Another New Manager, Welcome Mr Potter

1…5681011

Comments

  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited September 21
    Lukerz said:

    Two games (apparently) he’s been given; Everton away & Arsenal away.

    Don't know if this is true, or not.

    But, if true... why?

    Surely they should be able to form a judgement without pinning everything on those 2 games?

    If they think he has hidden depths and will deliver the goods with some kind of '2 game ultimatum' ... well, sack him now, because he should be giving his best performance anyway, no ultimatum needed. If he's holding back some super power until it's crunch time...

    2 away games ... well, anyone who knows football knows any away point is a good point, and Arsenal we'd really expect nothing. So a point from those 2 games would be enough to earn a stay of execution.... 4 from 7 - that's still utterly dreadful. Still sacking form.
  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    Mrs G, The rumour is the board don’t want to give any new manager those two games in case we lose them both so keep GP on then sack him after we get beaten leaving any new manager a better run of fixtures.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    We had 4 from 7 in 22-23 and 16-17 where we finished 14th and 13th respectively, so all is not lost.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited September 21
    Fortuneseeker said:

    Mrs G, The rumour is the board don’t want to give any new manager those two games in case we lose them both so keep GP on then sack him after we get beaten leaving any new manager a better run of fixtures.

    That's ridiculous.

    Edit. The rumour, I mean.

    What on earth difference would it make to anyone with an iota of sense?

    I can only see that the people promulgating the rumour, or giving it credence, lack the aforesaid iota.
  • chicagohammerchicagohammer
    I have never liked or frankly believed the “two games to save your job” mantra, I would hope that those in the know, ie those behind the scenes, can tell how the land lies and whatever happens in two games is so subjective it is ridiculous, they sought him out, gave him the job, gave him funds to buy players etc so for now should back him.

    Our start has clearly not been as desired so I can understand the board looking at options but surely I think that they should give him until year end at least.

    If it is already clear that there is no clear sight to any expected improvement then by all means get rid and replace him but please, let’s move away from wether or not the next two games decide anything..

    Just my tuppence worth
  • jay_in_cptjay_in_cpt
    “Cut your losses now” comes to my mind…
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Giving him until the end of the year could have us so far under we’d need a periscope to see the teams above.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Or we could be 10th.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    edited September 22
    Orr 11th or 12th or 13th and so on or even 9th or 8th etc.
  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    or 20th.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Fortuneseeker said:

    or 20th.

    I think that's what thornbury said.
  • jay_in_cptjay_in_cpt
    I just feel he’s had long enough to change our fortunes, last season his record wasn’t great ( home wins against Fulham- we IMO were very lucky and against a very poor Leicester) he’s had new players that I’m guessing he wanted and if anything, we’ve got worse.
    I like Potter as a person, but IMO for the club, he has to go, and go soon….
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    The main thing in his favour, imo, is that our weakest area this season has been at CB where we have been absolutely dire, and yet that's not an area where he's been able to spend thanks to the ridiculously overinflated price we paid for Kilman last summer and the obligation, also from last summer, of £35m or so for Todibo. He's having to deal with a huge investment in the area on players that just aren't fit for purpose.
  • alderzalderz
    buffybegood said:

    The main thing in his favour, imo, is that our weakest area this season has been at CB where we have been absolutely dire, and yet that's not an area where he's been able to spend thanks to the ridiculously overinflated price we paid for Kilman last summer and the obligation, also from last summer, of £35m or so for Todibo. He's having to deal with a huge investment in the area on players that just aren't fit for purpose.

    But he's continued to pick Kilman. We've just brought in Igor, who's not kicked a ball yet in the two matches he's been here for despite the fact our centre backs have been desperately poor. He also dumped Areola to bring in Hermansen and then dumped Hermansen after 4 games to bring Areola back.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    alderz said:

    But he's continued to pick Kilman. We've just brought in Igor, who's not kicked a ball yet in the two matches he's been here for despite the fact our centre backs have been desperately poor. He also dumped Areola to bring in Hermansen and then dumped Hermansen after 4 games to bring Areola back.

    Igor was a last minute, desperate loan as Aguerd was sold right at the end of the window. There isn't too much choice for him at CB, and it's the greatest cause for concern despite failing, yet again, to address CF in the transfer window.

  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Well, we have 4 CB's yet he sticking to Mav and Kilman. Same issue with JWP.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    edited September 22
    If Igor was that good would Brighton have let him leave on loan? Last season he only started when Dunk or van Hecke were unavailable.

