Freedman out!

[William the White]

Rooney and Owen were playing for England at 17.

They were good enough so they were old enough.

does anyone have any actual evidence that any of ours are good enough?

[bobo the clown]

Rooney and Owen were playing for England at 17.

They were good enough so they were old enough.

does anyone have any actual evidence that any of ours are good enough?

Edited quoting - Disgraceful Billy.

I said I wasn't saying they were that standard.

No evidence they are good enough, plenty of evidence they'd do more good for us than N'Gog did, or Mason for that matter.

[Jugs]

He isn't developing any kids here. He can't even bring himself to stick a young striker on the bench, instead preferring to have no striker on the bench. He also prefers to play a centre-half at full back instead of giving young White a go.

To be fair, I do think the younger players would have seen more game time if we was winning more games. Hardly a good environment to be blooding youngsters at the moment.

... because NOT playing any is working out just fine ??

I just feel one could be on the bench. If they don't get on they're in good company. If they get 10-20 minutes what could go wrong for them ? They fail to get into the game .... they miss a sitter ... a seasoned pro takes controls them. All "so what" ... we're getting that now.

Now, and I'm not saying they are of this standard but, Rooney and Owen were playing for England at 17.

My point was aimed more at not wanting to bring kids into a team with a poor mentality and doing really well at losing

No good for the kids if the big boys are shouting at them for making mistakes. In a happier team players don't usually start the blame game and pointing fingers. The big boys would be more sympathetic and go about helping them in the right way rather than giving them a bollocking.

I really doubt our more experienced players would give a young debutant a bollocking, even if we are down at the bottom. That wouldn't happen.

[bedwetter2]

Rooney and Owen were playing for England at 17.

They were good enough so they were old enough.

does anyone have any actual evidence that any of ours are good enough?

Edited quoting - Disgraceful Billy.

I said I wasn't saying they were that standard.

No evidence they are good enough, plenty of evidence they'd do more good for us than N'Gog did, or Mason for that matter.

Interesting that players who were deemed to not be good enough for BWFC not so long ago are good enough for other clubs.

For example, I remember going to one of the few games that I have been to in the last couple of years and was astonished to see that the player who was constantly being berated for being useless by know-f-alls on here was by far the best player, I mean stand-out, on the pitch. Take a bow Marcos Alonso of Sunderland. His mate Rodrigo whilst here was only ever played out of position by the Happy Clapper and consequently was p*ssed off at his treatment. No wonder he didn't want to come back for more of the same.

Even Danny Ward is scoring goals for his current Championship side Huddersfield. Any number of others who were cast out to general acclaim on here are still playing and contributing at a higher level than the Championship.

You see, it may just be that our current crop of young players is good enough but due to a combination of stupidity and a lack of encouragement they will not get a chance. This club has a very poor record under the last four managers of developing and believing in players. Why? I suggest that buying has been seen as the easiest and quickest way to add bodies to the squad although not the cheapest. Those days should be over but I can't help feeling that this manager or any other appointed will still want to bring in journeyman types from elsewhere rather than take a slightly more (in his eyes) risky route. In our current situation I would applaud a manager who takes that risk to add one young player at a time to the first team.

Supporters have their part to play by supporting whoever plays and if they wish to make a point to the manager or board, to do so in a slightly more intelligent manner than is usual Bolton practice.

[SmokinFrazier]

It seems to be accepted that Freedman has this great record of promoting young players but...who exactly? It's not like there's a long list of young players who Freedman brought through and enhanced. The only young members of Palace's current squad who Freedman managed are Parr, Garvan, Williams, O'Keefe, Ward and Bolasie. Nobody seems to rate Parr, O'Keefe or Williams and Garvan wasn't even included in the squad by Holloway. Ward and Bolasie are better but Freedman was their manager for just a few months, so it's not like you can credit him for them eventually being good players. The two good young players who Freedman managed and are now good away from Palace are Zaha and Clyne, so it's not like he's produced a load of young players who were bought by bigger clubs either.

