fredbob

i'd take maldini in his prime or baresi over vidic ,terry or carhvallo. So you'd take some of the worlds greatest ever? Yeh so would i i think.

How about the formations that are used nowaday, there has to be a reason why the 433 is now so popular when it wasnt 15 years ago? What reason to do you cite for the change in formations preferences? What about the immaculate organizsation of teams since mourihno came into the game. What about allardyces "contain" them mentality which gears teamm towards defendeing. These are all changes in my book, remeber when Derby would go out and try and outplay Man U with inferior players and still come out with 3 points. Would that happen ever again? Things have changed, and i think people are being navie by saying that it hasnt and all these managers who have studied and been apart of the game continuously for 40years are simply "over complicating" things. If football hasnt changed then you'd all agree without thinking twice that successful managers nthe past, such as Shankly, Clough etc would be successful managers now with the exact saem style. chelsea often use a 4-3-3 whereas man utd go more 4-4-1-1 as do arsenal.(no dramatic change) liverpool still 4-4-2.(hey 4-4-1-1 think beardsly playing off ferdinand or andy cole) but anyway they are fluid and moving,only chelsea play quite rigid. keegan like his players to move,to have the nouse to use space and to cover for others. it's not subbuteo...players can move. one of the most disappointing things about nufc's play since robson left is that you could tell which nufc player had the ball by where on the pitch it was see the connection with those 4 i quoted..they are the ones with the best players Id have o agree to an extent with you there, but what about the world game, what about the hugely successfull clubs in Europe (arguably better managers). You're over simplyfying this too much, your making it sound far far too easy. I really disagree with you if you think football hasnt changed. Do you think uber successful managers in the past would make a success of any team inthe present day? If not then surely you are contradicting your "football hasnt changed at all stance". we are talking about 3 years.....if you think football has changed that massivly in 3 years you'll have to do a damn sight more than that to impress me. the players have got quicker and stronger...the basics are the same. the team with the best basics has been the most succesful team in this country for the past dozen years. as for morinhos "immaculate organisaation" take the team in 4th add twice as much as anyone else can spend. i'd argue redknapp or hughes in charge would take them to the title Fair point, i think in the EPL changed when Mourhino and Abramovich came. I just think it took it had a completely different outlook from that point, eveni thnk the basics are the same, i could agree with your more, but i think the finer points have changed dramatically. Also, do you think a manager of the past would be just as sucessful as they were then now?

I love these cliches where people say football has "changed". I didn't realise that the goals were bigger, or teams played with more players .............. What a surprise, NE5 with a pathetic attempt at a dig at someone who has a different opinion, mate you're so pathetic its unreal, grow up and take the statement as it was attempted. Do you think football is exactly the same as it was then? I dont, ever since the likes of Allardyce and Mourihoin came on the secene, in my eyes the game took a different outlook, teams are incredibly organized, and the whole "containing" mentality came into play, i dont ever remeber seeing a team having a containing mentality, i remeber the days when Derby would go and try and outplay Man U and actually come out with 3 ponts, that would never happen in the modern era, never will. Draw your own conclusions? The lack of organisation in defense was one of keys reasons that i cite as being one where Keegan old style of football may not be entirely successful. Do you think the likes of Bruce and Pallister in there prime hold a flame to Ferdinand and Vidic or Terry and Carhvallo in their prime. Persoannly i dont think so. There is a reason for that, a more scientific approach is required in the game, but no too much, the days where the whole "get stuck in lads" way of coaching doesnt work, its the primary reason why i dont think there are many good British managers. It just an opinion NE5, in future if you dont accept it or understand it just ignore it , petty retort make you look like an idiot. Ill be honest, im very optimistic about Keegan, he could be just what the club needs, and the buzz around the club is like nothing ive seen before, he wouldnt of been my first choice personally but i will support him 100% of the way. Nowts changed I'm afraid. Talented players playing with a positive attitude to their strengths will beat muddled tactics anytime. How anyone can defend this having suffered the crap "tactics" under Souness, and sadly Roeder and Allardyce because at least they tried to do right for the club, is beyond me. Well, if you didn't see the first time around, I have a sneaking feeling that you may be on the brink of another u-turn to match the last one, especially when you see the quality of players he brings in once he starts spending some money and setting different standards to what you are used to. Was i not right in not wating Allardyce to have too much miney this period? I think so. Also, if you cant see the difference in not wanting to give a current manager funds after not doing too well with his own purchases and me advocating giving a new manager funds so he can make his own purchases then i really see no hope for you. Should take this to PM but quite frankly im very bored with you. which is of course not the reason you gave for not spending money. As for being bored, ditto. Its one of many reasons i gave for not spending money, but i guess you see what you wanna see. I could prove it to you if you'd like? no thanks. You said previously you would blow my top 4 statistic away, and backtracked when you realised you couldn't :sign5:

