Dougie Freedman - New Manager

[jonnycooper]

Good and decisive leaders don't tend to appoint someone then sack them 10 games later.

How long did Sammy Lee get?

Sammy Lee was like a Steve Kean appointment. Took a club that was stable and doing well and started a drastic downturn in fortunes, whereas DF has undoubtedly made a disappointing start but I'm bearing in mind that he inherited a pile of shit and hasn't managed to make it smell like roses. He's got new signings to come in and can only be judged accurately when they've had chance to settle in. He also knows the division, unlike Solbakken and Berg.

Problem is, if you're us Wolves or Blackburn you don't just get a great manager cos they go to bigger clubs, you take a punt on someone and develop him. Or you get a manager proven in relative mediocrity like we did with megson.

Problem with taking a punt is you take a risk, we'll see if Gartside's paid off in due course.

He knows this division(unlike Solbakken and Berg) Mourinho,Mancini,Ancelotti and Wenger knew the PL then I take it..

[wanderers_on_tour]

Good and decisive leaders don't tend to appoint someone then sack them 10 games later.

How long did Sammy Lee get?

Sammy Lee was like a Steve Kean appointment. Took a club that was stable and doing well and started a drastic downturn in fortunes, whereas DF has undoubtedly made a disappointing start but I'm bearing in mind that he inherited a pile of shit and hasn't managed to make it smell like roses. He's got new signings to come in and can only be judged accurately when they've had chance to settle in. He also knows the division, unlike Solbakken and Berg.

Problem is, if you're us Wolves or Blackburn you don't just get a great manager cos they go to bigger clubs, you take a punt on someone and develop him. Or you get a manager proven in relative mediocrity like we did with megson.

Problem with taking a punt is you take a risk, we'll see if Gartside's paid off in due course.

He knows this division(unlike Solbakken and Berg) Mourinho,Mancini,Ancelotti and Wenger knew the PL then I take it..

Maybe not but each had won things before joining the premier league (league titles, champions league etc.) that help'd justify their appointment and minimize the gamble subsequently. Even though they hadn't played in the English top flight they'd played in some of the most competitive domestic leagues in Europe (Wenger aside) and had beaten premier league sides in European competition. I don't think you can really compare the four to Solbakken and Berg...

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Are you suggesting we follow Blackburn's example? I suppose McLeish is free now...

Blackburn shouldn't have got rid of Kean, I don't think. However, they were right to sack Berg when they did. That was good, decisive leadership.

Wrong. They shouldn't have sacked Allardyce and promoted Kean. Berg was madness. Megson was never going to work for us. Sammy Lee deserved a shot but was patently not a manager once we had a chance to see him in action. Coyle seemed like a good appointment, but hindsight tells us otherwise. I didn't think Dougie was right for us, but we need to stick by someone. 5 years of decline with a momentary few months of doing ok will take time to fix. Our players have no fight and belief. We need leaders. If some of Dougie's new signings have that quality, then we'll start to see an upturn in the coming weeks.

But to suggest we follow Blackburn's lead of random appointments and sackings is ludicrous. BL3 - they may be above us, but they're hardly ripping apart the division are they.

[boltonboris]

They didn't sack Allardyce got footballing reasons though, did they? I think that was obvious from the beginning

[thebish]

And to add to that one of the many arguments used, by you and others I think, when searching for a manager, was that with a manager like say McLeish or McCarthy, we do sort of already know their limitations.

nope - I NEVER ONCE called for McCarthy or McCleish or made any such argument - you are simply making stuff up. I don't know why you continually do that...

my vote was for solskjaer - Freedman had not occurred to me and I had no opinion about him either way.

[thebish]

But to suggest we follow Blackburn's lead of random appointments and sackings is ludicrous. BL3 - they may be above us, but they're hardly ripping apart the division are they.

to be fair, I'm not really sure that was BL3's point. He was pointing out that despite being an utter shambles this season in terms of the coming and going of managers - Blackburn are still outperforming us. It was yet another dig at Freedman - that's all - if Freedman can't get our squad to outperform Blackburn despite the total shambles going on at Blackburn - then Freedman hasn't had the start we had hoped for...

it's not an unreasonable point - but it's easy to lose BL3's reasonable observations...

I asked BL3 what he attributed b'burn's success to.. he hasn't answered (not untypically)

my guess is that is largely nothing to do with management - but mostly to do with cash - having spent £8mill on a striker who is banging them in for fun...

[BWFC_Insane]

And to add to that one of the many arguments used, by you and others I think, when searching for a manager, was that with a manager like say McLeish or McCarthy, we do sort of already know their limitations.

nope - I NEVER ONCE called for McCarthy or McCleish or made any such argument - you are simply making stuff up. I don't know why you continually do that...

my vote was for solskjaer - Freedman had not occurred to me and I had no opinion about him either way.

