Allardyce to quit Bolton at end of season

[mrmojorisin75]

Don't want him. Bolton play ugly football and i never want to see that sort of play at Newcastle.

 

And because we play like Barcelona we should keep Roeder

 

the assumption here is that roeder isn't intending on playing crap football forever, that he'll improve as we go on and get some consistency; whereas it's allardyces stock in trade and the secret to his success....

 

can allardyce change?  i doubt it

 

 

Have you seen much of Bolton at all? It is a myth that they play awful football, they don't and haven't done for a while now. Yes they can be very direct and don't mind mixing it up, but they are no Wimbledon or even Watford for that matter, they are similar in style to Liverpool and Chelsea. Anyhow stuff performances, give me results over eye candy all day long.

 

Totally agree. I was beginning to think I was the only one on here who's seen that Bolton play far better football than us for the vast majority of the time and are as far removed from being "ugly" as most teams in the league. There's a difference between being organised and being ugly, is there not? It's become one of these media-peddled things from seasons ago where everyone is quite happy to just hop on the bandwagon and give the same opinion despite not having much first-hand knowledge of the subject matter. I'd equate it to saying something like "the Geordies would rather lose 4-3 than draw 0-0" - i.e. something that is quite probably utter tosh but is believed by most of the non-Toon supporting mongo's around the country.

 

They're hardly thrilling, but they have some excellent players with a good level of technical ability.

 

Regarding the technical ability thing, Bolton employ individual coaches to work on players' games on a one-to-one basis, imagine that here. There would be hope for even Carr. Welll OK, maybe not.

 

Mrmojorisin75, fair enough, see what you're saying.

 

Loads of the more forward-thinking clubs have specialised technical coaches these days, do they not?

 

I recall Martin Jol banging on about Tottenham employing one in the pre-season and I'm fairly certain the likes of Chelsea and Liverpool have them, as well.

 

tell you what, if anything this is the biggest indictment of roeders tenure at the club and applies to souness, robson, gullitt and dalglish too

 

none of them have made the slightest effort (i'm aware of) to overhaul our training/fitness/recovery/rehab and all that jazz at the club

 

from what i can see it's largely the same setup and the same people, and basically our injury list has become progressively worse year by year

 

if allardyce would do one thing i'd hope it would be to do something about the freeloading, obviously imcompetent clowns we've got there now

[Howaythelads]

 

Serious question.

 

Why are you happy to give managers more time when almost everyone else can see through them?  I'm not just talking about on here because I don't know a single person who thinks Roeder is up to the job.

 

Because prematurely sacking Managers is how we are in the situation we are in.

 

No c*** worth having will touch us.

 

Every time we appoint a new Manager it costs us Millions, not just in payoffs and compensation for new Managers, but when they want to build their teams.

 

Like previously and as stated countless times, the only time we shouldnt back Roeder is if we can get someone in, significantly better, Allardyce is not that man.

 

Changing for changes sake may keep the boo boys happy, but its worsening the position we're in.

 

No, you're wrong there despite agreeing with a lot of what you say.

 

We're where we are now mostly because Souness was the wrong man to replace Robson, if he'd been the right man we'd be doing ok now. It is the manager that matters, the timing of replacing the manager is largely secondary but if you want to point to timing I've often said Robson should have gone sooner.  He didn't go too early, he went too late.

[mrmojorisin75]

Don't want him. Bolton play ugly football and i never want to see that sort of play at Newcastle.

 

And because we play like Barcelona we should keep Roeder

 

the assumption here is that roeder isn't intending on playing crap football forever, that he'll improve as we go on and get some consistency; whereas it's allardyces stock in trade and the secret to his success....

 

can allardyce change?  i doubt it

 

 

Have you seen much of Bolton at all? It is a myth that they play awful football, they don't and haven't done for a while now. Yes they can be very direct and don't mind mixing it up, but they are no Wimbledon or even Watford for that matter, they are similar in style to Liverpool and Chelsea. Anyhow stuff performances, give me results over eye candy all day long.

