The David Moyes Thread

Cuz1

I stated whilst fans were on his back that Imo Nolan United our club when he joined us, by far big Sam’s best signing and having met him my opinion never changed, and maybe moyes best one too

alderz

I think he’s been really good since the break. From joining to lockdown we weren’t good, but he seems to have found his formula, got the time to work out his personnel, and get players fit. Like others, I have gripes, but I’m happy with him. I don’t think he should be getting a new contract just yet, because it’s very possible that we fall apart and he gets sacked by Christmas - just like every other manager in world football - but if we keep doing what we’re doing I’d be happy to have him long term.

I’m surprised how many people are saying they were anti-Pellegrini when he replayed Moyes last time. It’s definitely possible that I have forgotten, but I remember the mood being that Moyes wasn’t good enough and Pellegrini was going to take us forward. I don’t remember many people criticising his appointment (except jay), but maybe I’m misremembering.

Cuz1

Alderz I will hold my hands up I was glad when pelle came but he had to go in the end but I wouldn’t have taken moyes back on but he’s doing ok so far better than I imagined he would

EXETERHAMMER

I stick by the point that Moyes is not an exciting manager. However, he has improved fitness and has played in a way to get the best out of some players e.g. Arnie in the past and now Antonio.
He has brought more stability than Pelle, plays a better brand of football than Big Sam.
Still preferred Slav though.

Cuz1

I’d agree with arnie but Antonio I’m sure selected for England before moyes so i wouldn’t heap the praise on moyes for that

baracks_a_hammer

Jay was 100% anti-Pelle

I wasn’t particularly enamoured either - but then again you lot would probably say I don’t get thrilled about many things West Ham related!!!

My defence though would be that most of whu606’s existence has coincided with our present owners’ ownership...

ianbishoplegend

I thought Hugil wasn’t a bad signing. 8m (which was at a time of elevated prices) for 15 goal a season forward. Would have liked to see him in the cups etc. A touch if Steve Jones about him. Think Moyes saw him as a last option with injury hit forward line - never needed in the end. Wasn’t hard to shift him on to decent clubs either.

Cuz1

Yes was that easy we had to loan him out first and no doubt took a hit on the sell on price as well

ianbishoplegend

I think we took a hit more because the entire market did. He scored some crackers last season

OutcastLondoner

ianbishoplegend said:

I thought Hugil wasn’t a bad signing. 8m (which was at a time of elevated prices) for 15 goal a season forward. Would have liked to see him in the cups etc. A touch if Steve Jones about him. Think Moyes saw him as a last option with injury hit forward line - never needed in the end. Wasn’t hard to shift him on to decent clubs either.

When did he score 15 goals, apart from last season?

His 13 goals almost never makes the top 10 Championship scorers

Cuz1

ianbishoplegend said:

I think we took a hit more because the entire market did. He scored some crackers last season

I think we took a hit because he was a poor buy who even then never given a chance

alderz

Cuz1 said:

I’d agree with arnie but Antonio I’m sure selected for England before moyes so i wouldn’t heap the praise on moyes for that

He got called up, once I think, and never played. He’s currently one of the most dangerous centre forwards in the league, and considering most of us didn’t consider him a striker until now, I think Moyes takes the credit. Yeah he’s always been a good player, but he’s playing the beta football of his life, IMO.

ianbishoplegend said:

I thought Hugil wasn’t a bad signing. 8m (which was at a time of elevated prices) for 15 goal a season forward. Would have liked to see him in the cups etc. A touch if Steve Jones about him. Think Moyes saw him as a last option with injury hit forward line - never needed in the end. Wasn’t hard to shift him on to decent clubs either.

Moyes spent £8m on him and have him three sub appearances. That’s a terrible signing. He might not have been if he had been given a chance, but he wasn’t, so he was.

baracks_a_hammer

I mean on the disaster scale, Hugill + West Ham was not far short of Savio Nseroko??

At least in his short time with us, I believe Savio managed to register an assist.

WHU_Champo_league_in_7_years

I thought Hugill was an awful signing at the time

A lot of posters were saying how he's a hungry championship player, but imo even though he got however many goals he was a championship striker

Which I'm is an issue I've had with this window, every single championship player we didn't go for fans have gotten angry, but the truth is only the top drawer Championship players are going to cut it in the Prem

Lukerz

Classic example was Ryan Manning.

