Steve McClaren

[TRon]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:35, Kid Icarus said:

It doesn't have to be negative, but it has been and it almost certainly will be. Using top teams as examples doesn't really stick when you're talking about an NUFC led by Ashley, managed by McClaren. It's fantasy to think that it would be anything other than more of the same Big Sam/Pulis style, because even if McClaren had the best intentions of using the long ball 'going direct' or as an option among ones where we play nice football, rather than a main plan, we don't and won't have the players at the back to make it anything other than a regular panicked choice, with no good football being played (Williamson etc), nor the player(s) up front to make it look effective when they do (Carroll)

 

I would have thought that is the job of the manager to organise his team and being buddies with Carr there really is no excuse for not getting the right personnel through the door.Ashley has publicly said that he's going to spend big this time, so if between the 3 of them - or 4 if you include lickspittle Charnley - if they can't put a workable squad together, what's the point?

 

 

[Guest firetotheworks]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:41, TRon said:

  Quote

It doesn't have to be negative, but it has been and it almost certainly will be. Using top teams as examples doesn't really stick when you're talking about an NUFC led by Ashley, managed by McClaren. It's fantasy to think that it would be anything other than more of the same Big Sam/Pulis style, because even if McClaren had the best intentions of using the long ball 'going direct' or as an option among ones where we play nice football, rather than a main plan, we don't and won't have the players at the back to make it anything other than a regular panicked choice, with no good football being played (Williamson etc), nor the player(s) up front to make it look effective when they do (Carroll)

 

I would have thought that is the job of the manager to organise his team and being buddies with Carr there really is no excuse for not getting the right personnel through the door.Ashley has publicly said that he's going to spend big this time, so if between the 3 of them - or 4 if you include lickspittle Charnley - if they can't put a workable squad together, what's the point?

 

 

 

We're already at that stage and have been for quite some time now.

[Noodles]

He's just gunna be another in a huge line of mediocre British managers we've had since Bobby. Time to change the fucking record.

[Ketsbaia]

I'm not enthralled with McClaren but I think too many people are going off the other end with his appointment.

 

I mean yes, Ashley is a twat and this club will keep going nowhere under his ownership, but McClaren is better than Carver, Pardew, Hughton, Shearer and Kinnear - every manager since Keegan '08. At least it's someone the players might respect. We could've done better but, by god, I was worried we'd do worse.

[EthiGeordie]

Poor guy dont get a  chance before he start.

[ads]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:26, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

  Quote

  Quote

We've played like we had one, and we did have one until 2010. Personally I'd rather not have a target man, or play like we have one.

 

I'm not against having a target man, you don't need to play negative football with one by any means.

 

For instance, I'd count both Giroud and Negredo as target man and Arsenal nor Valencia play 'direct' by any means.

Giroud isn't a target man

He is.

[Mole_Toonfan]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:26, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

  Quote

  Quote

We've played like we had one, and we did have one until 2010. Personally I'd rather not have a target man, or play like we have one.

 

I'm not against having a target man, you don't need to play negative football with one by any means.

 

For instance, I'd count both Giroud and Negredo as target man and Arsenal nor Valencia play 'direct' by any means.

Giroud isn't a target man

 

Not in the dominant Shearer and Drogba sense, but his role his hold the ball up and be a "target" and lay the ball off to those around him.

 

So from a very loose point of view he is, still though i do agree with the general notion that a target man doesn't mean the football has to be complete and utter dishwater and negative as fuck.

[TRon]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:44, Kid Icarus said:

  Quote

  Quote

It doesn't have to be negative, but it has been and it almost certainly will be. Using top teams as examples doesn't really stick when you're talking about an NUFC led by Ashley, managed by McClaren. It's fantasy to think that it would be anything other than more of the same Big Sam/Pulis style, because even if McClaren had the best intentions of using the long ball 'going direct' or as an option among ones where we play nice football, rather than a main plan, we don't and won't have the players at the back to make it anything other than a regular panicked choice, with no good football being played (Williamson etc), nor the player(s) up front to make it look effective when they do (Carroll)

 

I would have thought that is the job of the manager to organise his team and being buddies with Carr there really is no excuse for not getting the right personnel through the door.Ashley has publicly said that he's going to spend big this time, so if between the 3 of them - or 4 if you include lickspittle Charnley - if they can't put a workable squad together, what's the point?

