Life after Brendan

[readingbedding]

Clear to see, that we're much improved.
Everyone is happy about that.

BR's gone, we have a new manager in and we're much improved.

May it all continue!

[rabidbee]

Fickle is as fickle does.

Are you new to being a football fan?

[Maguire]

You've got Brendan's problem (you're not Brendan are you?) - waffleitis.

Let's just go on facts. It is, after all, a results business. To my knowledge you don't get any bonus points for talking a good game, blaming other people or any other excuses.

In short, you have no response to any point I raise. Didn't think so.

[Maguire]

Fickle is as fickle does.

Are you new to being a football fan?

I wouldn't consider myself particularly fickle in so much as I don't change my opinion with the wind.

It might be the nature of football fans but this board is a pure, distilled embodiment of fickleness.

[Schards#2]

I can't see any point in going over this. Would Rodgers have produced comparable results since Christmas? Personally, I very much doubt it as, although Mags has a point that results were improving, IMHO though, performances were not and we didn't play with any consistancy or visable team spirit.

The fact is, we will never know, so, yes, maybe sacking Rodgers was harsh and hasty but it can never be proven beyond doubt.

My main concern is that, whilst McDermott was for me the best option to try and survive this season by getting the best out of what he had, I'm not sure he is the best man to progress in subsequent years as he's, basically, a scout who's made a few prudent loan signings and engendered a bit of team spirit and fight. If we stay up, he will undoubtedly have earned the right to have the job going forward but I worry about how far we can progress with him, albeit, he's had a stormer so far.

[rabidbee]

It might be the nature of football fans but this board is a pure, distilled embodiment of fickleness.

You just have to remember that 90% of people are uttercunts.

And avoid Team Board for a few days after we lose.

[CMRoyal]

No doubt if we lose the next two and slump back into the bottom three, popular HNA opinion will swing back the other way once more

Fans in judging a manager by his results shock.

Stupid comment.

Nice.

The point is that you should have an opinion and hold it, not change it with the wind depending on our results. One week Jimmy's the worst player ever, the next week he's getting cheered to the rafters. One week Shane Long will never make it, the next he's a goal machine destined for the premiership.

Fickle is as fickle does.

No, first of all this is about the managers not players. I thought it was wrong to appoint MaccyD as manager. After three or fours games I thought I was right to think that. What should I do now that performances and results have improved? Try to deny he's doing a good job? Bend the stats to convince myself and others that my original opinion still holds? No. On the evidence so far, I was wrong in my initial belief. Each game adds to the evidence for or against and I will change or harden my opinion accordingly.

As the old saying goes: "When the facts change I change my opinion. What do you do?"

[Maguire]

I can't see any point in going over this. Would Rodgers have produced comparable results since Christmas? Personally, I very much doubt it as, although Mags has a point that results were improving, IMHO though, performances were not and we didn't play with any consistancy or visable team spirit.

The fact is, we will never know, so, yes, maybe sacking Rodgers was harsh and hasty but it can never be proven beyond doubt.

My main concern is that, whilst McDermott was for me the best option to try and survive this season by getting the best out of what he had, I'm not sure he is the best man to progress in subsequent years as he's, basically, a scout who's made a few prudent loan signings and engendered a bit of team spirit and fight. If we stay up, he will undoubtedly have earned the right to have the job going forward but I worry about how far we can progress with him, albeit, he's had a stormer so far.

Interesting. First two paragraphs are fair comment, not sure where I stand on the last one though.

I guess you have to think that every day he spends in the job is an extra day at management school for him and be optimistic that he'll grow into the genuine article.

[Ian Royal]

No doubt if we lose the next two and slump back into the bottom three, popular HNA opinion will swing back the other way once more

It doesn't matter about "popular opinion". Brian has a better set of results so the change was worthwhile.

Pretty simplistic view don't you think?

When B-Mac didn't have such a good set of results did you think it was a bad change?

No because there was promise in most performances and until now he hasn't had a long enough run of games to have been fully judged.

How do you know what the results would've been for the same games under Rodgers?

Because we failed to string performances together under Rodgers and any results we had always looked like one offs. His brand of football and management didn't suit us. Two key areas of change in our season are Griffin (signed by McDermott) and Mills returning to the side (marginalised by Rodgers)

Surely you appreciate that taking over during the turmoil of the close season and early season means that Rodgers first games were played under much harder circumstances than Brian's (when the team was getting settled and results were already improving?), thus rendering a comparison pointless?

Having a pre-season > than coming in to a club in piss poor position and form mid-way through the season. I still don't subscribe to things were getting better under Rodgers. We'd got a few better results, but as the squad is now proving, it was always better than we were doing so was bound to pick up a few better results here and there. Palace and Scunny suggested to me that Rodgers upward trend had already run out of steam.

Overall, delighted with McDermott's progress but that doesn't mean I don't think getting rid of Rodgers was overly hasty.

Regardless of whether it was hasty it's been vindicated by our run of 4 wins on the trott, something we looked utterly incapable of under Rodgers, who never even managed two. And by our excellent FA Cup run. If it was hasty, it was only by a matter of about two games.
Rodgers MAY have kept us up, but it didn't look likely. McDermott looks a very good bet to keep us up, contrary to what a lot of of the doom and gloom idiots who hung on Rodgers every word said.

