Real talk | Page 4 | Vital Football

Real talk

Calvin Plummer said:
Are they though? On the basis of teams comfortably getting ahead of us and then shutting up shop. If we had gone away to Bristol City, strolled into a 2 goal lead then we would instantly have pulled everyone behind the ball and said job done. Which is exactly what happened yesterday.

Actually we would have done it at 1-0 up...

I agree we played better than we have once they did that but right now we've no way of knowing how much of that was due to City dropping off.

Yesterday could be encouraging or it could be more of the same shite we've had for months.
Click to expand...
A big part of us playing better was because we actually got a goal and the players had something to go for.

But it took an absolute worldie for us to get that...

Had Freeman not done so, we would likely have petered out and surrendered (as we were doing), paying lip service to getting back into the game, huffing and puffing without showing any real belief we could get back into it
 
Pope John XXIII said:
A big part of us playing better was because we actually got a goal and the players had something to go for.

But it took an absolute worldie for us to get that...

Had Freeman not done so, we would likely have petered out and surrendered (as we were doing), paying lip service to getting back into the game, huffing and puffing without showing any real belief we could get back into it
Click to expand...

Imagine if Freeman had someone to pass to!
 
the jock said:
Bang on

Also lee Westwood response to arters comments


Lee Westwood
@WestwoodLee

Replying to
@NFFC
When he says take responsibility he must mean the preparation is not right or they’ve not been giving it 100%. All sportsmen can do is prepare correctly and give it everything. After that it’s uncontrollable and full of variables. Control the controllable. That is my advice.
Click to expand...


Westwood would be better off giving advice on how to bottle it; after all, no one in the history of Golf has bottled more Majors than Lee has
 
Pope John XXIII said:
A big part of us playing better was because we actually got a goal and the players had something to go for.

But it took an absolute worldie for us to get that...

Had Freeman not done so, we would likely have petered out and surrendered (as we were doing), paying lip service to getting back into the game, huffing and puffing without showing any real belief we could get back into it
Click to expand...


Didnt we start the game off playing better?

Mighten's chance came before they had a kick of the ball
 
Pope John XXIII said:
Ricardo Sa Pinto being talked about on Twitter.

Exactly the sort of awful, nondescript foreign appointment you would make to put the seal on a humiliating and ignominious relegation season
Click to expand...
Yeah we should be going for one of those top quality experienced Championship managers that are knocking our door down for the opportunity.
 
i am a tree said:
Yeah we should be going for one of those top quality experienced Championship managers that are knocking our door down for the opportunity.
Click to expand...
How do you know they are not?

Last time the job was open we spoke to Jokanovitch (I believe), that Sheffield Wednesday guy and Martin O'Neill.
 
To a degree, the Forest job is THAT toxic, that it almost becomes attractive again.

1) You will probably be still getting a salary long after you've stopped work.
2) You can say that the environment was so toxic that it was difficult to succeed.
3) You can say that your hands were tied with regards to transfers.
4) You can say that you were lied to regarding the depth of input in to transfers.
5) You can say it was difficult in working under the cloud of completely unrealistic expectations.
6) You can say that the expectations did not match the level of backing.
7) You can say that despite 20 years of consistent abject failure, that the expectations of the fans were unrealistic and not conducive to building sustainable success.
8) You can say that there are deeply rooted cultural problems at the club that your hands were tied with regards to solving.
9) You can say that the remarkable overachieving history of the club was a 'heavy cross to bear.'
10) You can say that it was difficult to instill your own preferred style and philosophy due to the fact that the squad you inherited was bloated with new signings that were not compatible with how you wanted to play.

Basically, there's not really anything to lose for any potential incoming manager.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
How do you know they are not?

Last time the job was open we spoke to Jokanovitch (I believe), that Sheffield Wednesday guy and Martin O'Neill.
Click to expand...
I'm just guessing that not many managers would want to manage someone else's team when clearly they aren't going to be able to make the changes they want. It is a team with potential, but you're drastically reducing the pool of managers who will come here because you have to get someone whose style fits what we already have here and thinks they can manage these players specifically. Just 'a good manager' isn't going to work unless we're going to replace the team again.
 
i am a tree said:
I'm just guessing that not many managers would want to manage someone else's team when clearly they aren't going to be able to make the changes they want. It is a team with potential, but you're drastically reducing the pool of managers who will come here because you have to get someone whose style fits what we already have here and thinks they can manage these players specifically. Just 'a good manager' isn't going to work unless we're going to replace the team again.
Click to expand...
What manager could possibly be in a situation that is any different?

Whenever you take on a new job it will be someone else's team.

Of you do so close to a window there will be players only just signed, not that that makes any difference.

You will always be waiting till the summer window realistically to make it more your own.

At least managers at forest know they are going to be able to get players in, even if they aren't going to be big priced players.

I agree about the style of course, and I'm not sure whose style fits a team of defenders and defensive midfielders. But that is a failure of the recruitment structure; whoever wanted all those DCMs and whoever sanctioned it has done us a massive disservice for months if not years to come
 
Pope John XXIII said:
What manager could possibly be in a situation that is any different?

Whenever you take on a new job it will be someone else's team.

Of you do so close to a window there will be players only just signed, not that that makes any difference.

You will always be waiting till the summer window realistically to make it more your own.

At least managers at forest know they are going to be able to get players in, even if they aren't going to be big priced players.

I agree about the style of course, and I'm not sure whose style fits a team of defenders and defensive midfielders. But that is a failure of the recruitment structure; whoever wanted all those DCMs and whoever sanctioned it has done us a massive disservice for months if not years to come
Click to expand...

Of course when you take on a job its someone else's team. Don't you think the matter of how many players the new manager cna bring in would be an issue during the negotiation? That's how its different, we have only just finished buying an entire team, I can't see us then hiring a manager who wants to make major changes to that.
Naturally that excludes a bunch of managers who would look at our team and realize that its unbalanced and would want to change it drastically.

I can't imagine Pearson or someone like that agreeing to that.

Now, IF EM wants to back the next manager to make changes to our already new team then yeah, we might get some interest.
 
i am a tree said:
Of course when you take on a job its someone else's team. Don't you think the matter of how many players the new manager cna bring in would be an issue during the negotiation? That's how its different, we have only just finished buying an entire team, I can't see us then hiring a manager who wants to make major changes to that.
Naturally that excludes a bunch of managers who would look at our team and realize that its unbalanced and would want to change it drastically.

I can't imagine Pearson or someone like that agreeing to that.

Now, IF EM wants to back the next manager to make changes to our already new team then yeah, we might get some interest.
Click to expand...
I think we would be ideal because the board have demonstrated that they are very happy to sign a whole new team and shift/bomb out large numbers. The churn is high enough to satisfy any new manager.

The hard part is they have to do well enough with what they have to be able to get to a decent window, whereas SL had three to make use of
 
Hes picked 4 or 5 players, mckenna, freeman, taylor and artur that wed all be happy with. Sounds like hes also had another ten that the board brought in. I dont see the point in changing managers unless its someone we unanimously agree on.
The players played for him v city and we improved so I see some positives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.