There must have been some kind of attraction for him even to have been considered in the first place? If it’s a data driven system that is being used is that data in the positive trajectory cause I can’t see any kind of improvement in anything at all that’s been done in the last 12 games, which I think is a fair sample size to be judged on!
The corporate waffle of coaching. That's what. The not football manager, the head coach waffle. Its a special language
I get that you can spin stats to show anything you want in a positive light but surely if we are using a data driven system and that’s what highlighted that things were on the downturn under Johnson then this has got to be showing the same or worse? or have the goal posts been changed so the target is different and we are now looking at finishing mid table and cashing in some of the assets who have greater ambitions before having a proper go at promotion?
The "data" on Beale as a manager/head coach is that he had as many bad results as good ones at QPR, and that he had Rangers 3rd in a two horse race when he got the sack
Surely it can’t just be hope though they must be seeing something that they are clinging to that will translate into a positive sometime soon! I know it was said the players were loving his training but that’s not being adapted into the games or it is the levels certainly aren’t there!
https://www.si.com/soccer/sunderlan...prove-michael-beale-has-made-sunderland-worse Just worse across the board.
It wasn't said by anybody other than by the bloke who employed him and that was right at the start of this depressing little experiment.
Wasnt the consensus he was signed to replace Pritch who was actively looking for a move? But yeah a very very strange signing in the current climate
One of our top wage earners now, If I have worked out correctly if we hadnt signed him, we would have been able to afford Moore in January
Moore was a hell of alot of money for a loan if reports are correct! We’d signed 4 forwards so not surprised it wasnt something we did in the end
£15k a week for a year, and probably a signing on fee, £600k for Dack, I am sure I read Ipswich were paying less than that for him, for the loan period anyhow
I never saw that anywhere, it may be true, just so annoying. He could have made a huge difference, I say could, as I am convinced we dont know how to play with a target man
That capology website that people are using are gospel for Dack's wages is bizarre. According them Dan Neil is on £1,300 a week, Chris Rigg is on £1,000 a week. Kiefer Moore is on 15k a week and Ipswich also pay Brandon Williams £65k a week
