So, 5 games in...

[UpTheLeagueFox]

21 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

Can people stop saying 'It's only 5 games' ! 

Puel has had 41 games.

34 Premier League games

7 Cup games

[StriderHiryu]

4 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

... do you not think that Bournemouth has provided the rest of the league with the definitive way to beat our team! 

 Playing away, why not sit back and hit us on the break. 

It's not just Bournemouth, this was true of us last season too. It's quite hilarious really... the weakness of the team who had arguably the best counter attacking team arguably in Premier League history is now... being counter attacked! You've got to laugh at the irony of this statement.

 

So for us it's about finding the balance between pushing up and keeping the back secure. I don't think we are going to solve it over night, but I take some solace in that we had a similar issue when Ranieri came in. At the start of 15/16 we played some incredible stuff, the gung-ho attitude was great to see but there was a reason why we conceded (usually first) in every game. But with some tweaks to personell and system we found a great balance and the rest is history. I know we play a different way now, but I think the general principle is the same - we need to work on the details so remain creative but don't get exposed on the counter attack. IF we can solve it, I think we could be a good team and if we can't... then results will continue to stall and probably Puel will be out before Christmas. But really given the team we now have things would really have to go wrong for that to happen. The spine of Kasper / Maguire / Ndidi / Vardy along with Maddison should keep us clear of relegation.

 

Huddersfield will be a good test of where we are. We haven't yet had a game in which we've both played well AND got a good result yet in the league. I don't expect the game to be easy but on paper our team is much better than theirs. We shall see!

[ealingfox]

42 minutes ago, Simoken said:

41 games to prove all you twats wrong... no way near enough considering clear changes he has applied to the squad, which is the best way forward. He has taken us to a modern styled era of football and using our young talent unlike the previous.. managers who stuck with the old and figured out and didnt have the guts to make real change. (no offence to ranieri but we were lucky the top teams all had a bad season) I cant honestly think wed of won it otherwise in all honesty But yeah.. blame Puel for having the balls to try something new and trusting our youngsters sounds crazy right.

 

How many games is enough?

[FrankieADZ]

after 5 games in the points total is about what I expected tbh given we've played Man Utd, Wolves, Southampton, Liverpool and Bournemouth

 

and not forgetting the amount of fans moaning about Puel too, 

so its standard tbh 

[Simoken]

6 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

How many games is enough?

a full season, or would you prefer our club to continue this sacking tradition for quick fixes.. or long term ambitions?. For myself I feel Puel has made real change and printed his own style at the club in a very short space of time and thats impressive and obviously the players have responded positively to it. Oh and the young players 'Gray' not sulking and looking miserable is refreshing to see for once.

Edited 18 September 2018 by Simoken

[st albans fox]

57 minutes ago, STUHILL said:

Can people stop saying 'It's only 5 games' ! 

 

Puel has had 41 games. Over a season worth of games. Had two transfer windows and a full pre-season.

 

It is not just 5 games! 

 

He should, and no doubt will get more time, but there should be cut off point when people have to acknowledge that he is just not doing a good enough job with the players and resources he has available to him.

 

Try and watch a recording of us playing under shakey at Huddersfield or Bournemouth early last season - both draws but miles behind the quality of football we are now playing 

 

it it takes time and changes of personnel to get to where we are at the moment ........ if his personality is the issue then I get that but he should be afforded the time to bed in the new players and see where we are once that’s achieved

 

if we find ourselves wallowing around in a relegation scrap then the owners will likely be forced into a change but otherwise I don’t see any radical alteration toniur current direction of travel 

Edited 18 September 2018 by st albans fox

[ealingfox]

6 minutes ago, Simoken said:

a full season, or would you prefer our club to continue this sacking tradition for quick fixes.. or long term ambitions?. For myself I feel Puel has made real change and printed his own style at the club in a very short space of time and thats impressive and obviously the players have responded positively to it.

 

 he's had nearly a year, and two transfer windows. It's not a very short space of time. And on what basis are the players responding positively?

 

I'm not advocating sacking him now, I'm just interested because this is all people seem to say, to give him time, rather than look at anything that's actually happening on the pitch. Can guarantee if we're near the bottom at Christmas the goalposts will be moved, and when we finish lower down the table than last year at the end of the season theyll be moved again.

 

I just want to know when we will actually be allowed to point out the very questionable aspects of his management.

Edited 18 September 2018 by ealingfox

[STUHILL]

1 hour ago, Simoken said:

41 games to prove all you twats wrong... no way near enough considering clear changes he has applied to the squad, which is the best way forward. He has taken us to a modern styled era of football and using our young talent unlike the previous.. managers who stuck with the old and figured out and didnt have the guts to make real change. (no offence to ranieri but we were lucky the top teams all had a bad season) I cant honestly think wed of won it otherwise in all honesty But yeah.. blame Puel for having the balls to try something new and trusting our youngsters sounds crazy right.

Missed the part where I said '...should, and no doubt will get more time' eh?

 

He plays Chilwell and Gray. Both got their first significant starts under Claudio. Otherwise, Choudary has been binned off to the u23's again along with Darnell Johnson and Barnes shipped out again, so where is this promoting youth policy?

 

Gray isn't performing and will likely be dropped and Chilwell was making his breakthrough pre-puel and is actually being under utilised in this system.

 

More time needed for Puel but turning us into a team who keeps possession better, but concedes soft goals and struggles to break down teams, is no great achievement in over a season's worth of games, in my book.

 

Let's see how he does over the next 10 games or so, and hopefully he gets us playing to the squads strengths, as we do have a talented bunch of players and a top 8 finish should still be our realistic aim. 

Edited 18 September 2018 by STUHILL

[Ric Flair]

26 minutes ago, Simoken said:

a full season, or would you prefer our club to continue this sacking tradition for quick fixes.. or long term ambitions?. For myself I feel Puel has made real change and printed his own style at the club in a very short space of time and thats impressive and obviously the players have responded positively to it. Oh and the young players 'Gray' not sulking and looking miserable is refreshing to see for once.

His printed style has seen him go from getting us to play fast and direct football on the counter, mixed with being more comfortable in possession and resulting in a superb opening 10 games for us, to slow, laborious football where we see a lot of the ball in areas where the opposition allow us to have it, they set their defence and we lose all impetus and focus and either give the ball away or we swing aimless crosses in to the box with only Vardy in there, who's weakness is attacking crosses. We've also become very easy to counter attack ourselves whilst we fiddle with ourselves with the ball. The last 20 or so games under Puel we've been worryingly soft and the results show that, we're not a top 10 team on current form. Also, the vast majority of this side have now played under him for the best part of a year, this isn't a case of a host of new players not yet used to his way of playing. Now either he recognises that a lot of this team aren't capable of playing the style of football he wants and he'll replace them in due course, or he's not getting the best out of them and has to shoulder the blame. It might have been an idea not to get rid of every single other option up front bar Vardy and Iheanacho who he seems to not particularly rate, without bringing any replacements in. He spent most of his time trying to recruit a collection of defenders, yet he refuses to change systems to provide more balance and utilise these defenders and in the process has made us even worse at defending than his predecessors. He's got very little going for him currently.

[STUHILL]

35 minutes ago, Simoken said:

a full season, or would you prefer our club to continue this sacking tradition for quick fixes.. or long term ambitions?. For myself I feel Puel has made real change and printed his own style at the club in a very short space of time and thats impressive and obviously the players have responded positively to it. Oh and the young players 'Gray' not sulking and looking miserable is refreshing to see for once.

So two seasons in total then? 

[STUHILL]

3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

His printed style has seen him go from getting us to play fast and direct football on the counter, mixed with being more comfortable in possession and resulting in a superb opening 10 games for us, to slow, laborious football where we see a lot of the ball in areas where the opposition allow us to have it, they set their defence and we lose all impetus and focus and either give the ball away or we swing aimless crosses in to the box with only Vardy in there, who's weakness is attacking crosses. We've also become very easy to counter attack ourselves whilst we fiddle with ourselves with the ball. The last 20 or so games under Puel we've been worryingly soft anthe results show that, we're not a tod p 10 team on current form. Also, the vast majority of this side have now played under him for the best part of a year, this isn't a case of a host of new players not yet used to his way of playing. Now either he recognises that a lot of this team aren't capable of playing the style of football he wants and he'll replace them in due course, or he's not getting the best out of them and has to shoulder the blame. It might have been an idea not to get rid of every single other option up front bar Vardy and Iheanacho who he seems to not particularly rate, without bringing any replacements in. He spent most of his time trying to recruit a collection of defenders, yet he refuses to change systems to provide more balance and utilise these defenders and in the process has made us even worse at defending than his predecessors. He's got very little going for him currently.

 

Sums it up perfectly. This isn't even a Puel bash either. It's just how things are at the moment.

 

I don't know why anyone would deny any of this. The only argument is, how much longer do we give him to fix these issues.

 

8-10 games for me, which brings us up until December.

[STUHILL]

44 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Try and watch a recording of us playing under shakey at Huddersfield or Bournemouth early last season - both draws but miles behind the quality of football we are now playing 

 

it it takes time and changes of personnel to get to where we are at the moment ........ if his personality is the issue then I get that but he should be afforded the time to bed in the new players and see where we are once that’s achieved

 

if we find ourselves wallowing around in a relegation scrap then the owners will likely be forced into a change but otherwise I don’t see any radical alteration toniur current direction of travel 

I agree, as I state in all my posts. He needs more time.

 

Argument is, how much more? 

 

Puel needs to make some changes now, as too many red flags at the moment for our longer term development and ambitions.

 

We all want a Manager for the long-term, but that doesn't mean we have to stick with the wrong one no matter what. 

 

At the moment, he is doing enough but warning signs are there and he should be getting more out of this talented squad.

[StriderHiryu]

1 hour ago, ealingfox said:

 

 he's had nearly a year, and two transfer windows. It's not a very short space of time. And on what basis are the players responding positively?

 

I'm not advocating sacking him now, I'm just interested because this is all people seem to say, to give him time, rather than look at anything that's actually happening on the pitch. Can guarantee if we're near the bottom at Christmas the goalposts will be moved, and when we finish lower down the table than last year at the end of the season theyll be moved again.

 

I just want to know when we will actually be allowed to point out the very questionable aspects of his management.

A great question. For me after 10 games of this season, he will have been here for about a year / 38 league games plus one major transfer window. At that point in my mind it's fair to make comparisons and judgements on how he's performing. 

 

Our next set of games are against teams we should expect to get some points from, so I think we will learn a lot from those games. Last year we finished 9th and got to the quarter finals of both cups. Sure we lost one of our best players, but we retained everyone else and spent significantly and backed the manager. So if we are doing worse, you'd have to objectively say that's underperforming and if we are doing better, then that's decent to good. Probably good given the yonug age of the first team squad.

 

My expectation is we will be roughly where we are now, in midtable after 5 more games. Is that good enough? Well let's cross that bridge when we get there!

 

Regardless of what happens I will support the club and have faith in the owners. They'll make the right decision when needed, as they usually do.

[KingsX]

 

- Look at the last 26 games, we’re total shite.  We’ll be playing Reading and Millwall next year.

 

- But we won the four in a row before that.  My arbitrary sample shows upwards of a point and a half per match.  Claude’s gassing up the European tour bus.

 

- We were bloody lucky to get 3 points off Wolves and Soton.  We should be in the relegation zone.

 

- We were bloody unlucky not to get points off Manure and Pool.  We're actually more like top six.

 

- Huddersfield will hammer us.  This is the end.

 

- 3-0, Vardy brace.  We’re just getting started!

 

- You’re a snowflake.

 

- You hate this club.

