Guest BooBoo Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Pip, I think it's probably a bit harsh to judge Pardew's record. Sure he didn't set the world alight but at those clubs such as West Ham, Reading, Southampton and Charlton, what was he realistically expected to achieve?. I think WHU and Reading will both deem his reigns at those clubs as successful. Charlton is the obvious black Mark, but they were looking doomed for delegation when he walked through the door. Football management is more about which players you have at your disposal. I don't think he's overly involved in the recruitment process but once those players are signed, he has to get the best out of them and get them performing as a unit. At that, he's been mildly successful. He's also got the best out of the more average members of our squad- Best looks a different player and Steven Taylor is probably playing the best form of his career. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 If Pardew isn't getting the credit and Carr isn't getting the credit then we must have some football genius at work upstairs. What cant be taken away from Pardew is that the players all speak very well of him, even those who have left such as Joey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 You look at a kid like Abeid. With Pardew in full control of transfers, no way we sign a promising kid like him. No fucking way. And if Smith was fit, I don't think there's a doubt that Smith starts. That's the type of manager that I think Pardew is, and that's by judging what he says, looking at his record at past clubs and his team selection here. It's unfortunate but I don't think it's far from the truth. We're somewhat lucky that he's only being asked to coach this team and he has a good assistant like Carver, who has a lot of experience in coaching a team to play offensive football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dontooner Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 AP is given a hard job, he has to wipe the board ass ever time they screw up... But there are better managers out there ( Jol before fulham employed him). Would ship him out if there are better options and the team reaches it potential under him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 "this 'sexy football' thing is being imposed on him by the hierarchy" Damn the hierarchy and their desire for 'sexy football'. Bunkum by the way, Pardew throughout his career has tried to play football the right way as it were. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 This team - with this set of players - would be a joy to watch under KK. But anyway, Pardew's doing a decent job. It seems that he has a plan and is trying hard to implement it, but I think the quality of players that we have makes it much easier to do this. If left to his own, we would have signed a bunch of big-club rejects and other English no-marks that have Premiership experience - the likes of Warnock come to mind. The quotes about Crouch, Defoe etc. that he made still really bother me. I don't think he's anything better than an average manager, and I think this 'sexy football' thing is being imposed on him by the hierarchy as well. I suppose he has good man-management skills, but I would give more credit to our recruitment team than to Pardew. I just don't see anything in his record that says that this guy is a good manager, but now with quality, skillful players, we're playing better football. I don't think that's a coincidence. If you have sexiness like Cabaye, Ben Arfa and Marveaux on the pitch, they're going to pass and move well because they've been doing it their whole lives. But if you had Warnock and Crouch on the pitch, then the team would play hoofball. The style of play is just a product of the players on the pitch, so that's why the credit to our recent improvement in performances should be given more to the recruitment team than to Pardew. In my humble opinion, anyway. I agree with this mostly. I think he's working it out as he goes along as I'm pretty sure he has little control over the players we bring in which has probably worked in our favour as the recruitment team seem to be doing their job quite well. There's not been much sign that he is getting them to play in any particular style but as the right players come together the style is evolving automatically. The one thing I'll say in his favour is that when he makes a monumental gaffe at least he learns from it. The two big lads up front at QPR to put pressure on their defenders for example. I never heard such shit in my life but at least he hasn't repeated it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliassenfredrik Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 You look at a kid like Abeid. With Pardew in full control of transfers, no way we sign a promising kid like him. No f***ing way. And if Smith was fit, I don't think there's a doubt that Smith starts. That's the type of manager that I think Pardew is, and that's by judging what he says, looking at his record at past clubs and his team selection here. It's unfortunate but I don't think it's far from the truth. We're somewhat lucky that he's only being asked to coach this team and he has a good assistant like Carver, who has a lot of experience in coaching a team to play offensive football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's a moot point really as Pardew isn't in charge of transfers so it's rather irrelevant who he would or wouldn't rather sign. The point is, he's getting good results out of the players he has got. Look at Souness for example, he had on paper a very decent team when we had Owen, Shearer, Luque, Solano, Emre and Parker. On paper that looked a very decent outfit from an attacking pov.. Souness was completely incapable though of managing and organising a good bunch of players, something that he failed to do at every club he managed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teohgk Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's a moot point really as Pardew isn't in charge of transfers so it's rather irrelevant who he would or wouldn't rather sign. The point is, he's getting good results out of the players he has got. Look at Souness for example, he had on paper a very decent team when we had Owen, Shearer, Luque, Solano, Emre and Parker. On paper that looked a very decent outfit from an attacking pov.. Souness was completely incapable though of managing and organising a good bunch of players, something that he failed to do at every club he managed. he won almost everything with Liverpool....