Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Also the only manager in many years that's had money to spend
But also brought some fantastic players in on frees.
Also the only manager in many years that's had money to spend
We didn't lose a game where we scored first, and Poyet has the 3rd best win ratio in the history of the club. Great statistics which shows that you can use any statistic to argue a point.
And how big was his budget compared to all of our previous managers? I think, considering Poyet broke our record transfer twice for 2 attacking players a couple of seasons ago we would have expected to see us comeback from behind more than once in this period. I like the fact that Gus likes to keep it tight at the back, but it's quite simply unnecessary in my opinion to play two holding midfielders (who score practically no goals) at home against virtually every team in the division and rely on our 4 'attacking' players to make something happen.
Those who want him to stay must be deluded.
Do you really think things could ever get back to 'normal' and the good ship Albion would sale on towards the Prem as if nothing has happened?
No,we don't yet know the details,but regardless of that IMHO there is no going back,it just wouldn't work.
But what if it turns out he has NOT breached his contract or done anything wrong?
I would rather see us play the Poyet style than more direct football BUT to compare his approach with that of Spain is wrong.
Spain and Barcelona pressure high up the pitch, play with width and move the ball very quickly. They also play passing football at far higher a tempo and the vast majority of touches and passes are made in the midfield in advanced positions, not slowly, along the back four.
To liken the Albion's appoach to Spain etc is just lazy. There are many different types of passing football.
If anything, our approach is more like the style adopted by a lot of Italian sides in the mid 90s. Slow, building from the back, limited numbers of attacking players with the pressure for creativity placed on the shoulders' of a couple of players. Solidity in defence the priority.
And how big was his budget compared to all of our previous managers? I think, considering Poyet broke our record transfer twice for 2 attacking players a couple of seasons ago we would have expected to see us comeback from behind more than once in this period. I like the fact that Gus likes to keep it tight at the back, but it's quite simply unnecessary in my opinion to play two holding midfielders (who score practically no goals) at home against virtually every team in the division and rely on our 4 'attacking' players to make something happen.
Gus always said it was a work in progress. It took 18 months to land Ulloa, our two wingers had injury problems and then no sooner did we play with two strikers, then one got a long term injury and the other a long ban. Hardly the fault of the manager.
If anything, our approach is more like the style adopted by a lot of Italian sides in the mid 90s. Slow, building from the back, limited numbers of attacking players with the pressure for creativity placed on the shoulders' of a couple of players. Solidity in defence the priority.
As usual your totally wrong, Matt. What we NEED is two ranks of FOUR, with TWO wingers and a BIG MAN UP FRONT. Defenders don't need to pass either so lets get rid of Greer and his silly bollocks and put in a bid for Colin Hawkins. Take a look at Peterborough, Wolves or Bristol City. They got it RIGHT. Whereas GUS and his silly pass the ball around, make space, intelligent football bollocks only managed to get us 4TH. Our highest finish in DECADES.
I would rather see us play the Poyet style than more direct football BUT to compare his approach with that of Spain is wrong.
Spain and Barcelona pressure high up the pitch, play with width and move the ball very quickly. They also play passing football at far higher a tempo and the vast majority of touches and passes are made in the midfield in advanced positions, not slowly, along the back four.
To liken the Albion's appoach to Spain etc is just lazy. There are many different types of passing football.
If anything, our approach is more like the style adopted by a lot of Italian sides in the mid 90s. Slow, building from the back, limited numbers of attacking players with the pressure for creativity placed on the shoulders' of a couple of players. Solidity in defence the priority.
Not sure the size of stadium is relevant as they had smaller gates than us.I've no idea how it compares to managers in the 70's, 80' and early 90's, football finances have changed so much. Its arguable that Adams had a bigger budget relative to the other teams in div 3 at the time. Clearly Coppell and McGhee would have killed for a budget like his.
But a fairer comparison is against other teams in our division. No doubt Leicester, Forest, Middlesbrough, Bolton had bigger budgets than us, I expect Birmingham, Wolves, Leeds did too. They've all got bigger stadiums than us as well, and we finished above all of them.
Not sure the size of stadium is relevant as they had smaller gates than us.
But also brought some fantastic players in on frees.
Not sure the size of stadium is relevant as they had smaller gates than us.
The only difference between us and the three that went up were tactics we got ours wrong at home. The budget excuse is just that an excuse.Its not relevant to anything other than countering the argument oft put forward that with our new stadium and bigger transfer budget 'we should have easily got top 2 and Gus blew it'. All its done is give us some parity but we're still behind the big guns in this division in terms of spending power and attractiveness to players, so that Gus HAS over-achieved.
The only difference between us and the three that went up were tactics we got ours wrong at home. The budget excuse is just that an excuse.