BFS - Bristol City (H)

[Hound]

I’ll still defend Stam quite happily. Yes he made mistakes but he also did a lot right, got us playing great football in the Reading way and got results. I don’t blame him for the mess Gourlay got us into and a lot of the decline in the second season was out of his control.
.

Not sure you'll get too many agreements with that. The football played was some of the worst I've ever seen to be honest, but obviously thats subjective. But the low crowds, general comment from the fans would probably point in that direction.

I'm not really too sure how it was out of his control second season. Depending how much influence he had on the types of signings we brought in, they weren't what was needed. Lack of faith in Bodvarsson was a big problem, and the inability to find a plan b when all the other teams quickly cottoned on to how to play against us. He picked the team, tactics etc.

Agree partially with both of you

The football wasn’t great unfortunately - it was effective for a while but I think great is an overstatement

However some sympathies with Stam in the sense that Al Habsi, Obita, Williams, Swift, McCleary, Beerens and Kermorgant were all very much key players in season 1 and for differing reasons, barely featured in season 2. Quite easily those 7 walked into our XI most games. He could/should have adapted but don’t think we should ignore how many key players were missing from our initial success

agreed, but he did drop Beerens. He was barely part of the picture when he left. Swift and McCleary didnt massively influence S1 second half either, and Yann not the first half.

Obviously all were losses but there were plenty of replacements signed.

[URZZZZ]

Not sure you'll get too many agreements with that. The football played was some of the worst I've ever seen to be honest, but obviously thats subjective. But the low crowds, general comment from the fans would probably point in that direction.

I'm not really too sure how it was out of his control second season. Depending how much influence he had on the types of signings we brought in, they weren't what was needed. Lack of faith in Bodvarsson was a big problem, and the inability to find a plan b when all the other teams quickly cottoned on to how to play against us. He picked the team, tactics etc.

Agree partially with both of you

The football wasn’t great unfortunately - it was effective for a while but I think great is an overstatement

However some sympathies with Stam in the sense that Al Habsi, Obita, Williams, Swift, McCleary, Beerens and Kermorgant were all very much key players in season 1 and for differing reasons, barely featured in season 2. Quite easily those 7 walked into our XI most games. He could/should have adapted but don’t think we should ignore how many key players were missing from our initial success

agreed, but he did drop Beerens. He was barely part of the picture when he left. Swift and McCleary didnt massively influence S1 second half either, and Yann not the first half.

Obviously all were losses but there were plenty of replacements signed.

Yeah I’m not defending his replacement signings as most were ineffective/not much use

Just think it’s difficult when the majority of your first choice XI can’t play for one reason or another the next season as there becomes a lack of cohesion

But I never really liked him. Constantly complaining about our support (even though the standard of play was pretty dire), doing stupid things to try and send a message, I.e starting a season with six on the bench, playing McCleary or Beerens up front with Bodvarsson on the bench because he wanted another striker even though Bodvarsson had scored the equaliser the game before etc

He was never particularly popular here

[leon]

Agree partially with both of you

The football wasn’t great unfortunately - it was effective for a while but I think great is an overstatement

However some sympathies with Stam in the sense that Al Habsi, Obita, Williams, Swift, McCleary, Beerens and Kermorgant were all very much key players in season 1 and for differing reasons, barely featured in season 2. Quite easily those 7 walked into our XI most games. He could/should have adapted but don’t think we should ignore how many key players were missing from our initial success

agreed, but he did drop Beerens. He was barely part of the picture when he left. Swift and McCleary didnt massively influence S1 second half either, and Yann not the first half.

Obviously all were losses but there were plenty of replacements signed.

Yeah I’m not defending his replacement signings as most were ineffective/not much use

Just think it’s difficult when the majority of your first choice XI can’t play for one reason or another the next season as there becomes a lack of cohesion

But I never really liked him. Constantly complaining about our support (even though the standard of play was pretty dire), doing stupid things to try and send a message, I.e starting a season with six on the bench, playing McCleary or Beerens up front with Bodvarsson on the bench because he wanted another striker even though Bodvarsson had scored the equaliser the game before etc

He was never particularly popular here

I thought he was a twat.