 

Totally agree. I was beginning to think I was the only one on here who's seen that Bolton play far better football than us for the vast majority of the time and are as far removed from being "ugly" as most teams in the league. There's a difference between being organised and being ugly, is there not? It's become one of these media-peddled things from seasons ago where everyone is quite happy to just hop on the bandwagon and give the same opinion despite not having much first-hand knowledge of the subject matter. I'd equate it to saying something like "the Geordies would rather lose 4-3 than draw 0-0" - i.e. something that is quite probably utter tosh but is believed by most of the non-Toon supporting mongo's around the country.

 

They're hardly thrilling, but they have some excellent players with a good level of technical ability.

 

People have seen them play teams like Arsenal and have labled them because of that, not many teams beat Arsenal they try and play like Arsenal and teams have learnt this, adapted their approach and get better results against them.

 

As you say the whole "Bolton boring football" thing is a media tag that has stuck the same way we are labled "entertainers" and the atmosphere at SJP is amazing!

 

this is mint

 

you all sound like you're trying to talk youselves into something you don't really believe 'cause you think it's gonna happen (not saying you don't believe it just it reads a bit like that)

 

you'll be fucken weeping into your collective pints when we're watching 8m equivalents of ivan kampo hoofing the ball up to 10m equivalents of kevin davies

 

ba ha ha

 

You obviously havent seen much of Bolton recently have you? Just believe everything you read in the media I take it?

 

Take it you have seen £4.5m Bramble hoofing up towards £10.9m Martins a lot though?

 

ha ha, sorry i couldn't help myself...

 

i referred just earlier to myself exaggerating how bad bolton are, i know they're not, but i know that they base the game on being physical, organised and more often than not throwing teams out of their stride and using long throws etc... as an effective tactical tool (works well against us)

 

to me they've developed a better footballing side to the game after years of being horrible but the horrible side is undoubtedly still in there

 

how much horrible would we have to see from an allardyce nufc team before we saw the marginal increase in football quality?  they're not that good you know....

[Cajun]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

[Alberto2005]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

[Howaythelads]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another shit appointment by Fred?

[Cajun]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another shit appointment by Fred?

 

Of course not.

[Unbelievable]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld?

[mrmojorisin75]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

the fact that he played that style due to budget could be seen as a given, too obvious for words

 

however bolton have been safe from relegation troubles for quite some time now yet they still base their game on the same style with a few minor additions such as you mention - their primary tactic is still the same however hence you being only able to name diouf and anelka as current first teamers that don't fit the "horrible" category

 

how long do you give him to transition his style from one to the other before it defines him? 

the lad nappy mentioned allardyce has had time and i'd agree; he's hardly set up a production line of free, developed talent in his time has he?  nor has he blown loads of cash in tripe, granted

 

as mentioned previously steve coppell has brought reading up playing nice football on a budget so a budget is not an excuse...

 

is allardyce a pragmatist who can adapt his style to club he's at or is he a one trick pony?  this whole thing largely started today 'cause i said the later and people disagreed with me

[Tom_NUFC]

Can't say I'm thrilled by the prospect of Allardyce here. I don't like him, I don't like the Football his sides play, and perhaps some of those saying his sides only play sh!te football because he doesn't have the money or resources are right, then again maybe not. I'm not sure I'd like us to be the guinea pig on that one.

[Howaythelads]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Of course not.

 

The other managers (apart from Roeder) appointed by Fat "pie eater" Fred have had superior track records to Allardyce. Why were they shit appointments?

[Cajun]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Of course not.

 

The other managers (apart from Roeder) appointed by Fat "pie eater" Fred have had superior track records to Allardyce. Why were they shit appointments?

 

You have been looking for an argument since you got on, not going to give you one today I am afraid.

[Howaythelads]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld?

 

Errr.....why not?  The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked.

[Unbelievable]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld?

 

Errr.....why not?  The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked.

 

Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?"

[Howaythelads]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Of course not.

 

The other managers (apart from Roeder) appointed by Fat "pie eater" Fred have had superior track records to Allardyce. Why were they s*** appointments?

