[Archived] Barnsley Away

[ABBEY]

we need the chaddometer bringing back

[Rover_Shaun]

[Stuart]

Open your eyes man, it's about more than just the 11 players that take the pitch every week.

The players have had no communication streams with the club for years, contracts and bonuses never discussed, transfers never discussed, nothing discussed, which causes division and insecurity for everyone on the playing staff.

Finance directors that have no power, directors that have no power, club officials that have no communication streams and managers trying to run the club with no lines of communication.

Gary Bowyer was probably washing the kit at one stage it's been that bad Stuart.

It's not just about 11 players at 3pm on a Saturday, if every facet of the club is rotten you can have a 40 goal strike force and still fail big time.

We have thousands that sleepwalk to and from the ground every other week, don't be just another lemming, accept it's about more than just 90 minutes of football every Saturday for goodness sake.

And yet some say we had stability or were even on the up.

You seem to be losing the plot at the minute Gav. Because you can't, or can't justify the travel to, go to matches you are becoming increasingly bitter with every post. Get to the games and join the protests.

I've yet to hear any rumours that players aren't being paid but I can well imagine that contract discussions are few and far between. This is almost certainly down to the colossal drop in wages that players are being expected to accept. We have so many players out of contract. However, a better manager could turn these gripes into performances - even if it's to get a new contract elsewhere. Other clubs manage it with less money than us. It has become an excuse for failure and everyone is swallowing it. Lambert would probably have stayed if he had been communicated with, if he had been given a budget based on player sales. He wasn't going to put up with their antics.

But the post you reacted to was purely down to the money. Oh and Bowyer having a better time of it than most. Washing the kits - ha!

[RoverCanada]

Thanks for the reply. Think we're going to agree to disagree here though!

I like the look of Mulgrew as a player too, but when you need players to be fit then his regular injuries limit him from being a success. It's hardly a success if he's only there for half the games! It'd be less of a gamble/problem if every other player for the positions he played was fit but given they're mostly crocks as well then it goes from folly into madness. You talk about the need for numbers but what kind of numbers, let alone quality, is being added when they're in the treatment room? It just doesn't add up.

Not sure how the it's the right approach for the loans.either. Again, they're a waste of space and wages. It's a waste of opportunity as there are some brilliant loanees playing at championship level who would have really added to our team. You only need to look at Gallacher to see the impact they could have and yet you seem happy with a one in six hitting this level - or two in six hitting above poor for that matter! That's a total utter waste imo. Added to which it holds our youngsters back. There's no positives attached to it.

The 50% success rate is based on players being ok - if it were that they were good or had a significant positive impact on the team, then the percentage drops right down. (But we don't have those standards any more!) Only Williams, Graham and Gallacher would pass that benchmark and have noticeably improved the team. That doesn't suggest a transfer genius, or even someone astute in the transfer market at all.

You suggest that this is down to having to buy so many players at once, possibly so. But look at his record of signing players who've had a good impact at other clubs too. Again, it's not good or pretty, and suggests that whether he had to make 3 signings or 13 his ratios would still have been the same.

Regardless having 50% of transfers in the dud category is terrible business. 50% dud is appalling, it's half our transfers being detrimental. There is no way that that can be acceptable for any club. Having 50% make a significant positive impact perhaps is comparable with other clubs, but 50% to be complete let downs is not. Perhaps other clubs may have a similar success rate in terms of significant positive impact, but they would have a much lower proportion of duds, or non contributors. I reckon any chairman who had a 50% dud ratio in transfers from a manager would be telling the manager that he was fired. Strangely, only at Rovers is this considered ok.

How about this: I'd prefer having Mulgrew alone on the roster over having all of Mulgrew, Greer, and Brown over Greer alone. Mulgrew + Greer is fine, but probably a luxury we shouldn't be shelling out for given our finances.

Re: loans not being the "right approach", I think you contradict yourself later in your paragraph when you refer to it as a "waste of opportunity". I gather you're not completely against loans in principle (I get the argument that they can stand in the way of a team's own youth players, but they're not always necessarily ready. The Championship is a tough league to break into. See Nyambe and Lenihan's struggles this year, or Mahoney at the end of last year! It's a balance...). You're essentially saying Coyle's failed to bring in the kind of high impact youngsters you can potentially get from PL clubs, which I wouldn't necessarily disagree with. My point was it's the right idea. For young loanees, he's brought in Gallagher, Hoban, Samuelsen, Byrne, and Hendrie. First two I'd say have been successful (barring Hoban's injury...), he was/has been weirdly adverse to using the next two (they're certainly the right "flavour" of the loans you'd want to bring in), while Hendrie's been a failure so far. However, as I alluded to before, while there's the cost of maybe taking some minutes away from our youth players and the opportunity cost vs alternative signings, the cost of such loans is relatively low compared to, say, being stuck with Feeney's contract for two years.

