of that money by selling Warnock.

He left at that point that Villa made an offer. Do you think Villa coordinated their offer to when Salgado arrived too?

He was sold to cover a hole in the wage budget, and by definition Salgado's addition to the squad was part of that wage budget. But if we didn't bring one £35,000 a week player in we would've brought another £35,000 a week player in soon enough since that's a fairly average PL wage.

There's a difference between that and selling Warnock to cover Salgado, who's been a successful signing for the club.

No, it doesn't. And you've just invented a random scenario with no substance in order to make some vague point.

I've used a hypothetical scenario to prove a point yes. It's a fairly common debating technique but one that you seem to have difficulty in understanding.

If you sign a 28 year old for £4 million you're staking both the £4 million and the wages you're paying that player on the player being good. If you get two or three good seasons and sell them for £4 million, it's usually seen as a good buy.

But you're still risking more money (ie £4 million + wages) than you are signing a 31-32 year old who is extremely talented, who has been performing at a high level and who is still fit (just wages).

I don't see what's so difficult to understand about that.

Raul's earning €4m per year at Schalke.

Guti's earning €2.7m per year at Besiktas.

That's about £67,000/£45,000 per week respectively. Now consider they'd earn more on the gravy train of the PL. On top of Salgado's wages, that's far too much for a club like Rovers to be realistically spending on short-term marquee signings. It would cripple us regardless of whether they were a success.

I don't think the plan was to sign Guti AND Raul, just one or the other. But when you think that we're currently paying Santa Cruz's £90,000 wages for half a season, or have just spunked £3.5 million on a midfielder who hasn't played yet, either would still look like decent value. Even getting Raul on a free and paying £6.5 million for wages over two seasons would be akin to spending £2 million on a player, and spending £40,000 a week on wages for two seasons, although admittedly not getting a resale from them.

And in any event, the point was that Sam wanted to bring creativity and flair to our team, but the circumstances wouldn't allow it. Look at the vast majority of Premier League clubs. Blackpool, Wigan and Wolves aside, the vast majority of other Premier League clubs would be able to afford that. That shows the circumstances under which Sam had to work with.

Four seasons is short-term success. It certainly cannot be considered long-term success in the bigger picture. Sam got out while the going was good, because he knew his methods were proving financially unstable for Bolton. Aside from Anelka, how much resale value did Sam make from his Bolton squad?

Stelios, Campo, Speed, Pedersen etc.

It's little secret that Bolton had an astronomical wage-bill and mounting debts because of all the expensive short-term players Allardyce signed, not to mention his extensive backroom staff.

So you read Sam's mind and figured out what his motives were? I'm happy to go with the motives that were expressed publicly rather than invent ones out of nowhere. And those seem to make sense - Sam had took the side to a point where they need extra investment to move onto the next level (Champions League football) but the funds weren't available to provide that.

Yes his players didn't have big resale values, but they also didn't cost anything either. What were the resale values of Tugay and Friedel? They still gave great service to the club though didn't they? Sam wasn't as good as Hughes in the transfer market but if you think of countless other managers who'll spend millions on players and then not recoup the money, Sam's approach was preferable.

And I just can't see Raul playing in an Allardyce side, sorry. It was alright signing someone like Anelka, who could run the channels and had the pace to stretch defences, but Raul wouldn't get much joy up front on his own waiting for a Pedersen special.

Raul wasn't an out and out striker and would drop back and bridge the gap between midfield and attack well. In that sort of role I think he'd be very good. He's got the sort of class that would usually shine through.

And look at Sir Alex's track record, but he couldn't make Juan Veron adjust to the speed of the Premier League, and he turned out to be an expensive flop.

Of course there's exceptions, no ones saying Raul would have been 100% a success. But it's likely he wouldve been.

Not really. That goes against his ethos of percentage football.

So on one hand you're saying Sam's incapable of changing his tactics to adjust the situation, but on the other hand you said that he did change his tactics on occasion?

So that's a whopping 3 games out of 17?

No, there was also the Chelsea game at home, a large part of our game at Birmingham which we didnt deserve to lose, a lot of the Wolves game...

Shoulda, coulda, woulda

We have the players to mix it up and open defences without resorting to long-ball, especially when most of the PL is bog-average when you discount the elite.

Really? Which players? There's Hoilett who's still only 20 and was in his first season in the league last term, Olsson on a good day...and then I'm really struggling to think of anyone else. We have players capable of doing it occasionally, like Pedersen, but no one capable of doing it on a regular enough basis to incorporate it into our tactics.

Most of the PL might be bog average, but apart from three or four clubs they've all spent a great deal more on their team than we've been able to these last few seasons.

[chris]

What we need is a young Batistuta

[John]

Topman, you have been saying for months (or even longer) we have the players to play better/attacking football, who are these players out of interest? Notice you also highlighted the Chelsea game at home which we lost - the Premier League don't give points out for decent performances sadly.

Think proof is in the pudding on that particular point, sadly we are finding out first hand what happens when we try and play a little football - we look disorganised, ship goals left right and centre and have a constant failure to win matches.

As for those "defending Sam" as you put it, I think it is something to do with the fact he is a very good manager and did an excellent job whilst manager of this football club, pity some still can't see it (or don't want to because they dislike the man).

[SD4E]

The negatives people usually attribute to Sam in these debates are usually over exaggerated IMO because they dislike him (like the "hoofball", it was never as bad as some like to make out).

No it was worse.

Still robinson taking every free kick in our own half' and even 5-10 yards in the opposition half was not the reason why every other fan in country calls him the hoofball expert

[John]

No it was worse.

Still robinson taking every free kick in our own half' and even 5-10 yards in the opposition half was not the reason why every other fan in country calls him the hoofball expert

Point I was making it was not always as bad as some liked to make out....obviously it was a direct style of play but it got us results particularly at home. If you look at our results in the 2nd half of last season you can't really complain, what a fantastic finish to the season.

I actually enjoy it when Robinson punts it into the box! He is quite accurate with his kicking.

[den]

No it was worse.

Still robinson taking every free kick in our own half' and even 5-10 yards in the opposition half was not the reason why every other fan in country calls him the hoofball expert

The last home game, Robinson came over in front of the JW upper, to take a free kick from the half way line and right on the touchline as well. In fact, he was almost with us in the stand. I said to the lady next to me that he'll be taking the corner kicks next and she burst out laughing - because she had thought exactly the same thing.

This pretty, flowing football really is a big improvement and losing games on top is a hoot. BTW, I don't recall too many comments about that particular hoofballing approach on here.

[Mattyblue]

Topman wants us to play like we did against Liverpool before Kean 'started dicking about' with his tactics. Simple init.