Expectations now for the new season?

[inckley fox]

2 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

This is wild hypothesis!  You're suggesting that there was a situation where maresca came to an interview, was faced with a board of idiots and just said, 'oh go on then'?  It's an absurd picture.  Maresca had multiple options and part of what appealed to him was the fact that we were building a squad from scratch, he'd also had his fingers burnt by a club not prepared to give him time - it seems far more probably that the situation was maresca had been approached by his agent earlier this year, came to the interview and was told we expect to make the coady and winks signings and we understand that (as has always been KP policy) the plan is to develop a sustainable PL team and, within reason, to take the right amount of time to do so.  He's not going to have risked his career if he didn't feel that the club had a solid, workable and ambitious plan.

My understanding of the Marsch situation was that he was first choice but the fan reaction caused them to make a u-turn - that we've already spent nearly 20M suggests that Marsch's claims of a lack of spending are complete bullshit.

I point out that it's entirely speculation, and a best-guess scenario.

 

We've not gone down the road that delivered us success last time in this league, nor the road that's delivered success for most other clubs that got out of this league. It's reasonable to point that out, even though I'd love us to defy the science every bit as much as you.

 

So I have suggested, with full acknowledgement of lack of evidence (not a problem, I thought, when people are so optimistic about a management set-up which has nothing other than promise and high ambition to speak for it) what the thought process might have been behind making an appointment which, on the surface, makes little sense. I.e. appointing totally inexperienced people to achieve something which is almost exclusively achieved by people with more experience than Enzo Maresca and friends. Of course, there are exceptions.

 

If we consider that this board have repeatedly made decisions for 18 months which appear to make little sense, and which have resulted in exactly the same chaos that any vaguely sensible bystander would have forecast (and did), then it seems reasonable to me that a fan would try to figure out what the hell has been going through their minds recently too. And, as regards the interview, yes, I entirely believe that confirmation bias played a huge part. I don't think that's at all unrealistic, given even the tiniest smidgeon of context.

 

I've followed your posts a great deal, and some of them make (without wishing to patronise) superb points. But, to a degree, they seem to be based on unsubstantiated or even emotionally-driven confidence in our owners. Your excuses for them are also wild hypotheses. The hard facts about mismanagement, at all levels, are born out by the fact that we were one of the two most extraordinary relegations of the past four decades. In my opinion, that should bother us. And no, it isn't all down to Brendan.

 

As for Marsch, his scepticism about our post-relegation plan was widely reported, and credibly.

 

As for Maresca... A lot of eggs have been placed in that basket. A great deal seems to hinge on the hope that he's a game-changer of the Wallace/Little/O'Neill/Pearson variety. But I also remember Sousa, Sven, Pleat and Levein, as I'm sure you do too. Optimism shouldn't displace those shadows.

Edited 10 July 2023 by inckley fox

[gurru991]

I have high expectations for our new management group and the team that they will put out. I have followed City for sixty years now & Rodgers pushed me to the edge. For some reason Enzo has given restored my faith & I expecting attractive, winning football. First or second place though please...   My heart wont take the playoffs !!!

[SuperMike]

Already sick of hearing the phrase 'possession based football'.

I can see it now: p*ss about pass, pass, passing - lose possession - 1-0 down. Manager insists that possession leads to success (it does when you have the calibre of player of Man City). Players get wracked off with it all. Lower half of table. Struggling to score. Underestimating the opponents (all but 3 teams in the division are either ex Premier League or 'sleeping giants'). Memories of our worst ever period (Paulo Sousa). Basically a continuation of the turgid football of the Puel / Rodgers regimes.

Edited 10 July 2023 by SuperMike
Read again in six months time and tell me i'm not wrong!

[Nick]

17 minutes ago, SuperMike said:

Already sick of hearing the phrase 'possession based football'.

I can see it now: p*ss about pass, pass, passing - lose possession - 1-0 down. Manager insists that possession leads to success (it does when you have the calibre of player of Man City). Players get wracked off with it all. Lower half of table. Struggling to score. Underestimating the opponents (all but 3 teams in the division are either ex Premier League or 'sleeping giants'). Memories of our worst ever period (Paulo Sousa). Basically a continuation of the turgid football of the Puel / Rodgers regimes.

I think our new manager to be fair to him has talked about the ability to deliver differing approaches/styles of play to suit players and the opposition/division. 

[Lillehamring]

8 hours ago, inckley fox said:

I point out that it's entirely speculation, and a best-guess scenario.