Re: 50% strike rate, I've taken a glance at some random teams' transfer dealings in past years and I think you're being waaaay optimistic if you think teams regularly do better than that. I could even do a "proper" analysis of it if you doubt me However, as I suggested, 50% is not good enough when you're counting on so many of them to be regular first teamers. Coyle couldn't afford to make the mistakes he's made.

A binary evaluation of players as hits or misses is too simplistic anyway. It annoyed me when people would somehow account Bowyer's transfers dealings as Conway + Gestede - Koita - Dabo = 0... It's more like Gallagher's a 1, Greer's a 0.5, Hendrie's a 0 (or even a minus), etc. etc.

[Gav]

And yet some say we had stability or were even on the up.

You seem to be losing the plot at the minute Gav. Because you can't, or can't justify the travel to, go to matches you are becoming increasingly bitter with every post. Get to the games and join the protests.

I've yet to hear any rumours that players aren't being paid but I can well imagine that contract discussions are few and far between. This is almost certainly down to the colossal drop in wages that players are being expected to accept. We have so many players out of contract. However, a better manager could turn these gripes into performances - even if it's to get a new contract elsewhere. Other clubs manage it with less money than us. It has become an excuse for failure and everyone is swallowing it. Lambert would probably have stayed if he had been communicated with, if he had been given a budget based on player sales. He wasn't going to put up with their antics.

But the post you reacted to was purely down to the money. Oh and Bowyer having a better time of it than most. Washing the kits - ha!

I'll ignore the first few lines because they're written by a 3yr old.....

The rest of your post missed the point by a country mile so I'll try again.....

If you have uncertainty in the work place, be it no pay rise this year, not sure if you need to take the days over Christmas as leave, no new contract offer, expenses being called into question, no private healthcare for new employees, childcare voucher scheme being pulled, pension not being as profitable as originally thought, all these things can and will cause conflict with the workforce and impact on performance, certainly has everywhere I've ever worked.

So transfer that analogy to a basket case of a football club, but include over paid, pampered professional footballers and its multiplied by a 1000, and you think we should be doing better than we currently are?

Its not just about the players abilities, its much bigger than that Stuart.

[Stuart]

I'll ignore the first few lines because they're written by a 3yr old.....

The rest of your post missed the point by a country mile so I'll try again.....

If you have uncertainty in the work place, be it no pay rise this year, not sure if you need to take the days over Christmas as leave, no new contract offer, expenses being called into question, no private healthcare for new employees, childcare voucher scheme being pulled, pension not being as profitable as originally thought, all these things can and will cause conflict with the workforce and impact on performance, certainly has everywhere I've ever worked.

So transfer that analogy to a basket case of a football club, but include over paid, pampered professional footballers and its multiplied by a 1000, and you think we should be doing better than we currently are?

Its not just about the players abilities, its much bigger than that Stuart.

I'll ignore your first few lines too as they are written by a patronising @#/?.

Now, do you think any football club in the lower half of the Championship is stable and financially sound? Or do you think they all have players in the situations you describe? Now, do you think that players have regular meetings with the owners, the chairman, the financial director? No, they speak to the manager. A good one can put all that to bed and provide reassurance, even if there is none. He may say something like, trust me, if I want you to stay and you want to stay and they don't offer you a contract then I'll be walking before you, and I'm going nowhere, so I'll do what I do best to look after you - now, all you have to do is focus on what you do best and perform on that pitch, because the better we perform, the better you perform the better it is for you and the club. If the worst comes to the worst I'll move on and I'll sign you IF you can show you'll perform for me".

A good man manager would do this. Someone like Big Sam, for instance.

Someone like Bowyer would say, "I'm gonna be honest with you, I have no idea. I'll ask and let you know what they say. Okay. Now c'mon Marshy keep your head down and do your best, y'know".

Wonder what Coyle would say?

[AggyBlue]

Wonder what Coyle would say?

I can get you more doughnuts

[Gav]

I'll ignore your first few lines too as they are written by a patronising @#/?.

