Of course you make a fair point but my sample period is over 11 months - Leicester were out the top 2 for probably 11 days and had games in hand.
That argument is even more short term. Speakman said that no one at the club was happy with being in the play offs. We won’t be, that is regression. Whether that be short term or not, it isn’t what the club wanted or what they expected at the end of the season.
Looking at this thread it's hard to believe the title is 'NEW head coach' ... ... it's mainly how bad our recently sacked manager was and how we were warned by Rangers fans that he wasn't a good manager. I'll guarantee if Heckingbottom is appointed we'll be warned by Leeds and Sheff Utd fans that he'll be a disaster ... ... whoever it is we'll be warned
Why not make the sample size the 3 years since this regime came in? Because we've 100% progressed if you look at it like that. But that doesn't fit your agenda.
The argument that I'm making is that the poor performance this season is down to more than the head coach. Mowbray and Beale were getting similar results. Very little change, even under a coach that you think is useless. That indicates that the team/squad were performing at about their natural level, regardless of who the coach was. Therefore, driving the coach out based on people not liking his history or they way he said things is ridiculous. The lesson that needs to be learnt from this is, the next head coach needs to be given time and to be judged against results over that prolonged period and against the quality of his squad.
If its Heckinbottom people will ask why they had to wait until the summer as he's out of work unless Sheffield United are still paying him off of course. That would raise more concerns over speakmans competence in the role he has. The current temporary head coach can't be in the frame anymore surely?
Look, I could post other examples, using endless time periods, it's futile because there's always another example that contradicts it by shifting the time period. Leicester won the title, were relegated, went top of the Championship, dropped out of the top two and are now top again ... ... they may finish top and be refused entry to the PL because of cheating. Surely you're really hoping we bring in a great manager, keep our good players, sign more and do better next season ... ... things change in football, progression ad regression are rarely permanent.
We were 12th in March 2023, a season ago. so we’re about par . we also have a much deeper squad A much better run academy and players coming through Some really **** luck with injuries , many of whom will be ready for next season Some much nicer clobber and kit Add 3 quality players and a coach who fits us, and some litter bins and we’ll be good
No need for the last line. I have opinions and just because you maybe disagree doesn't make my opinion agenda driven - that's just not fair. I am much happier with the current owner than I was with the previous duo - absolutely.
OK mate, I'll leave it there ... ... whatever is said you'll find a possible scenario to justify your 'concerns'. Most of what you're imagining may never even happen.
The part in bold simply isn't true. There were a large proportion of our fan base who used those reports to dismiss him before a ball was kicked. Fans were criticising immediately.
You're not wrong - however you could argue we've needed a good quality central striker and central midfielder for the last 2 or 3 windows and they've failed to address this.
I hate this “agenda” malarkey. We all want the ****ing same thing, like I said, you can make arguments for progression or regression in any way you like. Did Donald progress the club because we finished 8th but finished 4th the next. It doesn’t matter what people thoughts are, and you won’t change his mind, I just find this agenda thing absolute nonsense. My agenda will be the same as yours and Coastals, promoted to the Premier League, you might have more patience, it doesn’t mean anything else.
It is an agenda when you repeat the same points but ignore everyone else's. I think Speakman should be replaced, but don't tell other people their sample size is too small when you are also using a small sample size.
They were pointing out for a week before he was appointed that it was a really bad choice - Speakman ignored all the red flags and appointed his best ever coaching session provider. The fans were proven right in their reservations about Beale - that's just a fact.
It's just becoming tedious how many times we can be lectured about how bad Beale was and how we've slipped down the table ... ... yes, everyone knows we've slipped down the table ffs. It's like being told, a hundred times daily, that night follows day ... ... or is it day follows night
to be fair i agree with you we all want the same some are too positive some are way to negative and then you have the ones in between but we also have some who have a massive agenda against the owners and speakmen who would rather see them all crash and burn then see them turn it around, and look for anything possibly negative to have a go at them
I'm not allowed to point out mine was 11 months and theirs was 11 days? Ffs mate it's a canny difference you know?
