fred wrote: ↑Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:07 pm
he haad a good spell at Barnsley I believe).
The trouble for me is that his good spell came at the start when the team was already playing well and winning (the previous manager doing well and then leaving when offered the Bristol City manager job). As such it is very easy to wonder if the team simply kept on doing what they were doing irrespective of the manager. Then as PH's time in charge increased the results started tailing off - again you have to wonder is that because of the way he managed (did he alienate players, were his tactics poor, could he not motivate players etc). The end of his time there saw them winning just 1 or 2 in the last 16 and losing 4 (and drawing 1) of his last 5 matches. The team was in complete free fall and the only excuse seemed to be that some of the better players were sold - but for me it just seems like a convenient excuse, like the ones he is trotting out before and after every match here, as all clubs lose decent players be they sold or injured but good managers still manage to get results. It wasn't like he was getting good results despite them selling the best players he was staring at relegation with 27 points from 30 matches this season. PH talks about overachieving but he was not overachieving in any way at Barnsley.
That for me is why I am concerned and think the longer he is in charge the worse we will become. I dread the thought of him bringing in his own players because if that is what he was doing at Barnsley then he has either failed to replace the players that left with decent championship level players or he has failed to get the most out of them - so either way he has failed.
When looking at managers I don't care so much if they have had a bad spell, even a relegation, if they have shown signs of being able to identify the problems, overcome them and then get the team performing again. I have seen no sign of that with PH who's Barnsley side have plummeted for over a calendar year after his initial honeymoon period was over.
I keep saying that I want to see a decent team performance, rather than a result, from the team. This would indicate that either he is a) able to come up with good tactics or b) motivate the players and get the best out of them (or possibly either a & b). We just haven't seen that. At best we played decent for spells in some matches but that isn't enough, especially in matches where we were already losing or playing against poor teams.
The only reasons I hear for keeping him are feeble at best -
1) He needs more time - nothing in his record shows that given time he can succeed in fact the longer he was at Barnsley the worse it became
2) He is highly regarded - by whom? Sorry but anyone can be highly regarded but at some point they have to show what they can do. This is a results business and if you can't get results you have to at least show that you are at least moving in the right direction with performances - so that people say, 'oh they were unlucky but when it clicks they will be a good side.'
3) He has inherited a poor squad of players - yes some of our players aren't great but how can anyone use that excuse when they were doing better before he came.
These are flimsy excuses for why he is doing cr*p but not reasons to keep him.