 

 

 

We're already at that stage and have been for quite some time now.

 

But previously the pro-Pardew brigade could argue that he wasn't able to implement his own brand of football because he had no say in the transfer policy. Now at least Carr and McClaren should be on the same page so assuming Ashley loosens the purse strings even a little bit, then there's no excuse for not getting the right players for the positions required. If we need a big defender we should be signing a big defender.

[ponsaelius]

He'll be great at getting us to 11th every season, which is all that matters

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Thing is, a neutral appointment's no good really. We needed someone who would demonstrate a genuine change of approach.

[Parsley]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:50, TRon said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

It doesn't have to be negative, but it has been and it almost certainly will be. Using top teams as examples doesn't really stick when you're talking about an NUFC led by Ashley, managed by McClaren. It's fantasy to think that it would be anything other than more of the same Big Sam/Pulis style, because even if McClaren had the best intentions of using the long ball 'going direct' or as an option among ones where we play nice football, rather than a main plan, we don't and won't have the players at the back to make it anything other than a regular panicked choice, with no good football being played (Williamson etc), nor the player(s) up front to make it look effective when they do (Carroll)

 

I would have thought that is the job of the manager to organise his team and being buddies with Carr there really is no excuse for not getting the right personnel through the door.Ashley has publicly said that he's going to spend big this time, so if between the 3 of them - or 4 if you include lickspittle Charnley - if they can't put a workable squad together, what's the point?

 

 

 

We're already at that stage and have been for quite some time now.

 

But previously the pro-Pardew brigade could argue that he wasn't able to implement his own brand of football because he had no say in the transfer policy. Now at least Carr and McClaren should be on the same page so assuming Ashley loosens the purse strings even a little bit, then there's no excuse for not getting the right players for the positions required. If we need a big defender we should be signing a big defender.

There's certainly a case for arguing that, had we had a manager on a similar wave length to Carr in terms of rating players in the first place (ie instead of Pardew), the likes of Yanga-Mbiwa, Marveaux, Santon - maybe even Ben Arfa - would still be playing for the club. Or, at the very least, sold on for a profit rather than a loss.

 

It's very tempting to write McClaren off as a jobs-for-the-boys type of appointment, but his connections with Carr really should work in the club's favour going forward.

[The College Dropout]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:26, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

  Quote

  Quote

We've played like we had one, and we did have one until 2010. Personally I'd rather not have a target man, or play like we have one.

 

I'm not against having a target man, you don't need to play negative football with one by any means.

 

For instance, I'd count both Giroud and Negredo as target man and Arsenal nor Valencia play 'direct' by any means.

Giroud isn't a target man

 

He is. He's in the team so that they can get the ball forward quickly and bring others into play.

[The College Dropout]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:50, Mole_Toonfan said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

We've played like we had one, and we did have one until 2010. Personally I'd rather not have a target man, or play like we have one.

 

I'm not against having a target man, you don't need to play negative football with one by any means.

 

For instance, I'd count both Giroud and Negredo as target man and Arsenal nor Valencia play 'direct' by any means.

Giroud isn't a target man

 

Not in the dominant Shearer and Drogba sense, but his role his hold the ball up and be a "target" and lay the ball off to those around him.

 

So from a very loose point of view he is, still though i do agree with the general notion that a target man doesn't mean the football has to be complete and utter dishwater and negative as f***.

 

Loose POV?

Hold up the ball. Bring others into play. A target to build around = definition of a target man lol.

 

 

[Mole_Toonfan]

  On 04/06/2015 at 13:01, The College Dropout said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

We've played like we had one, and we did have one until 2010. Personally I'd rather not have a target man, or play like we have one.

 

I'm not against having a target man, you don't need to play negative football with one by any means.

 

For instance, I'd count both Giroud and Negredo as target man and Arsenal nor Valencia play 'direct' by any means.

Giroud isn't a target man

 

Not in the dominant Shearer and Drogba sense, but his role his hold the ball up and be a "target" and lay the ball off to those around him.

 

So from a very loose point of view he is, still though i do agree with the general notion that a target man doesn't mean the football has to be complete and utter dishwater and negative as f***.

