[Albion] Are we a better run club than Palace?

[Giraffe]

I know the answer, do you?

The reason I ask, is that I see some parallels between our appointment of Potter and Palace's of Frank de Boer.

Both clubs appointed a manager to change or evolve the way the teams played.

Both managers produced that style of play quite quickly but without the results.

De Boer was sacked after four games, despite the fact the team was creating chances and looking quite good, but ultimately losing all four. A typical tinpot action in my view.

Potter appears to have changed the team style, it is more attractive, but one win in six is not a great haul. Could easily be one in seven soon.

My view is that he needs time, a long time. Why appoint a manager to change the style if you're just going to sack him quickly? Hyppia got half a season when it was clear he was not up to the task much earlier than that. Potter may need much longer before style equates to improved results.

We know we are a better run club than Palace, I'm pretty sure we will prove it by sticking with Potter long term regardless of how long it takes, but doubt he would avoid the sack after a relegation or even a close survival like Hughton?

 

[Albion Dan]

Palace stayed up. We will see which decision is best.

 

[The Optimist]

If a close survival was a poor first half of the season with an improved second half he’d keep his job.

 

[knocky1]

Palace. Boxing Day. Not sure we’ve ever run as well as them that day.

 

[Icy Gull]

I keep seeing these comparisons of Hyypia and Potter. Ridiculous imo, with Hyypia we were just shit and it was clear from the pre season game against Saints that he was completely out of his depth. Potter is not

Palace have stayed up against the odds every season, credit where it’s due, annoyingly.

 

[andy1980]

The club is a lot more than just the first team. The answer is yes if you take everything on and of the pitch into account.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Parallels...
De Boer
P4 W0 D0 L4 GF0 GA7 pts 0

Potter
P4 W1 D1 L2 GF4 GA7 pts 4

We can't know what went on behind the scenes at Palace, but it went a lot deeper than just the results. De Boer by all accounts couldn't or wouldn't adequately explain his tactics or team selections to the board, and communications started to break down almost immediately.

Weren't Palace the first team in 93 years to not score a goal in their first 4 games?

The only parallel is that De Boer was to instigate a change in tactics and style. Above that the parallels maybe few and far between.

 

[Giraffe]

Parallels...
De Boer
P4 W0 D0 L4 GF0 GA7 pts 0

Potter
P4 W1 D1 L2 GF4 GA7 pts 4

We can't know what went on behind the scenes at Palace, but it went a lot deeper than just the results. De Boer by all accounts couldn't or wouldn't adequately explain his tactics or team selections to the board, and communications started to break down almost immediately.

Weren't Palace the first team in 93 years to not score a goal in their first 4 games?

The only parallel is that De Boer was to instigate a change in tactics and style. Above that the parallels maybe few and far between.

Yes I concur with your last sentence.

 

[Simster]

Determining which club is better run goes a lot deeper than whether or not we sack an underperforming manager early.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Yes.

 

[LamieRobertson]

I know the answer, do you?

The reason I ask, is that I see some parallels between our appointment of Potter and Palace's of Frank de Boer.

Both clubs appointed a manager to change or evolve the way the teams played.

Both managers produced that style of play quite quickly but without the results.

De Boer was sacked after four games, despite the fact the team was creating chances and looking quite good, but ultimately losing all four. A typical tinpot action in my view.

Potter appears to have changed the team style, it is more attractive, but one win in six is not a great haul. Could easily be one in seven soon.

My view is that he needs time, a long time. Why appoint a manager to change the style if you're just going to sack him quickly? Hyppia got half a season when it was clear he was not up to the task much earlier than that. Potter may need much longer before style equates to improved results.

We know we are a better run club than Palace, I'm pretty sure we will prove it by sticking with Potter long term regardless of how long it takes, but doubt he would avoid the sack after a relegation or even a close survival like Hughton?

Erm...what was the question again

 

[Brovion]

Forget the manager, I'm more concerned that despite the vast millions we now earn, way more than at any time in our history, we still apparently made a loss last year. I'm going to be overly negative here, but forget Palace, are we any better run than the likes of Swansea or Wigan? Or even Bolton and Bury? Last financial year it looks like we spent money we didn't have on overpriced, shit players and God knows how many behind-the-scenes bods. That can't go on.

