One of the things that does instantly come to mind when you see a old club favourite being given the top job is what happened last time when Gunny took the regins. The reality of this situation is however that little is that the only similarity is that they both have a passion for the club which, if well translated to the players will only be an advantage. Firstly Gunn was not part of our coaching set up at the time, he had spent time as our goalkeeping coach but was now a scout. Gunn had never been responsible for a team, setting tactics and communicating that to the players he was learning on the job. Adams has had the chance to run teams and define footballing philosophies that he's instilled into the players. In this sense Adams is a far better candidate for the job than Gunn ever was. Gunn was an appeal to the fans to bring follow, Adams is a sensible appointment with the fans backing as an added advantage. The second point I'd raise is that goalkeepers very rarely manage to be successful managers and my theory is because whilst the rest of the teams role rely on most other players the goalkeepers role is regularly solo or at least part of a smaller team of himself and the back four. There is not attacking style of play that the team could have that will change the role of the goalkeeper and as such they are far less involed in the overall training session, regularly being pulled off to work with the other keepers and that coach. This is not to say that it isn't possible Nigel Adkins of course being an exception to this rule. Adams however was an attacking player, he knows attacking, he knows creating chances and he knows scoring goals he will be far better tactically and will know how to drill the players for this in a way that Gunn couldn't. The fact here is that whilst this is a role of the dice the more I think about it it probably isn't as bigger risk as some feel it to be. As it was so eloquently put in the guardian, it would be hard to do worse with the squad and he might do better. This leads me onto my last point of comparison, Gunn was given a squad with was quite frankly terrible, there were far too many loans and not nearly enough quality, this is obvious if you ever look to see what happened to the majority of the players who took us down, the best of them Clingan failed to find a club at the start of this season and now pals in Scotland. The squad of players we have now is easily the most talented that I have ever seen play for us (my following started a few years after we were delegated from the PL the first time) and there is clearly enough talent to stay up. Hopefully with Adams passion and the freedom to play some attacking football we'll still be in the PL next season.
To suggest this is a sensible appointment in its own right, with the fans backing just being an added advantage is nonsense IMO. If that were the case, why isn't Mark Robson getting the job? He has more experience but a lower profile with the fans. Would it be a sensible appointment if we were taking someone from another club whose experience is mainly at an under 14 level? No, of course it wouldn't. This is all about appeasing the fans. That said, I'm fairly relaxed about it because I think Neil has every chance of getting the players 'up' for Fulham. I have no idea why people have been pushing Neil Adams since Christmas though.
It could be argued Dave that Dave Stringer built that great side and Walker was just there at the right time!
It may well not work, but surely it was worth the chance. OK, so I'm a long way away in Vietnam, but even I can feel the difference in atmosphere on the boards, the feeling that a dead weight has been lifted off the club. OK, Swedish, it may all be an illusion and Adams turns into the new Gunn/Terry Cooper (or whatever the Wolves guy was called). But just the sheer pleasure of caring again and believing again and knowing that the ugly, sub-Allardyce anti-football won't happen again. For me, that is the best tonic I've had all season.
The atmosphere is definitely better. I don't for a moment believe that senior players weren't consulted about the appointment of Adams, just as I am fairly certain that the senior players were the ones who finally got McNally to pull the trigger. The one thing I won't agree is people suggesting we played "ugly, sub-Allardyce anti-football". This is just blatantly false and it's an unnecessary criticism designed to add extra justification - there's justification enough in the decision without additional falsehoods. If we'd played that sort of football, I imagine we'd be roughly where Allardyce and Pulis have their teams in the table. The problem was that our football was defensive, tentative, slow-paced, too structured and predictable. It lacked a style - it was trying to be everything to everyone and just didn't work. We weren't hoofball.
Just had a look on t'interweb at how Gunny got on as a manager as for some reason I thought he was only in charge for the last half a dozen games and thought he lost them all after the 4-0 against Barnsley in his first game so I was amazed to realise he actually had 19 games in charge - almost half a season! Blimey, my old brain cells must be a bit addled as I honestly don't remember him being in charge for anything like as many games as that!