I love these cliches where people say football has "changed". I didn't realise that the goals were bigger, or teams played with more players .............. What a surprise, NE5 with a pathetic attempt at a dig at someone who has a different opinion, mate you're so pathetic its unreal, grow up and take the statement as it was attempted. Do you think football is exactly the same as it was then? I dont, ever since the likes of Allardyce and Mourihoin came on the secene, in my eyes the game took a different outlook, teams are incredibly organized, and the whole "containing" mentality came into play, i dont ever remeber seeing a team having a containing mentality, i remeber the days when Derby would go and try and outplay Man U and actually come out with 3 ponts, that would never happen in the modern era, never will. Draw your own conclusions? The lack of organisation in defense was one of keys reasons that i cite as being one where Keegan old style of football may not be entirely successful. Do you think the likes of Bruce and Pallister in there prime hold a flame to Ferdinand and Vidic or Terry and Carhvallo in their prime. Persoannly i dont think so. There is a reason for that, a more scientific approach is required in the game, but no too much, the days where the whole "get stuck in lads" way of coaching doesnt work, its the primary reason why i dont think there are many good British managers. It just an opinion NE5, in future if you dont accept it or understand it just ignore it , petty retort make you look like an idiot. Ill be honest, im very optimistic about Keegan, he could be just what the club needs, and the buzz around the club is like nothing ive seen before, he wouldnt of been my first choice personally but i will support him 100% of the way. Nowts changed I'm afraid. Talented players playing with a positive attitude to their strengths will beat muddled tactics anytime. How anyone can defend this having suffered the crap "tactics" under Souness, and sadly Roeder and Allardyce because at least they tried to do right for the club, is beyond me. Well, if you didn't see the first time around, I have a sneaking feeling that you may be on the brink of another u-turn to match the last one, especially when you see the quality of players he brings in once he starts spending some money and setting different standards to what you are used to. Was i not right in not wating Allardyce to have too much miney this period? I think so. Also, if you cant see the difference in not wanting to give a current manager funds after not doing too well with his own purchases and me advocating giving a new manager funds so he can make his own purchases then i really see no hope for you. Should take this to PM but quite frankly im very bored with you. which is of course not the reason you gave for not spending money. As for being bored, ditto. Its one of many reasons i gave for not spending money, but i guess you see what you wanna see. I could prove it to you if you'd like?

How about the formations that are used nowaday, there has to be a reason why the 433 is now so popular when it wasnt 15 years ago? What reason to do you cite for the change in formations preferences? What about the immaculate organizsation of teams since mourihno came into the game. What about allardyces "contain" them mentality which gears teamm towards defendeing. These are all changes in my book, remeber when Derby would go out and try and outplay Man U with inferior players and still come out with 3 points. Would that happen ever again? Things have changed, and i think people are being navie by saying that it hasnt and all these managers who have studied and been apart of the game continuously for 40years are simply "over complicating" things. If football hasnt changed then you'd all agree without thinking twice that successful managers nthe past, such as Shankly, Clough etc would be successful managers now with the exact saem style. chelsea often use a 4-3-3 whereas man utd go more 4-4-1-1 as do arsenal.(no dramatic change) liverpool still 4-4-2.(hey 4-4-1-1 think beardsly playing off ferdinand or andy cole) but anyway they are fluid and moving,only chelsea play quite rigid. keegan like his players to move,to have the nouse to use space and to cover for others. it's not subbuteo...players can move. one of the most disappointing things about nufc's play since robson left is that you could tell which nufc player had the ball by where on the pitch it was see the connection with those 4 i quoted..they are the ones with the best players Id have o agree to an extent with you there, but what about the world game, what about the hugely successfull clubs in Europe (arguably better managers). You're over simplyfying this too much, your making it sound far far too easy. I really disagree with you if you think football hasnt changed. Do you think uber successful managers in the past would make a success of any team inthe present day? If not then surely you are contradicting your "football hasnt changed at all stance".

