Not sure I agree there. Form under Struber would have us staying up. So surely that means the issues were August to October? Too much damage done from August maybe, but enough since then without that terrible start to be a Championship side next year.
Who knows. Maybe we'd have signed him in the Summer as oppose to Wilks and Radlinger? I know you're jumping to Stendel's defence, but all I'm saying is that the damage wasn't done in August because form since Struber took over would have us state. Six extra points in August or September and we'd be outside the drop zone.
Too much damage done last summer, could’ve had Pep Guardiola managing us at the start of this season and we’d have been as poor. Blame lies squarely at the owners feet for the calamitous summer sales and transfers. Tin pot supposed billionaires
No wins from the second game of the season until Struber took over and by then we were talking about Rotherhams record low points total - that was where the damage was done - Its actually quite surprising we still have a chance ( if only a slim one after today) of escaping - 3 wins from 5 games - its not impossible but a tall order
No I'm not. I'm just wondering if we would have done. I do however think any manager would have struggled given who we lost. Hull have struggled after losing Bowen and Grosiki in Jan.
The lack of options upfront is a problem we have no one to bully the opposition defence and never replaced Kieffer.
But do you not think the improvement would have come with more games under Stendel anyway? Massively inexperienced side at Championship level for me, and no manager could have overcome what the Board did to the squad. It was the Board wot did it.
I believe to a certain extent Stendel had given up to be honest. Rightly or wrongly, and for reasons that can be aimed at recruitment, he didn't seem to be prepared to change things or make us more difficult to play against. I don't think Struber would have employed the same tactics in those games and would have yielded more points. Doesn't mean I think one is better than the other, but in that situation/moment I think Struber's ppg would have been better.
Why would you be judgemental? I'm not anti-board. However, I've said we should have kept Pinnock since day one and still believe that now. But I also think we invested in some (not all) really talented footballers. Our mistake, just like last time in the Championship, was too many in one go. That's why I think keeping Pinnock would have been key to bringing everything together in the same way the Sollbauer signing has helped us no end too. At the same time I understand the challenge that is signing experienced Championship ready footballers. You only have to look at the wages some of the unproven players we've sold have managed to pick up elsewhere to get that it isn't as easy as people playing 'Football Manager' suggest. We're sticking by the rules which I'm a huge supporter of. Unfortunately with that comes some limitations in the transfer market and for us to get it right our success rate needs to be brilliant, rather than just ok.
I'm not. That's the point, but some on here jump down your throat if you post anything critical. I agree with you. Or at the very least, Pinnock should not have been allowed to go until we had secured a genuine replacement (as opposed to a development prospect or two). The world and his mother have now caught on to the 'buy 'em cheap and bring 'em on' modus operandi that we espoused, and some are doing it much better. Our current way of working means we can not achieve stability in the Championship, and bashing up League One every year or two becomes a bit tiresome when it is accompanied by the inevitable struggle in the following year. Along with the dismal 'matchday experience' it's done for me so far as attending in person is concerned, although I'll always follow on PC/TV/media.
I don't have any issues with the matchday experience. Is it any worse than it was before? I'm involved in the FanZone so I'm naturally biased, but it definitely hasn't gone backwards. Efforts have been made in the last two years. Plus the output from the media team is just superb despite budget and resource compared to others. I would have kept Pinnock regardless. My biggest gripe at the strategy is the assumption that losing someone on a free transfer is losing money. Staying up in the Championship, and having your new recruits perform much better, is worth more than the £3 million Brentford paid us. That's short sighted. I think if we'd have taken that 'not for sale' stance on Pinnock from say January 2019, we'd have either encouraged bids twice as high as what Brentford offered, or no bids, and a player who understood where he stood for the next 12 months.
Summer recruitment made stopping up difficult to the point of impossibility. We have a massively unbalanced inexperienced squad which lacks the ability to compete at this level. We have improved with the signing of Solbauer and the rest gaining experience but we still need to play at our maximum to compete and hope the opposition have an off day
The policy of our owners though is to sign players that we can develop and improve, so by this logic the longer the players stay at the club the better they will become, it was a massive gamble to throw so many kids in at the deep end in August. Stendel was always going to be up against it.