Shepherd and his IDIOTIC choice Allardyce have DESTROYED NUFC

[madras]

 

Of course Barton has been an utter disaster and Smith was no replacement for Dyer. But my point was that I don't think we would have risked relegation under Allardyce although it might have been ugly. Sacking rather than backing a manager in early January, when we weren't totally safe, was high risk especially when the (second choice) replacement hasn't managed a club for 3 years. If Sam wasn't Ashley's man then 12th May 2008 was the date for saying goodbye.

 

I agree with most of that except for where we would be with Allerdyce, I don't think we would have a single point more.  In some ways I wish he was still here, just so he could get the stick he deserves and suffer the s**** we're having to suffer, instead of sitting at home with all those £millions.

:clap: :clap:

[Teasy]

 

Do you think we could beat Spurs, Everton or even West Ham at home right now? Or draw with Arsenal or Aston Villa at home? Or beat Bolton away when they had both Anelka and Diouf playing?

 

We've got a far better chance now then if Allardyce had stayed, that's for f****** sure!  Spurs were a shambles when we played them under that fat c***, as were Bolton..

 

Spending less than £10 million on a squad that came 13th last season and expecting too much is why we are where we are right now.

 

Expecting too much?

[Guest DazzaNufc1892]

I'd rather have Souness back as manager than Allardyce, he was that bad.

 

Seemed a decent choice at the time but I don't think anyone could have known how bad he'd turn out.

 

are you crazy? allardyce took a team ranked at 14th, no direction, in turmoil, injury ridden, to a team that wasnt going to get relegated, sorted out the injuries, and gave us the feeling of stability inside the club.

 

souness took a team that was a champions league challenger to relegation candidates, so dont talk crazy man

[quayside]

 

Of course Barton has been an utter disaster and Smith was no replacement for Dyer. But my point was that I don't think we would have risked relegation under Allardyce although it might have been ugly. Sacking rather than backing a manager in early January, when we weren't totally safe, was high risk especially when the (second choice) replacement hasn't managed a club for 3 years. If Sam wasn't Ashley's man then 12th May 2008 was the date for saying goodbye.

 

I agree with most of that except for where we would be with Allerdyce, I don't think we would have a single point more.  In some ways I wish he was still here, just so he could get the stick he deserves and suffer the s**** we're having to suffer, instead of sitting at home with all those £millions.

 

Well I don't think we'd have been humped like we have recently under Allardyce but who's to know. Would we have been better off spending £6 million on sacking Allardyce or keeping him on and spending that money on Lassana Diarra?

[Teasy]

I'd rather have Souness back as manager than Allardyce, he was that bad.

 

Seemed a decent choice at the time but I don't think anyone could have known how bad he'd turn out.

 

are you crazy? allardyce took a team ranked at 14th, no direction, in turmoil, injury ridden, to a team that wasnt going to get relegated, sorted out the injuries, and gave us the feeling of stability inside the club.

 

You've got to be taking the piss?..

[Mick]

 

Well I don't think we'd have been humped like we have recently under Allardyce but who's to know. Would we have been better off spending £6 million on sacking Allardyce or keeping him on and spending that money on Lassana Diarra?

 

Signing Diarra would have been a good move, Keeping Allardyce would only have been a good move for the reasons previously mentioned.  The confidence of the players was shot to pieces long before he left the club.

[dcmk]

 

Of course Barton has been an utter disaster and Smith was no replacement for Dyer. But my point was that I don't think we would have risked relegation under Allardyce although it might have been ugly. Sacking rather than backing a manager in early January, when we weren't totally safe, was high risk especially when the (second choice) replacement hasn't managed a club for 3 years. If Sam wasn't Ashley's man then 12th May 2008 was the date for saying goodbye.

 

I agree with most of that except for where we would be with Allerdyce, I don't think we would have a single point more.  In some ways I wish he was still here, just so he could get the stick he deserves and suffer the s**** we're having to suffer, instead of sitting at home with all those £millions.

 

Well I don't think we'd have been humped like we have recently under Allardyce but who's to know. Would we have been better off spending £6 million on sacking Allardyce or keeping him on and spending that money on Lassana Diarra?

 

what part of 90k don't you understand??

[fredbob]

Quite a spectrum of issues being discussed in here, there are a number of things which i think went wrong at this club, and i think that the first thing was  the sacking of Bobby robson, in my opinion he shouldnt of been sacked, we were easily one of the 5th best teams in EPL and had poor ish season with some very poor results, i understand that discipline seemed an issue but how much of that indiscipline arose from the public denouncment of SBR, who knows? That seemed to be the reason that was given for his sacking, not only was it a sacking which was wrong but done at a horrendous time, i dont understand who people were expecting to employ after sacking a legendary manager who has just consistently finished in the top 5 for the past 3 years. It made the job unteneable in my book and we paid the price for it.