[Silver Fox]

Steve Clarke was a fvcking snake, no matter what he has achieved for Scotland

Oh and we were excellent on Saturday, a joy to behold, glad to see we're definitely going up again

[Mid Sussex Royal]

Steve Clarke was a fvcking snake, no matter what he has achieved for Scotland

Oh and we were excellent on Saturday, a joy to behold, glad to see we're definitely going up again

I think Clarke is given an unnecessarily hard time over Fulham; he was approached and said no...as was McDermott by Wolves (also said no) as was Charlie Hurley by Sheff U (says in his book by the way)

It happens in football when managers are doing a good job.

[tidus_mi2]

Steve Clarke was a fvcking snake, no matter what he has achieved for Scotland

Oh and we were excellent on Saturday, a joy to behold, glad to see we're definitely going up again

I think Clarke is given an unnecessarily hard time over Fulham; he was approached and said no...as was McDermott by Wolves (also said no) as was Charlie Hurley by Sheff U (says in his book by the way)

It happens in football when managers are doing a good job.

Wasn't the difference that Clarke actually went to speak with Fulham whereas McDermott outright rejected Wolves.

[muirinho]

agreed, but he did drop Beerens. He was barely part of the picture when he left. Swift and McCleary didnt massively influence S1 second half either, and Yann not the first half.

Obviously all were losses but there were plenty of replacements signed.

Yeah I’m not defending his replacement signings as most were ineffective/not much use

Just think it’s difficult when the majority of your first choice XI can’t play for one reason or another the next season as there becomes a lack of cohesion

But I never really liked him. Constantly complaining about our support (even though the standard of play was pretty dire), doing stupid things to try and send a message, I.e starting a season with six on the bench, playing McCleary or Beerens up front with Bodvarsson on the bench because he wanted another striker even though Bodvarsson had scored the equaliser the game before etc

He was never particularly popular here

I thought he was a twat.

Players seemed to like him. I reckon Stam is probably a decent coach, but useless manager. He was lucky the first year - there weren't enough problems to actually require management skills, and maybe unlucky the second, but he seemed very good at blaming the supporters and the owners, not himself (and, to be fair, his players).

What S1 had that S2 didn't was a sense of belief the players had that they were on the right track - they came back from some absolute tonkings that season to win/draw the next game. That evaporated entirely in S2, and I wonder if the departure of Steven Reid, who was also very popular, had something to do with that.

[Snowflake Royal]

I’ll still defend Stam quite happily. Yes he made mistakes but he also did a lot right, got us playing great football in the Reading way and got results. I don’t blame him for the mess Gourlay got us into and a lot of the decline in the second season was out of his control.
.

Not sure you'll get too many agreements with that. The football played was some of the worst I've ever seen to be honest, but obviously thats subjective. But the low crowds, general comment from the fans would probably point in that direction.

I'm not really too sure how it was out of his control second season. Depending how much influence he had on the types of signings we brought in, they weren't what was needed. Lack of faith in Bodvarsson was a big problem, and the inability to find a plan b when all the other teams quickly cottoned on to how to play against us. He picked the team, tactics etc.

It's all very good when you inherit a decent but underperforming squad and make a few good signings.

But no decent manager oversees that level of decline having been gifted that amount of resources.

Take Beerens... it requires a spectacularly shit manager to sign a small left winger and have him perform one season and then play him out of position as a striker and drum him out the club for predictably failing to perform in the handful of games you give him there.

Look at the man management of Kelly - talk him up to the point you turn a promising young talent into an arrogant arse who believes he's three times his actual quality, we're in no danger of relegation and he's good enough to cost in the Championship.

A guy who goes along with retaining an aging injured striker as our goalscorer and spends the money we had to replace him on an over the hill inconsistent AM.

Who replaces the midfield general with a midfielder he then spends half the season playing at RB because he thought one RB was enough, having let go a youth player who could have done a job there too.

Who refused to do anything to change a system that was failing spectacularly.

Stam was fuk awful.

