Dunc Posted 17 January 2005 Posted 17 January 2005 Of course we all have to realise that no matter what happens Chandler can be proved correct in his belief that MA would have brought success as it can never be confirmed or denied. If we have success under CL then Chandler will simply state that he inherited MA's best players, simply removed the chaff and brought in a few 'Highland League Rejects' to compliment MA's players and success was easy. If we don't get promotion under CL then Chandler can just continue to trot out his worn out arguments (its been nearly 4 months of the same points) and basically state that MA, given time, would have done better. Of course if we do get promoted then Chandler could even state that it isn't success, and a true gauge of success would be staying up in the Prem or finishing top 10 or top 6 or champions league qualifers etc. This means that no matter what happens for the next few years Chandler can continue to post the bonehead drivel he has done since November. Oh the joy. I'm back off to 'talkingtesticles' (thats a pretty good name to be fair) where the Chandler-less topics aren't repeats, day after day.
Chandler Posted 18 January 2005 Posted 18 January 2005 Of course we all have to realise that no matter what happens Chandler can be proved correct in his belief that MA would have brought success as it can never be confirmed or denied.If we have success under CL then Chandler will simply state that he inherited MA's best players, simply removed the chaff and brought in a few 'Highland League Rejects' to compliment MA's players and success was easy. If we don't get promotion under CL then Chandler can just continue to trot out his worn out arguments (its been nearly 4 months of the same points) and basically state that MA, given time, would have done better. Of course if we do get promoted then Chandler could even state that it isn't success, and a true gauge of success would be staying up in the Prem or finishing top 10 or top 6 or champions league qualifers etc. This means that no matter what happens for the next few years Chandler can continue to post the bonehead drivel he has done since November. Oh the joy. I'm back off to 'talkingtesticles' (thats a pretty good name to be fair) where the Chandler-less topics aren't repeats, day after day. 55554[/snapback] Oh me ol' mate Dunc - we go way back (er about three months). I can't be all that boring and repetitive if you've come all this way to see me. Dunc, I rate you a cut above yer average FB on this (and the other site) so can't you see me ol' cock that your argument cuts both ways? You suggest that whatever Levein achieves I will either not credit him or say that Adams would have done better. Well, time will tell for Levein and myself. BUT the FB's on here (and no doubt on Talking Balls as well) are now effectively blaming the team's CURRENT poor form on Adams by saying that his signings are the problem (a bit odd when you consider that only a couple of them raised eyebrows when they were brought in and it was Micky, not the team as a whole, that was blamed for the slow start). Having let him off the hook, the FB's then put fishy Levein back in the water and say we can't measure him until he's had the chance to bring in his own players! I suppose this means accepting relegation does it? So whatever Levein does it seems he can't be worse than Adams. Dunc the difference between me and this lot is that I might not concede in the future, they are conceding nothing now.
shen Posted 18 January 2005 Posted 18 January 2005 Of course we all have to realise that no matter what happens Chandler can be proved correct in his belief that MA would have brought success as it can never be confirmed or denied.If we have success under CL then Chandler will simply state that he inherited MA's best players, simply removed the chaff and brought in a few 'Highland League Rejects' to compliment MA's players and success was easy. If we don't get promotion under CL then Chandler can just continue to trot out his worn out arguments (its been nearly 4 months of the same points) and basically state that MA, given time, would have done better. Of course if we do get promoted then Chandler could even state that it isn't success, and a true gauge of success would be staying up in the Prem or finishing top 10 or top 6 or champions league qualifers etc. This means that no matter what happens for the next few years Chandler can continue to post the bonehead drivel he has done since November. Oh the joy. I'm back off to 'talkingtesticles' (thats a pretty good name to be fair) where the Chandler-less topics aren't repeats, day after day. 55554[/snapback] Oh me ol' mate Dunc - we go way back (er about three months). I can't be all that boring and repetitive if you've come all this way to see me. Dunc, I rate you a cut above yer average FB on this (and the other site) so can't you see me ol' cock that your argument cuts both ways? You suggest that whatever Levein achieves I will either not credit him or say that Adams would have done better. Well, time will tell for Levein and myself. BUT the FB's on here (and no doubt on Talking Balls as well) are now effectively blaming the team's CURRENT poor form on Adams by saying that his signings are the problem (a bit odd when you consider that only a couple of them raised eyebrows when they were brought in and it was Micky, not the team as a whole, that was blamed for the slow start). Having let him off the hook, the FB's then put fishy Levein back in the water and say we can't measure him until he's had the chance to bring in his own players! I suppose this means accepting relegation does it? So whatever Levein does it seems he can't be worse than Adams. Dunc the difference between me and this lot is that I might not concede in the future, they are conceding nothing now. 55882[/snapback] Well it takes time to figure out the cause and the cure for the problems we've had playing at home (especially). Micky couldn't turn the tide (look at his home record since the promotion) and apparently its something that takes a longer period of time to correct. To be honest, I cant see why you're picking on the supposed FB's as this is