Dougie Freedman - New Manager

[Ianmooreslovechild]

Maybe thats just my impression then,I guess I took being called Einstein the wrong way,maybe it was a compliment on my erudacity and grace. I have no problem with people having different opinions.No point in there being a forum if everyone thought the same. I just get the impression that had we got McCarthy in he would be moaning about it and calling for Freedman who was flying at the top with palace. It's a bit tedious that's all and he rarely qualifies or answers questions just likes a good moan.
The point about changing the team may be valid, I had hoped we stick with what we had v Blackburn but some players may not have been fresh enough and Freedman may well still be looking at what we have. That's an opinion/view and possible explanation for something that didnt work. Having that opinion doesnt make me a fool or an apologist it's simply a rational explanation. I get tired of people believing it's necessary to polarize things when so little in football or life is black and white.

[Peter Thompson]

I'm not sure that's really true... BL3 seems a bit humourless and has a bit of a lack of grace and no obvious potential for self-effacement... but apart from the odd sarky response to someone abusing him - he's rarely offensive (unless you are offended by a view that is different to yours or swims against the stream...)

it's hard to read because it is a bit of an exaggerated parody - but quite a lot of what he writes is actually true. (and is now being written by others) it's also hard to read because it is so ubiquitous and endlessly repetitive...

he's certainly much less offensive than the replies he garners are...

I agree with Bish....nowt wrong with BL3, he just happens to have a different opinion than the majority - its just his turn to get a lot of the flak - I've been there a few times, it's all harmless fun and the forum should be about different opinions.

Anyway I'm much more offensive than him

[TANGODANCER]

The point about changing the team may be valid, I had hoped we stick with what we had v Blackburn but some players may not have been fresh enough and Freedman may well still be looking at what we have. That's an opinion/view and possible explanation for something that didnt work. Having that opinion doesnt make me a fool or an apologist it's simply a rational explanation. I get tired of people believing it's necessary to polarize things when so little in football or life is black and white.

John Mc was in the commentary box yesterday and said: "Sometimes you try things and they work, sometimes they don't, today didn't". That's the sensible statement and we just hope that's what it was, a try-out. It certainly didn't work too well but we have to give DF enough savvy to see it and remedy it.

[Harry Genshaw]

I'm not sure that's really true... BL3 seems a bit humourless and has a bit of a lack of grace and no obvious potential for self-effacement... but apart from the odd sarky response to someone abusing him - he's rarely offensive (unless you are offended by a view that is different to yours or swims against the stream...)

it's hard to read because it is a bit of an exaggerated parody - but quite a lot of what he writes is actually true. (and is now being written by others) it's also hard to read because it is so ubiquitous and endlessly repetitive...

he's certainly much less offensive than the replies he garners are...

I agree with Bish....nowt wrong with BL3, he just happens to have a different opinion than the majority - its just his turn to get a lot of the flak - I've been there a few times, it's all harmless fun and the forum should be about different opinions.

Anyway I'm much more offensive than him

I've no problem with folk having a different opinion but where BL3 differs from you and say, BWFC Insane who has often had an opinion opposite to the majority, you two at least respond to a direct question!

[plymouth wanderer]

I'm not sure that's really true... BL3 seems a bit humourless and has a bit of a lack of grace and no obvious potential for self-effacement... but apart from the odd sarky response to someone abusing him - he's rarely offensive (unless you are offended by a view that is different to yours or swims against the stream...)

it's hard to read because it is a bit of an exaggerated parody - but quite a lot of what he writes is actually true. (and is now being written by others) it's also hard to read because it is so ubiquitous and endlessly repetitive...

he's certainly much less offensive than the replies he garners are...

I agree with Bish....nowt wrong with BL3, he just happens to have a different opinion than the majority - its just his turn to get a lot of the flak - I've been there a few times, it's all harmless fun and the forum should be about different opinions.

Anyway I'm much more offensive than him

I've no problem with folk having a different opinion but where BL3 differs from you and say, BWFC Insane who has often had an opinion opposite to the majority, you two at least respond to a direct question!

Spot on HG

People like him just want us to fail so he can bitch

It's easy to be negative

[Lord Kangana]

<Tea everyfuckingwhere>

Seriously, thats piss funny.

[BL3]

It's easy to be negative

You should know. You're still complaining about a manager who left in October.

[BWFC_Insane]

Look BL3 comes across to me as a bit of a wind up merchant. He's not offensive or owt. He's perfectly entitled to a different opinion. I think the trouble is that his viewpoint now is so diametrically opposed to what it was under the previous manager, who he was all for keeping and giving time for that he comes across a bit bitter. But maybe he is, and he's entitled to be so.