Now, do you think any football club in the lower half of the Championship is stable and financially sound? Or do you think they all have players in the situations you describe? Now, do you think that players have regular meetings with the owners, the chairman, the financial director? No, they speak to the manager. A good one can put all that to bed and provide reassurance, even if there is none. He may say something like, trust me, if I want you to stay and you want to stay and they don't offer you a contract then I'll be walking before you, and I'm going nowhere, so I'll do what I do best to look after you - now, all you have to do is focus on what you do best and perform on that pitch, because the better we perform, the better you perform the better it is for you and the club. If the worst comes to the worst I'll move on and I'll sign you IF you can show you'll perform for me".

A good man manager would do this. Someone like Big Sam, for instance.

Someone like Bowyer would say, "I'm gonna be honest with you, I have no idea. I'll ask and let you know what they say. Okay. Now c'mon Marshy keep your head down and do your best, y'know".

Wonder what Coyle would say?

The bigger picture is clearly lost on you, you simply don't understand how football and industry works which is quite worrying really.

You can have the best manager in the world but if he has his hands tied behind his back like Lambert and Berg they'll do nothing.

How many times does history have to repeat itself for you to get it?

[Stuart]

The bigger picture is clearly lost on you, you simply don't understand how football and industry works which is quite worrying really.

You can have the best manager in the world but if he has his hands tied behind his back like Lambert and Berg they'll do nothing.

How many times does history have to repeat itself for you to get it?

I don't want the best manager in the world but currently we have one of the worst.

This all started because I agreed with somebody else about how lack of finances shouldn't be used as an excuse. I stand by that. You have moved the goal posts because for some reason you are in the mood for a bit of robust debate.

But look, we can bang on about how Venkys are the problem and there's nothing we can do about it, blah, blah. Meanwhile crying into our beers watching Coyle take us down with a whimper, despite having a mid-table Championship standard squad.

Even with Venkys here we still need to stay in this division. It doesn't stop us wanting them out but that is the here-and-now issue. Coyle is failing, has failed. Let's give a proven manager a go at saving us. The first step to that potentially happening is to crank up the pressure on Coyle. Like. Any. Other. Normal. Club's. Fans. Would. Be. Expected. To.

[Leonard Venkhater]

I can get you more doughnuts

It was Tuesday....so 5 all. My serve?

[RevidgeBlue]

Gav has a point to an extent but it defies logic to assert that a good manager wouldn't do any better than Coyle with the same set of players.

If Coyle went, would the owners actually appoint a good manager though? Maybe not but that in itself still isn't a sufficient reason to persevere with Coyle just as fear of the unknown wasn't a sufficient reason to limp on with Bowyer indefinitely before he was sacked.

[arbitro]

Gav has a point to an extent but it defies logic to assert that a good manager wouldn't do any better than Coyle with the same set of players.

If Coyle went, would the owners actually appoint a good manager though? Maybe not but that in itself still isn't a sufficient reason to persevere with Coyle just as fear of the unknown wasn't a sufficient reason to limp on with Bowyer indefinitely before he was sacked.

Define good manager. The majority of fans classed Paul Lambert as a good manager but you clearly don't rate him. We need somebody who can set up a team who can win or draw ugly and scrape results much like Mark Hughes and Sam Allardyce did when they rescued us from the mess we were in.

[Blue blood]

How about this: I'd prefer having Mulgrew alone on the roster over having all of Mulgrew, Greer, and Brown over Greer alone. Mulgrew + Greer is fine, but probably a luxury we shouldn't be shelling out for given our finances.

Re: loans not being the "right approach", I think you contradict yourself later in your paragraph when you refer to it as a "waste of opportunity". I gather you're not completely against loans in principle (I get the argument that they can stand in the way of a team's own youth players, but they're not always necessarily ready. The Championship is a tough league to break into. See Nyambe and Lenihan's struggles this year, or Mahoney at the end of last year! It's a balance...). You're essentially saying Coyle's failed to bring in the kind of high impact youngsters you can potentially get from PL clubs, which I wouldn't necessarily disagree with. My point was it's the right idea. For young loanees, he's brought in Gallagher, Hoban, Samuelsen, Byrne, and Hendrie. First two I'd say have been successful (barring Hoban's injury...), he was/has been weirdly adverse to using the next two (they're certainly the right "flavour" of the loans you'd want to bring in), while Hendrie's been a failure so far. However, as I alluded to before, while there's the cost of maybe taking some minutes away from our youth players and the opportunity cost vs alternative signings, the cost of such loans is relatively low compared to, say, being stuck with Feeney's contract for two years.