 

Cue Souness.

Cue Roeder.

 

Allardyce was the first pro active appointment in a while from the Shephard era of chairmanship, but he was extremely unfortunate in having the takeover occur at the bignnning of the his tenureship, he was stiill provided with soem funds and made, at the time some decent signings on paper, his biggest flaws seemed to be highlighted with some horrific resultsand the fact that his signings werent coming to fruition suggested that his style wasnt being accepted by the club.

 

I think he went maybe a week too late, i think suggestions that he should of stayed till the end are incorrect, had he stayed, was he expected to recieve funds ever though he was a doomed man, what sense does that make in anyones mind, also, shoould he of been given funds when his signings hadnt worked so far, it made no sense to give him funds to waste, hence the need for a new manager, this is where the biggest mistake of the ashley owenership has occured, and that is the appoinmtnet of Keegan, i think that there were better appointments out there, Deschamps would of been my personal choice.

 

 

[heero]

i believe its been going from bad to worse in the last couple of years since they sacked Bobby. Bobby should have stayed  then.

Kevin can't do anything about this, he has to work with what he has,and what he has is ..................

 

[sicsfingeredmong]

Granted Allardyce couldn't adapt his 'underdog/spoiling style of football' here on the big stage, but Mort and Ashley's handling of the club has been nothing short of comical in the wake of the Allardyce's appointment. Shepherd could not have seen Allardyce's eventual inability to adapt to a bigger stage/bigger club. This he cannot be held accountable, but the club's dealings in the wake of Sam's appointment fall squarely on the cautious/conservative buggers who now run the club.

 

For starters they financially didn't back Allardyce in the Summer, for example several of our incoming transfers hinged on players departing once we had secured the incoming revenue streams. The sales of Parker and Dyer in particular acted as the twin catalysts behind our spending flurries at the bookends of the transfer window - the already secured transfer of Barton, at least at the agreement stage between ourselves and City, was put on hold as Mort quickly established a 'sell to finance buys' policy. During the above mentioned window i would've preferred to have seen Ashley pump another 20mill into the transfer coffers, as opposed to him reducing the club's debts and making the club a more lucrative asset for potential buyers in the event of him wanting to pull the plug & cash-in later on.

 

Sacking a manager so late in a transfer window, without having a successor already signed sealed & delivered on the dotted line, leaving Keegan - or whoever else - inadequate time to strengthen the sqaud was amauterish bordering on suicidal. Sacking Allardyce at the beginning of the window, and appointing Keegan soon after whilst having the neccesary time and financial backing to make things happen in the window just past would've been a good move.

 

As much i respect Keegan as a club manager circumstances beyond his control, circumstances which been dictated by the powers that be aka Mort & Ashley, have put him behind the 8-ball from the outset. Right now i'm prepared to label the Keegan appointment as being a desperate gimick, a desperate roll of the dice. In the form of Souness we had a manager who relied on having Lady Luck rescue the team from it's on-field doldrums, it appears that we now have top-level pair - aka Mort & Ashley - who gambled the club's future on similar footnote.

 

There was nothing wrong with Shepherd's appointment of Allardyce, if he indeed was the sole string puller on this front. Allardyce had Bolton punching above their weight. The same rule of thumb would apply to Moyes as well, and i'm sure many supporters would've applauded such a move - ie. a football based decision - if the previous board had pulled off such a move.

 

Judging by the original post's motive the power of hindsight, and the blame game which can ensue, is certainly a beautiful thing.

 

[Rebellious]

Haha...  one left last season!  We played better under Allardyce, tbh.  Actually, the best football we've played in the last couple years has been under Souness!  Haha....  awesome!  

 

 

 

 

We played better under BS?  Are you serious ? 

[quayside]

Granted Allardyce couldn't adapt his 'underdog/spoiling style of football' here on the big stage, but Mort and Ashley's handling of the club has been nothing short of comical in the wake of the Allardyce's appointment. Shepherd could not have seen Allardyce's eventual inability to adapt to a bigger stage/bigger club. This he cannot be held accountable, but the club's dealings in the wake of Sam's appointment fall squarely on the cautious/conservative buggers who now run the club.

 

For starters they financially didn't back Allardyce in the Summer, for example several of our incoming transfers hinged on players departing once we had secured the incoming revenue streams. The sales of Parker and Dyer in particular acted as the twin catalysts behind our spending flurries at the bookends of the transfer window - the already secured transfer of Barton, at least at the agreement stage between ourselves and City, was put on hold as Mort quickly established a 'sell to finance buys' policy. During the above mentioned window i would've preferred to have seen Ashley pump another 20mill into the transfer coffers, as opposed to him reducing the club's debts and making the club a more lucrative asset for potential buyers in the event of him wanting to pull the plug & cash-in later on.

