Freedman out!

[Worthy4England]

OK, quite separate, not nasty question .... what happens so that professional sportsmen who are all individually capable, much as we piss and moan, should mentally fold so rapidly at the merest hint of a set back ?

I can get the lack of confidence stuff, but to go from flowing, passing, moving to looking like they've stood on a land-mine within minutes is the symptom of something very weird.

It's probably something that happens everywhere when confidence is low. I mean we've seen that happen here for years.

I suspect Iles summed it up on his twitter 'no leaders within the squad'.

And just who assembled a fair chunk of that squad AND picked the great leader Knight to be skipper?
FFS when are you going to stop defending Freedman?
Has anyone met BWFCi?
I'm begining to think he's bloody Gartside!

I don't see any defence of Freedman or anyone else in there Hobes.

Just an observation that heads dropping becomes a habit, like winning becomes a habit.

[Bruce Rioja]

It was not a good change at all. But it did not change the course of the game, Bournemouth were already all over us.

The word 'but' is completely superfluous in that line, Fella.

[SmokinFrazier]

What did change the game was them being gifted a goal because we didn't close down their player outside our box...yet again. Five of our players were in a position where they could have possibly blocked the shot or at least put pressure on Grabban, yet they didn't go towards him which let him get a free shot off. It was a great strike and it's possible we couldn't have stopped it anyway, but you have to do a lot more than just stand there and just let players shoot. That lack of pressure on opposition players in shooting areas has cost us far too many goals this season, yet nothing changes. It's terrible.

[Worthy4England]

What did change the game was them being gifted a goal because we didn't close down their player outside our box...yet again. Five of our players were in a position where they could have possibly blocked the shot or at least put pressure on Grabban, yet they didn't go towards him which let him get a free shot off. It was a great strike and it's possible we couldn't have stopped it anyway, but you have to do a lot more than just stand there and just let players shoot. That lack of pressure on opposition players in shooting areas has cost us far too many goals this season, yet nothing changes. It's terrible.

It has.

I did think some of the team half stopped because of the head injury. Still unforgivable as you play the whistle, and not something we did when there was an earlier "head injury" and we were in possession.

[bobo the clown]

Yep, but that IS part of a manager's job. To pick people up and dust them down. Some types respond to one style, some to another. That we are so totally brittle seems like more than that.

Regarding having no leaders ... & that's probably correct ... I remember looking on the pich one time 5 or 6 years ago and having some or all of Speed, Okocha, Bergsson, Nolan, Davies, N'Gotty, Campo in his own odd way ... all captain material and thinking that character sometimes plays more a part than pure ability. How clear that is now.

Certainly Dawson last year walked in and was so clearly the organiser, the talker. It was embarrassing to see how soon he took over that role. It's obvious that Knight hasn't ever had that and it seems Spearing hasn't. McNaughton looked like he has (played again yesterday, from the bench ... albeit they were pummelled).

I think Coyle hated anyone not fitting his little born-again mentality ... anyone who stood against him was sidelined/shipped out. DF has continued that. He may look for hard work on the training ground as his marker but anyone who disagrees with him is shunted out ... and obviously there's a lot to disagree with.

Can you see him properly discussing whether a tactic or a formation is right ... or working ... with a player ? He may bemoan lack of character but he's brought in 75% of that lot so should have seen that as part of the skill-set he required.

[jaffka]

Peter Brough was a great radio ventriloquist....till they invented T.V, and then everybody realised he was actually rubbish. I'm sensing a connection somewhere. Dougie didn't even play so well on the wireless today.

If Tango, who comes across to me as one of the more patient fans and willing to give people a chance is losing faith and questioning Duggie, then quite clearly things are going very wrong.