Having a manager who may or may not be the new De Boer (and I think he's better than that) should really be the least of our worries.

 

[A1X]

The club is a lot more than just the first team. The answer is yes if you take everything on and of the pitch into account.

For example, we didn't make the news last year for demanding our women's team pay to play for us. Whereas Palace...

 

[hoveboyslim]

Forget the manager, I'm more concerned that despite the vast millions we now earn, way more than at any time in our history, we still apparently made a loss last year. I'm going to be overly negative here, but forget Palace, are we any better run than the likes of Swansea or Wigan? Or even Bolton and Bury? Last financial year it looks like we spent money we didn't have on overpriced, shit players and God knows how many behind-the-scenes bods. That can't go on.

Having a manager who may or may not be the new De Boer (and I think he's better than that) should really be the least of our worries.

That is football, sadly. Depressing as it is, I can't see it ever changing.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Parallels...
De Boer
P4 W0 D0 L4 GF0 GA7 pts 0

Potter
P4 W1 D1 L2 GF4 GA7 pts 4

We can't know what went on behind the scenes at Palace, but it went a lot deeper than just the results. De Boer by all accounts couldn't or wouldn't adequately explain his tactics or team selections to the board, and communications started to break down almost immediately.

Weren't Palace the first team in 93 years to not score a goal in their first 4 games?

The only parallel is that De Boer was to instigate a change in tactics and style. Above that the parallels maybe few and far between.

Parallels ...

Hinshelwood WDLLLLL

Potter WDLLDDL

 

[Mr Putdown]

The reason I ask, is that I see some parallels between our appointment of Potter and Palace's of Frank de Boer.

Both clubs appointed a manager to change or evolve the way the teams played.

Both managers produced that style of play quite quickly but without the results.

De Boer was sacked after four games, despite the fact the team was creating chances and looking quite good, but ultimately losing all four. A typical tinpot action in my view.

We weren’t “creating chances” or “looking quite good”, we were shockingly bad and drastic action was needed to resolve what was clearly a dreadful appointment.

That “typical tinpot action” resulted in the team finishing 11th in the league, rather than being relegated.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

'Better-run' covers too much ground for the question to have a simple answer. Palace's ratio of wages to turnover suggests that their business is unsustainable, but if the players they over-pay continue to keep them in the Premier League then their plan is working for them. The fact that we have a very rich owner disguises the fact that until recently we were also running at a significant loss, and if TB suddenly decided to take his money elsewhere, we'd very soon find out if we are well-run or not.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Parallels ...

Hinshelwood WDLLLLL

Potter WDLLDDL

Few more Ls needed before there are any parallels there shirley?

 

[Easy 10]

We weren’t “creating chances” or “looking quite good”, we were shockingly bad and drastic action was needed to resolve what was clearly a dreadful appointment.

That “typical tinpot action” resulted in the team finishing 11th in the league, rather than being relegated.

I vaguely recall your lot absolutely battering Burnley at Turf Moor in what turned out to be his last game, but ending up with a very amusing, sorry, UNFORTUNATE defeat. So not all the performances were dreadful. 4 games in is nowhere near long enough to judge anyway, there must have been something else going on behind the scenes for him to have been binned off that early. Players probably went grizzling to Disney about something or other I expect.

 

[loz]

I vaguely recall your lot absolutely battering Burnley at Turf Moor in what turned out to be his last game, but ending up with a very amusing, sorry, UNFORTUNATE defeat. So not all the performances were dreadful. 4 games in is nowhere near long enough to judge anyway, there must have been something else going on behind the scenes for him to have been binned off that early. Players probably went grizzling to Disney about something or other I expect.

Behind the scenes , it was in front of our eyes, every training video was De boar playing keepy ups or showing his skills to the players who just looked horrified, his arrogance of playing players in the wrong positions and spunking a lot of money on Dutch players who were not nearly good enough. TBH its better to get rid of an employee quickly than letting them stay too long and that goes to any profession.

I am not sure about Potter but with the right players he has shown what he can do with other clubs so deserves a chance..unlike De boar.