 

Loose POV?

Hold up the ball. Bring others into play. A target to build around = definition of a target man lol.

 

Don't get into semantics, i know you love it but it's boring. You know what i meant exactly.

[Guest antz1uk]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:37, mozy said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

I don't particularly want McClaren, but he is the best British coach around. Some of the childish hate on here is frightening. His CV is excellent. 

 

I'd agree with this.

 

I don't. and why on earth must a coach be British anyway?

 

as for the bold, it is not excellent by a long way. he's an uninspirinig coach that has zero charisma, of whom i can see players getting completely bored with, has zero plan B, he won a league cup with Boro, at a time when nobody but bolton, Leicester and the likes took it seriously and fluked his way to a UEFA cup final, before getting absolutely murdered in it. he failed at Derby, Forest, Wolfsburg and the 2nd time at Twente, he won the league in Holland which is the Dutch equivalent of the SPL.

 

I didn't say he had to be british, I just said he's the best.

 

The rest of your post is horrendous, you can't write off a cup win simply saying no-one else took it seriously. If it was that easy then more teams would have tried to win it. He failed at Wolfsburg and Forest but only had half a season in charge of each. He has a win % over 50 in both Twente spells and had a fantastic spell in charge at Derby.

 

I don't particularly want McClaren but he gets an unfairly rough deal due to the England debacle, and his managerial talent level deserves to be managing in the Premier League.

 

As did pardew here but he was still an abomination of a manager, mcclaren is exactly the same, a couple of good spells in a career with more clubs than nick faldo

[The College Dropout]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:56, Parsley said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

It doesn't have to be negative, but it has been and it almost certainly will be. Using top teams as examples doesn't really stick when you're talking about an NUFC led by Ashley, managed by McClaren. It's fantasy to think that it would be anything other than more of the same Big Sam/Pulis style, because even if McClaren had the best intentions of using the long ball 'going direct' or as an option among ones where we play nice football, rather than a main plan, we don't and won't have the players at the back to make it anything other than a regular panicked choice, with no good football being played (Williamson etc), nor the player(s) up front to make it look effective when they do (Carroll)

 

I would have thought that is the job of the manager to organise his team and being buddies with Carr there really is no excuse for not getting the right personnel through the door.Ashley has publicly said that he's going to spend big this time, so if between the 3 of them - or 4 if you include lickspittle Charnley - if they can't put a workable squad together, what's the point?

 

 

 

We're already at that stage and have been for quite some time now.

 

But previously the pro-Pardew brigade could argue that he wasn't able to implement his own brand of football because he had no say in the transfer policy. Now at least Carr and McClaren should be on the same page so assuming Ashley loosens the purse strings even a little bit, then there's no excuse for not getting the right players for the positions required. If we need a big defender we should be signing a big defender.

There's certainly a case for arguing that, had we had a manager on a similar wave length to Carr in terms of rating players in the first place (ie instead of Pardew), the likes of Yanga-Mbiwa, Marveaux, Santon - maybe even Ben Arfa - would still be playing for the club. Or, at the very least, sold on for a profit rather than a loss.

 

It's very tempting to write McClaren off as a jobs-for-the-boys type of appointment, but his connections with Carr really should work in the club's favour going forward.

2 out of those 4 where sold for non-football reasons.

 

Our club would still be rotten with MYM & Marveaux man

[B-more Mag]

Carr's sort of put himself on the line with this. Not really, because I'm sure Ashley and Charnley won't touch him even if this goes south. But, hypothetically, he's put himself on the line with this.

[The College Dropout]

  On 04/06/2015 at 13:02, Mole_Toonfan said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

We've played like we had one, and we did have one until 2010. Personally I'd rather not have a target man, or play like we have one.

 

I'm not against having a target man, you don't need to play negative football with one by any means.

 

For instance, I'd count both Giroud and Negredo as target man and Arsenal nor Valencia play 'direct' by any means.

Giroud isn't a target man

 

Not in the dominant Shearer and Drogba sense, but his role his hold the ball up and be a "target" and lay the ball off to those around him.

 

So from a very loose point of view he is, still though i do agree with the general notion that a target man doesn't mean the football has to be complete and utter dishwater and negative as f***.

 

Loose POV?