Freedman always bangs on about his record with young players but I don't think that stands up to scrutiny. We're not talking about another Wenger here. Gary Megson has a better record in that regard, considering he brought in and developed Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Chungy into quality players. If we are to "develop the kids", I'm not convinced at all that Freedman is the man to do it, regardless of how many times he pats himself on the back for it.

[Hoboh]

Freedman couldn't develop a rash!

[Prufrock]

So on the one hand he was only there five minutes, but on the other he's shit because he ONLY managed to develop Clyne and Zaha?! A 15m winger, and one of the best full backs in the Prem!

[coffeymagic]

Freedman should be a politician. He says one thing and promises everything while at the same time doing exactly the opposite.

I heard him on the radio on Saturday telling us that we are 'this close' to giving someone a good hiding.

A 1-0 hdiing of course. And that will only happen if their centre forwards (yes with an S on the end) suffer a cardiac arrest or are struck by lightning as they are about to shoot.

He's got Coyle's determination to proved right at all costs. With Coyle it was Muamba with Dougie it's Medo and Spearing. He would rather lose 1-0 than win I think because he can turn around and say 'We were always in the game'. It's like he's read the manual back to front and upside down.

He gets shot of players he brought in to the club and replaces them with no better and often worse. He says he is determind to bring the youth through but promotes on loan mis-fires ahead of them.

Are we sure this isn't Gary Megson with a Dougie Freedman mask on?

He claims he's not worried because we've got 4 home games coming up. We've only won two at home all season Dougie! Where are the wins coming from?

If we stay up this year it'll be a miracle. It's as clear as custard that everything about Freedman's team is about failure and disappointment.

Thank Christ he has Lennie Larence by his side.

[BWFC_Insane]

It seems to be accepted that Freedman has this great record of promoting young players but...who exactly? It's not like there's a long list of young players who Freedman brought through and enhanced. The only young members of Palace's current squad who Freedman managed are Parr, Garvan, Williams, O'Keefe, Ward and Bolasie. Nobody seems to rate Parr, O'Keefe or Williams and Garvan wasn't even included in the squad by Holloway. Ward and Bolasie are better but Freedman was their manager for just a few months, so it's not like you can credit him for them eventually being good players. The two good young players who Freedman managed and are now good away from Palace are Zaha and Clyne, so it's not like he's produced a load of young players who were bought by bigger clubs either.

Freedman always bangs on about his record with young players but I don't think that stands up to scrutiny. We're not talking about another Wenger here. Gary Megson has a better record in that regard, considering he brought in and developed Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Chungy into quality players. If we are to "develop the kids", I'm not convinced at all that Freedman is the man to do it, regardless of how many times he pats himself on the back for it.

Right put to one side whether Freedman is responsible for the development or not of those players, because I don't think that argument is one that we can determine. But......

Clyne and Zaha are both youth products who came through the ranks at Palace broke into the team and did well before making the club transfer profits of ~£2.5M and ~£15M respectively.

Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Lee were all signed for in relative terms big fees. By my reckoning around £13M for the 4 of them. They are not examples of bringing through kids and turning them into highly valuable assets. They are examples of decent (but relatively expensive) signings. Like spending a small amount on some kid and bringing them through I might accept. But Mark Davies, the cheapest of those cost £1M. That is not the same as picking up a 17 year old for nowt and them developing into something special or bringing one through entirely.

Our last "youth product" in that sense is probably Nolan. The point being that in the future we're not going to be able to spend £1M on the next Davies let alone £5M on the next Cahill. So we have to spend a fraction of that on younger players and develop them, or bring them through ourselves. That is what the club needs to do. Now Freedman has said that is what he believes in and wants to do. The problem is right now that is somewhat of a leap of faith. But I'd suggest that were he to leave the club would be looking again for a manager with that desire and "track record" in the longer term. Managers who want money to buy experienced players are not going to be on Eddie Davies' shopping list, like it or not.

[Jugs]

How much are we spending on our academy and when are we going to see it bear some fruits?

[jaffka]

He has spent money on young players, this season. Quite a lot of money in fact.

If we are waiting for his batch of 10 year olds to break through, then the league form will have to improve drastically for him to still be here.

[coffeymagic]

Why does he constantly bang on about having to work 'within financial constraints' when we all know we're not in debt?

I mean of course we are in debt if you use the common definition of the word which means 'owing money to other individuals or groups' but we all know that we don't owe any money apart from the money which we owe.

Which is nothing. Unless of course you include the money which we do owe.

Which we don't.

So we don't owe anything apart from money.

To people.

And now we've got rid of N'Garbage there is more money to spend on Cockney rejects and people with no vowels in their name.

Or too many vowels in their name.

Exciting new 'gifts' to the people of Bolton brought to you by The Three Wise Men.

A midfielder, a midfielder and yay another midfielder.

Sponsored by Frankingsense.

[bobo the clown]

↑↑↑

How can I show that I "like" a post ?

Anyway ... "like".

♡

[coffeymagic]

I'm telling you I'm 'this' close to calling Radio Manchester - that's how annoyed I am.

Jimmy Wagg (for it is he) "Right Tony in Glasgow, standy by yer phone because we're coming to you next straight after the travel, the weather, an advert for some god awful Alan Beeswax live thing that no one wants to go to, more travel, more weather and then the travel and weather so stand by. And if you're like Tony and want your threepenneth courtesy of the BBC then all you have to do is dial 0161 - if you're outside the Greater Manchester area or on some kind of poser phone then 228 2255 and Liam will be delighted to talk to you but do so quickly as it's now quarter past five and we're only on till 6pm when Ian Cheeseman comes live from the Ethiad Stadium as Citeeeeeee.....Manchester City take on Chelsea in the biggest game of the season so far so if you want to talk about any football topic whether that be local, non league, national, international or Manchester City's glorious march to financial collapse don't just sit there pick up the phone because it's no use sitting there like a pudding listening to other people when you can have your say. And don't be worried it's only me and former Wandereers defender Simon Charlesworth helping you put the football world to rights so get dialling now. Stand by Tony we#'re coming to you next right after Lindsay's brought us the traffic and travel.

Lindsay - ....if you spot any problems on the road then call us on 0161 228 2255....'

Jimmy Wagg (for it is still he). Right in a moment we're going all the way up to Scotland to talk to a disgruntled Wanderers fan about the predicament of his club who AREN'T Manchester City and are having an absolute DOG of a season but first we're going to talk to Maureen in Crumpsall who's called about the competition me and Easmonn set on Sunday. Maureen, hi-ya matey - how are you.

Twenty minutes of school girl laughter later '....sorry Maureen the Leaning Tower of Pisa is in Rome...ha ha ha ha...right then, that's it, time has beaten us there is no more it only remains for me to say thank you to Simon Farnworth for coming into the studio and now it's over to Ian Cheeseman at the Ettyad to see if City can buy themselves this years Premier League from under the noses of Chelmsford!

Is how I imagine it going.

[LeverEnd]

It seems to be accepted that Freedman has this great record of promoting young players but...who exactly? It's not like there's a long list of young players who Freedman brought through and enhanced. The only young members of Palace's current squad who Freedman managed are Parr, Garvan, Williams, O'Keefe, Ward and Bolasie. Nobody seems to rate Parr, O'Keefe or Williams and Garvan wasn't even included in the squad by Holloway. Ward and Bolasie are better but Freedman was their manager for just a few months, so it's not like you can credit him for them eventually being good players. The two good young players who Freedman managed and are now good away from Palace are Zaha and Clyne, so it's not like he's produced a load of young players who were bought by bigger clubs either.

Freedman always bangs on about his record with young players but I don't think that stands up to scrutiny. We're not talking about another Wenger here. Gary Megson has a better record in that regard, considering he brought in and developed Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Chungy into quality players. If we are to "develop the kids", I'm not convinced at all that Freedman is the man to do it, regardless of how many times he pats himself on the back for it.

Right put to one side whether Freedman is responsible for the development or not of those players, because I don't think that argument is one that we can determine. But......

Clyne and Zaha are both youth products who came through the ranks at Palace broke into the team and did well before making the club transfer profits of ~£2.5M and ~£15M respectively.

Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Lee were all signed for in relative terms big fees. By my reckoning around £13M for the 4 of them. They are not examples of bringing through kids and turning them into highly valuable assets. They are examples of decent (but relatively expensive) signings. Like spending a small amount on some kid and bringing them through I might accept. But Mark Davies, the cheapest of those cost £1M. That is not the same as picking up a 17 year old for nowt and them developing into something special or bringing one through entirely.

Our last "youth product" in that sense is probably Nolan. The point being that in the future we're not going to be able to spend £1M on the next Davies let alone £5M on the next Cahill. So we have to spend a fraction of that on younger players and develop them, or bring them through ourselves. That is what the club needs to do. Now Freedman has said that is what he believes in and wants to do. The problem is right now that is somewhat of a leap of faith. But I'd suggest that were he to leave the club would be looking again for a manager with that desire and "track record" in the longer term. Managers who want money to buy experienced players are not going to be on Eddie Davies' shopping list, like it or not.

I don't think there's anything wrong at all with that plan, just the person chosen to carry it out. We should stick with that long-term plan, DF is not the only person in football capable of doing that.
We need someone with experience, a strong character who can also deal with grown-ups (OK, senior players!).

[BWFC_Insane]

It seems to be accepted that Freedman has this great record of promoting young players but...who exactly? It's not like there's a long list of young players who Freedman brought through and enhanced. The only young members of Palace's current squad who Freedman managed are Parr, Garvan, Williams, O'Keefe, Ward and Bolasie. Nobody seems to rate Parr, O'Keefe or Williams and Garvan wasn't even included in the squad by Holloway. Ward and Bolasie are better but Freedman was their manager for just a few months, so it's not like you can credit him for them eventually being good players. The two good young players who Freedman managed and are now good away from Palace are Zaha and Clyne, so it's not like he's produced a load of young players who were bought by bigger clubs either.

Freedman always bangs on about his record with young players but I don't think that stands up to scrutiny. We're not talking about another Wenger here. Gary Megson has a better record in that regard, considering he brought in and developed Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Chungy into quality players. If we are to "develop the kids", I'm not convinced at all that Freedman is the man to do it, regardless of how many times he pats himself on the back for it.

Right put to one side whether Freedman is responsible for the development or not of those players, because I don't think that argument is one that we can determine. But......

Clyne and Zaha are both youth products who came through the ranks at Palace broke into the team and did well before making the club transfer profits of ~£2.5M and ~£15M respectively.

Muamba, Cahill, Davies and Lee were all signed for in relative terms big fees. By my reckoning around £13M for the 4 of them. They are not examples of bringing through kids and turning them into highly valuable assets. They are examples of decent (but relatively expensive) signings. Like spending a small amount on some kid and bringing them through I might accept. But Mark Davies, the cheapest of those cost £1M. That is not the same as picking up a 17 year old for nowt and them developing into something special or bringing one through entirely.

Our last "youth product" in that sense is probably Nolan. The point being that in the future we're not going to be able to spend £1M on the next Davies let alone £5M on the next Cahill. So we have to spend a fraction of that on younger players and develop them, or bring them through ourselves. That is what the club needs to do. Now Freedman has said that is what he believes in and wants to do. The problem is right now that is somewhat of a leap of faith. But I'd suggest that were he to leave the club would be looking again for a manager with that desire and "track record" in the longer term. Managers who want money to buy experienced players are not going to be on Eddie Davies' shopping list, like it or not.

I don't think there's anything wrong at all with that plan, just the person chosen to carry it out. We should stick with that long-term plan, DF is not the only person in football capable of doing that.
We need someone with experience, a strong character who can also deal with grown-ups (OK, senior players!).

