No, from the outside, looking in, it is possible to develop the view that they haven't gone about things well. The problem with any of these scenarios is that there are so many factors that we know nothing about, that we can't following the reasoning that's led to their decisions with any accuracy.
I think this is becoming a little too 'cast in stone' tbh. Surely modern managers don't just have one style/tactic/formation. The first question, for a prospective manager, should be about how they'd use the squad we have/will have. The next questions should be about how they'd approach home/away games, when losing/winning/drawing, against a team that comes to attack/defend, etc etc etc. In the modern game that can't just be 433 and keep repeating the same things win or lose. We have to have a manager who can cope with the loss of certain players through suspension/injury/sale and adapt to situations such as teams doubling/trebling up against Clarke. I don't believe, and the managerial changes haven't helped, that we've really 'found our style' and many players haven't found their best positions. That's because the likes of Jobe, Neil, Ba, Rigg, etc, have been asked, at an early age, to play in various positions, styles, tactics. I agree with you, that we need a good foundation, but think our next manager needs a full season to sort things out.
May or not be him or not, but Mr Jansens mam was a singer. Absolutely nothing to do with football, but I found it interesting.
Especially when it comes to Rosenior who hasn't hit 40 yet. It's fair to look at what he's achieved so far, which is impressive for a rookie, but it's daft to say the football will be boring or any one specific style at all. He's only just starting out in his coaching career. Knock a few years off and he could legitimately still be playing at this level. Nobody knows what to expect from him other than that in his very recent history he nearly got in the playoffs.
Pleased you aren't in charge of recruiting the new coach if they are the questions you'd ask. Coaches don't just have one tactic but they have an overall style which they stick to more or less and surely you don't target a coach who has a specific style and ask them to implement a different style when you could just target a coach who has a track record of playing your desired style of football? Man City aren't going to appoint Big Sam any time soon. The club, Speakman specifically, should broadly set the style we want to play and then recruit a coach and players to implement that style. Going after Still, a coach who looks to instil a solid defensive shape and looks to beat teams on the counter attack, but then pivoting to Jansen, a possession heavy coach, is just not the way to do things. Setting a play style for the club is the easiest part of the DoF's job and should've been the first thing he did when he walked through the door, instead we have a squad which is so disjointed that whoever comes in needs at least 8 signings and 4 of them being starting 11 players straight away. These players have been asked to play different tactics and different styles because we keep recruiting coaches that are drastically different to the previous which leads to needing a massive overhaul. We may as well go back to employing a manager instead of a head coach and allowing them to dictate recruitment.
Excuses to fail, the recruitment brought in the foreign young lads, why would it be Mowbrays fault that he struggled to communicate with them? And he was bang on about the strikers, all 4 look that they couldn't play up front. Think you are confusing excuses with the facts. Beale and Dodds also failed to get a tune out of any of them.
What’s PJ style of play, the last few months have scarred me Either way, let’s hope we back him in the market with what we need
I agree with all of that and it's impossible to know how a manager will adapt to a new club/squad. I'm not totally opposed to Rosenior, I just believe he's too similar in attitude to those he'd following. Also that he was given some very good players, at Hull, but regularly criticised for the poor home performances ... ... that worries me because of how quiet the SOL became in the second half of the season. Even if we change things later I believe we need to play some real attacking football to give everyone a boost. Playing cautious football, out from the back, won't get people fired up even if it grinds out results.
It's the continual voicing of those things that handed players excuses in my opinion ... ... and that's what it is, my opinion. I'm not stating anything as a fact, this is what I posted .... "One of my continuing theories is that football players can easily latch onto the slightest excuse. That's from watching football, at many levels, and playing Sunday League. I usually had good managers but one, in particular, would say things like 'Ooh, tough game today lads'. Heads would drop just a little, wrong but true. During the last few months Mowbray, in my opinion, kept giving the team excuses to fail. Even things as daft as 'I can't communicate with the foreign lads' and 'none of these strikers know their jobs', etc. In the end I think it became Mowbray making excuses for himself ... ... and that situation couldn't continue."
He was stating facts, he was sacked to cover up for Speakmans incompetence in last summers transfer window.
So let's hope the next manager can put all that behind us ... ... hopefully there's only so long we can carry on discussing why Mowbray had to go and why Beale was a mistake. There's a new season/manager/signings to look forward to, And, no I'm not influencing recruitment, none of us are.
Now that's guesswork. It may be true but it's guesswork nonetheless. We were promoted once, almost twice, with Speakman there. And I don't believe Sunderland's manager should use every interview to criticise Sunderland and the players. Mowbray is supposed to be a 'Grit yer teeth and battle on' kinda bloke, not a repetitive complainer.
You didn't mate, I was just responding to, 'Pleased you aren't in charge of recruiting the new coach if they are the questions you'd ask.' You seem to want to draw me into an argument over semantics and nuances for some reason, you did yesterday. No offence but I don't want to argue over trifles. It's sunny and the garden needs some work. Have a good day. please log in to view this image
Posting guesswork as an opinion is one thing ... ... posting guesswork as fact is another. You're stating why Mowbray was sacked when it's just speculation on your part. "He was stating facts, he was sacked to cover up for Speakmans incompetence You seem to want an argument over semantics, not football, sorry not interested.