We all change our minds on things. It was just such a huge about face from 'Not Coyles fault at all, it will be fine' to condemning a better points per game total from the new man.

Perhaps he genuinely believes Coyle is a better manager than Freedman. Which again we have to accept that is his opinion.

Personally I think he is frustrated that Coyle was sacked for some reason and is lashing out. Again I think that happens. We all pretty much get frustrated time to time.

This is for debating, even if it gets heated I don't think anyone should be hating anyone on the basis of a few or even many posts on a forum.

[BL3]

I think it's easier for the usual suspects to blame the previous manager, rather than address the failings of the current one, now that they've gone out on a limb to tell us what a student of the game he is.

The reality is that Jimmy Philips who had never managed a team in the Championship, had almost as good a record as Freedman. He was working with the same squad wasn't he?

[BWFC_Insane]

I think it's easier for the usual suspects to blame the previous manager, rather than address the failings of the current one, now that they've gone out on a limb to tell us what a student of the game he is.

The reality is that Jimmy Philips who had never managed a team in the Championship, had almost as good a record as Freedman. He was working with the same squad wasn't he?

Yeah but you're taking such a small sample. Allardyce didn't take us up in his first season for example and financially we were in as dire if not a worse position then. He even made some mistakes, which he acknowledged, releasing Johansen etc. But it was worth waiting for the promotion and what came after.

I'm not saying that will be the case at all with Freedman. But like it or not he's what we've got and is a young manager. Can we not give him a decent amount of time before getting too angsty. We weren't doing very well, in fact worse, before he came so I think its worth at least seeing where he takes us.

Either way, we don't have a choice.

[plymouth wanderer]

It's easy to be negative

You should know. You're still complaining about a manager who left in October.

When have I recently whinged about Coyle?

Your complaining about a manager who has been here for 7 games and has just lost his first

As I said it's easy to be negative

[thebish]

Look BL3 comes across to me as a bit of a wind up merchant. He's not offensive or owt. He's perfectly entitled to a different opinion. I think the trouble is that his viewpoint now is so diametrically opposed to what it was under the previous manager, who he was all for keeping...

genuine question... was BL3 all for keeping Coyle - or is this a bit of an oft-repeated myth?

it's possible I have missed summat - which is why I ask.

but - all I have seen is stuff like "if Freedman wasn't going to improve our position up the table - or get us to the playoffs - then we might as well have kept phillips or coyle" - that kind of thing..

which - I disagree with - but is a little short of the Coyle-love that some seem to attribute to BL3. so far - that's all I've seen - plus the oft repeated mantra (that I have some sympathy with) that if we called Coyle for summat and Dougie does the same thing - then we should also call Dougie...

neither of those things amounts to a Coyle love-in - or that much a positive endorsement of Coyle..

so - have i missed something?? (it is quite possible I have!)

[BWFC_Insane]

Look BL3 comes across to me as a bit of a wind up merchant. He's not offensive or owt. He's perfectly entitled to a different opinion. I think the trouble is that his viewpoint now is so diametrically opposed to what it was under the previous manager, who he was all for keeping...

genuine question... was BL3 all for keeping Coyle - or is this a bit of an oft-repeated myth?

it's possible I have missed summat - which is why I ask.

but - all I have seen is stuff like "if Freedman wasn't going to improve our position up the table - or get us to the playoffs - then we might as well have kept phillips or coyle" - that kind of thing..

which - I disagree with - but is a little short of the Coyle-love that some seem to attribute to BL3. so far - that's all I've seen - plus the oft repeated mantra (that I have some sympathy with) that if we called Coyle for summat and Dougie does the same thing - then we should also call Dougie...

neither of those things amounts to a Coyle love-in - or that much a positive endorsement of Coyle..

so - have i missed something?? (it is quite possible I have!)

He was very in the keep Coyle camp at the time I believe.

Most of his posts were at the time arguing that position, even to the point of saying 'if he's halved the wage bill what do you expect?'

[bobo the clown]

The problem is we all know what BL3 is NOT for, but we have no idea what he IS for.

Despite many direct requests.

This allows his to piss & moan without anyone knowing what he sees as an alternative.