    Todibo has been subbed in all three matches this season so I guess Potter is even less impressed with him than he is with Kilman and Mavropanos

    Since he took over Potter has replaced the entire coaching staff with his own people plus he brought in Kyle Macaulay as head of recruitment

    If we sack Potter some of them might want to leave while the new manager might want to replace those that do stay with his own people

    What effect will all this change have on the players?

    If we do sack Potter we need to find a permanent replacement otherwise we'll just suffer more turmoil in the summer
  • SlackerSlacker
    For the above reasons I’m leaning towards keeping Potter.
  • stevesteve
    edited September 22
    Me to But if they are going to make a change ,Do it now so the new guy gets a full month before the Brentford game
  • alderzalderz
    I think the question is how much confidence do they have that he's the right guy, in the face of his record so far suggesting he isn't. I think the easy way out for the board is to sack him, and I'd surprised if they don't in the next international break.

    That said, I still think he'll recovery and we'll be fine. I think he'll end up doing alright for us, it's just going really badly so far.
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    I think everything going around at present is just speculation and rumour, but I would be very surprised if he is not out the door as I would have expected a vote of confidence at this point from the club.

    I think they see what we do, in that there is no real improvement in areas in which there are clear failings and that's the worrying part. I suspect Potter will get another pay off and probably end up an incredibly wealthy man due to a very brief period of his life at Brighton, yet the stats will say he was one of Chelsea's worst manager and now ours. I doubt he will er-enter management anytime soon.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    But you know what he had at Brighton? Stability.
  • IronHerbIronHerb



    One to cheer up thorn. We're on the rise. ⚒
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Just been reading an article on why we are conceding so many goals from corners, 7 so far in the league this season. It highlighted tactics used by Chelsea, Spurs and Palace to prevent our keeper and defenders getting to the ball.
    If a journalist can fathom it out why the hell can’t Potter and his team see it and sort it.
  • alderzalderz
    thornburyiron said:

    If a journalist can fathom it out why the hell can’t Potter and his team see it and sort it.

    What you'll notice in the article on the BBC is that Chelsea, Spurs and Palace all used slightly different tactics to one another. Maybe they're adapting quicker than us to new routines (they also all have specific set piece coaches, I think).

    And anyway, who says Potter can't see it? Sorting it is a different thing altogether.
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    IronHerb said:

    But you know what he had at Brighton? Stability.

    There is another way of viewing the Brighton period however, in that it possibly wasn't down to him. Brighton have continued to perform as well once he left and ever since, but Chelsea and West ham have shown no improvement and in Chelsea certainly a reduced improvement upon his arrival, and we look to be going the same way.
  • Giant_HammerGiant_Hammer
    IronHerb said:

    But you know what he had at Brighton? Stability.

    Stability, is that the Croation boy?

  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    I do think he used the window badly, and that may not have been down to him entirely but we can never know that. I thought a priority was a centre back as In Kilman, Tobido and Mavro we have no dominant figure, only supporting figures. A Zouma figure may have made all the difference to our performances and results. That is a failing as he had half a season to notice that and yet here we are with a Championship centre back pairing trying to compete in the Premier league. We ended up with three players in the last week or so yet he had that half a season to identify our weaknesses, he brought in his own recruitment guy and we were not waiting to sell as we had the Kudus money from week one of the window, and yet we still shopped like a guy running into a garage on Christmas eve.
  • secrethammersfansecrethammersfan
    Does anyone else get the feeling that Sullivan's process of hiring a manager is not so much "we had a discussion about shared values, the identity of the club, and our one, three and five year goals, they presented their plans for executing this, together with what they would need to achieve this, and we see a definite potential to work together to achieve these goals", and more like "they were free (i.e. available) and they were free (i.e. no contract termination clause), and they were in the Sun's rumours column."?
  • alderzalderz
    claretandbluesky said:

    I do think he used the window badly, and that may not have been down to him entirely but we can never know that. I thought a priority was a centre back as In Kilman, Tobido and Mavro we have no dominant figure, only supporting figures. A Zouma figure may have made all the difference to our performances and results. That is a failing as he had half a season to notice that and yet here we are with a Championship centre back pairing trying to compete in the Premier league. We ended up with three players in the last week or so yet he had that half a season to identify our weaknesses, he brought in his own recruitment guy and we were not waiting to sell as we had the Kudus money from week one of the window, and yet we still shopped like a guy running into a garage on Christmas eve.

    I think it's hard to dispute that we could have done with a dominating centre back, but I think if we'd focussed on that instead of CM or LB we would have been saying that CM or LB were the priority.
Sign In or Register to comment.