[Hound]

And tbf nothing he has done since suggests you’re wrong there Ian

[muirinho]

Steve Clarke was a fvcking snake, no matter what he has achieved for Scotland

Oh and we were excellent on Saturday, a joy to behold, glad to see we're definitely going up again

I think Clarke is given an unnecessarily hard time over Fulham; he was approached and said no...as was McDermott by Wolves (also said no) as was Charlie Hurley by Sheff U (says in his book by the way)

It happens in football when managers are doing a good job.

Wasn't the difference that Clarke actually went to speak with Fulham whereas McDermott outright rejected Wolves.

Yeah, he went to speak with them, then decided that actually Reading were better. But, once you've done that, you've marked your cards as being likely to leave when a better offer does turn up - you're not staying because you have a project you believe in, you're staying because something better hasn't come along.

Whether that's fair or not is not really relevant - owners demand loyalty. And you're basically getting paid for that loyalty, if you get sacked you'll still get the money from your contract until you find a next job - AND - unless you're abjectly awful, it doesn't seem to make a whole pile of difference in terms of getting that next job.

If Scotland had come in for him, or a big PL side, then I think that would have been a bit different.

[Snowflake Royal]

And Stam signed Moore & Meite, the recent losing run shows how important those 2 are

True - but the football we played under Stam was not "great" and absolutely not in the "Reading way".

I think the view on Clarke is based slightly in hindsight on his subsequent successes.

Stam’s football philosophy was the same as Eamonn Dolan and David Dodds, Brendan Rodgers and Brian McDermott, the philosophy that permeates right through the club, the philosophy that our young players have been used to since they were young children. You might not appreciate it but it is the Reading way.

Clarke’s career since he left us hasn’t really lived up to his achievements before he joined us. Decent record at Kilmarnock but they’re not exactly West Brom.

LMFAO @ Stam and McDermott having the same footballing philosophy.

[Snowflake Royal]

I think Clarke is given an unnecessarily hard time over Fulham; he was approached and said no...as was McDermott by Wolves (also said no) as was Charlie Hurley by Sheff U (says in his book by the way)

It happens in football when managers are doing a good job.

Wasn't the difference that Clarke actually went to speak with Fulham whereas McDermott outright rejected Wolves.

Yeah, he went to speak with them, then decided that actually Reading were better. But, once you've done that, you've marked your cards as being likely to leave when a better offer does turn up - you're not staying because you have a project you believe in, you're staying because something better hasn't come along.

Whether that's fair or not is not really relevant - owners demand loyalty. And you're basically getting paid for that loyalty, if you get sacked you'll still get the money from your contract until you find a next job - AND - unless you're abjectly awful, it doesn't seem to make a whole pile of difference in terms of getting that next job.

If Scotland had come in for him, or a big PL side, then I think that would have been a bit different.

He only did well at any point because the body snatchers borrowed Blackman for a couple of months and left a shit hot replacement by mistake.

He didn't really improve us the season he took over, by the time he left we were nose diving.

[SCIAG]

True - but the football we played under Stam was not "great" and absolutely not in the "Reading way".

I think the view on Clarke is based slightly in hindsight on his subsequent successes.

Stam’s football philosophy was the same as Eamonn Dolan and David Dodds, Brendan Rodgers and Brian McDermott, the philosophy that permeates right through the club, the philosophy that our young players have been used to since they were young children. You might not appreciate it but it is the Reading way.

Clarke’s career since he left us hasn’t really lived up to his achievements before he joined us. Decent record at Kilmarnock but they’re not exactly West Brom.

LMFAO @ Stam and McDermott having the same footballing philosophy.

Oh they absolutely did. Remember when McDermott first took over and fielded a midfield of Tabb, Howard, and Gylfi? We stroked it around on the deck like nobody’s business.

Of course once we lost Gylfi and Howard went off the boil, McDermott was able to adopt a more pragmatic approach. But in his second spell at the club he adopted a very similar style to the one Stam ultimately adopted. His 4-4-2 diamond was practically identical to Stam’s 3-4-1-2, and fans were already jeering at the possession-focused style.