Hold up the ball. Bring others into play. A target to build around = definition of a target man lol.

 

Don't get into semantics, i know you love it but it's boring. You know what i meant exactly.

 

I really don’t. What is your definition of a target man? Giroud ticks nearly every box lol. What’s loose about it? Especially when it's the definitive factor in him being in the team.

[KaKa]

  On 04/06/2015 at 13:06, B-more Mag said:

Carr's sort of put himself on the line with this. Not really, because I'm sure Ashley and Charnley won't touch him even if this goes south. But, hypothetically, he's put himself on the line with this.

 

No doubt. This is all on Carr for sure.

 

He's the most capable football person we have though, and so it is best that way.

 

let's see what happens.

[TRon]

  On 04/06/2015 at 13:06, B-more Mag said:

Carr's sort of put himself on the line with this. Not really, because I'm sure Ashley and Charnley won't touch him even if this goes south. But, hypothetically, he's put himself on the line with this.

 

Well he should be accountable for the players he recommends. With Pardew gone and a like minded manager in place there's nowhere to hide if it goes tits up.

[afar]

I sold, thanks Ryder, fantastic journalism as always:

 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/five-career-highs-steve-mcclaren-9385966

[Tiotes Witch Doctor]

Pros:

Good track record in cup competitions, which is our biggest chance of winning anything, provided the club actually permit a cup run this season.

Is capable of playing a more attractive brand of football and isn't by any means a long ball man.

Isn't afraid of using flair players and generally tends to favour a more attacking lineup.

His ties with Carr could mean that they could generally be more in sync on transfer picks and potentially more funds being released.

Has brought mild success to the NE before in form of a cup win for Boro, can he replicate this?

 

Cons:

Very much another yes man appointment.

Won't be be able to push us on to the next level even we spend 100 million (IMO)

He is a passionless manager, or at least comes across in that way.

Another Pardew in terms of ability, hes certainly and improvement but more of a mid table man than a top 6 challenger.

He's a bit of a knacker.

[Village Idiot]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:00, antz1uk said:

he won the league in Holland which is the Dutch equivalent of the SPL.

 

Except that he wasn't managing the Old Firm. It's like winning the SPL with Dundee. McClaren's record is very spotty, but winning the Dutch league with Twentee was a damn impressive achievement.

[Lenny]

  On 04/06/2015 at 13:18, Tiotes Witch Doctor said:

Pros:

Good track record in cup competitions, which is our biggest chance of winning anything, provided the club actually permit a cup run this season.

Is capable of playing a more attractive brand of football and isn't by any means a long ball man.

Isn't afraid of using flair players and generally tends to favour a more attacking lineup.

His ties with Carr could mean that they could generally be more in sync on transfer picks and potentially more funds being released.

Has brought mild success to the NE before in form of a cup win for Boro, can he replicate this?

 

Cons:

Very much another yes man appointment.

Won't be be able to push us on to the next level even we spend 100 million (IMO)

He is a passionless manager, or at least comes across in that way.

Another Pardew in terms of ability, hes certainly and improvement but more of a mid table man than a top 6 challenger.

He's a bit of a knacker.

 

Think that's a fair assessment, other that him being on par with Pardew ability wise.

[Dave]

  On 04/06/2015 at 12:07, Wullie said:

The Eredivisie might well be like the SPL but he effectively won it with Dundee United, it was an impressive feat that shouldn't be downplayed. He did achieve it in a fairly negative manner mind, his team scored about 40 goals less than the team in second, but a real achievement nevertheless.

 

His cup runs at Boro don't mean anything more than Alex McLeish, Graeme Souness, Roberto Di Matteo and Avram Grant's ability to win a few games in a particular competition during a shit league season. Just ignore them.

 

FWIW McClaren himself agrees:

 

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11096/8578840/brits-abroad-steve-mcclaren

  Quote

I was fortunate to win things with Manchester United as an assistant and then to be involved with England. I won that first trophy at Middlesbrough and then was lucky enough to get to a UEFA Cup final there. But I always thought the true measure of a coach is managing the season.

 

I'd seen a team win a league at Manchester United and I wanted to do it myself. To do it in Holland especially was fantastic. To go through a 34-game programme, ending with the title, was exactly what I wanted to achieve and one of the main goals of my career.