The Kevin Keegan debate

[fredbob]

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.

 

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.

[NE5]

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.

 

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.

 

 

[fredbob]

he has a point thogh..what has dramatically changed in football over the past 3 years ?

 

the teams who are doing well are playing the same style,pass and move with the best players. it's not like a shift fron 3-2-5 has occurred

 

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".

[fredbob]

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.

 

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?

[NE5]

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.

 

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

 

 

[madras]

he has a point thogh..what has dramatically changed in football over the past 3 years ?

 

the teams who are doing well are playing the same style,pass and move with the best players. it's not like a shift fron 3-2-5 has occurred

 

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

[fredbob]

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.

 

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:    

 

 

[madras]

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.

i'd take maldini in his prime or baresi over vidic ,terry or carhvallo.

 

 

[fredbob]

he has a point thogh..what has dramatically changed in football over the past 3 years ?

 

the teams who are doing well are playing the same style,pass and move with the best players. it's not like a shift fron 3-2-5 has occurred

 

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?

[Baggio]

Back where we started. If not for going PLC he would never have left. FACT. I'm pleased you have finally got rid of that avatar, but it should have been an avatar of the Halls.

 

Have you read his book?

 

He says the reason he wanted to leave was because he felt he couldn't motivate the players anymore, he spoke to Terry Mac about it and got the impression that Terry thought he was right, he then spoke to Freddie Fletcher about it with a 'heavy heart' and Fletcher said that he too had doubts that Keegan could take them to the next stage.

 

Fletcher set up a meeting with him and the rest of the board and Keegan told them his views, they then agreed he would stay on until the end of the season which was best for everyone, he ended up leaving sooner though because the PLC wasn't happy about floating with uncertainty over the managers job, they gave him the ultimatum to either sign a contract extension or leave now so he walked.

 

To say he would never have left if the club hadn't of become a PLC is wrong, he would of left still just at the end of the season.

 

I dont think you can knock Keegan leaving for those reasons, that team had took a big hit losing the title and the money wasnt there do build a new team.

 

The influence of a man called Mark Corbridge, brought in as part of the listing of the club, which was obviously decided by the major shareholders, played a big part in keegans disillusionment, he says so in his book.

 

 

 

Actually Keegan says Mark Corbridge "Was the main architect of my departure"

 

Keegan had said he wanted to leave because he thought he couldn't take the club any further and had agreed to leave at the end of the season, Mark Corbridge was the bloke who gave him the ultimatum of either signing a new contract or going straight away, Keegan said they had realised that they could neither go to the City with the terms they had agreed nor could they lie about it, so they didn't really have a choice.

 

Keegan said "Right, lets get settled up and finished, because there is no way I am going to stay beyond the end of the season. There is no turning back"

[madras]

he has a point thogh..what has dramatically changed in football over the past 3 years ?

 

the teams who are doing well are playing the same style,pass and move with the best players. it's not like a shift fron 3-2-5 has occurred

 

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?

we aren't talking about the past but the 3 years since keeagn left the game

[fredbob]

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.

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.

[madras]

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.

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.

you chose some of the best in the world of todays football. i chose 2 of the best from the past 20 years....seems fair to me

[madras]

the difference between football today and that of 20 years ago isn't technical or tactical but physical...todays game is quicker and stronger....managers can't really control outside of fitness regimes with the fitness coaches take care of.

[fredbob]

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.

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.

you chose some of the best in the world of todays football. i chose 2 of the best from the past 20 years....seems fair to me

 

20 years, or ever?

 

I thought that they were a reflection of the changes in football, in the EPL in particular. Im just someone who thinks that football has changed alot, primarily the way we think about football and to an extent the way a team plays.

 

~I thougt we werent talking a bout the past.  

[fredbob]

the difference between football today and that of 20 years ago isn't technical or tactical but physical...todays game is quicker and stronger....managers can't really control outside of fitness regimes with the fitness coaches take care of.

 

 

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree, i think the "containing mentality" used at alot of clubs is a prime example of the change in mentality in football. I think the current use of 433 throughout Europe is another example of change.

 

If you as well as others are saying that football hasnt changed then you're directly advoacting that managers of the past would be just as successful then as they are now, even with the minor changes that your're intimating.  Its alot more than physical in my book.

[NE5]

the difference between football today and that of 20 years ago isn't technical or tactical but physical...todays game is quicker and stronger....managers can't really control outside of fitness regimes with the fitness coaches take care of.

 

 

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree, i think the "containing mentality" used at alot of clubs is a prime example of the change in mentality in football. I think the current use of 433 throughout Europe is another example of change.

 

If you as well as others are saying that football hasnt changed then you're directly advoacting that managers of the past would be just as successful then as they are now, even with the minor changes that your're intimating.  Its alot more than physical in my book.

 

err.........yes. Exactly. You can't do more than be the best of your era. Are you advocating that Bill Shankly and Brian Clough wouldn't be the top managers if they were still around today in their prime ?

 

And in the playing sense, George Best wouldn't be an outstanding talent ?

 

 

[Wullie]

Would Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez be happy playing exciting football and winning nothing for 5 (FIVE) Years. NO, you know they wouldnt because they wouldnt be happy with second best. Neither is KK by the way. That is why he has come back................TO WIN SOMETHING, TO BE A SUCCESS, SOMETHING HE HASNT DONE ANYWHERE ELSE.

 

What a dense comparison. Compare Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez taking over at Sheff Wed, Preston, Scunthorpe or Colchester and having the best team in the country within three years and you're a little closer to making sense.

[fredbob]

the difference between football today and that of 20 years ago isn't technical or tactical but physical...todays game is quicker and stronger....managers can't really control outside of fitness regimes with the fitness coaches take care of.

 

 

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree, i think the "containing mentality" used at alot of clubs is a prime example of the change in mentality in football. I think the current use of 433 throughout Europe is another example of change.

 

If you as well as others are saying that football hasnt changed then you're directly advoacting that managers of the past would be just as successful then as they are now, even with the minor changes that your're intimating.  Its alot more than physical in my book.

 

err.........yes. Exactly. You can't do more than be the best of your era. Are you advocating that Bill Shankly and Brian Clough wouldn't be the top managers if they were still around today in their prime ?

 

And in the playing sense, George Best wouldn't be an outstanding talent ?

 

 

 

I used Pallister and Bruce as an example, against the likes of Ferdinand and Vidic, as an example of the changes in the football, for the same team. Madras picked out possibly the 2 best defender inthe historyof world football. i dont think that that illustrated my point too well.

 

Absoltuley i agree that they were the best of there era, but im saying that maybe there styles of management wouldnt be as successfull now as it was then, can you definitively say it would? Im intimating that with all the chnges in footbal that i see there style of management, the same style which made, Dalglish, Souness even Howard Wilkinson successful , wont work nowadays.

 

Its a differing opinion, if you dont accept it or understand it (for the 15th time) just ignore it and move on.

[Shearergol]

Would Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez be happy playing exciting football and winning nothing for 5 (FIVE) Years. NO, you know they wouldnt because they wouldnt be happy with second best. Neither is KK by the way. That is why he has come back................TO WIN SOMETHING, TO BE A SUCCESS, SOMETHING HE HASNT DONE ANYWHERE ELSE.

 

What a dense comparison. Compare Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez taking over at Sheff Wed, Preston, Scunthorpe or Colchester and having the best team in the country within three years and you're a little closer to making sense.

 

I'm drooling at that thought tbh

[NE5]

Would Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez be happy playing exciting football and winning nothing for 5 (FIVE) Years. NO, you know they wouldnt because they wouldnt be happy with second best. Neither is KK by the way. That is why he has come back................TO WIN SOMETHING, TO BE A SUCCESS, SOMETHING HE HASNT DONE ANYWHERE ELSE.

 

What a dense comparison. Compare Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez taking over at Sheff Wed, Preston, Scunthorpe or Colchester and having the best team in the country within three years and you're a little closer to making sense.