[thebish]

Look BL3 comes across to me as a bit of a wind up merchant. He's not offensive or owt. He's perfectly entitled to a different opinion. I think the trouble is that his viewpoint now is so diametrically opposed to what it was under the previous manager, who he was all for keeping...

genuine question... was BL3 all for keeping Coyle - or is this a bit of an oft-repeated myth?

it's possible I have missed summat - which is why I ask.

but - all I have seen is stuff like "if Freedman wasn't going to improve our position up the table - or get us to the playoffs - then we might as well have kept phillips or coyle" - that kind of thing..

which - I disagree with - but is a little short of the Coyle-love that some seem to attribute to BL3. so far - that's all I've seen - plus the oft repeated mantra (that I have some sympathy with) that if we called Coyle for summat and Dougie does the same thing - then we should also call Dougie...

neither of those things amounts to a Coyle love-in - or that much a positive endorsement of Coyle..

so - have i missed something?? (it is quite possible I have!)

He was very in the keep Coyle camp at the time I believe.

Most of his posts were at the time arguing that position, even to the point of saying 'if he's halved the wage bill what do you expect?'

there are lots of long (and fairly pointless arguments) between you and BL3 (and often LK) about Coyle - and about net spend and wage bills and the like - and formations... but I can't see anything where BL3 ever says he thinks Coyle was ace or great... usually he is arguing that the alternatives proposed are no better... which isn't quite the same as saying Coyle is ace...

again, I may be wrong - but I suspect BL3 has never actually said whether he liked Coyle that much or not - and into the void has come this myth that BL3 was once a massive Coyle-fan...

[BWFC_Insane]

Look BL3 comes across to me as a bit of a wind up merchant. He's not offensive or owt. He's perfectly entitled to a different opinion. I think the trouble is that his viewpoint now is so diametrically opposed to what it was under the previous manager, who he was all for keeping...

genuine question... was BL3 all for keeping Coyle - or is this a bit of an oft-repeated myth?

it's possible I have missed summat - which is why I ask.

but - all I have seen is stuff like "if Freedman wasn't going to improve our position up the table - or get us to the playoffs - then we might as well have kept phillips or coyle" - that kind of thing..

which - I disagree with - but is a little short of the Coyle-love that some seem to attribute to BL3. so far - that's all I've seen - plus the oft repeated mantra (that I have some sympathy with) that if we called Coyle for summat and Dougie does the same thing - then we should also call Dougie...

neither of those things amounts to a Coyle love-in - or that much a positive endorsement of Coyle..

so - have i missed something?? (it is quite possible I have!)

He was very in the keep Coyle camp at the time I believe.

Most of his posts were at the time arguing that position, even to the point of saying 'if he's halved the wage bill what do you expect?'

there are lots of long (and fairly pointless arguments) between you and BL3 (and often LK) about Coyle - and about net spend and wage bills and the like - and formations... but I can't see anything where BL3 ever says he thinks Coyle was ace or great... usually he is arguing that the alternatives proposed are no better... which isn't quite the same as saying Coyle is ace...

again, I may be wrong - but I suspect BL3 has never actually said whether he liked Coyle that much or not - and into the void has come this myth that BL3 was once a massive Coyle-fan...

Probably all true. There are also lots of times I remember BL3 saying that the defeats under Coyle were not down to the manager or tactics but purely down to players not doing well enough or making mistakes that were not down to Coyle. Essentially stating that Coyle was not accountable.

That opinion seems to have 100% flipped since Dougie came in.

Now I am not blind to Dougie perhaps making some odd decisions, and I've called him on some from yesterday. And I am admittedly far more prepared to give him a chance than I was with Coyle, at the end. But thats the crucial thing, Coyle got a decent time to turn things round. It was not based on a few games but 18 months of desperately poor slide.

It's just the complete 100% mind flip, which gets me a bit.

I know he's trying to make a point and I don't have an issue with that really, this forum is kind of for that. But he doesn't really justify his position at all, which sort of puts him in WUM territory in some ways.

[officer_dibble]

Unless his point is we all blamed coyle so we should immediateley blame dougie...he's a fckn wum or a member of owens family. And if that is the point its made and move on!

[BWFC_Insane]

Unless his point is we all blamed coyle so we should immediateley blame dougie...he's a fckn wum or a member of owens family. And if that is the point its made and move on!

But if that is his point he's got to appreciate that 3 years is a bit different to 7 games.....

[thebish]

It's just the complete 100% mind flip, which gets me a bit.

a little bit like the one you made about our squad-quality??

[BWFC_Insane]

It's just the complete 100% mind flip, which gets me a bit.

a little bit like the one you made about our squad-quality??

Not really a 100% flip though, I said that I had overrated them but that we are still underperforming....