[Harry Genshaw]

I was thinking about Blackburn's situation today. Joke owners, players on Premiership wages, seemingly clueless who fired 3 managers in quick succession. Now no way would I ever want us to go down that kind of route - but their dismissals of Appleton (Freedman MKII) and Berg don't look too daft now

[LeverEnd]

I was thinking about Blackburn's situation today. Joke owners, players on Premiership wages, seemingly clueless who fired 3 managers in quick succession. Now no way would I ever want us to go down that kind of route - but their dismissals of Appleton (Freedman MKII) and Berg don't look too daft now

I think it still looks daft, but to think they can go through all that and still be better than us says a lot.

[Worthy4England]

I'm not at all convinced the "stability" isn't overrated. I'd be quite surprised if most Champ teams didn't chop n change until they found a manager that worked...

Burnley have been through plenty of Managers...on their 3rd since Coyle

Leicester are on their 12th since 2000, Derby on their 9th, Forest seem to have had a few....

Sure when you get a decent one, you want to keep them to get the stability, but until you get a decent one, why not change bad ones?

[SmokinFrazier]

I'm not at all convinced the "stability" isn't overrated. I'd be quite surprised if most Champ teams didn't chop n change until they found a manager that worked...

Burnley have been through plenty of Managers...on their 3rd since Coyle

Leicester are on their 12th since 2000, Derby on their 9th, Forest seem to have had a few....

Sure when you get a decent one, you want to keep them to get the stability, but until you get a decent one, why not change bad ones?

Yeah, I agree with this.

There's no guarantee that if you stick with a poor manager, he'll eventually come good and things will improve. That might happen but it's not guaranteed and if results aren't right, you can't just assume things will get better in the long term, especially whilst retaining a manager who is damaging the club. I don't want us to chop and change too often but I would prefer that to sticking with an inept manager, just to avoid disrupting things too often. Stability isn't what we need, we need results and good performances.

One of the mistakes we've made in the past is not changing managers quickly enough and if we do that again, it might result in relegation to League One. We cannot afford that to happen. Freedman should go quickly and if his successor is no good, get rid of him too and repeat that until we find someone capable of taking us places. The only way we'll get back to the Premier League is with a good manager, not sticking with a failure. You don't get additional points for loyalty.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm not at all convinced the "stability" isn't overrated. I'd be quite surprised if most Champ teams didn't chop n change until they found a manager that worked...

Burnley have been through plenty of Managers...on their 3rd since Coyle

Leicester are on their 12th since 2000, Derby on their 9th, Forest seem to have had a few....

Sure when you get a decent one, you want to keep them to get the stability, but until you get a decent one, why not change bad ones?

Yeah, I agree with this.

There's no guarantee that if you stick with a poor manager, he'll eventually come good and things will improve. That might happen but it's not guaranteed and if results aren't right, you can't just assume things will get better in the long term, especially whilst retaining a manager who is damaging the club. I don't want us to chop and change too often but I would prefer that to sticking with an inept manager, just to avoid disrupting things too often. Stability isn't what we need, we need results and good performances.

One of the mistakes we've made in the past is not changing managers quickly enough and if we do that again, it might result in relegation to League One. We cannot afford that to happen. Freedman should go quickly and if his successor is no good, get rid of him too and repeat that until we find someone capable of taking us places. The only way we'll get back to the Premier League is with a good manager, not sticking with a failure. You don't get additional points for loyalty.

If you want to keep changing managers then I suggest you pay for it. Cos Eddie ain't putting anymore in that is obvious,

And we have on money. It would cost Leeds 5M to sack McDermott. Sacking and getting managers isn't cheap and we have nowt to do it with. Nowt.

[SmokinFrazier]

I'm not at all convinced the "stability" isn't overrated. I'd be quite surprised if most Champ teams didn't chop n change until they found a manager that worked...

Burnley have been through plenty of Managers...on their 3rd since Coyle

Leicester are on their 12th since 2000, Derby on their 9th, Forest seem to have had a few....

Sure when you get a decent one, you want to keep them to get the stability, but until you get a decent one, why not change bad ones?

Yeah, I agree with this.