I love these cliches where people say football has "changed". I didn't realise that the goals were bigger, or teams played with more players .............. What a surprise, NE5 with a pathetic attempt at a dig at someone who has a different opinion, mate you're so pathetic its unreal, grow up and take the statement as it was attempted. Do you think football is exactly the same as it was then? I dont, ever since the likes of Allardyce and Mourihoin came on the secene, in my eyes the game took a different outlook, teams are incredibly organized, and the whole "containing" mentality came into play, i dont ever remeber seeing a team having a containing mentality, i remeber the days when Derby would go and try and outplay Man U and actually come out with 3 ponts, that would never happen in the modern era, never will. Draw your own conclusions? The lack of organisation in defense was one of keys reasons that i cite as being one where Keegan old style of football may not be entirely successful. Do you think the likes of Bruce and Pallister in there prime hold a flame to Ferdinand and Vidic or Terry and Carhvallo in their prime. Persoannly i dont think so. There is a reason for that, a more scientific approach is required in the game, but no too much, the days where the whole "get stuck in lads" way of coaching doesnt work, its the primary reason why i dont think there are many good British managers. It just an opinion NE5, in future if you dont accept it or understand it just ignore it , petty retort make you look like an idiot. Ill be honest, im very optimistic about Keegan, he could be just what the club needs, and the buzz around the club is like nothing ive seen before, he wouldnt of been my first choice personally but i will support him 100% of the way. Nowts changed I'm afraid. Talented players playing with a positive attitude to their strengths will beat muddled tactics anytime. How anyone can defend this having suffered the crap "tactics" under Souness, and sadly Roeder and Allardyce because at least they tried to do right for the club, is beyond me. Well, if you didn't see the first time around, I have a sneaking feeling that you may be on the brink of another u-turn to match the last one, especially when you see the quality of players he brings in once he starts spending some money and setting different standards to what you are used to. Was i not right in not wating Allardyce to have too much miney this period? I think so. Also, if you cant see the difference in not wanting to give a current manager funds after not doing too well with his own purchases and me advocating giving a new manager funds so he can make his own purchases then i really see no hope for you. Should take this to PM but quite frankly im very bored with you.

How about the formations that are used nowaday, there has to be a reason why the 433 is now so popular when it wasnt 15 years ago? What reason to do you cite for the change in formations preferences? What about the immaculate organizsation of teams since mourihno came into the game. What about allardyces "contain" them mentality which gears teamm towards defendeing. These are all changes in my book, remeber when Derby would go out and try and outplay Man U with inferior players and still come out with 3 points. Would that happen ever again? Things have changed, and i think people are being navie by saying that it hasnt and all these managers who have studied and been apart of the game continuously for 40years are simply "over complicating" things. If football hasnt changed then you'd all agree without thinking twice that successful managers nthe past, such as Shankly, Clough etc would be successful managers now with the exact saem style.

I love these cliches where people say football has "changed". I didn't realise that the goals were bigger, or teams played with more players .............. What a surprise, NE5 with a pathetic attempt at a dig at someone who has a different opinion, mate you're so pathetic its unreal, grow up and take the statement as it was attempted. Do you think football is exactly the same as it was then? I dont, ever since the likes of Allardyce and Mourihoin came on the secene, in my eyes the game took a different outlook, teams are incredibly organized, and the whole "containing" mentality came into play, i dont ever remeber seeing a team having a containing mentality, i remeber the days when Derby would go and try and outplay Man U and actually come out with 3 ponts, that would never happen in the modern era, never will. Draw your own conclusions? The lack of organisation in defense was one of keys reasons that i cite as being one where Keegan old style of football may not be entirely successful. Do you think the likes of Bruce and Pallister in there prime hold a flame to Ferdinand and Vidic or Terry and Carhvallo in their prime. Persoannly i dont think so. There is a reason for that, a more scientific approach is required in the game, but no too much, the days where the whole "get stuck in lads" way of coaching doesnt work, its the primary reason why i dont think there are many good British managers. It just an opinion NE5, in future if you dont accept it or understand it just ignore it , petty retort make you look like an idiot. Ill be honest, im very optimistic about Keegan, he could be just what the club needs, and the buzz around the club is like nothing ive seen before, he wouldnt of been my first choice personally but i will support him 100% of the way.

just out of interest, what happened to that chilean winger at liverpool? gonzalez or whatever his name is...

