Conveniently applies to Adkins but oh no Slutsky was a big sack of **** who couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery. One thing he did was get us playing as a team. We scored goals and posed a threat. With Grosicki, Bowen and Martin/Campbell in attack we should have no trouble doing just that. But we're not and players that previously worked well together now look more like they're opposing magnets. Allams must have told them to play like ****s. Clearly absolutely nothing to do with Adkins being a **** ex Scunthorpe manager.
I don't think Slutsky was a sack of ****. Ultimately he had the same restrictions Adkins did and that's the most important thing. I admit to being a bit surprised by how he was afforded a lot more respect than Adkins by most fans simply because he sounded more exciting (ex CSKA, Russia manager as opposed to Scunthorpe and Reading) whilst people search for issues with everything Adkins says.
I think it's probably because the team actually looked capable of playing a bit under Slutsky and maybe under different circumstances would have been a big hit. Also the fact he's not an ex Scunthorpe **** bag.
Seems managing any team is the impossible job nowadays. Even the previously respected Mourinho has become a laughing stock. How many managers are actually universally highly rated now?
I wouldn't knock Adkins for not getting the best out of Milinkovic, I reckon he probably just isn't good enough
Will probably get certain Adkins fans breathing down my neck again but Harry Wilson proved last night how Adkins got an improvement in the team in the second half of the season, along with the return of Abel. Slutsky would have proven to be a far superior manager to Adkins given the whole season but panic set in before Christmas
I don't get what that's based on at all. Slutsky had his hands tied just like every recent City manager, so I'm reluctant to criticise him, but he offered nothing to suggest he was better than Adkins. People were convinced by Slutsky from day one because of his impressive-sounding links to Chelsea and Abramovic and the teams he'd managed. We were routinely losing by several goals. This year has been **** but the squad and preparation have been somehow even worse than last year so it can't be compared to last season. I don't think any head coach would turn this current one into a decent team and I don't think its performance is a reflection on Adkins at all. If your midfield is as weak as ours you're always going to struggle. I remember Southampton being one of the best visiting sides to come to the KC in the Championship when he was their manager and that seems a far more reasonable thing to judge him on to me.
I don't think there are any Adkins fans on here. Just some fans who know it's really not his fault. People who knew we were going to be ****e before pre season even started. People who understand who the real culprits are.
Do you think we could have attracted a better manager? Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Adkins, I just don't think we could have done better. We were always going to get someone who just needed a job. If it wasn't Nige it would have been some other joker. I'd take Phil Brown back, but I like him, so I wouldn't wish it on him.
Slutsky would have the benefit of Hernandez and Wilsons impact on the team. Put it this way, Henriksen started looking semi decent as soon as those two players were introduced to the side, now look at him. I said it pre-season, without the quality of those two players in particular Adkins was going to have no chance, whether you rate him or not as a manager
You are quite right, who else would we have attracted? Phil Brown would be daft to even consider it. Memories like our first Wembley appearance, winni g our first ever game in the top flight, being briefly at the top of the PL whilst watching us beat WBA, stunning everyone including City fans by going to Arsenal and Tottenham and winning would all be tarnished by the inevitable failure under which would come under the ****s in charge.
It depends on how you judge managers. Adkins had a lot of success initially, but that was a while ago. In that sense he was a proven manager. His recent record suggests that he has not progressed from that. The problem you have is that there are probably a lot of people with more up to date understanding of the game and coaching methods who would not have any track record as managers, so that's why the likes of Adkins/Steve Mclaren etc. keep ending up in employment.
Hardly any managers go from job to job being successful everywhere though? Only really Guardiola currently. Almost all managers struggle at certain clubs or jobs, it's just inevitable. Doesn't mean they're all ****. Look at Marco Silva. Fantastic for us and initially for Watford. Everyone laughed at Paul Merson for dismissing this fantastic manager. Then Watford's results changed and suddenly he was a joke again. Steve McClaren has had some incredible success as a manager, but he's took some awful jobs and now he's the butt of everybody's jokes. Because he failed at Newcastle and England like every manager did around those times? Because he was stitched up at Forest like Adkins here? We really need to cut managers more slack. It can't be right that 99% of them are ****.
Out of the 92 managers only 4 will win the leagues they are in and 6 more will get promoted so by definition around 90% of managers will fail. Which is why there is such a merry ground of managers being rewarded for what is classed as failure by walking into other jobs as there are relatively few with the coaching badges required nowadays.