[Guest]

21 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

I'm not advocating sacking him now, I'm just interested because this is all people seem to say, to give him time, rather than look at anything that's actually happening on the pitch. Can guarantee if we're near the bottom at Christmas the goalposts will be moved, and when we finish lower down the table than last year at the end of the season theyll be moved again.

 

I just want to know when we will actually be allowed to point out the very questionable aspects of his management.

Isn't that what you and many others have been doing for months now?

 

No-one has stopped you pointing out (your opinions). Some of us just disagree and point that out too.

 

The answer to the other question about how long should he be given? How long is a piece of rope?

 

If we're going along mid table what is the hurry to ditch him and try another unknown? 

 

Some of us believe that it takes time and persistence and the modern day idea of sacking a coach every year if you don't finish higher than the previous year or every half year in the fear of maybe not finishing higher than the last year is flawed.

 

As long as we stay in the Prem I'm happy to give him "time" as I'm enjoying most of the football more now than when we were playing park the bus football.

[Ric Flair]

6 hours ago, FIF said:

Isn't that what you and many others have been doing for months now?

 

No-one has stopped you pointing out (your opinions). Some of us just disagree and point that out too.

 

The answer to the other question about how long should he be given? How long is a piece of rope?

 

If we're going along mid table what is the hurry to ditch him and try another unknown? 

 

Some of us believe that it takes time and persistence and the modern day idea of sacking a coach every year if you don't finish higher than the previous year or every half year in the fear of maybe not finishing higher than the last year is flawed.

 

As long as we stay in the Prem I'm happy to give him "time" as I'm enjoying most of the football more now than when we were playing park the bus football.

Our success in the modern era have all come pretty instantly. Pearson won the league in his first season and then when he came back he kept on improving us. Ranieri won us the PL instantly and we'll always be grateful. People point towards the protests over O'Neill's start at the club but he turned it around and got us firing in much less time than Puel who we seem to be regressing under. I think giving managers an infinite amount of time is no wiser than seemingly getting rid of them if they've not made progression over the medium term, no point flogging a dead horse.

[desertfox2]

6 hours ago, FIF said:

Isn't that what you and many others have been doing for months now?

 

No-one has stopped you pointing out (your opinions). Some of us just disagree and point that out too.

 

The answer to the other question about how long should he be given? How long is a piece of rope?

 

If we're going along mid table what is the hurry to ditch him and try another unknown? 

 

Some of us believe that it takes time and persistence and the modern day idea of sacking a coach every year if you don't finish higher than the previous year or every half year in the fear of maybe not finishing higher than the last year is flawed.

 

As long as we stay in the Prem I'm happy to give him "time" as I'm enjoying most of the football more now than when we were playing park the bus football.

Good points.

 

If we sack Puel (unless we are in or around the relegation zone and at least halfway through the season) who in their right mind that is any good would want to manage us?  We already have a reputation for getting rid of managers. If we sack Puel when we are midtable it's a huge red flag to every manager out there. Not to mention midtable despite losing one of if not the best players we have ever had whilst at the same time significantly reducing the age of the side.  I get that everyone wants to see good attacking and entertaining football, but realistically how many sides of our size can do that week in week out without leaving themselves at risk of shipping a load of goals and ending up in possible relegation trouble.  

 

 

[Guest Col city fan]

23 minutes ago, desertfox2 said:

Good points.

 

If we sack Puel (unless we are in or around the relegation zone and at least halfway through the season) who in their right mind that is any good would want to manage us?  We already have a reputation for getting rid of managers. If we sack Puel when we are midtable it's a huge red flag to every manager out there. Not to mention midtable despite losing one of if not the best players we have ever had whilst at the same time significantly reducing the age of the side.  I get that everyone wants to see good attacking and entertaining football, but realistically how many sides of our size can do that week in week out without leaving themselves at risk of shipping a load of goals and ending up in possible relegation trouble.  

 

 

This is absolute bollox it really is.

Every manager feels they can do better than the last one.

If Puel fooks this up and gets sacked, there will be plenty of decent applicants waiting in the wings insisting that they ‘can do a better job’. (Seriously have you not heard of the managerial Merry-go-round)?

