The Long Term Under Johnno

He's helped, definitely. But let's not pretend Hourihane's return hasn't been just as key. Take both out (huge chance of that happening next month) and we're relegation fodder. In my opinion.

 

That is what debating is all about. You are trying to question every aspect of the other blokes position to find out whether there is any value in it. As I say, I do not enter a debate expecting to win it. All that I hope for is that I have made the other bloke think. If I have caused you to think, then that in itself is my reward.

 

Both key. In Jan it is vital to keep both. Otherwise the continued softness at the back won't be hidden....

 

Not sure it's in the club's hands. Let's hope the players are daft.

 

Go back 20 years (95-96), and of the 24 teams in this division, 5 have since played in the Premier League, including Bournemouth and Swansea (who were relegated in 96). How many would have predicted their rise up the league?

 

The clubs mentioned though are clubs from large catchment areas who have grown with a little investment, other than Bournemouth who have had a lot of money to spend. Cant imagine Morcambe or Accrington getting that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's not necessarily true. Other factors could come into it. For example this manager is on a 3 year contract rather than the usual rolling one so the compensation could be a lot higher if we sacked him. We also have an owner who'd like to sell & maybe doesn't want to fork out a fortune in compo when he won't reap the benefits of the change in manager if he's selling up soon

 

Who though would have expected Wigan to spend several years in the premier league, win the FA Cup and play European football, when they didn't join the football league until the late 1970's?

 

The manager is on a 3 year contract because the 12 month rolling contracts that other managers were on has encouraged the wrong sort of behaviour within the club. It has encouraged this 12 months cycle of sackings when the playing cycle is a 4 year one. It is just the wrong sort of practice to continue to get shot of managers at 12 month intervals, and this manger's contract reflected that.

The owner would like to get out of the club, but I think selling is the wrong description. At the moment, he is simply a cash cow. Every time that the club runs sort of money to sack a manager, buy a player or even help tide it over a sort term cash shortfall, it turns to Patrick Cryne. It is a long term drain on his resources, and it is just not feasible to expect to be paid for something that will be a long term drain on another owner's resources. In a recent posting, I advanced the view that it will actually cost him £3m to walk away, because that is what it will cost him to make the club financially independent of the need for regular cash injections.

 

Do you not think that by entering into an arrangement where the tangible assets of the club are jointly held by himself and a non-commercial organisation, PC has made the club unsaleable?

 

It would appear via the lack of interest shown that what you state certainly makes the club unappealing to potential investors.

Just how many people have shown interest in taking over ?

 

Only the gang from Swindon, according to MatthewWAB, although we never did get to the bottom of that!

 

We can agree to differ about Machin then. My view is that he came in immediately solidified the defence the signing of Fleming being equally instrumental in the and we survived his initial season as Mel identified our defensive weaknesses and sorted them out pretty much instantaneously. The problems he had were at the other end of the field that took longer to sort out. I do remember Taggart playing full back and central midfield and scoring some good goals from there. In his first Seasonhe was a regular starter and made An immediate impact scoring some vital goals. Of course he didn't play the full season as he was signed part way through that Season and was injured for part of the next but it's disingenuous to fail to acknowledge the impact he and Gary made. We went from being the easiest team in the league to beat to the hardest

Again I don't disagree about being wary of sacking managers. Johnson may develop into a good one. I would just be looking to relieve him of overall control moving into a coaching role alongside someone with experience with reinstatement at a later date. All our managers in my lifetime have worked under difficult circumstances (with the possible exception of Allan Clarke mk1). Best players sold outmuscled financially Johnson's job is no harder or easier than any of them. I think the boards strategy is the correct one. It's just difficult to find the correct person to implement it and move you forwards as a club. Peterborough managed to walk this tightrope under Ferguson as did Brentford under Warburton. But it is not an easy job. Wilson seemed to have handled recruitment well (some obvious failures but Alex Ferguson reckons anything near a 50 percent success rate is a good result) Johnson at this point in his career just doesn't look capable of it and none of his signings thus far can be seen as an unqualified success.

Treating Williams who has played 6 games for us and was injured when we signed him as a pivotal player is perhaps leaving the logic behind a little too much. We have actually had a fully fit squad for most of the season so it's not something to hide behind.

The performances have been unacceptable a nasty mess of indecision. As you have mentioned in your minority reports too many square pegs in round holes. Your star central midfield told publicly he cannot play in a position he has played throughout his career and then when circumstances mean you have to play a system that you have been avoiding all season your star midfielder and the rest of the team kick on almost immediately. I like Johnson as a person he speaks dynamically and well but unfortunately his teams do not demonstrate this. Possibly no coincidence that both his current and former clubs are in the bottom 4.

Onwards and upwards.

 

As someone who is happy to give Johnson time (boo hiss, I hate BFC etc ) it's hard (ie impossible) to argue against your critique there - I'm interested to see what happens once Scowen's fit - supporting Johnson doesn't mean I can't see that he's had his hand forced somewhat with his midfield options and by accident it seems to be working. Accommodating Scowen, Hourihane & Pearson will be interesting..

 

Sold in January. Problem solved.

 

I hope Conor stays but you couldn't blame him given the lack of appreciation for his talents if he goes.

Should always be one of Scowen or Pearson I'd go for Scowen myself but Pearson like Watkins seems updroppable. It's nice to see a variety of opinions. Until the Altrincham debacle I was in the persevere camp but the performance that day was a step too far for he.

 

Scowen should be first pick for the midfield, the others should be vying for the other place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Another juggernaut of a thread started by me.

Reight poster.

 

I agree.

 

What Cryne has done is make the club unsellable to anyone who simply wants the land. The big concern is that an unscrupulous buyer might want the club in order to shrink it, sell off the land to a developer and move the club to a green field site out of town with a 10,000 capacity stadium. The problem with looking for a new owner is that it is very hard to find a good un. Cryne will be looking for someone who is interested in the club for the right reasons, that is, he is looking for someone who is interested in developing it, and has the money to do so.

The land is a bit of a red herring. The board chaired by John Dennis used the land as security for a loan, which they had no chance of servicing once things turned against them. The bank had no alternative but to bring in an Administrator. It was the only way they had of saving it, because that board was running towards destruction. If the land was returned to the football club, it would once again be used to finance a loan and we would rapidly be in the same mess.

Because of these two points, I am a big supporter of the arrangements continuing as they are. I agree that it does give us some problems, like who is going to do any further development to the ground when there comes a time when we need it, but I can see a solution there also.