OK, I accept what you say to a large extent and will try to modify my words. We have not played hoofball under Hughton. But we have been turgid and lacked any kind of creativity. I suspect the problem was that Hughton was pretty good at stifling a game (look at that run of home games last season, which included Newcastle and Fulham, in which neither team seemed to have a shot on target). This season, I think, he planned to do more and he tried to do more, but he couldn't. For whatever reason, I don't know. He couldn't let go enough? He couldn't trust the players enough? He didn't have the vision? As a defender, he didn't have the experience? He chose backroom staff who had the same talents and the same limitations as himself? Whatever the reason, he couldn't move on, and so we slowly but surely stagnated. That's my reading of the situation anyway. Not saying I'm right and I'm happy to listen to other people's ideas about why it didn't work in the end.
Weird, isn't it? But my memory of it is exactly the same. He came in about six games before the end of the season, won the first in a blaze of glory, and then lost the rest. Really strange how most of us seem to remember it this way now.
I agree with this post and your modification entirely. Sorry - my last post probably seemed quite aggressive - I just disagree with anyone who thinks the problem was that we played hoofball, because we simply didn't. I appreciate you were just trying to abbreviate your opinion. Unfortunately, hoofball is successful - we were lacking in any style, let alone hoofball. Our football (as you say) was turgid, slow and predictable, which meant we never scored many and, on occasion, conceded a bucketload. Not hoofball
I really don't think we're "doing another Bryan Gunn" because I don't think Neil Adams will be in charge beyond the end of this season, whether or not we avoid relegation (and I suspect he has been told that and is happy with that). He's in to do a squad galvanising job, arguably focussed primarily on the Fulham game to get the vital result, but I'm sure he'll see out the season whatever. I personally think he (and the squad) can do it over these five games; I just hope it's all sorted before the Arsenal game so I can at least watch that last home game without having to view nervously between my fingers.
But just because the feeling seems better on this board and other boards, vietnam, and amongst City fans in general, doesn´t necessarily mean that the team will suddenly start playing better, if only life were that simple.
I'm not arguing that Adams is the next great norwich manager, personally I would be very reticent to see him continue after the summer even if he does a good job. I'd probably like to see him promoted to a job with more responsibility and then in a few years when the job come up again as it no doubt will for what ever reason then consider him properly for the job. Essentially I think this is an interview for a job in about 3 years time, that was how I interpreted some of the things McNally said at the press conference. I'm also not saying that he is a sensible appointment in its own right, of course we wouldn't have appointed him if he was at a different club but he's got the right combination of passion and coaching experience to fit the situation. Robson wouldn't be able to convey the passion that Adams will and in to be honest a rousing speech and a rocket up the arse is half of what we need. Combined with some more attacking play it might work. I was literally comparing the appointment of Adams and that of Gunn. Not of Adams and the entirety of managers available.
The atmosphere has been pretty dire at matches recently, I was at Swansea and it was dreadful very little noise came from the fans. No open revolt against Hughton but a subdued silence and the noise that was made was largely negative. Compared to other away games I've been to which are generally loud and enthusiastic even earlier this season. It can't be good for the players and the end of the WBA game showed that. If nothing else has changed Fulham will start out rocking, it's a sell out so there will be 3000 there, it will be warm enough that the coats will go and we'll see the distinctive sea of yellow. That will be an improvement. That alone is not enough but it will be something and every extra percentage that we can eek out is important.
This appointment smacks of one last throw of the dice, and by changing the die we think that we are going to get lucky. Well it might turn out to be the case, we will never know, but certainly away form has been so bad that we almost had nothing to lose by making the change. What a very sad end for CH and I wish NA well, I just hope that we score first at the Cottage otherwise I fear the rot setting in and not being able to escape it until next season (in the Championship)
OK, but at least if we go 1-0 down, I don't see us giving up and accepting that we are going to lose. And that's how it's looked away from home for the whole of this season. We have not equalised on a single occasion away from home this season. That is a pretty damning statistic.
Interesting - I didn't know about that stat, but it doesn't surprise me in the slightest. We really do need to find a way to stop crumbling once their first goal goes in. The last time I believe we didn't crumble, other than at home to Stoke where we got lucky, was maybe against Palace. Damning indeed.