It will be about money too. Promise a potential incumbent a zillion quid a season and the queue will be backing up to the River Soar. There may even be a few fat managerial rejects stood in it!

[l444ry]

1 hour ago, desertfox2 said:

Good points.

 

If we sack Puel (unless we are in or around the relegation zone and at least halfway through the season) who in their right mind that is any good would want to manage us?  We already have a reputation for getting rid of managers. If we sack Puel when we are midtable it's a huge red flag to every manager out there. Not to mention midtable despite losing one of if not the best players we have ever had whilst at the same time significantly reducing the age of the side.  I get that everyone wants to see good attacking and entertaining football, but realistically how many sides of our size can do that week in week out without leaving themselves at risk of shipping a load of goals and ending up in possible relegation trouble.  

 

 

Doesn't seem to have hurt Chelsea or, more pertinently, Watford. 

Edited 19 September 2018 by l444ry

[Webbo]

1 hour ago, desertfox2 said:

Good points.

 

If we sack Puel (unless we are in or around the relegation zone and at least halfway through the season) who in their right mind that is any good would want to manage us?  We already have a reputation for getting rid of managers. If we sack Puel when we are midtable it's a huge red flag to every manager out there. Not to mention midtable despite losing one of if not the best players we have ever had whilst at the same time significantly reducing the age of the side.  I get that everyone wants to see good attacking and entertaining football, but realistically how many sides of our size can do that week in week out without leaving themselves at risk of shipping a load of goals and ending up in possible relegation trouble.  

 

 

How many managers did newcastle sack before they appointed Benitez?. Most managerial vacancies occur after a sacking. Dozens of managers want to manage in the premier league, we have a good squad and the wages will be damn good. the idea that nobody will want to come here if we sack Puel is laughable.

[Strokes]

1 hour ago, Col city fan said:

This is absolute bollox it really is.

Every manager feels they can do better than the last one.

If Puel fooks this up and gets sacked, there will be plenty of decent applicants waiting in the wings insisting that they ‘can do a better job’. (Seriously have you not heard of the managerial Merry-go-round)?

It will be about money too. Promise a potential incumbent a zillion quid a season and the queue will be backing up to the River Soar. There may even be a few fat managerial rejects stood in it!

Where were all these better applicants last time around Col, surely we would have taken them then?

[Guest Col city fan]

24 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Where were all these better applicants last time around Col, surely we would have taken them then?

I have no idea who we considered mate, have you? And Puel would have been seen as decent choice anyway I suspect.

[Strokes]

11 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I have no idea who we considered mate, have you? And Puel would have been seen as decent choice anyway I suspect.

I don’t recall his appointment being received with much enthusiasm, it was pretty left field. It always feels with the owners/CEOs here that they are never prepared for the ‘manager merry go round’. If there is a viable option out there, let’s sound them out before sticking in the knife for a change. We can’t afford to write off another season to manager transition. 

[sacreblueits442]

On 18/09/2018 at 09:54, Finnaldo said:

This forum honestly baffles me.

 

In the years since the title win everyone's said we can't keep playing as we were, that we were being found out, that we were being neutralised. 

 

The manager has totally revamped the team. New formation and tactics, a radical shift in service upfront from Mahrez to a younger and inexperienced (yet extremely talented) Maddison and the team as a whole has had a few years shaved off it.

 

He's given the fans what they want and after 5 games they want him out. 

 

 

 

 

...not so much the last 5 games, more what had gone on before!!!

We were all crying out for a RB, he brings in Ricardo who is not a RB, does  not seem to understand the concept and a total light weight defensively. Such a waste, we could have a bona fide RB with Ricardo playing RW, (he knew the way Ricardo plays) once again he seems to have over complicated the situation.

   He seems to have a built in self destruct button.......the only problem is he keeps pushing it!!!!!!

[UPinCarolina]

Let’s reevaluate when we’ve got a larger sample size from this season. I think that our position at the end of October will tell us far more than what has transpired thus far.