Re: 50% strike rate, I've taken a glance at some random teams' transfer dealings in past years and I think you're being waaaay optimistic if you think teams regularly do better than that. I could even do a "proper" analysis of it if you doubt me However, as I suggested, 50% is not good enough when you're counting on so many of them to be regular first teamers. Coyle couldn't afford to make the mistakes he's made.

A binary evaluation of players as hits or misses is too simplistic anyway. It annoyed me when people would somehow account Bowyer's transfers dealings as Conway + Gestede - Koita - Dabo = 0... It's more like Gallagher's a 1, Greer's a 0.5, Hendrie's a 0 (or even a minus), etc. etc.

Think we're agreeing a fair bit. With the loanees it's only right IF the appropriate quality is brought in. Otherwise it has no better impact regardless of if it is the right or wrong idea if the team doesn't benefit. If a doctor killed a patient when operating on his heart if he had heart problems, I doubt the medical review board would say "he had the right idea, the heart was the problem". No points for Clueless on that score from me.

Agree your score per player system is a more accurate system of categorising players but I feel under that Coyle would come much worse off than other managers. Whilst other managers may get similar number of transfers that significantly improve the team, they definitely won't sign as many duds as clueless. Imo 50% of our signings were duds and even with the lax barometer of not being a dud as a standard, Clueless still looks unfavourable to any other managers. Whilst other managers may have a similar success ratio for improving the team (though I think they'd have better) none would have so many in the negative/zero effect camp. Another part of our manager's special skills. More likely their percentage of average/like for like players would be higher than Coyle's. Regardless I don't see how anyone can think well done Owen based on the summer window.

[Gav]

I don't want the best manager in the world but currently we have one of the worst.

This all started because I agreed with somebody else about how lack of finances shouldn't be used as an excuse. I stand by that. You have moved the goal posts because for some reason you are in the mood for a bit of robust debate.

But look, we can bang on about how Venkys are the problem and there's nothing we can do about it, blah, blah. Meanwhile crying into our beers watching Coyle take us down with a whimper, despite having a mid-table Championship standard squad.

Even with Venkys here we still need to stay in this division. It doesn't stop us wanting them out but that is the here-and-now issue. Coyle is failing, has failed. Let's give a proven manager a go at saving us. The first step to that potentially happening is to crank up the pressure on Coyle. Like. Any. Other. Normal. Club's. Fans. Would. Be. Expected. To.

It goes much deeper than the current manager as I've been saying, and if you think we have a mid table championship squad you've been on the Christmas sherry.

Its the same excuses over and over again, the same arguments, and the managerial magic wand isn't going to change anything.

Should we keep Coyle? no we shouldn't, but lets not pretend replacing him is going to save the club because we're setup to fail, and be it this season or next we'll be playing league 1 football sooner rather than later.

Gav has a point to an extent but it defies logic to assert that a good manager wouldn't do any better than Coyle with the same set of players.

If Coyle went, would the owners actually appoint a good manager though? Maybe not but that in itself still isn't a sufficient reason to persevere with Coyle just as fear of the unknown wasn't a sufficient reason to limp on with Bowyer indefinitely before he was sacked.

We disagree I know, but we had a good manager in Lambert, he had the same squad and had us heading down because the clubs setup to fail.

Most posters ended up hating Bowyer, but history shows he did a tremendous job under the circumstances and shows that changing managers just isn't going to work here.

[Hasta]

Lambert had us heading down? Now whose been on the sherry !??

[chaddyrovers]

Lambert had us heading down? Now whose been on the sherry !??

What a load of rubbish.

Im very confident Lambert would have got us top 6 this season if his plans were backed.

[Hasta]

What a load of rubbish.

Im very confident he would have got us top 6 this season if his plans were backed.

Bloody hell. Everyone's been on the sherry !!!!!

[Stuart]

It goes much deeper than the current manager as I've been saying, and if you think we have a mid table championship squad you've been on the Christmas sherry.

Its the same excuses over and over again, the same arguments, and the managerial magic wand isn't going to change anything.

Should we keep Coyle? no we shouldn't, but lets not pretend replacing him is going to save the club because we're setup to fail, and be it this season or next we'll be playing league 1 football sooner rather than later.

We disagree I know, but we had a good manager in Lambert, he had the same squad and had us heading down because the clubs setup to fail.

Most posters ended up hating Bowyer, but history shows he did a tremendous job under the circumstances and shows that changing managers just isn't going to work here.

Have you seen how bad this division is? That we are so far down speaks volumes about just how bad Coyle is.

[ABBEY]

Bloody hell. Everyone's been on the sherry !!!!!

thats only 4 places higher than chaddy said where chimphead would get us.