Ended up going to Swansea for £700k.

alderz

baracks_a_hammer said:

I mean on the disaster scale, Hugill + West Ham was not far short of Savio Nseroko??

At least in his short time with us, I believe Savio managed to register an assist.

According to Soccerbase:

Hugill was signed for £8m, and sold for £2.5m. He made 3 appearances, meaning each appearance cost us £1.83m.

Savio was signed for £9m, and sold for (this fee is according to Wikipedia) approx. £2m AND we received Manuel Da Costa. He made 11 appearances in total, meaning each appearance cost of £0.64m.

If you factor in Da Costa (who we sold for £1m after he made 46 appearances and scored 4 goals) then the Savio transfer was £9m to sign Savio and Da Costa, £3m of incoming fees, 46 appearances at £0.13m per appearances.

Financially, Savio was a far better signing than Hugill.

baracks_a_hammer

Alderz

Probably added to the cost of hugill would have been the fact that we were likely subsiding his wages for his two seasons on loan?

OutcastLondoner

This article from before we signed Savio is amusing https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/113657-savio-nsereko-rumoured-west-ham-offer-and-video-evidence.amp.html

Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes

Savio. Ah, that takes me back.

alderz

The other thing with Savio, is that he was a Germany U20 international. He was in the Germany U19 squad that won the U19 EUROs in 2008. We gambled on his potential, that genuinely seemed to be high.

Hugill was a 26 year old with a 1 in 4 record in the Championship. We knew exactly what we were getting. Panic buy, pure and simple.

Cuz1

He was prolific for us though

claretandbluesky

Antonio came from Forest for 7m over five years ago and has been a good buy.

Benrahma is a big gamble at 25m ! but one I hope will pay off. It would be very easY to imagine two different scenarios playing out in 12 months from now we are saying he is the best player since Payet, cuts defences in two, beats players for fun and serves up a few exceptional goals OR expensive luxury with some nice tricks but overall impact on the game very little and too in often. Sometimes you take a punt I guess.

Cuz1

Alderz, I usually agree but with Antonio the only credit I give moyes is that he’s played him in his correct position one where when at Forest he thrived on hence why we I assume we brought him, it was bilic who I wasn’t a fan of who decided he could fit into wing back roles to suit an injury crisis and his performances dropped off

alderz

I’d argue that his normal position is on the wing, and that it’s Moyes who converted him to striker. Sure he played there before, but not consistently or effectively in the premier league. But, as grey used to say, it’s all about the onions.

Cuz1

Yes true but wouldnt class him as a striker as such even though he’s scoring goals he still spends time out wide as such as he did during his forest days

imagelost

This is disgusting
David Moyes has done better then then expected , and you are thinking of replacing him?
Explain you you self

alderz

imagelost said:

This is disgusting
David Moyes has done better then then expected , and you are thinking of replacing him?
Explain you you self

Sorry, where did anyone say that he should be replaced?

BubblesNeverDies

Aimed at nobody, but, as a former teacher of English, just want to help:

Buy (verb) = present tense: bought = past tense.
Examples: I buy the next round: I bought the last round.

Bring (verb) = present tense: brought = past tense
Examples: I bring the furniture from the shop: I brought it in my van

Lose (verb) = present tense: lost = past tense
Example: I win, you lose: We lost 2-4 lost

Loose (adjective) = not tight (not related to "lose")
Example: the screw is loose

They're - short for "they are"
Their - possessive adjective meaning "belonging to them"
There - preposition, as in "over there"

He's/she's/it's - short for "he is/ she is/ it is"
His/hers/its - belonging to "him/ her/ it"

Hope nobody takes this as a dig that needs modding.

Kuchinghammer

Personally, as long as I can understand what the poster is meaning, I don't worry about the grammar. Not a dig at anyone, just my opinion.

buffybegood

BubblesNeverDies said:

it's - short for "it is"
its - belonging to "it"

This was always an issue for me at school, I've lost count of the number of occasions I had to write:

"It's a poor dog that never has its day"

10, or 20, or 30 times after a mistake in a piece of English homework. I still occasionally make a mistake with it, but I usually spot it if I proof read before I post or send it.