this is something we might be shadowing. Maybe not to the same scale, but with the same results. https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/sunderland-latest-struggles-years-making-025624948.html
Well done m8 on finding this article. A possible mirror image of the goings on within our beloved club, we can only read between the lines about what goes on behind the scenes, however there definitely seems a parity with Sunderland?
Some similarities although we were able to offload many of our big earners from the Prem, Medel, Caulker, Mutch (at a profit) and Campbell with the dregs of our poorer signings now mostly off the books on loan with contracts expiring next year.. The rapid turnover in managers with differing styles and philosophies is a fair comparison although we appear to have some stability now - whether we like what that stability has to offer is another matter.
We've only really had a rapid turn over of 1 manager with a differing style. MM was given huge funding and allowed to build his philosophy and 'style'. Ole was a terrible appointment with no track record and an instruction to transform a style and squad in the middle of a PL relegation battle. Lets be fair that had disaster written all over it (with the obvious benefit of hindsight). Ole's kid in a sweet shop transfer dealings that filled the squad with average players was a major issue that shouldn't have been allowed to happen. Neither should MM's massive overspend for that matter. Slade is uninspiring in name and reputation but there's a logic to his appointment. He should know the lower leagues and, in theory, be able to shop there with success. He hasn't really done that with any great success but from a board strategy level it doesn't mean it was wrong as a concept. As Blue says whether or not we like the current strategy is another matter, but there is no argument that the club clearly knows what it is trying to do. As we get to the business end of this season it will be much easier to decide whether it is working or not. We have discussed opinions on how we see this season working out, I'm more positive than most on here, but as I've already said we'll all only really know sometime in the first 5 months of 2016. The fact Big R started winning Hilts over on the weekend has to be a good sign though! What about you Sparks? Can I top that glass up for you?
Wouldn't do any good Stevo - I've tried topping it up but there must be a hole in the bottom....... Views on the games expressed on here are as much about performances as results. Whilst the result is ultimately what matters, you have to keep the performances in perspective and relative to the quality of opposition. Wolves played nothing like the quality I'd expected of them and we took advantage of it. Yes, you can only beat what's put in front of you, but that applies to MK Dons as well last night. To say we probably deserved to win it flies in the face of reality as much as thinking we're world beaters after the Wolves result. We lost a game we should have been capable of winning and that is not good. Slade can moan about unnecessary extra time system and illness in the camp, but the fact is he failed to deliver a winning combination. Next up are Forest who are a shambles so far this season. Strangely enough on the face of it we should have enough to beat "they're scared of us" Freedman's mob and depending upon other results maybe even get into the top 6 at the end of August - if that happens we'll see a lot more than Hilts converting....... Personally, I'm worried that it is going to fall apart at the City ground on Saturday and there'll be renewed calls for change. We are playing better as a team this season and that is an obvious improvement, but apart from a very poor Wolves side on the day, we've lacked the guile and fire power to put teams to the sword. I'm also worried that Revell's goal last night will make him an automatic choice up front for the next half dozen games.
My heart sank when I saw he was our scorer for that exact reason If KWJ is fit I'm pretty confident he'll start