But lets be clear it isn't a conscious "we have a philosophy" plan, it is one borne out of necessity either through FFP or Eddie's shrinking pockets.

So in short - we have no choice. We probably should have been doing this in the glory years in the premiership when Allardyce led us to top 10 positions but that is water under the bridge...

My point is that few managers who are experienced will want to come in and do that. And I can't think of many who have shown an ability to do that over their careers, who we could attract.

The idea of Warnock for a few months is appealing but he's already been in a similar position, recently at Palace where he left as he "wasn't up for doing that kind of job anymore".

It isn't an attactive proposition.

[Eagle in peace]

But isn't that the hope? He's done similar at Palace and built a team on scraps and kids that was at the top of the table. Isn't that why he's here because that is the long term plan, cut the wage bill and bring in cheaper players and develop the kids?

He was a manager for about 5 minutes, that had a small run of good results that came after a longer run of crapper results. He's done nothing yet to prove anything apart from he might have got lucky with a small run of good results. On any normal he would be ranked as a punt, a long shot or an outsider. We've punted and lost the bet big time. We either keep the gamble going until there is nothing left, or we seek professional help.

Yeah, his work at Palace has been overrated. If you look at his record, the only thing which stands out is the record he had at the end of his stay at Palace. It wasn't a prolonged period of success, it was a mere 8 games which included 6 wins. That's it. Palace had lost the other 3 league games that season too so it wasn't like it was a great start. Looking at his record, you can clearly see why some Palace fans wanted him to be sacked at the start of that season.

We hired Freedman because of a run of 6 wins in 8 games. Prior to that run, Palace had played 12 league games and had a record of 10 losses and 2 draws, so lets not pretend he did anything substantial for them.

There was no turnaround for Palace. They had a decent squad, he made them a mid-table team and they had a good run of 8 games. Ian Holloway did a better job than Freedman did at Palace, without question, and I'd be thankful if I was a Palace fan that Freedman had left when he did. They should be grateful that he doesn't have an ounce of loyalty.

This (and Abdoulaye's Twin's post) is broadly what a number of us were trying to tell you when providing a balanced view to the (then) euphoria of your signing Freedman. I could understand that back then you would only think it was sour grapes on our part, but unfortunately for you, it has come to pass.

It is still an ongoing thread on our board regarding this topic, the reason being as we have explained ad infinitum, he WAS (past tense) a legend to us and some of us refuse to move on... This move has done him irreparable damage to his managerial stock IMO and has resulted in your slim opportunity to bounce back to the PL being lost. I don't know what the answer is for you guys, but I don't see the logic in carrying on with such a deflating situation.

[Lord Kangana]

Irreparable. Aside from that, couldn't agree more.

[Eagle in peace]

It seems to be accepted that Freedman has this great record of promoting young players but...who exactly? It's not like there's a long list of young players who Freedman brought through and enhanced. The only young members of Palace's current squad who Freedman managed are Parr, Garvan, Williams, O'Keefe, Ward and Bolasie. Nobody seems to rate Parr, O'Keefe or Williams and Garvan wasn't even included in the squad by Holloway. Ward and Bolasie are better but Freedman was their manager for just a few months, so it's not like you can credit him for them eventually being good players. The two good young players who Freedman managed and are now good away from Palace are Zaha and Clyne, so it's not like he's produced a load of young players who were bought by bigger clubs either.

Parr, Williams and O'Keefe are all thought of highly by the fans. Parr and O'Keefe bought in young with Johnny through our academy. We are very concerned that Pulis is marginalising Williams, which would be a travesty of his talent and commitment to the club.

Ward and Bolasie are thought of equally well, with the caveat that Bolasie's end product is often poor.

The key denominator through all these are Freedman bought them. Largely, his selection of players for us was very good. Probably the best since Sir Steve Coppell.

[Eagle in peace]

Irreparable. Aside from that, couldn't agree more.

Well corrected! My bad.