wolf8312 Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Peter H said: Yes Should we have had a manager lined up when we did it? Yes Well thats really no then. As, as we can now see, we didn't! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nogs Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 We might as well as we're we right to sack Martinez. Yes of course it was the right decision, there is no chance results would have improved under him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf8312 Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 The thread wasn't asking simply if we were right to sack him (that was the title) but whether we panicked and sacked him at a time during which the alternative is a man (or men) who is less qualified than the man we already had. I cant help wondering if a lot of the Everton old boys wanted Koeman out thinking that they could do better, but didn't really have a back up plan! I dont honestly have the answer myself because its something nobody can really know, not knowing for certain how things would have played out had Koeman been given more time. But...people who sign off with the declarative "YES" are just as clueless as I am. We dont have a good enough overview of the real situation to be anywhere near being able to form a clear opinion! All I can say for sure is it looks like a real mess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 If a know it all on a football forum knew back in September that we should have been sourcing a replacement (albeit to much criticism) then why wasn't the board? The answer lies in the same file where kings dock, Chang and kitbag deals are located. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevO Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 He had to go, but there should have been a plan. Even West Ham moved ahead in two days. markjazzbassist, Quinn31 and Romey 1878 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf8312 Posted November 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Wow great performance, and that goal by Rooney, did I ever doubt him? I guess the question is now were we right to get rid of Unsworth, ha ha! Some bad results but that game looked like a real turning point, and perhaps a long spell on the bench has really fired Rooney up. The question has to be did we need really a fixer or just a bit of confidence back? The problem, not just with Everton, but all premiership clubs is a lack of patience and tenacity to hold on, and be brave when the ship starts sinking. But its an understandable phenomenon when you look at what happened to teams like Leeds.. Only time will tell I guess but I think if we brought big Sam in mainly to starve off relegation then Unsworth could plausibly have done exactly the same job for much cheaper. Feel both happy and sad for him. Made up for Rooney as well, he's proved me and other doubters wrong for the moment, and I think hes won his place back! Still mustn't go mad, I kind of sensed we would stuff Moyes! What really worries me, is we may now have a manager who feels his only remit is to keep us from being relegated! Still we need to give him a chance... Matt and nogs 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Blue Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 On 11/27/2017 at 13:29, hafnia said: If a know it all on a football forum knew back in September that we should have been sourcing a replacement (albeit to much criticism) then why wasn't the board? The answer lies in the same file where kings dock, Chang and kitbag deals are located. In defense of the Moshiri and the board, most of us though Koeman was a good choice as manager. When the wheels came off and he had to go in October there simply was not the quality of manager about available to replace him. We tried very hard to get Silva but Watford rightly said no, Moshiri thought it was just a question of money, it was not so more time was wasted. As much respect as I have for Unsworth he clearly was not yet up to first team management and this made the prospect of him managing till the end of the season untenable. The search became more urgent and we were left with slim pickings and then Fat Sam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 13 minutes ago, London Blue said: In defense of the Moshiri and the board, most of us though Koeman was a good choice as manager. When the wheels came off and he had to go in October there simply was not the quality of manager about available to replace him. We tried very hard to get Silva but Watford rightly said no, Moshiri thought it was just a question of money, it was not so more time was wasted. As much respect as I have for Unsworth he clearly was not yet up to first team management and this made the prospect of him managing till the end of the season untenable. The search became more urgent and we were left with slim pickings and then Fat Sam. I think the problem is completely the boards fault. It was clear as day during the summer qualifiers that something wasn't right - the performances were abysmal whilst the spending was ongoing, but we were winning and it was pre-season (even though it wasn't really, they were competition games) so it was excused. When the performances, along with 2-3 positions not being backed up, Koeman clearly didn't have a clue how to rectify it and the board should've been contingency planning as soon as the transfer window was closed - the signs were there. I'm still on the fence about Unsworth; it might well be too soon for him, but the players certainly didn't help him. What didn't help the players was 5 weeks of uncertainty and rumour, which is solely on the shoulders of the board. They could've said "Unsworth's in charge until the end of the season", but told him in secret that they were still searching in the meantime and might replace him before that. I think he would've been fine with that. Instead, he was left with a poisoned chalice and in limbo along with the players. We saw yesterday what happens when a bit of certainty does; granted it was against Moyes and Wham but the confidence with which we played was indistinguishable from the previous month. We looked like a team with a purpose, an idea, but most importantly confidence and swagger for the most part - and it was Unsworths team, tactics and mangement during that game, like with the other home game with Watford). Of course there were shakey moments but we got our heads up and got over them quickly instead of capitulating ala Lyon and Southampton. I'm convinced that's because of some sense of prolonged stability is now clear (even if I'm really not happy with the candidate, in case you hadn't noticed ) Just my thoughts anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf8312 Posted November 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 I still pretty much think we panicked, and that if avoiding relegation was our only real goal we could have done so with either Koeman or Unsworth without the expenditure of millions and millions upon big Sam. It might well have been a blessing in disguise for Unsworth too, and I reckon hes pretty relieved to get out. Such a top job for someone so inexperienced could only have harmed his future prospects in management if things went wrong as they probably would have. We're all just fans and our opinions and predictions mean very little, but big Sam after all that? Matt 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Blue Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Matt