There's no guarantee that if you stick with a poor manager, he'll eventually come good and things will improve. That might happen but it's not guaranteed and if results aren't right, you can't just assume things will get better in the long term, especially whilst retaining a manager who is damaging the club. I don't want us to chop and change too often but I would prefer that to sticking with an inept manager, just to avoid disrupting things too often. Stability isn't what we need, we need results and good performances.

One of the mistakes we've made in the past is not changing managers quickly enough and if we do that again, it might result in relegation to League One. We cannot afford that to happen. Freedman should go quickly and if his successor is no good, get rid of him too and repeat that until we find someone capable of taking us places. The only way we'll get back to the Premier League is with a good manager, not sticking with a failure. You don't get additional points for loyalty.

If you want to keep changing managers then I suggest you pay for it. Cos Eddie ain't putting anymore in that is obvious,

And we have on money. It would cost Leeds 5M to sack McDermott. Sacking and getting managers isn't cheap and we have nowt to do it with. Nowt.

It'll cost Eddie more to not sack Freedman. The only way to start making money is by hiring the right man and getting promoted.

I have no doubts at all that when Davies decides Freedman has to go, he will do. He has the money to do it, the only issue is FFP but we won't make that anyway, regardless of whether Freedman gets sacked or not. He's not on a lengthy contract, so getting rid won't make much difference to us. It has to be done, for many reasons including financial.

[Worthy4England]

Managers shouldn't be different than players particularly.

If you have to shell out for one decent Manager, instead of the 3 shit midfielders they were going to sign, but the new guy can do better with what you've got, then that isn't a bad thing.

[BWFC_Insane]

It'll cost Eddie more to not sack Freedman. The only way to start making money is by hiring the right man and getting promoted.

I have no doubts at all that when Davies decides Freedman has to go, he will do. He has the money to do it, the only issue is FFP but we won't make that anyway, regardless of whether Freedman gets sacked or not. He's not on a lengthy contract, so getting rid won't make much difference to us. It has to be done, for many reasons including financial.

We didn't make any money in the premiership over the 11 years we were there. Quite the opposite we lost a fortune. So why you think that would be any different now is mind boggling.

I don't think Eddie is looking to make money. I suspect he just isn't going to invest anymore money into BWFC.

[Hoboh]

I'm not at all convinced the "stability" isn't overrated. I'd be quite surprised if most Champ teams didn't chop n change until they found a manager that worked...

Burnley have been through plenty of Managers...on their 3rd since Coyle

Leicester are on their 12th since 2000, Derby on their 9th, Forest seem to have had a few....

Sure when you get a decent one, you want to keep them to get the stability, but until you get a decent one, why not change bad ones?

Yeah, I agree with this.

There's no guarantee that if you stick with a poor manager, he'll eventually come good and things will improve. That might happen but it's not guaranteed and if results aren't right, you can't just assume things will get better in the long term, especially whilst retaining a manager who is damaging the club. I don't want us to chop and change too often but I would prefer that to sticking with an inept manager, just to avoid disrupting things too often. Stability isn't what we need, we need results and good performances.

One of the mistakes we've made in the past is not changing managers quickly enough and if we do that again, it might result in relegation to League One. We cannot afford that to happen. Freedman should go quickly and if his successor is no good, get rid of him too and repeat that until we find someone capable of taking us places. The only way we'll get back to the Premier League is with a good manager, not sticking with a failure. You don't get additional points for loyalty.

If you want to keep changing managers then I suggest you pay for it. Cos Eddie ain't putting anymore in that is obvious,

And we have on money. It would cost Leeds 5M to sack McDermott. Sacking and getting managers isn't cheap and we have nowt to do it with. Nowt.

Ok I'll follow that to its conclusion, last one out...........

I supose Cuadrilla can start to move to swell Eddies coffers then

[jaffka]

I'm not at all convinced the "stability" isn't overrated. I'd be quite surprised if most Champ teams didn't chop n change until they found a manager that worked...

Burnley have been through plenty of Managers...on their 3rd since Coyle

Leicester are on their 12th since 2000, Derby on their 9th, Forest seem to have had a few....

Sure when you get a decent one, you want to keep them to get the stability, but until you get a decent one, why not change bad ones?

Yeah, I agree with this.

There's no guarantee that if you stick with a poor manager, he'll eventually come good and things will improve. That might happen but it's not guaranteed and if results aren't right, you can't just assume things will get better in the long term, especially whilst retaining a manager who is damaging the club. I don't want us to chop and change too often but I would prefer that to sticking with an inept manager, just to avoid disrupting things too often. Stability isn't what we need, we need results and good performances.

One of the mistakes we've made in the past is not changing managers quickly enough and if we do that again, it might result in relegation to League One. We cannot afford that to happen. Freedman should go quickly and if his successor is no good, get rid of him too and repeat that until we find someone capable of taking us places. The only way we'll get back to the Premier League is with a good manager, not sticking with a failure. You don't get additional points for loyalty.

If you want to keep changing managers then I suggest you pay for it. Cos Eddie ain't putting anymore in that is obvious,

And we have on money. It would cost Leeds 5M to sack McDermott. Sacking and getting managers isn't cheap and we have nowt to do it with. Nowt.

Again, from you, that is just pure and utter rubbish.

If dogshit football is being served up, which it is, people vote with their feet, which they are.

[bobo the clown]

14,000 there yesterday.

10-13,000 less than at better times.

That's a lot of feet voting not to bother .... & no wonder tbh.

[Tombwfc]

It'll cost Eddie more to not sack Freedman. The only way to start making money is by hiring the right man and getting promoted.

I have no doubts at all that when Davies decides Freedman has to go, he will do. He has the money to do it, the only issue is FFP but we won't make that anyway, regardless of whether Freedman gets sacked or not. He's not on a lengthy contract, so getting rid won't make much difference to us. It has to be done, for many reasons including financial.

We didn't make any money in the premiership over the 11 years we were there. Quite the opposite we lost a fortune. So why you think that would be any different now is mind boggling.

I don't think Eddie is looking to make money. I suspect he just isn't going to invest anymore money into BWFC.

Who paid out for Spearing then?

Anyway, we're stuck paying Dougie for the next 15 months of his contract whether we like it or not. So the real question is not whether we can find the lump sum to pay off Dougie (which I don't think anybody ever really does), but if we can find the 500k-600k a year to bring in somebody new.

Given that's less than half we were paying Ngog, I'd guess we can. And if we lose the next two, we will.

[SmokinFrazier]

It'll cost Eddie more to not sack Freedman. The only way to start making money is by hiring the right man and getting promoted.

I have no doubts at all that when Davies decides Freedman has to go, he will do. He has the money to do it, the only issue is FFP but we won't make that anyway, regardless of whether Freedman gets sacked or not. He's not on a lengthy contract, so getting rid won't make much difference to us. It has to be done, for many reasons including financial.

We didn't make any money in the premiership over the 11 years we were there. Quite the opposite we lost a fortune. So why you think that would be any different now is mind boggling.

I don't think Eddie is looking to make money. I suspect he just isn't going to invest anymore money into BWFC.

I didn't say I think that would be any different, I said it's the only way. Without that extra TV money the Premier League would provide, we have absolutely no chance of turning a profit in the next few years. That's the only way we can start to make money, as I said.

And as has been pointed out, Davies wouldn't have signed Spearing if the money wasn't there. He's still a multi-millionaire and if he wanted to, I'm sure we could spend £10m on a player tomorrow. The issue is FFP, not Davies' wealth, but if the situation is drastic enough, he'll have to make the right call regardless of FFP.

On a side note, do you think Freedman should be sacked?

[Thor]

He's not on a lengthy contract, so getting rid won't make much difference to us. It has to be done, for many reasons including financial.[/quote]

It is not normal practice to have to pay out a managers contract in full. It's most probably a percentage or a negotiated sum. The compensation we paid to get him from Palace is water under the bridge though!