Transfers (also ambition/investment/ground & lots more.....)

Sounds good. A strong statement but what happens when 30 mins in and you are 2 down because the oppositions formation is negating yours?

One of McCalls management ‘failings’, acknowledged even by some of his fervent supporters, is his inability to change a game when his plan A isn’t working.

So his statement has worrying undertones for me.

 

Yes if you remember the City/Bolton game City were 2 up in no time and us fans were giving Parky stick big time, we were making Bolton look mugs, Parky changes his formation and it's soon 2 - 2 with Bolton looking like scoring the 3rd, of course in games where the opposition suss us early doors he may need to change it but the season he took over from Parky he got most of the home games right.
I believe you can get away with changing formations once but IMO league two teams would struggle to change it twice within a game, time will tell.

 

Henderson confirmed at salford.

 

McCall is no Parkinson. Let’s be honest.

 

Hmm . I see no evidence that he has learnt anything. His time at Scunthorpe would be evidence of that.

 

Most of the time while he was here his plan A did work, I am more a fan of countering teams rather than sticking to a plan anyway. Im assuming this is why we had such dross away form last season as teams knew what to expect.

 

Loved em both although many said under Parky it was one dimensional I always thought his team could get a result,
Without doubt Stuarts teams played possession football which at times could be frustrating, 60+ % of possession means nothing if you don't make the use of that possession in the final third.
Stuart has not inherited as good a squad as he did from Parky although again some were saying Parky left him with the bare bones, not sure that was true, Doyle, Meridith, Darby, McArdle, McMahon, Marshall, Clarke, Hanson, adding his signings gave us a very balanced squad.

 

Well if you always let the opposition worry about you without ever changing your tactic, you'll end up with a season like Hull City's, but I agree with the general idea.

We would setup to draw at best against extremely poor sides that all the other top 6/7 teams were smashing 3-0 away from home. God knows what Bowyer was thinking.

 

Hm, that massive 39 games he managed them for is hardly the basis on which to write him off.

I’d prefer to look back at his 2nd spell at City where he managed 96 games and won 44 (41% win rate), or his 43% win rate at Motherwell.

He’s the man for us.

 

He’s the man for our board which is all that matters. McCall deserves our support. Whether he is the right man will be seen in the results we get and how we get them.
Get behind the man who is tasked with taking us forwards.

 

The Wembley playoff season had faults but to get within a hairs breadth of promotion has to be viewed as an excellent season. As Bronco said he did have a team full of leaders and a squad that was very close knit. he dosn't have that luxury now. Only time will tell but as it stands that squad ain't good enough, see what turns up in the next few weeks.

 

I would counter that 'most of the time' it didn't.

In his second stint, for one season (with a club on the upswing) he did well and made the final. We lost. The following season it started well and then fell away (yes Rahic was here but a strong manager can still deliver results despite interference. It's the managers job to do that).

In his first stint (I can hear the excuse now about how he was just learning blah blah blah blah) it didn't work...did it?

His way of working, which doesn't change, didn't work at Scunthorpe either and was failing in his final season at Motherwell.

I am not saying 'McCall out' (well not yet ) there was a comment made about changing formations and I was asking for comment on what makes us think that McCall has learned how to change how a team is playing if his Plan A isn't working because as far as I can see there is nothing in his management appointments that points to a manager that has that in his arsenal.

Anyway... the argument is probably best set aside until November.

 

Rumour on twitter from that Insider/Secret Bantam account that Guthrie is leaving for Crewe.

We can only hope.

 

39 games...so we totally dismiss it because he only got 39 games....almost a whole season...Jeez

Anyway I would rather not cherry pick.

From an English league management perspective I would prefer to look at his stints at Bradford 1 and 2 and his stint at Scunthorpe and look at league position, not possession time or percentage wins.

But acknowledging your point I will try to remember to argue that we are a successful club because our manager has a better win percentage than your manager. I am sure the Millwall supporters at Wembley were distraught that their manager couldn't boast the same win percentage all those years ago :-(

Can we turn that into a song for the Kop?

We don't care, we don't care if we dont win a cup or go up
Our manager has a tremendous win percentage and ginger hair..look.

I can hear it ringing out and echoing down Midland Road.

 

It must be either a very early or late April fool
Aren't Crewe a L1 side

 

Can I just ask with no agenda whatsoever why people have already decided Guthrie is utterly awful? Please note I am not saying for a second I think he is the answer/a huge asset/the second coming I am purely interested to see if I have missed something? As far as I can see he has played around 90 minutes over 2 games for us. His main chance came against Stevenage where I would say he did look poor. However, is the amount of time he has played enough to write him off completely? In this league he had arguably done well in a poor Stevenage side, certainly comparable scoring wise to other strikers we have signed. Just wondering why people have written him off so quickly?

 

He must have a fantastic agent if true. Bottom of league two to a side chasing play offs at the time and now to league one with hardly a ball kicked for his current side.