 

We've not gone down the road that delivered us success last time in this league, nor the road that's delivered success for most other clubs that got out of this league. It's reasonable to point that out, even though I'd love us to defy the science every bit as much as you.

 

So I have suggested, with full acknowledgement of lack of evidence (not a problem, I thought, when people are so optimistic about a management set-up which has nothing other than promise and high ambition to speak for it) what the thought process might have been behind making an appointment which, on the surface, makes little sense. I.e. appointing totally inexperienced people to achieve something which is almost exclusively achieved by people with more experience than Enzo Maresca and friends. Of course, there are exceptions.

 

If we consider that this board have repeatedly made decisions for 18 months which appear to make little sense, and which have resulted in exactly the same chaos that any vaguely sensible bystander would have forecast (and did), then it seems reasonable to me that a fan would try to figure out what the hell has been going through their minds recently too. And, as regards the interview, yes, I entirely believe that confirmation bias played a huge part. I don't think that's at all unrealistic, given even the tiniest smidgeon of context.

 

I've followed your posts a great deal, and some of them make (without wishing to patronise) superb points. But, to a degree, they seem to be based on unsubstantiated or even emotionally-driven confidence in our owners. Your excuses for them are also wild hypotheses. The hard facts about mismanagement, at all levels, are born out by the fact that we were one of the two most extraordinary relegations of the past four decades. In my opinion, that should bother us. And no, it isn't all down to Brendan.

 

As for Marsch, his scepticism about our post-relegation plan was widely reported, and credibly.

 

As for Maresca... A lot of eggs have been placed in that basket. A great deal seems to hinge on the hope that he's a game-changer of the Wallace/Little/O'Neill/Pearson variety. But I also remember Sousa, Sven, Pleat and Levein, as I'm sure you do too. Optimism shouldn't displace those shadows.

Thank you for the flattery (always welcome) - but to clarify my way of thinking regarding the board, and why it conflicts with the consensus that they are idiots - my reasosns for defending the board are based on the fact that none of us know why the decisions of the last 18 months or so have been made (rather than simply blind faith or emotion) - i find it too easy to simply believe they were bad decisions made through ignorance or incompetence but that there were genuine footballing and business reasons why they took decisions that seem, on the face of it, bad business.  I just can't imagine, with so much at stake, and with such a good track record, things suddenly flipped to incompetence.  Notwithstanding, it didn't work out, but maybe the situation they found themselves in was one which left them with very limited options.  Did they want relegation? - no; but look at where we find ourselves, suddenly were in a position of optimism, it feels like the absurdities of last summer have been cast off and we can get back to doing what we have previously done so well.... for me, it seems like Plan A was to slog through with BR and hope we could do enough (and, to be fair, it almost worked - but that's a different discussion) and this is plan B - the tactical retreat i have talked of - I know from an emotional point of view it seems horrific and unacceptable - but it's a business and what is best for the club might be to do the rebuild at this level, rather than at a wildly expensive PL level?

Which brings us to Maresca - i agree he's an unorthodox choice, but so too, to a degree, was Pearson, and Ramieri was a complete curve ball - so there's a strong argument to suggest consistent thinking from the board.  And you only have to see how the attitude of fans on FT has flipped since he came in - even the idea of Parker seemed to darken the mood, Maresca's hire seems to have given everyone a reason to believe again - to me that seems astute, well planned and well executed.  I'm inclined to believe it (was it top or rudkin?) when they said they'd admired him for some time, it fits in with my narrative that explains why they held on to BR so long.  the idea that the interview/decision making was in some way a matter of convenience, or completely random, or fortunate, or desperate seems to discredit both the board and Maresca - given how right it feels and how sudden and excellent the response was brings us back to the question: are the board idiots that might have struck gold, or did they know exactly what they were doing and went for and got the man they feel can turn things around?  Time will tell - but so far the signings seem to have identified the major weaknesses of last season (again - coincidence, or that the club know what the problem is and want to fix it?).  Also i feel it's remiss to underestimate the power of confidence and mood - forest were so poor last year but survived due to the mood at their home games, whilst we had a top half team and failed due to (in part) the lack of confidence or interest of the players, to an extent the fans too. This season the feeling, so far, seems to be very different, it feels like a weight has been lifted and we have a young and exciting manager with new ideas that can raise the players and the fans....

[Beachyboy]

3 hours ago, SuperMike said:

Already sick of hearing the phrase 'possession based football'.