Proabaly the best CM we have in the squad. Dont know who to play him with, if its Zog then he has to be a DM esxclusively. Cant think who else could play in thecentre and give us the same dynamism as those 2.v

Dont think he should last too long in the first team, i dont think his movment is very intelligent, and his pace lets him down when hes too far away from the box, also when he cuts 9 time out of ten he will slow down play by doing his shimmy thing. If we are after a playmaker, then we need our outlets to be equally as good.

Barton, if he gets out of jail.

I wanna see zog in the centre, last night he was superb and i think he'd be very effective in the centre. SWP has been very effetive in the centre for Chelsea recently, i think zog could do a similar job. Duff can stay on the left for me!!

I think it would be a shrewd to make Barton captain, it might sort his head out and give him some responsibilty, was he captain for Man C? If so, forget this. Make it his captainship to lose, i can imagine it working to be honest, providing he doesnt go down tht is.

Can see this to be fair, looks about the best formation we could have. I think we'll see alot of Roz, he reminds me of Albert, just without the confidence.

So based on one game Zoggy's now the answer to our center midfield problems? No thanks. The boy's 20/21, he shouldn't have to take control of our whole attacking game, stick him out on the left where he doesn't have as many defensive duties and we should get a new attacking AM so we have more options in attack. To be fair though, would a thorough bred AM midfielder actually provide that much defensive cover? Well, anymore then Zog would? i think he could be quite successful in the centre with a good DM behind him, bit like Speed and Dyer were. I like him in that Centre AM role becaseu he's so direct and draws out defenders in more danderous positions, giving more space for strikers, when he's out on the wing h can be direct but wont open up any space for our strikers.

You dont, its a car crash of a video.

Can see alot of pace being signed. Cant see him being too unhappy with the defence or forwards to be honest, i think they'll be a bit of activity for the centre of midfield maybe. Wonder what Barton has to say about this appointment?

Why is he so willing to take this job when it came available but wont be so keen to take any other lower league job? Im sure there would be plenty of teams who'd want him. I imagine if he doesnt get back into the club in one form or another he'll profess his happiness at doing his media work. "I have a contract to honour etc etc".

I cant think what his first signing would be, id like to see quaresma, i cant think who'd keegan would dislike to be honest,maybe he'll replace the 40 year old who's on ANC duty, maybe butt as well. First signing will be a centre midfielder, maybe, Deco? I genuinely can see a sneaky bid for Ronaldihno some time in the future as well.

Thats what i think. I bet hes completly clueless about some of europes cream, hows he gonna get that knowledge back?

Will Keegan be able to adapt to the new premiership which changed dramatically after the arrival of Mourhino? If Keegan gets us playing like he did in the 90s my bet is that he still wouldnt get u into the top5 or 6, becasue the defensive organisation of teams has changed so much. I can see his brand of football making mince meat of lower teams out there, but will the tactically adept and organzied teams such as Chelsea Arsenal etc succumb to our football. My opinion is no. The game is a lot less open and teams have a "containing" style which is a completely new style. Will Keegan be able to adapt? I personally am not sure, but i have to admit that this is truly a golden time for nufc fans only. I say this cautiously becasue i was very optimistic with Allardyce. To be fair to the owners they've probably made a smart choice becasue whilst not the most ambitious appointment, it truly is one of the most inspirational appointments.

Bring em on....

Always says alot to me when a team plays like a team inspired after a sacking, shows that they are glad the previous regime is over. COME ON THE TOOOOOOOONN!

Bollocks Watched it ALL, home and away since 1969 ,and I'm amazed that we've missed another opportunity to appoint a manager to take us forward. Just in case you didn't realise, all through the 'Keegan Era' we played lovely football we were everyone's second team and we won FECK ALL Is amazing how many people forget this, we won nothing, are people hoping that he will install the exact same style of football, against the likes of Rooney, Ronaldo etc and get better results? Him at nufc was the peak of his career, that was 12 years ago, he;s been out o football for 3 years now, football is a whole different ball game.