 

Sacking a manager so late in a transfer window, without having a successor already signed sealed & delivered on the dotted line, leaving Keegan - or whoever else - inadequate time to strengthen the sqaud was amauterish bordering on suicidal. Sacking Allardyce at the beginning of the window, and appointing Keegan soon after whilst having the neccesary time and financial backing to make things happen in the window just past would've been a good move.

 

As much i respect Keegan as a club manager circumstances beyond his control, circumstances which been dictated by the powers that be aka Mort & Ashley, have put him behind the 8-ball from the outset. Right now i'm prepared to label the Keegan appointment as being a desperate gimick, a desperate roll of the dice. In the form of Souness we had a manager who relied on having Lady Luck rescue the team from it's on-field doldrums, it appears that we now have top-level pair - aka Mort & Ashley - who gambled the club's future on similar footnote.

 

There was nothing wrong with Shepherd's appointment of Allardyce, if he indeed was the sole string puller on this front. Allardyce had Bolton punching above their weight. The same rule of thumb would apply to Moyes as well, and i'm sure many supporters would've applauded such a move - ie. a football based decision - if the previous board had pulled off such a move.

 

Judging by the original post's motive the power of hindsight, and the blame game which can ensue, is certainly a beautiful thing.

 

 

That's a very good assessment and I agree with a lot of that.

 

The only thing to factor in is that Ashley had no choice but to pay off the debt. There's another thread on here about the club finances but the gist is that the annual report has now been published showing that the club was in a dreadful financial state when Ashley took over. Plus the club had £45 million loan notes that were repayable in instalments up to 2016. The loan notes contained a clause that said that on a change of ownership of the club the lender had the option to call in the full amount of the loan notes within 60 days. So Ashley got stuck with that - whether he knew it was coming or not is anybody's guess.

 

According to the annual report after he bought the club he put a total of £75 million to refinance the club. In the circumstances the financial caution in the transfer market was understandable. There is little doubt that some of Sam's targets were missed because of it though and at the end of the day the result was that less than £10 million was invested in a lower mid table squad and thats just not enough in the current climate.

[TRon]

Granted Allardyce couldn't adapt his 'underdog/spoiling style of football' here on the big stage, but Mort and Ashley's handling of the club has been nothing short of comical in the wake of the Allardyce's appointment. Shepherd could not have seen Allardyce's eventual inability to adapt to a bigger stage/bigger club. This he cannot be held accountable, but the club's dealings in the wake of Sam's appointment fall squarely on the cautious/conservative buggers who now run the club.

 

For starters they financially didn't back Allardyce in the Summer, for example several of our incoming transfers hinged on players departing once we had secured the incoming revenue streams. The sales of Parker and Dyer in particular acted as the twin catalysts behind our spending flurries at the bookends of the transfer window - the already secured transfer of Barton, at least at the agreement stage between ourselves and City, was put on hold as Mort quickly established a 'sell to finance buys' policy. During the above mentioned window i would've preferred to have seen Ashley pump another 20mill into the transfer coffers, as opposed to him reducing the club's debts and making the club a more lucrative asset for potential buyers in the event of him wanting to pull the plug & cash-in later on.

 

Sacking a manager so late in a transfer window, without having a successor already signed sealed & delivered on the dotted line, leaving Keegan - or whoever else - inadequate time to strengthen the sqaud was amauterish bordering on suicidal. Sacking Allardyce at the beginning of the window, and appointing Keegan soon after whilst having the neccesary time and financial backing to make things happen in the window just past would've been a good move.

 

As much i respect Keegan as a club manager circumstances beyond his control, circumstances which been dictated by the powers that be aka Mort & Ashley, have put him behind the 8-ball from the outset. Right now i'm prepared to label the Keegan appointment as being a desperate gimick, a desperate roll of the dice. In the form of Souness we had a manager who relied on having Lady Luck rescue the team from it's on-field doldrums, it appears that we now have top-level pair - aka Mort & Ashley - who gambled the club's future on similar footnote.

 

There was nothing wrong with Shepherd's appointment of Allardyce, if he indeed was the sole string puller on this front. Allardyce had Bolton punching above their weight. The same rule of thumb would apply to Moyes as well, and i'm sure many supporters would've applauded such a move - ie. a football based decision - if the previous board had pulled off such a move.

 

Judging by the original post's motive the power of hindsight, and the blame game which can ensue, is certainly a beautiful thing.

 

 

While I agree that originally appointing Allardyce was fair enough, I don't agree that he should have been given a blank cheque by Ashley. Ashley was right not to trust him to blow his wad if the signings so far are anything to go by so he can hardly be blamed for not backing even further, a manager he never wanted in the first place.