Things are better. The majority of the fans have faith in the manager and support the team. We accepted we were in a relegation fight ages ago. Now we're doing something about it. Looking like an excellent decision by Madejski to me.

[Royal With Cheese]

As the old saying goes: "When the facts change I change my opinion. What do you do?"

Sorry to be picky here but a fact cannot change. A fact is always a fact.

[Ian Royal]

As the old saying goes: "When the facts change I change my opinion. What do you do?"

Sorry to be picky here but a fact cannot change. A fact is always a fact.

When new facts appear, I revise my opinion.

When more evidence appears, I revise my opinion.

Acceptable?

[Royal With Cheese]

As the old saying goes: "When the facts change I change my opinion. What do you do?"

Sorry to be picky here but a fact cannot change. A fact is always a fact.

When new facts appear, I revise my opinion.

When more evidence appears, I revise my opinion.

Acceptable?

Sounds reasonable to me. Has abousolutely no bearing on CMRoyals original quote though. He was talking about facts changing - which simply can't happen.

Sorry to get all Spacey on everyone.

[Woodcote Royal]

You've got Brendan's problem (you're not Brendan are you?) - waffleitis.

Let's just go on facts. It is, after all, a results business. To my knowledge you don't get any bonus points for talking a good game, blaming other people or any other excuses.

In short, you have no response to any point I raise. Didn't think so.

I have. You were wrong, get over it.

[Maguire]

You've got Brendan's problem (you're not Brendan are you?) - waffleitis.

Let's just go on facts. It is, after all, a results business. To my knowledge you don't get any bonus points for talking a good game, blaming other people or any other excuses.

In short, you have no response to any point I raise. Didn't think so.

I have. You were wrong, get over it.

A typically in-depth analysis there.

What was I "wrong" about?

[CMRoyal]

As the old saying goes: "When the facts change I change my opinion. What do you do?"

Sorry to be picky here but a fact cannot change. A fact is always a fact.

Yeah, that Keynes - what a dullard, eh?

Actually I got the quote slightly wrong:-

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Mayna ... Attributed

"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

Philosophically, I would say that "Facts" plural can change. Fact 1 - first game drawn. Fact 2 - second game drawn. Those were the facts. Fact 3 - third game lost. No "fact" has changed, but the array of "facts" that inform my opinion has. But maybe we'll stick with Ian Royal's use of the word "evidence".

[Woodcote Royal]

What was I "wrong" about?

You were wrong about McDermott and no in depth analysis is going to change that. It was obvious he was turning things around long before it was reflected in our league results and this is now there for everyone to see.

I was wrong about Rodgers.......................he was a disaster.

[Maguire]

What was I "wrong" about?

You were wrong about McDermott and no in depth analysis is going to change that. It was obvious he was turning things around long before it was reflected in our league results and this is now there for everyone to see.

I was wrong about Rodgers.......................he was a disaster.

How was I wrong about McDermott? I've never been anything than supportive of him.

Finding the whole Rodgers thing somewhat distasteful doesn't mean I'm obliged to hate whoever replaced him. I like B-Mac as i've said at numerous junctures.

[Woodcote Royal]

I never said you disliked the guy but your earlier posts in this thread show that you were clearly not convinced by his early days in charge..................but I'm happy for others to draw their own conclusions.

EDIT. What was "distasteful" about Rodgers's dismissal

He was a nightmare and our Chairman looks to have played a blinder by removing him just in time and replacing with someone who look he can get the job done despite what all the doubters (yourself included) said at the time.

[Hoop Blah]

Agreeing with the jist of what Mags is saying here as you just can't know what we'd have done under Rodgers over this run of games (of course there is the untold story of why he was sacked which might put it all in a different light - come on Dirk!!).

I still think it was the wrong time to get rid of Rodgers as I think performances and results were improving though and his results and time as manager can't be reviewed without putting it in context with the massive task of taking over a side that hadn't won at home for 6 months, couldn't score a goal and had then lost all the best players from it's recent past.

The present is all about McDermott and the grand job he's doing of getting results, if not performances, out of a limited squad. That's a sign of something good, be it just a honeymoon period, a feel good factor that this group of players have with a familiar voice, or some genius managment by the man himself.

As good a job as he's doing though, I share Schards is worry that he isn't the man to take us on once he's secured our Championship status. It's one thing getting a group of players to perform in the short term, it's a totally different proposition to build and evolve a squad over time. That's when you have to really manage the squad and mould it in your own way (the Peter Taylor effect - he's great when taking over a set squad, but give him time and money and he'll ruin all the good work).

Only time will tell.

[papereyes]

He probably doesn't want or need me fighting his corner, but Maguire's 'beef' seemed to be at people trying to run Rodgers down/ramp BMcD up when BMcD was also struggling, not the results or performances themselves.

Someone saying "under Rodgers, we'd have lost that 5-0" springs to mind, after the defeat up at Forest.