[Hound]

My mind must be playing tricks. Wasn’t McD’s diamond basically 4 Cms shoved in a midfield whilst Stam played 4-3-3 with 2 out and out wingers in G and Beerens?

[Snowflake Royal]

My mind must be playing tricks. Wasn’t McD’s diamond basically 4 Cms shoved in a midfield whilst Stam played 4-3-3 with 2 out and out wingers in G and Beerens?

I think SCIAG has lost the plot.

[wolsey]

The football under Stam was the reason I fell out of love with the Club I've supported for 50 years...I will pay to watch this team when I get the chance (regardless of the results)

[Silver Fox]

Steve Clarke was a fvcking snake, no matter what he has achieved for Scotland

Oh and we were excellent on Saturday, a joy to behold, glad to see we're definitely going up again

I think Clarke is given an unnecessarily hard time over Fulham; he was approached and said no...as was McDermott by Wolves (also said no) as was Charlie Hurley by Sheff U (says in his book by the way)

It happens in football when managers are doing a good job.

Wasn't the difference that Clarke actually went to speak with Fulham whereas McDermott outright rejected Wolves.

Who said anything about Fulham?

[SCIAG]

My mind must be playing tricks. Wasn’t McD’s diamond basically 4 Cms shoved in a midfield whilst Stam played 4-3-3 with 2 out and out wingers in G and Beerens?

Both men used a variety of formations including 4-3-3. McDermott II is best remembered for the diamond but it was neither the main formation he used nor something Stam abandoned. McDermott spent more time using 4-3-3 variants with Vydra through the middle and a combination of McCleary, Robson-Kanu, John, Rakels, Piazon, and even Williams on the flanks. The diamond didn’t actually appear until April. Stam spent a lot of time using a back three, and the 3-4-1-2 he used a lot (most memorably in the playoffs) was the same basic shape as McDermott’s diamond but with the DM withdrawn a little more. So they were both using the same possession-focused style of play, the same primary formation, and extremely similar unusual alternative formations.

(While going through old match reports of the McDermott II era to check that my intuition was right I found quite a lot of “prophetic” remarks, worst of which was someone telling me by name, in a thread I hadn’t used, that Yann Kermorgant was our worst ever signing )

[Snowflake Royal]

I think Clarke is given an unnecessarily hard time over Fulham; he was approached and said no...as was McDermott by Wolves (also said no) as was Charlie Hurley by Sheff U (says in his book by the way)

It happens in football when managers are doing a good job.

Wasn't the difference that Clarke actually went to speak with Fulham whereas McDermott outright rejected Wolves.

Who said anything about Fulham?

Mid Sussex... it's in your quote m8

[Hound]

My mind must be playing tricks. Wasn’t McD’s diamond basically 4 Cms shoved in a midfield whilst Stam played 4-3-3 with 2 out and out wingers in G and Beerens?

Both men used a variety of formations including 4-3-3. McDermott II is best remembered for the diamond but it was neither the main formation he used nor something Stam abandoned. McDermott spent more time using 4-3-3 variants with Vydra through the middle and a combination of McCleary, Robson-Kanu, John, Rakels, Piazon, and even Williams on the flanks. The diamond didn’t actually appear until April. Stam spent a lot of time using a back three, and the 3-4-1-2 he used a lot (most memorably in the playoffs) was the same basic shape as McDermott’s diamond but with the DM withdrawn a little more. So they were both using the same possession-focused style of play, the same primary formation, and extremely similar unusual alternative formations.

(While going through old match reports of the McDermott II era to check that my intuition was right I found quite a lot of “prophetic” remarks, worst of which was someone telling me by name, in a thread I hadn’t used, that Yann Kermorgant was our worst ever signing )

yes, remember some very silly comments on Yann. I don't remember Stam playing 2 up top much at all tbh. If Grabban played, he generally played much more withdrawn, and the wide players were definitely forward players ahead the ACM. It was much more 4-3-3 or 5-2-3/5-4-1 from memory

McD seemed to land on the diamond out for just frustration with nothing else working if i recall. Maybe we played it, had a decent performance and stuck with it. I just remember him trying loads of different things with nothing really working particularly