said: I think the problem is completely the boards fault. It was clear as day during the summer qualifiers that something wasn't right - the performances were abysmal whilst the spending was ongoing, but we were winning and it was pre-season (even though it wasn't really, they were competition games) so it was excused. When the performances, along with 2-3 positions not being backed up, Koeman clearly didn't have a clue how to rectify it and the board should've been contingency planning as soon as the transfer window was closed - the signs were there. I'm still on the fence about Unsworth; it might well be too soon for him, but the players certainly didn't help him. What didn't help the players was 5 weeks of uncertainty and rumour, which is solely on the shoulders of the board. They could've said "Unsworth's in charge until the end of the season", but told him in secret that they were still searching in the meantime and might replace him before that. I think he would've been fine with that. Instead, he was left with a poisoned chalice and in limbo along with the players. We saw yesterday what happens when a bit of certainty does; granted it was against Moyes and Wham but the confidence with which we played was indistinguishable from the previous month. We looked like a team with a purpose, an idea, but most importantly confidence and swagger for the most part - and it was Unsworths team, tactics and mangement during that game, like with the other home game with Watford). Of course there were shakey moments but we got our heads up and got over them quickly instead of capitulating ala Lyon and Southampton. I'm convinced that's because of some sense of prolonged stability is now clear (even if I'm really not happy with the candidate, in case you hadn't noticed ) Just my thoughts anyway. I agree that there were early warning signs, but as Koeman was seen as the chosen one he was always going to be given time to sort it out, or not in this case. I think the board and fans were preopared to give the manager some leaway due to the transition to life after Lukaku, and our failiure to land a suitable replacement, coupled with Sandro not being ready for the premier league. If we had started casting around for a new manager back in September then that would have undermined Koeman and the squad. Catch 22 really, start a search for a potential replacement and undermine the current manager or not start having a back up and run the risk of not having a replacement if the wheel s come off. To be fair even if we did sack Koeman in Septmeber then there still would have been precious few replacements other than the usual suspects. Dont get me wrong the board screwed up royally in not ensuring we had cover for Baines, a proper replacement for Lukaku and seeing the fragility in our defence getting another center back. Just saying that the stars aligned and droped a big bucket of poo on us that hit us at the wrong time. Not that there ever is a good time to be hit by a bucket of shit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, London Blue said: I agree that there were early warning signs, but as Koeman was seen as the chosen one he was always going to be given time to sort it out, or not in this case. I think the board and fans were preopared to give the manager some leaway due to the transition to life after Lukaku, and our failiure to land a suitable replacement, coupled with Sandro not being ready for the premier league. If we had started casting around for a new manager back in September then that would have undermined Koeman and the squad. Catch 22 really, start a search for a potential replacement and undermine the current manager or not start having a back up and run the risk of not having a replacement if the wheel s come off. To be fair even if we did sack Koeman in Septmeber then there still would have been precious few replacements other than the usual suspects. Dont get me wrong the board screwed up royally in not ensuring we had cover for Baines, a proper replacement for Lukaku and seeing the fragility in our defence getting another center back. Just saying that the stars aligned and droped a big bucket of poo on us that hit us at the wrong time. Not that there ever is a good time to be hit by a bucket of shit! I don't buy this. All the players know that the scouting networks are looking for competition, and you'd hope that's a driver to make them perform better. Same should apply to managers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Blue Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, Matt said: I don't buy this. All the players know that the scouting networks are looking for competition, and you'd hope that's a driver to make them perform better. Same should apply to managers I agree competition should apply to managers, the only caviet is that if players think the manager is on the way out then they stop believeing in him and it makes it harder for him to manage and performances suffer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, London Blue said: I agree competition should apply to managers, the only caviet is that if players think the manager is on the way out then they stop believeing in him and it makes it harder for him to manage and performances suffer. But the only reason players should stop believing in the manager is because he's incompetent in which case everyone knows there's a replacement lined up. Chicken and egg I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
London Blue Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 49 minutes ago, Matt said: But the only reason players should stop believing in the manager is because he's incompetent in which case everyone knows there's a replacement lined up. Chicken and egg I guess Yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 The panic set in too early, should have left Unsworth in charge till January, by which time we would be well into the top half. If it was not to be then that's the time to panic, but if things are not too bad give it to him for the rest of the season, while you spend the next six months lining up a top manager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 46 minutes ago, Bill said: The panic set in too early, should have left Unsworth in charge till January, by which time we would be well into the top half. If it was not to be then that's the time to panic, but if things are not too bad give it to him for the rest of the season, while you spend the next six months lining up a top manager. It was either end of season or not at all. As I eluded to in another post, defining a longer-term manager sooner would've help Unsworth greatly. Giving him until January would've been counter productive for him (can't properly prepare for the window) or doesn't give any new manager time to assess his squad before the window. I agree with the premature panic though, but performances didn't exactly inspire hope for those who were getting very worried (and justifiably worried). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjazzbassist Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 had we gotten the transfer targets he wanted (which we will in january now cause regardless of manager it's still a problem) i imagine the first half of the campaign would have gone differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hafnia Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Allardyce will at least sort out that shite defence. Awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.