an absolutely normal phenomenon all around the world amongst footie fans. Didn't WBA get rid of Megson? The first manager to get them to the Premier League in I dont know how many years? Didn't Ipswich get rid og George Burley who in my opinion is one of the brightest if not THE brightest up-and-coming manager in the UK? And weren't they disposed of because they did not get results/meet up to board/fans expectations? Micky got a bad start, and playing-wise we got found out. He had used all his cards... he had no new tactical ideas, he had used up all the transfer budget on players who underperformed, and changing room morale was at an all-time low, with Keown getting into a dispute with Micky. He clearly wasn't enjoying himself and wasn't motivated to do anything about it, and that I think was the main reason he got the boot. Yes, fans' pressure got to him, and rightly so! He almost promised that the team would challenge for promotion, HE set himself those high goals, and he was probably as surprised and disappointed as the fans to see his team fail miserably. At the time, I was on the fence whether it was a good or bad decision to let Adams go, because I wasn't sure we could get anyone better in, but I could well see it coming. Whether CL is the right solution only time will tell, but it was a bold and brave move from the board. You cant question his success and he fitted the bill perfectly... I don't bear a grudge towards Adams though. He did well and he tried hard, but when a club go through what we did these last few years, it's bound to tear one down. For the same of optimism and a sense of better things to come it was, in hindsight, a good decision to let Adams go and start things afresh. You can criticise CL all you want, but who says it wouldn't have been even worse under Adams? All you ever bring up is how Adams would most probably have turned the corner, but things weren't indicating that. And you can look at stats all you want (last 6-12 games), it doesn't make the slightest of differences. You could tell Adams was desperate and had lost his edge and part of the dressing room too. I believe that the reason for the average start CL has had is down to a few factors: 3 different managers inside a month, causing confusion amongst the players; A fear-like phenomenon encrusted in the players when playing at home; A new manager getting used to his very new surroundings; A lack of transfer funds; and a team consisting of many uninterested journeymen. For this I won't point to Adams and solely blame him. He made an error that could just as well have been a success I admit. But I don't believe that he could solve the problems we had. He might have gone to sign yet more players on 1 year contracts had he stayed, but all this is just hypothetical. But if your 'life' consists of making 'life' a bitch for others on here, then surely you are sad and despicable. I sometimes wonder if your hate towards 'fickle boneheads' isn't just jealousy of not being one yourself or maybe... you are the fickle bonehead! 'Cause as much as you complain that the people on here dont take your opinions into account (and I think some of us rational people DO try to take a critical look at your views) you, of all people on here, are the most stubborn of all!
Cobbo Posted 21 January 2005 Posted 21 January 2005 mickey adams is rumerd to be joining cov 56892[/snapback] Certainly is Once again though, no mention of City this week! #### Rushden and Diamonds got more showing time than us.
Scow Posted 21 January 2005 Author Posted 21 January 2005 It's a bloody disgrace, they showed Wolves, Coventry and Forest!
Cobbo Posted 21 January 2005 Posted 21 January 2005 I take it back! They just said we have done a bit of dealing in the transfer market!!! All hail CSN!
Steven Posted 21 January 2005 Posted 21 January 2005 mickey adams is rumerd to be joining cov 56892[/snapback] Certainly is Once again though, no mention of City this week! #### Rushden and Diamonds got more showing time than us. 56893[/snapback] It is all about products and branding. At the moment our brand isn't worth much to anyone else outside the massed City ranks. <_<
Cobbo Posted 21 January 2005 Posted 21 January 2005 mickey adams is rumerd to be joining cov 56892[/snapback] Certainly is Once again though, no mention of City this week! #### Rushden and Diamonds got more showing time than us. 56893[/snapback] It is all about products and branding. At the moment our brand isn't worth much to anyone else outside the massed City ranks. <_< 56896[/snapback] But Rushden and Diamonds!! Who gives a flying fook?
Scow Posted 21 January 2005 Author Posted 21 January 2005 mickey adams is rumerd to be joining cov 56892[/snapback] Certainly is Once again though, no mention of City this week! #### Rushden and Diamonds got more showing time than us. 56893[/snapback] It is all about products and branding. At the moment our brand isn't worth much to anyone else outside the massed City ranks. <_< 56896[/snapback] But Rushden and Diamonds!! Who gives a flying fook? 56897[/snapback] Their fans, maybe?
Cobbo Posted 21 January 2005 Posted 21 January 2005 mickey adams is rumerd to be joining cov 56892[/snapback] Certainly is Once again though, no mention of City this week! #### Rushden and Diamonds got more showing time than us. 56893[/snapback] It is all about products and branding. At the moment our brand isn't worth much to anyone else outside the massed City ranks. <_< 56896[/snapback] But Rushden and Diamonds!! Who gives a flying fook? 56897[/snapback] Their fans, maybe? 56898[/snapback] Whooooooooooo?
Scow Posted 21 January 2005 Author Posted 21 January 2005 mickey adams is rumerd to be joining cov 56892[/snapback] Certainly is Once again though, no mention of City this week! #### Rushden and Diamonds got more showing time than us. 56893[/snapback] It is all about products and branding. At the moment our brand isn't worth much to anyone else outside the massed City ranks. <_< 56896[/snapback] But Rushden and Diamonds!! Who gives a flying fook? 56897[/snapback] Their fans, maybe? 56898[/snapback] Whooooooooooo? 56900[/snapback] All 5 of them, great stuff.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.