 

exactly

 

mackems.gif

[madras]

Would Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez be happy playing exciting football and winning nothing for 5 (FIVE) Years. NO, you know they wouldnt because they wouldnt be happy with second best. Neither is KK by the way. That is why he has come back................TO WIN SOMETHING, TO BE A SUCCESS, SOMETHING HE HASNT DONE ANYWHERE ELSE.

 

What a dense comparison. Compare Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Benitez taking over at Sheff Wed, Preston, Scunthorpe or Colchester and having the best team in the country within three years and you're a little closer to making sense.

no..what macca888 is saying is he would be quite happy for NUFC to get relegated if they won the FA cup in the process.

[NE5]

the difference between football today and that of 20 years ago isn't technical or tactical but physical...todays game is quicker and stronger....managers can't really control outside of fitness regimes with the fitness coaches take care of.

 

 

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree, i think the "containing mentality" used at alot of clubs is a prime example of the change in mentality in football. I think the current use of 433 throughout Europe is another example of change.

 

If you as well as others are saying that football hasnt changed then you're directly advoacting that managers of the past would be just as successful then as they are now, even with the minor changes that your're intimating.  Its alot more than physical in my book.

 

err.........yes. Exactly. You can't do more than be the best of your era. Are you advocating that Bill Shankly and Brian Clough wouldn't be the top managers if they were still around today in their prime ?

 

And in the playing sense, George Best wouldn't be an outstanding talent ?

 

 

 

I used Pallister and Bruce as an example, against the likes of Ferdinand and Vidic, as an example of the changes in the football, for the same team. Madras picked out possibly the 2 best defender inthe historyof world football. i dont think that that illustrated my point too well.

 

Absoltuley i agree that they were the best of there era, but im saying that maybe there styles of management wouldnt be as successfull now as it was then, can you definitively say it would? Im intimating that with all the chnges in footbal that i see there style of management, the same style which made, Dalglish, Souness even Howard Wilkinson successful , wont work nowadays.

 

Its a differing opinion, if you dont accept it or understand it (for the 15th time) just ignore it and move on.

 

best central defensive partnership I've ever seen play for a club in the UK was Roy McFarland and Colin Todd mate.

 

What exactly has changed since then ?

 

 

[madras]

the difference between football today and that of 20 years ago isn't technical or tactical but physical...todays game is quicker and stronger....managers can't really control outside of fitness regimes with the fitness coaches take care of.

 

 

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree, i think the "containing mentality" used at alot of clubs is a prime example of the change in mentality in football. I think the current use of 433 throughout Europe is another example of change.

 

If you as well as others are saying that football hasnt changed then you're directly advoacting that managers of the past would be just as successful then as they are now, even with the minor changes that your're intimating.  Its alot more than physical in my book.

 

err.........yes. Exactly. You can't do more than be the best of your era. Are you advocating that Bill Shankly and Brian Clough wouldn't be the top managers if they were still around today in their prime ?

 

And in the playing sense, George Best wouldn't be an outstanding talent ?

 

 

 

I used Pallister and Bruce as an example, against the likes of Ferdinand and Vidic, as an example of the changes in the football, for the same team. Madras picked out possibly the 2 best defender inthe historyof world football. i dont think that that illustrated my point too well.

 

Absoltuley i agree that they were the best of there era, but im saying that maybe there styles of management wouldnt be as successfull now as it was then, can you definitively say it would? Im intimating that with all the chnges in footbal that i see there style of management, the same style which made, Dalglish, Souness even Howard Wilkinson successful , wont work nowadays.

 

Its a differing opinion, if you dont accept it or understand it (for the 15th time) just ignore it and move on.

i don't see agreat deal of difference between ferguson and shankly/paisley or their styles of football. as i've already mentioned the containment football just about started with 70's liverpool and think itaslian football from 70's to the late 80's. as i've already said and others have mentioned doy you think mourinho would have been a huge hit had he not started off with the 4th placed team and how much exactly did he spend to make them champions ??.  then ask yourself...give liverpool to hughes or redkanpp with the same kitty.....think they'd win it or go close ?

[Tooj]

Roy Keane's always taught of him very highly apparently.