 

 

[Guest fraser]

Allardyce wasn't good enough but it wasn't all his fault. We were awful last season and were lucky to finish 13th. We won at Spurs when we could have been 3 or 4 down before we scored, how we beat Villa at SJP is a great footballing mystery, the performance against Sheffield United at SJP was awful, the one against Man City even worse but the quality of that squad was summed up by the way Birmingham City took us apart in the Cup.

 

Allardyce inherited shite and didn't have the ability to sort it. KK has inherited a situation far worse than even he could have imagined and a few signings in January wouldn't have sorted it. This has to be root and branch and those of us who remember him know that Keegan is ruthless enough to do it.

[Cronky]

Shepherd has a lot to answer for. Due to his mismanagement, we ended up stumbling from one poor, reactive decision to another on the managerial front over the last few years.

 

I don't think Allardyce was a bad appointment, but he was handicapped by having to work with a new Board that didn't really want him and didn't back him financially. With all the other pressures on him, it began to unravel.

 

We needn't have got into that situation if Shepherd had co-operated with the Halls over the transfer of the ownership of the club into the hands of various possible buyers who were clearly in a much better position to put in the much-needed investment. That business had dragged on over the preceding months. In the end, the only way forward was to stage some sort of coup, and that inevitably left the managerial and planning side in a bit of a mess.

 

In trying to maintain his control over the club, Shepherd was being selfish and not acting in the club's interests.

[wacko]

Will he take Everton to Champions League?

 

Yes, he has.

 

For one qualifying match

 

Didnt they drop into the Uefa Cup as a result of losing that then get knocked out of that as well?

Yup. I laughed my arse off.

 

In fairness, though, they were dropped right in at the deep end in the crappy half of the CL qualifying 3rd round. They were pretty much guaranteed a hard draw against a side with European experience and were ultimately unlucky not to beat Villareal, who got to the semis that year. That was a big ask for a side's first season in Europe, and they've got a lot better since.

 

I can't stand Gollum, but he has done a hell of a good job at Everton. I'd actually like them to win the UEFA Cup and us the CL.

[S.S.R.]

As much as I disliked Shepherd, as far as I'm concerned, he stopped being responsible for our plight the moment he sold his share of the club.

 

Our current owner/chairman have been at the club long enough to assess the problems, and should have been making a plan of action before the sale went through, rather than tread water for eight months, and basically write off a season.

[Guest Phil K]

I'd rather have Souness back as manager than Allardyce, he was that bad.

 

Seemed a decent choice at the time but I don't think anyone could have known how bad he'd turn out.

 

are you crazy? allardyce took a team ranked at 14th, no direction, in turmoil, injury ridden, to a team that wasnt going to get relegated, sorted out the injuries, and gave us the feeling of stability inside the club.

 

souness took a team that was a champions league challenger to relegation candidates, so dont talk crazy man

I think you're the crazy one.

Souness took over a team filled with w@nkers like Dyer and Bellamy who had taken the p1ss out of Sir Bob PUBLICALLY and were responsible for the plummet in dressing room feelings. Both had numerous mysterious "injuries" and treated the club with open contempt. Something had to be done, and Souness came in when we were dropping like a stone. (But nowhere near as bad as now, though) Souness had a great deal of bad luck, to be fair. While I am not a fan, I agree with his claim of Shepherds interference causing problems.

Allardyce came in, spent a LOT and spent BADLY. Would we be in this mess if he had not been sacked ?

He couldn't have done worse - but its the largely the players HE brought in which are the cause.

[ChezGiven]

Full of shit Phil.

 

Not one person was saying we were going to get relegated when Allardyce was here.

 

We've gone backwards since then whether you want to admit it to yourself or not.

[hakka]

The club started to ruin the day Bobby Robson was sacked.

 

Completely agree.

[ChrisJbarnes]

i dont know who to blame, allardyces poor tactics and buys, ashleys poor timing or the players. one thing though, not even jesus would be able to manage this team and get anywhere. shepherd got it all wrong.

[Baggio]

I blame Allardyce.

[Thespence]

Just like no one player is to blame for yesterday, I think there are loads of factors why we have been on the decline for a while.

[lovejoy]

i blame my avatar.

 

so im changing it

[2sheds]

Sacking a manager so late in a transfer window, without having a successor already signed sealed & delivered on the dotted line, leaving Keegan - or whoever else - inadequate time to strengthen the sqaud was amauterish bordering on suicidal. Sacking Allardyce at the beginning of the window, and appointing Keegan soon after whilst having the neccesary time and financial backing to make things happen in the window just past would've been a good move.

 

I think you are being a bit harsh on Ashley there - at least Keegan was appointed DURING the transfer window.

 

Unlike Souness appointed 5 days after the transfer window closed.

 

Unlike Roeder appointed 2 days after the transfer window closed.

 

And unlike Sir Bobby who was appointed about a week after the transfer window closed.