I can see it now: p*ss about pass, pass, passing - lose possession - 1-0 down. Manager insists that possession leads to success (it does when you have the calibre of player of Man City). Players get wracked off with it all. Lower half of table. Struggling to score. Underestimating the opponents (all but 3 teams in the division are either ex Premier League or 'sleeping giants'). Memories of our worst ever period (Paulo Sousa). Basically a continuation of the turgid football of the Puel / Rodgers regimes.

One of Peps things is he likes the centre backs to break the lines of play if they can. I think it will be right up Souttars Street that. We have had a bad experience of possession football, if possession is in the middle and attacking third, it can be exciting. If it's slow build up play at the back, which I don't think it will be (like before) that's when it's dull.

[SuperMike]

58 minutes ago, Beachyboy said:

One of Peps things is he likes the centre backs to break the lines of play if they can. I think it will be right up Souttars Street that. We have had a bad experience of possession football, if possession is in the middle and attacking third, it can be exciting. If it's slow build up play at the back, which I don't think it will be (like before) that's when it's dull.

 

3 hours ago, Nick said:

I think our new manager to be fair to him has talked about the ability to deliver differing approaches/styles of play to suit players and the opposition/division. 

Lets hope this is the way things go. To be fair my comment about possession based football was not aimed at any quote from Maresca - just a general  view.

Anyway, with the arrival of Mr. Coady, I am supa-confident that we will avoid a consecutive relegation.

[Lad1966]

I think we will be fighting for a play off place. I can’t see getting automatic promotion. We lack the quality in the middle of the park and lack of pace at the back. I hope we will be better organised!

[Big_Nige]

1 hour ago, Beachyboy said:

One of Peps things is he likes the centre backs to break the lines of play if they can. I think it will be right up Souttars Street that. We have had a bad experience of possession football, if possession is in the middle and attacking third, it can be exciting. If it's slow build up play at the back, which I don't think it will be (like before) that's when it's dull.

This is it for me. I think a lot of us shudder at the thought of possession for possessions sake after the last 2 seasons of turgid football. But possession football is exciting if you play in the right area’s, breaking lines quickly and then play in the opposition final third. Passing and moving, creating space and chances. Some of the goals we scored in Rodgers first season pre covid is what possession football should be about

[lcfcbluearmy]

13 hours ago, inckley fox said:

I point out that it's entirely speculation, and a best-guess scenario.

 

We've not gone down the road that delivered us success last time in this league, nor the road that's delivered success for most other clubs that got out of this league. It's reasonable to point that out, even though I'd love us to defy the science every bit as much as you.

 

So I have suggested, with full acknowledgement of lack of evidence (not a problem, I thought, when people are so optimistic about a management set-up which has nothing other than promise and high ambition to speak for it) what the thought process might have been behind making an appointment which, on the surface, makes little sense. I.e. appointing totally inexperienced people to achieve something which is almost exclusively achieved by people with more experience than Enzo Maresca and friends. Of course, there are exceptions.

 

If we consider that this board have repeatedly made decisions for 18 months which appear to make little sense, and which have resulted in exactly the same chaos that any vaguely sensible bystander would have forecast (and did), then it seems reasonable to me that a fan would try to figure out what the hell has been going through their minds recently too. And, as regards the interview, yes, I entirely believe that confirmation bias played a huge part. I don't think that's at all unrealistic, given even the tiniest smidgeon of context.

 

I've followed your posts a great deal, and some of them make (without wishing to patronise) superb points. But, to a degree, they seem to be based on unsubstantiated or even emotionally-driven confidence in our owners. Your excuses for them are also wild hypotheses. The hard facts about mismanagement, at all levels, are born out by the fact that we were one of the two most extraordinary relegations of the past four decades. In my opinion, that should bother us. And no, it isn't all down to Brendan.

 

As for Marsch, his scepticism about our post-relegation plan was widely reported, and credibly.

 

As for Maresca... A lot of eggs have been placed in that basket. A great deal seems to hinge on the hope that he's a game-changer of the Wallace/Little/O'Neill/Pearson variety. But I also remember Sousa, Sven, Pleat and Levein, as I'm sure you do too. Optimism shouldn't displace those shadows.

These reports about Marsch being sceptical only started coming out after reports that we were still searching for other candidates and we're not convinced by Marsch following the fan reaction. 

 

They were almost certainly briefed by his agent to try and save face. 

 

Will this work who knows but a lot of thought appears to have gone into this appointment with us supposedly looking at him before we went to Dean Smith. You may be right but at this moment I am quite positive about the moves we have made