 

You have been looking for an argument since you got on, not going to give you one today I am afraid.

 

Bollocks, tbh. It's a valid question in the context of what we're talking about. Fred gets slated as shit, it's been more than insinuated in this thread that the problem is really at Board level so i want to know what you and others who want Allardyce will think of the Board if this man is appointed. Especially if he is backed and fails.

 

BTW I'd sooner you "gave one" to one of your "chums". I'm accounted for.

[Howaythelads]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld?

 

Errr.....why not?  The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked.

 

Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?"

 

Wtf are you on about? Why don't you just post your point and be done with it?

[Syrette]

Not sure where this has come from, I thought he was pretty content at Bolton.

 

All that begging for the England job on national television was a bit of a clue.

 

And all his suggestions that he was happy at Bolton after not getting it were a bit of a clue that he was content.

[Cajun]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

the fact that he played that style due to budget could be seen as a given, too obvious for words

 

however bolton have been safe from relegation troubles for quite some time now yet they still base their game on the same style with a few minor additions such as you mention - their primary tactic is still the same however hence you being only able to name diouf and anelka as current first teamers that don't fit the "horrible" category

 

how long do you give him to transition his style from one to the other before it defines him? 

the lad nappy mentioned allardyce has had time and i'd agree; he's hardly set up a production line of free, developed talent in his time has he?  nor has he blown loads of cash in tripe, granted

 

as mentioned previously steve coppell has brought reading up playing nice football on a budget so a budget is not an excuse...

 

is allardyce a pragmatist who can adapt his style to club he's at or is he a one trick pony?  this whole thing largely started today 'cause i said the later and people disagreed with me

 

Coppell has done exactly what Pardew did last season, where are West Ham now?

 

As people have said, Bolton have changed their style and do play good football now. Sometimes they resort to the old fashioned bully boy football against better teams because it gets them results. If you expect us to play like Arsenal every week then we will need more than a Coppell to manage it every season and not find ourselves in the shit. We will also need to spend quite a bit (again) on players who are capable of it.

 

Allardyce plays "effective" football, he gets results, sometimes its not pretty but sometimes it is.

[NUFC06]

Don't want him. Bolton play ugly football and i never want to see that sort of play at Newcastle.

 

And because we play like Barcelona we should keep Roeder

 

the assumption here is that roeder isn't intending on playing crap football forever, that he'll improve as we go on and get some consistency; whereas it's allardyces stock in trade and the secret to his success....

 

can allardyce change?  i doubt it

 

 

can Roeder improve us?I doubt it

[Unbelievable]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Could we not ask the same hypothetical question if we appointed Hiddink or Hitzfeld?

 

Errr.....why not?  The answer is obvious, of course you can so I'm not sure why you asked.

 

Allright then.. Answer this and you will have answered your own question: "So if Hiddink replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?"

 

Wtf are you on about? Why don't you just post your point and be done with it?

 

OK, if it's too difficult to engage your own brain: "Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Asking rhetorical questions about a possible future hindsight just doesn't fly as an argument."

[Rich]

Not sure where this has come from, I thought he was pretty content at Bolton.

 

All that begging for the England job on national television was a bit of a clue.

 

And all his suggestions that he was happy at Bolton after not getting it were a bit of a clue that he was content.

 

To be fair, he was also strongy tipped to have applied for the Newcastle job twice since Robson as well. Obviously it's not concrete, but it was fairly well sounded-out.

 

I think he's been far from content at Bolton for a good while now and is desperately looking for his next launch-pad to lead him closer to the England job. He's been there an awful long time.

[Dinho lad]

Bollocks, tbh. It's a valid question in the context of what we're talking about. Fred gets slated as shit, it's been more than insinuated in this thread that the problem is really at Board level so i want to know what you and others who want Allardyce will think of the Board if this man is appointed. Especially if he is backed and fails.

 

You, in your own admission, blamed Souness 100% for Newcastle's troubles when he was manager here.

 

We know he was a shite manager, but that was ridiculous really. .

[Cajun]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

So if he replaces Roeder, is backed fully by the Board and fails, will he be yet another s*** appointment by Fred?

 

Of course not.

 

The other managers (apart from Roeder) appointed by Fat "pie eater" Fred have had superior track records to Allardyce. Why were they s*** appointments?

 

You have been looking for an argument since you got on, not going to give you one today I am afraid.

 

Bollocks, tbh. It's a valid question in the context of what we're talking about. Fred gets slated as shit, it's been more than insinuated in this thread that the problem is really at Board level so i want to know what you and others who want Allardyce will think of the Board if this man is appointed. Especially if he is backed and fails.

 

BTW I'd sooner you "gave one" to one of your "chums". I'm accounted for.

 

Souness was a poor signing which was plain for all to see. He was on his way done at Blackburn and they must have thanked whatever god they pray to when we stepped in and paid them for something that was likely going to cost them in time (getting rid of him).

 

Roeder was a lazy appointment, he did well enough that the fans wouldn't be in uproar to sign him, was cheap and very thankful for the opportunity.

[Parky]

Allardyce has played this "horrible" football because with then budget he has had to work with it was the most effective way. He could have played "attractive" football and gone down in style but I don't think he would have lasted long in the job.

 

As tmonkey has said he has shown his intentions with signings like Diouf, Okocha and Anelka and others he has tried to bring in.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a physical side and I wish we were organised. Allardyce wouldn't just improve the club on the field he would include every part of the training, scouting etc... Which is why for me he is exactly the type of person we need. Someone who knows how to organise, plan and improve for the long term.

 

the fact that he played that style due to budget could be seen as a given, too obvious for words

 

however bolton have been safe from relegation troubles for quite some time now yet they still base their game on the same style with a few minor additions such as you mention - their primary tactic is still the same however hence you being only able to name diouf and anelka as current first teamers that don't fit the "horrible" category

 

how long do you give him to transition his style from one to the other before it defines him? 

the lad nappy mentioned allardyce has had time and i'd agree; he's hardly set up a production line of free, developed talent in his time has he?  nor has he blown loads of cash in tripe, granted

 

as mentioned previously steve coppell has brought reading up playing nice football on a budget so a budget is not an excuse...

 

is allardyce a pragmatist who can adapt his style to club he's at or is he a one trick pony?  this whole thing largely started today 'cause i said the later and people disagreed with me

 

Coppell has done exactly what Pardew did last season, where are West Ham now?

 

As people have said, Bolton have changed their style and do play good football now. Sometimes they resort to the old fashioned bully boy football against better teams because it gets them results. If you expect us to play like Arsenal every week then we will need more than a Coppell to manage it every season and not find ourselves in the shit. We will also need to spend quite a bit (again) on players who are capable of it.

 

Allardyce plays "effective" football, he gets results, sometimes its not pretty but sometimes it is.

 

We're at the point in this thread where people are beginning to lose perspective...Liverpool and Chelsea play efficent football neither have a killer creative player..Football has moved on it is more a percentage game now with player ofter multi-tasking (Chelsea). I don't see people saying we don't want Mourinho cause Chelsea play percentage balls to Drogba for knock downs...So why this is getting levelled at Allardyce I'm not clear. It is clear Sam has made strides with Bolton and that he is a better allround manager. Is he a whole class above? MAYBE.

[Guest Nappy Rash]

 

No, you're wrong there despite agreeing with a lot of what you say.

 

We're where we are now mostly because Souness was the wrong man to replace Robson, if he'd been the right man we'd be doing ok now. It is the manager that matters, the timing of replacing the manager is largely secondary but if you want to point to timing I've often said Robson should have gone sooner.  He didn't go too early, he went too late.

 

Like Ive said in my posts after that, Chicken and Egg situation.

 

Steve Bruce or Sam Allardyce would have been equally bad choices, but luckily they turned it down, although saying that I think Allardyce may have been given a chance, I dont think Bruce would have been, Souness wasnt.

 

But that's another debate thats been done to death 

 

Shal I mention Souness had the best ever start to a Managerial tenure at the toon, had us in two competitions for the time first time in our history in April and he was still hated by a huge majority