Comparisons to our position under SBR.

[Mowen]

Just saw a post from Toon Amy that made me think. Under SBR we played fairly poor football for his first two seasons (finishing 11th and 11th after inheriting a team that had finished 13th) and his signings didn't all go to plan (Gavilan, Bassedas, Cort). We were improving, just not at the rate everyone wanted, and we had a top class England striker to lead the line.

 

As it turned out we were just two spot on signings away from the top 4, and although Robert and Bellamy were expensive they weren't outrageously so. We solidified as a unit until we got to the point where we just needed two class players to propel ourselves to the same level.

 

Are we as fans simply being impatient with Sam, or are the similarities not there/unfair on SBR? Surely it takes more than one close season and 12 games to turn a mess around?

[TRon]

I did a thread about SBR's football nous compared to Sam's dogma about this. In a nutshell, SBR was able to change his style to suit our forwards when we had Ferguson and Shearer even though he wasn't a committed long ball merchant. I don't see any sign of Allardyce being able to play in a way which suits the players he has right now. That's his biggest problem as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

[Mowen]

I did a thread about SBR's football nous compared to Sam's dogma about this. In a nutshell, SBR was able to change his style to suit our forwards when we had Ferguson and Shearer even though he wasn't a committed long ball merchant. I don't see any sign of Allardyce being able to play in a way which suits the players he has right now. That's his biggest problem as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

 

Might that not be a case of him trying to stick to what he knows best, i.e. something that he's had success with before, whilst he tries to drag us out of the mess and consolidate our position as a club?

[TRon]

I did a thread about SBR's football nous compared to Sam's dogma about this. In a nutshell, SBR was able to change his style to suit our forwards when we had Ferguson and Shearer even though he wasn't a committed long ball merchant. I don't see any sign of Allardyce being able to play in a way which suits the players he has right now. That's his biggest problem as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

 

Might that not be a case of him trying to stick to what he knows best, i.e. something that he's had success with before, whilst he tries to drag us out of the mess and consolidate our position as a club?

 

Does that mean if he had a team of midgets he'd still play the ball long and high because it's the only way he knows?

[Mowen]

No.

[Toon Amy]

Robson did not make so many changes straight away (I think the transfer window was closed when he took over?) Changes which most people welcomed by the way. For that reason alone it would normally take time to get consistency, in ideal circumstances you would have to be lucky to hit the ground running with form players who just fit in straight away. Then there are injuries so it is not ideal.

 

I think that Joey Barton was a big part of the plan, and being out injured with a metatarsal injury meant that he has had to change the plan. Also because he was not able to get the Premier League defenders he wanted, we have had to buy foreign ones, and they don't immediately adapt to the Premier League pace. That is not to say they never will, but they will have bad days.

 

For that reason alone we need to show some patience with the players, if not the manager.

 

I think he could do himself some favours by going back to basics. Perhaps Robson understood this better than Sam Allardyce but I am not entirely convinced that he is not capable of it.

 

For whatever reason, things were not going too badly results wise up until the Reading game, but they have got considerably worse since then. This coincides with a couple of injuries and Sam changing the team around because of a lack of form. I think that he has made some mistakes that could have been avoided, but all managers make mistakes at some point, usually in the early days.

 

Overall I think that Sam probably has tried to do what he knows works best, and up until a month ago it was working (not brilliantly but we were getting results. Now it isn't and he needs to rethink and adapt to the expectations and our style is different to that of Bolton.

 

I don't believe he is incapable of it. Perhaps stubborn, but another example is David Moyes, who in his second season went the first month without a victory and spent the whole season near the relegation zone. Some would have given up on him, but again he is building a good team now and they are no longer playing like Everton/Bolton (I used to think they played a very similar defensive boring game)

 

Allardyce is not going to be the same exactly as Robson, or Moyes, but I think they are good examples of why managers don't always get it right straight away. There are usually reasons why it goes wrong at first, notwithstanding that players aren't robots, they have form issues, injuries, settling in periods etc... I think we should show some patience and see what happens.

[Skirge]

We had been going backwards since the very moment SBR was sacked, then by some miracle we got what we thought was a decent manager and even better the club is sold to a bloke with shedloads of cash. Things really started to look as though we had started to move in the right direction, yet here we are 11th in the league and playing very poor football, everything is new yet the football has stayed the same.

 

Big Sam is nowhere near the caliber of coach that Sir Bobby is and thats the problem, Big Sam was not the best option, he was just the best we could get.

 

All that Sir Bobby lost the dressing room shite, Sam's problem is he has never had the dressing room to lose it.

[Guest maddog2]

I think there's a difference. Firstly, Sam is still far off from achieving what SBR had done before coming to SJP. Also SBR took us over when we were languishing in the relegation zone and he didn't had an entire summer to bring in his players - meaning the 11th spot he achieved in his 1st season was commendable but for Sam he has to atleast finish in the top half if he doesn't want this season to be a failure.

 

However it didn't really stop the fans from booing SBR off the pitch after we finished 5th did it?

 

Atleast Sam is fortunate he doesn't have to serve under Fat Fred. He'll get atleast the entire season, and he should - no point sacking the manager unless it looks like we're gonna be in a relegation battle.

[Nobby]

Just saw a post from Toon Amy that made me think. Under SBR we played fairly poor football for his first two seasons (finishing 11th and 11th after inheriting a team that had finished 13th) and his signings didn't all go to plan (Gavilan, Bassedas, Cort). We were improving, just not at the rate everyone wanted, and we had a top class England striker to lead the line.

 

As it turned out we were just two spot on signings away from the top 4, and although Robert and Bellamy were expensive they weren't outrageously so. We solidified as a unit until we got to the point where we just needed two class players to propel ourselves to the same level.

 

Are we as fans simply being impatient with Sam, or are the similarities not there/unfair on SBR? Surely it takes more than one close season and 12 games to turn a mess around?

 

think our results  in our first 12 games were alot better than this

 

In his first season, he rescued United from almost certain relegation, in his second season United finished 11th but would have been a lot higher had the Club not suffered such cruel luck with injuries and in 2001/02, led the Magpies to fourth place in the Premiership, and with it, a place in the Qualifying Round of the Champions League.

[Alberto2005]

We had been going backwards since the very moment SBR was sacked, then by some miracle we got what we thought was a decent manager and even better the club is sold to a bloke with shedloads of cash. Things really started to look as though we had started to move in the right direction, yet here we are 11th in the league and playing very poor football, everything is new yet the football has stayed the same.

 

Big Sam is nowhere near the caliber of coach that Sir Bobby is and thats the problem, Big Sam was not the best option, he was just the best we could get.

 

All that Sir Bobby lost the dressing room shite, Sam's problem is he has never had the dressing room to lose it.

The best option then.

[Guest alex]

The comparison is valid in that Robson needed time and so does Allardyce. The latter won't get it if he doesn't buck his ideas up though.

[Toon Amy]

Just saw a post from Toon Amy that made me think. Under SBR we played fairly poor football for his first two seasons (finishing 11th and 11th after inheriting a team that had finished 13th) and his signings didn't all go to plan (Gavilan, Bassedas, Cort). We were improving, just not at the rate everyone wanted, and we had a top class England striker to lead the line.

 

As it turned out we were just two spot on signings away from the top 4, and although Robert and Bellamy were expensive they weren't outrageously so. We solidified as a unit until we got to the point where we just needed two class players to propel ourselves to the same level.

 

Are we as fans simply being impatient with Sam, or are the similarities not there/unfair on SBR? Surely it takes more than one close season and 12 games to turn a mess around?

 

think our results  in our first 12 games were a lot better than this

 

In his first season, he rescued United from almost certain relegation, in his second season United finished 11th but would have been a lot higher had the Club not suffered such cruel luck with injuries and in 2001/02, led the Magpies to fourth place in the Premiership, and with it, a place in the Qualifying Round of the Champions League.

 

Well he didn't improve on it in the second season, and still got given time. Which turned out to be worth it, as we went into the Champions League.

 

As for the results being a lot better than this, no they weren't. I just checked.

 

the first 12 games under Robson  and Allardyce were exactly equal. 18 points.

 

13 games in. (Which is what we have actually played) Robson just edges it with 19 points to Allardyces 18.

 

Here's Bobby Robson's first 13 game stats.

 

took over 2nd September 1999:

 

<Snip - May have been 1999, but these fixtures still have copyrights>

 

Low points obviously losing to Bradford and Coventry.  High points obviously the Sheff Wed victory, giving us the feel good factor. All in all, up to the 13 games, only the difference of 1 loss being a draw for Robson.

The performances may have been better, (or we remember it more kindly) but the results and points were very similar in total.

[Mowen]

The comparison is valid in that Robson needed time and so does Allardyce. The latter won't get it if he doesn't buck his ideas up though.

 

That's the point I was trying to make. I personally don't think Allardyce is in the same class as SBR, but if he needed time so will Fat Sam. Everyone wants a quick fix though.

[Guest Li3nZ]

The comparison is valid in that Robson needed time and so does Allardyce. The latter won't get it if he doesn't buck his ideas up though.

 

That's the point I was trying to make. I personally don't think Allardyce is in the same class as SBR, but if he needed time so will Fat Sam. Everyone wants a quick fix though.

 

Good point. It's true to say if Robson needed time to turn things around then BS certainly does.

 

However, it was easy to forgive with Robson because his tactics and team selections made sense, played attractive football and his first home game against Sheff Wed... Well what can you say to that! Shearer scoring four or five as well?! Sure it wasn't "just" a hat trick... Anyway, he turned round a season where we were relegation fodder under Gullit.

 

Allardyce just looks to be making all the wrong decisions. Whatever it was, with Robson you felt you could trust him to do the right thing. Can the same now be said about BS?

[ohmelads]

The fundamental differences between the two, and the reason fans were more patient with Bobby, were down to the fact we always went out to win games and he was prepared to change tack in order to put the club first. Bobby made some mistakes as all managers do and he had his decisions which frustrated us (very late subs being a contentious issue). He was stubborn the odd time too (eg Solano playing for Peru) but as Tron points out he recognised the need to work with what he had and buy himself the time. He wasn't dogmatic in his approach.

 

Newcastle fans don't suffer fools kindly and when Souness put his ego in front of the job he lost the majority of the fans. If Sam is seen to be doing the same thing, by refusing to change and work with the current players, then he will be in big trouble. The club must come first. Sam obviously likes his public image as "his own man" but he needs to learn quickly that he won't get far unless he works with the current players. If fans detect his ego is part of the problem they will quickly lose patience with him.

 

I'm sure the board will be keen to see how he works with the current players before they release big transfer funds. Mort seems to have chosen his words carefully in recent times, and with Ashley taking such an interest in the team he is certainly under a lot of scrutiny. The ball is very much in Sam's court. This isn't the time to be experimenting with team selections and formations, these are Premier League games, not friendlies, and we're more than a third of the way through the season now.

 

I think Sam might be capable of bringing us success and I think there is more talent in this side than we're seeing, but the way he is behaving, the excuses he's making and the stubborn refusal to do the obvious is making me wonder. I think the pressure is getting to him, I just hope he can take a step back from it all and accept that some of his decisions have been absolutely mental.

[Nobby]

<snip. they may have been played, but they are still copyrighted fixtures>

 

 

[ohmelads]

What is that supposed to prove?

[lovejoy]

Just saw a post from Toon Amy that made me think. Under SBR we played fairly poor football for his first two seasons (finishing 11th and 11th after inheriting a team that had finished 13th) and his signings didn't all go to plan (Gavilan, Bassedas, Cort). We were improving, just not at the rate everyone wanted, and we had a top class England striker to lead the line.

 

As it turned out we were just two spot on signings away from the top 4, and although Robert and Bellamy were expensive they weren't outrageously so. We solidified as a unit until we got to the point where we just needed two class players to propel ourselves to the same level.

 

Are we as fans simply being impatient with Sam, or are the similarities not there/unfair on SBR? Surely it takes more than one close season and 12 games to turn a mess around?

 

 

massively

[Nobby]

What is that supposed to prove?

 

Steady progression under Robson

Steady decline under Allardyce

[Nobby]

Just saw a post from Toon Amy that made me think. Under SBR we played fairly poor football for his first two seasons (finishing 11th and 11th after inheriting a team that had finished 13th) and his signings didn't all go to plan (Gavilan, Bassedas, Cort). We were improving, just not at the rate everyone wanted, and we had a top class England striker to lead the line.

 

As it turned out we were just two spot on signings away from the top 4, and although Robert and Bellamy were expensive they weren't outrageously so. We solidified as a unit until we got to the point where we just needed two class players to propel ourselves to the same level.

 

Are we as fans simply being impatient with Sam, or are the similarities not there/unfair on SBR? Surely it takes more than one close season and 12 games to turn a mess around?

 

think our results  in our first 12 games were a lot better than this

 

In his first season, he rescued United from almost certain relegation, in his second season United finished 11th but would have been a lot higher had the Club not suffered such cruel luck with injuries and in 2001/02, led the Magpies to fourth place in the Premiership, and with it, a place in the Qualifying Round of the Champions League.

 

Well he didn't improve on it in the second season, and still got given time. Which turned out to be worth it, as we went into the Champions League.

 

As for the results being a lot better than this, no they weren't. I just checked.

 

the first 12 games under Robson  and Allardyce were exactly equal. 18 points.

 

13 games in. (Which is what we have actually played) Robson just edges it with 19 points to Allardyces 18.

 

Here's Bobby Robson's first 13 game stats.

 

took over 2nd September 1999:

 

<snip>

 

Low points obviously losing to Bradford and Coventry.  High points obviously the Sheff Wed victory, giving us the feel good factor. All in all, up to the 13 games, only the difference of 1 loss being a draw for Robson.

The performances may have been better, (or we remember it more kindly) but the results and points were very similar in total.

 

what were the next two games?

[James]

Stop posting fixtures please.

[Toon Amy]

what were the next two games?

why do you ask?

 

We beat Leicester and then drew with West Ham, but I'm not sure what it proves further than I've already said which was to answer your question.

 

We also finished 11th the following season, when he had 3 transfer windows (jan/summer/jan) to improve things, but still we gave him more time, and it paid dividends in the 3rd season.

[Toon Amy]

Stop posting fixtures please.

I have but I have also apologised because I didn't realise that past fixtures had anything to do with copyright.

[Nobby]

what were the next two games?

why do you ask?

 

We beat Leicester and then drew with West Ham, but I'm not sure what it proves further than I've already said which was to answer your question.

 

We also finished 11th the following season, when he had 3 transfer windows (jan/summer/jan) to improve things, but still we gave him more time, and it paid dividends in the 3rd season.

 

because i think we will lose our next three games

[Nobby]

Stop posting fixtures please.

I have but I have also apologised because I didn't realise that past fixtures had anything to do with copyright.

same. they are results, not fixtures anyway