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Pip, I think it's probably a bit harsh to judge Pardew's record. Sure he didn't set the world alight but at those clubs such as West Ham, Reading, Southampton and Charlton, what was he realistically expected to achieve?. I think WHU and Reading will both deem his reigns at those clubs as successful. Charlton is the obvious black Mark, but they were looking doomed for delegation when he walked through the door. Football management is more about which players you have at your disposal. I don't think he's overly involved in the recruitment process but once those players are signed, he has to get the best out of them and get them performing as a unit. At that, he's been mildly successful. He's also got the best out of the more average members of our squad- Best looks a different player and Steven Taylor is probably playing the best form of his career. I agree to an extent that he's responsible for getting the players to perform as a unit. But even looking at someone like Best. The guy didn't start for ages until injuries forced Pardew's hand. Like I said, circumstances have really forced Pardew's hands to do certain things that I think a better manager would have done, and Pardew's reaping the rewards for luck (Smith's injury, Shola's injury etc.). With a guy like S Taylor, the protection that the midfield offers to the defence is a massive part in why he's looking comfortable and confident. It's no surprise that our midfield was overrun against Blackpool last year when Smith was starting and then looked like a much better unit when Tiote started the next match against Everton and all the matches after that. And this year our defence is starting to look even more comfortable because we're dominating much more of the ball. You can't concede when you have the ball. That's the reason Pique and Puyol look so chilled You can say that it's to Pardew's credit that we've become a team who's more comfortable in possession, but the players are key to this. You take out Cabaye, stick in Smith and we're back to the style of football we played last year, regardless of what Pardew does on the training ground. I'm not saying Pardew's shit because he's obviously not and that's why the players look happy and why we're performing as a unit, but I don't think Pardew deserves as much credit as any other manager would if their team was getting the results that we are getting. Many of the things that Pardew's being given credit for are being imposed on him by the guys above or through circumstances that forced his hand. It's just my opinion, anyway, and it's why I don't think we'd suffer too much if he chose to leave and was then replaced by a manager who would be comfortable operating under the conditions that Pardew's operating under. He's certainly not as crucial to our results as KK and SBR were to the success of their teams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's a moot point really as Pardew isn't in charge of transfers so it's rather irrelevant who he would or wouldn't rather sign. The point is, he's getting good results out of the players he has got. Look at Souness for example, he had on paper a very decent team when we had Owen, Shearer, Luque, Solano, Emre and Parker. On paper that looked a very decent outfit from an attacking pov.. Souness was completely incapable though of managing and organising a good bunch of players, something that he failed to do at every club he managed. It's still early days to say whether Pardew is doing well despite the results. Look at Man U, they have a way of playing no matter who they pick because Ferguson's philosophy is drilled into the squad at every level. Maybe Pardew hasn't had enough time to get his side playing in a way which is recognisable game to game but when I see that I'll know he is a genuine quality manager. In the meantime the jury's still out for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 paragraphs ffs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's a moot point really as Pardew isn't in charge of transfers so it's rather irrelevant who he would or wouldn't rather sign. The point is, he's getting good results out of the players he has got. Look at Souness for example, he had on paper a very decent team when we had Owen, Shearer, Luque, Solano, Emre and Parker. On paper that looked a very decent outfit from an attacking pov.. Souness was completely incapable though of managing and organising a good bunch of players, something that he failed to do at every club he managed. Well, no, it speaks to his intelligence and his outlook. If he was happy with signing average players like Warnock or Carlton Cole - frankly another player that I think we would sign if Pardew was in charge of transfers, given his links to West Ham that he boasted about after signing Ba - then it says a lot about his management IQ, if such a thing exists. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 paragraphs ffs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolution Number 9 Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's a moot point really as Pardew isn't in charge of transfers so it's rather irrelevant who he would or wouldn't rather sign. The point is, he's getting good results out of the players he has got. Look at Souness for example, he had on paper a very decent team when we had Owen, Shearer, Luque, Solano, Emre and Parker. On paper that looked a very decent outfit from an attacking pov.. Souness was completely incapable though of managing and organising a good bunch of players, something that he failed to do at every club he managed. he won almost everything with Liverpool....... He won the FA cup once and left them in a position from which they never really recovered, tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 You're wandering into second guessing there. Is there anything to say that Pardew wanted Carlton Cole? Or the other two players you mentioned? I can recall summer transfer gossip about Warnock /Crouch but did Pardew say he wanted them. I dont think you can criticise though on who managers maybe wanted to sign but didn't or who transfer news linked us to. Hell, if that's the guess then Bobby Robson deserves a ticking off for wanting Francis Jeffers ahead of Bellamy. And for that matter, wanting to replace Alan Shearer with Emile Mpenza. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So Pip your point is we should all hail Mike Ashley the transfer genius? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 I think on here at least, he's always going to be one bad result away from heavy criticism. I liked Hughton but at this moment in time I feel more optimistic about the club than I did twelve months ago. Ashley is still making errors but on the pitch we seem quite stable and there's a core of very good players who are exciting to watch. I don't think we've fully gelled yet and our strongest XI is still up for debate. However, I can see positive signs and I think Pardew can take a lot of credit for that. Let's be honest, he's nowhere near as bad as the majority of us feared he'd be. Indeed, I'm pretty content on how things are going atm so all credit to Pardew really Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So Pip your point is we should all hail Mike Ashley the transfer genius? His point is that Pardew is due little credit because: - He has players bought for him. - He has had decisions imposed upon him by injuries. - Good players automatically equals good football. - He didn't bring through the youngsters. - He reportedly wanted to buy inferior players to the players that were bought for him. - Media interaction is easy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Shearer needed replacing anyway because he was too slow for the style of play that SBR wanted, and that's why SBR preferred the Kluivert - Bellamy partnership. SBR got sacked after that defeat at Villa where coincidentally Shearer was benched in favour of the aforementioned partnership, and I think Bellamy scored in that game and we played some decent football as well. But anyway, I'm not saying managers don't sign duds and they don't 'fall in love' with certain players, but in general I think there's a trend and good managers are obviously more often than not successful with transfers. SBR signed many players from all over the continent, favoured signing youth and was in full control of the club. Therefore the success that we had under him is full credit to him. Who knows, maybe someone like Viana would have been a success here if he wasn't forced to play LW and constantly cross the ball into the box. Maybe if SBR had been able to replace slow players like Shearer with more mobile players then we would have been able to afford having someone physically limited like Viana play in CM in the team because his passing and technique was so, so sweet. I'll try to look for the article where Pardew mentioned that he suggested a whole host of average players for the club to sign but thankfully all of his suggestions were rejected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 It's a moot point really as Pardew isn't in charge of transfers so it's rather irrelevant who he would or wouldn't rather sign. The point is, he's getting good results out of the players he has got. Look at Souness for example, he had on paper a very decent team when we had Owen, Shearer, Luque, Solano, Emre and Parker. On paper that looked a very decent outfit from an attacking pov.. Souness was completely incapable though of managing and organising a good bunch of players, something that he failed to do at every club he managed. Well, no, it speaks to his intelligence and his outlook. If he was happy with signing average players like Warnock or Carlton Cole - frankly another player that I think we would sign if Pardew was in charge of transfers, given his links to West Ham that he boasted about after signing Ba - then it says a lot about his management IQ, if such a thing exists. Of course Pardew has a great deal to do with incomings (less so with outgoings which is pretty par for the course), Carr has stated it often enough himself - recommendations are made, Carr organises trips for Pardew to see the players, then the final lists are given to the board. And as for going for English cloggers over foreign flair when he has a chance, can you explain to me his signing of players like Yossi Benayoun from Racing Santader in the past? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So Pip your point is we should all hail Mike Ashley the transfer genius? His point is that Pardew is due little credit because: - He has players bought for him. - He has had decisions imposed upon him by injuries. - Good players automatically equals good football. - He didn't bring through the youngsters. - He reportedly wanted to buy inferior players to the players that were bought for him. - Media interaction is easy. And that's why I got the feeling that we should worship Ashley from now on from Pip's argument. Ashley decided the transfer, ordered Carr to find good prospect, invest a lot in youth academy and training pitches, didn't approve Pardew's "inferior players" proposal. He also decided to get rid of Nolan and Barton and open up spaces for the youngsters to step up. Last year he went hardcore towards Saylor, forced him to sign extension and now playing in top form. ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Shearer needed replacing anyway because he was too slow for the style of play that SBR wanted, and that's why SBR preferred the Kluivert - Bellamy partnership. SBR got sacked after that defeat at Villa where coincidentally Shearer was benched in favour of the aforementioned partnership, and I think Bellamy scored in that game and we played some decent football as well. I didn't remember Kluivert was SBR's signing. It should be Sheprerd who made the decision, and Kluivert was as slow as fuck as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 Kluivert, Carr and Butt were all supposedly signings by Fat Fred, without Bobby's approval. I say supposedly as ive no proof but it seemed odd from what Bobby was saying at the time and who we ended up signing. It also seemed to further drive a wedge between Fred and Bobby after Shepherd made it public that it was Bobby's last season. Only two weeks before we signed Butt, Bobby came out with the line "I don't understand the link to Nicky Butt, we dont need him as we've got Hugo Viana." I'm pretty sure, it was generally accepted that Robson wanted that Spanisg full back (Miguel?) but ended up with Carr. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 So Pip your point is we should all hail Mike Ashley the transfer genius? His point is that Pardew is due little credit because: - He has players bought for him. - He has had decisions imposed upon him by injuries. - Good players automatically equals good football. - He didn't bring through the youngsters. - He reportedly wanted to buy inferior players to the players that were bought for him. - Media interaction is easy. And that's why I got the feeling that we should worship Ashley from now on from Pip's argument. Ashley decided the transfer, ordered Carr to find good prospect, invest a lot in youth academy and training pitches, didn't approve Pardew's "inferior players" proposal. He also decided to get rid of Nolan and Barton and open up spaces for the youngsters to step up. Last year he went hardcore towards Saylor, forced him to sign extension and now playing in top form. ? You're making out as if the part in bold is some deluded fantasy. It happened, you moron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts