Brian: The right decision?

[Harrydog]

AZ didn't like the style of football the BMc played, coupled with the poor results, and poor performances no one can honestly say he didn't deserve to couple.
maybe some of the 'fans' that booed performances need to take a hard look at themselves, as the atmosphere around the club beomces very negative an ultimately AZ has to make a decision.

[Davezk]

Personally I'm more excited about watching football under NA than the hit and hope football under BM.

Think back to when we got promoted, how many of those games were we under the cosh the whole game but won? It wasn't pretty but somehow the percentages went in our favour. Brighton and Southampton away are the 2 that spring to mind.

NA has a whole CV of success and I don't see why it can't continue here AND maybe play some nice attacking football. If we can play anywhere near how Southampton did under him, I'll be very happy.

[Extended-Phenotype]

You really love yourself with that pretentious name tag and spouting "words of wisdom" left, right and centre, don't you?

Self-respect, wisdom, a username which doesn’t begin with ‘Royal’ or a players name: yeah, I can appreciate why I stand out.

On the other hand, I honestly don't see the improvement that some people are talking about.

Like I said above, we are creating more chances, holding onto the ball more, completing passes better, looking more inventive and have been harder to play against – it’s not really difficult to see the improvement if you allow yourself.

Still think, however, that McD was treated harshly and I cannot believe that he was given much money. That which he was given I believe he spent well on the whole.

I’d say he made too many mistakes in the market for my liking, especially for a club operating on a small budget. If you aren’t going to spend much, make sure you get what you need. Not sure any of his signings this season have been a success, bar perhaps Kelly. That’s not a great return.

Brian had a plan, it failed. Was he due another chance? I think so. But Adkins looks set to be an improvement so onwards and upwards is all I say.

[sandman]

Attractive football is great if you do it in the opposition's half. Unfortunately the Adkins way is to knock it around our own half for half an hour and make dangerous square passes in front of your own box.

[Royalclapper]

Who's Brian?

[maffff]

Who's Brian?

Brian Griffin is a fictional character from the animated television series Family Guy. He is an anthropomorphic dog voiced by Seth MacFarlane.

[Big Foot]

Attractive football is great if you do it in the opposition's half. Unfortunately the Adkins way is to knock it around our own half for half an hour and make dangerous square passes in front of your own box.

NA is Rodgers MK II

[Wycombe Royal]

Attractive football is great if you do it in the opposition's half. Unfortunately the Adkins way is to knock it around our own half for half an hour and make dangerous square passes in front of your own box.

You've been watching different matches to me then.

[creative_username_1]

Adkins is in the great position at the moment of being relatively untested. The piss-poor results
can be attributed (possibly quite rightly) to the previous manager. We did knock it about quite
nicely but got torn to shreds defensively

Do any of you on here make decisions that could literally make or break you on a weekly/daily
basis. Do you put your money where your mouth is?

[sandman]

Attractive football is great if you do it in the opposition's half. Unfortunately the Adkins way is to knock it around our own half for half an hour and make dangerous square passes in front of your own box.

You've been watching different matches to me then.

You missed Man City where a square pass between one of our CM's and Gunter went straight to Aguero, another pass that went straight to Yaya Toure and of course we conceded the second goal through poor passing around our own area. The Liverpool game where they almost scored from a sloppy pass by Morrison and Suarez nearly scored from an awful square pass by Gunter. West Ham where McCarthy gave the ball to Carroll. He plays for easy possession in areas that don't hurt the opposition.

One win against a Fulham team who weren't playing for anything and you lot think we play like Spain. Maybe you've been watching QPR.

[Extended-Phenotype]

In McD's last 9, the action in our third averaged 28.4%
In Adkins' last 9, the action in our third averaged 30.6%

Suggests despite Adkins more possessional style, we aren't really passing the ball around at the back that much more than we were under Brian. Yet:

In McD's last 9 games we managed 75 shots on goal
In Adkins' 9 games we managed 112 shot on goal

Suggests we are carving out a lot more chances and becoming more of a threat.

In McD's last 9, we dominated possession in just 1 game.
In Adkins' last 9, we dominated possession in 3.

Suggests we are becoming more more in control.

I appreciate goals and points are ultimately what is important but in my opinion, when you are playing well, carving out more chances and dominating more games, confidence grows and wins will come with more consistency than with merely hanging on for 85 minutes and getting lucky in the last 5.

[melonhead]

none of that takes into account who we were playing, or whether the games meant anything to either team etc

[winchester_royal]

Attractive football is great if you do it in the opposition's half. Unfortunately the Adkins way is to knock it around our own half for half an hour and make dangerous square passes in front of your own box.

It really isn't

[melonhead]

there have been aspects of this so far tbf

[winchester_royal]

All I've seen is the goalie being asked to pass it out, and also the ball occasionally being passed across the defense to try and find a gap to pass it into further up. At no point have I seen us pass it across the back without purpose, and certainly not for '30 minutes'. We are trying to find the happy balance that Adkins found with Southampton, who were never a Swansea-like team under him.

[Extended-Phenotype]

none of that takes into account who we were playing, or whether the games meant anything to either team etc

I didn't take that into account for either 9, so it evens out?

Whatevs, people wanted evidence of improvement - Adkins 9 games is all we have to work with, considering the future, by definition, has not yet happened.

[West Stand Man]

Why is attractive football a dirty word?

.

I don't think it is attractive football that is the problem. It is that attractive football and winning football are not necessarily synonymous. Most of us are happy with ugly football so long as it produces results (even if we won't always admit it).

Many of us did not enjoy the possession and passing football played by Swansea when they visited the Mad Stad this season. It was very clever, very technical and totally unproductive for long periods. The trouble is that we are comparing it with Reading's game, which was less pretty and less successful.

[melonhead]

i dont find the swansea model attractive.


i can see the attraction when barcelona do it, cos they do it with power, pace and purpose
but the brendan rodgers style does my oxf*rd head in. i actually h8 it

[West Stand Man]

i dont find the swansea model attractive.


i can see the attraction when barcelona do it, cos they do it with power, pace and purpose
but the brendan rodgers style does my oxf*rd head in. i actually h8 it

As, I suspect, do loads of us.

[Extended-Phenotype]

I think, Brendan Rodgers excluded, most people think passing well and keeping possession is more effective football.

Not sure anyone is declaring winning games is a meaningless biproduct.