I think you've misread what I've said.

I remember at the time you saying along the lines of "not wanting one of the managerial names who are constantly on the managerial merrygoround". So the likes of McLeish and McCarthy. And the reason for that being that we already know what their limitations are.

That was the point I was making about track record etc.....

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

But to suggest we follow Blackburn's lead of random appointments and sackings is ludicrous. BL3 - they may be above us, but they're hardly ripping apart the division are they.

to be fair, I'm not really sure that was BL3's point. He was pointing out that despite being an utter shambles this season in terms of the coming and going of managers - Blackburn are still outperforming us. It was yet another dig at Freedman - that's all - if Freedman can't get our squad to outperform Blackburn despite the total shambles going on at Blackburn - then Freedman hasn't had the start we had hoped for...

it's not an unreasonable point - but it's easy to lose BL3's reasonable observations...

I asked BL3 what he attributed b'burn's success to.. he hasn't answered (not untypically)

my guess is that is largely nothing to do with management - but mostly to do with cash - having spent £8mill on a striker who is banging them in for fun...

Ah, poor construction of post on my part. The 1st sentence in the bit you've quoted was still in response to the OP. Frazier? The 2nd sentence was to BL3. Blackburn have been a shambles, no doubt there. Some might argue that it is 2 sets of players and ours are the more fecked up and it is just 2 poor situations. Not saying that is the case, but it might be that our mentality is so weak that it doesn't matter how good our players are, they simply can't perform as a group. I don't think anyone can argue that we don'tneed a player on that pitch that is going to gee them up and stir some fighting spirit. That may be all it needs?

[chester white]

Another question for BL3 which I expect to get ignored. How much damage do you believe Coyle did to the club and do you hold him accountable at all for the situation we currently find ourselves in?

[thebish]

whilst it's irritating that BL3 won't answer questions about Coyle, and I'm sure he has his own reasons... (embarassment??) - do people have to pass some kind of anti-Coyle test before they are allowed to voice opinions on a different manager?

[chester white]

I don't think it's relevant to every poster. But for someone as anti-Freedman as BL3 appears, I'm quite intrigued by his thoughts on Coyle and if he feels he is at all culpable for our current position.

[BL3]

All my opinions are on this site in writing. That's how a forum works. Fast forward a few months and we'll have people asking what i thought about Freedman because they can't be arsed to keep up or check back and yet these are the same people who complain about others 'banging the same drum' all the time. Maybe if they had an attention span longer than a goldfish, they wouldn't need to be continually reminded.

[boltonboris]

Perhaps he thinks the last bloke was shit and that the new bloke is showing himself to be no better at the moment. And is questioning what the managerial change has actually achieved..?

Which is pretty much where I am.

Coyle deserved to be sacked as he skid for 2 and a half years. The new bloke should get some time, but nowhere near the time Coyle was allowed. Keeping managers can be more damaging than cutting ties.

[BWFC_Insane]

Perhaps he thinks the last bloke was shit and that the new bloke is showing himself to be no better at the moment. And is questioning what the managerial change has actually achieved..?

Which is pretty much where I am.

Coyle deserved to be sacked as he skid for 2 and a half years. The new bloke should get some time, but nowhere near the time Coyle was allowed. Keeping managers can be more damaging than cutting ties.

But he didn't because he constantly argued that results were not Coyle's fault and that he should be given more time. When Coyle was in charge that is.

[boltonboris]

I haven't seen him argue that to be honest. I stand corrected.

[BL3]

Perhaps he thinks the last bloke was shit and that the new bloke is showing himself to be no better at the moment. And is questioning what the managerial change has actually achieved..?

Which is pretty much where I am.

Coyle deserved to be sacked as he skid for 2 and a half years. The new bloke should get some time, but nowhere near the time Coyle was allowed. Keeping managers can be more damaging than cutting ties.

But he didn't because he constantly argued that results were not Coyle's fault and that he should be given more time. When Coyle was in charge that is.

The circumstances were completely different. Coyle had a track record of success before he joined us and had been fairly successful during his time with us up to his third season. At that point he lost two of his better players before the season even started, not to mention Elmander and Sturridge, who contributed most of the goals the season before. It's no real surprise that we struggled and yet even then we almost managed to stay up. I certainly don't think that he deserves some of the insults you've thrown his way.

He was sacked because the club thought we needed someone to 'get us back on track'. You can excuse Freedman by saying he's doing no worse than Coyle did this season, but he was brought in to do better and he isn't. He has failed to 'get us back on track' and arguing that he's inherited a load of shite players is a lame excuse when other managers are doing far better with far fewer resources.

[thebish]

Perhaps he thinks the last bloke was shit and that the new bloke is showing himself to be no better at the moment. And is questioning what the managerial change has actually achieved..?

Which is pretty much where I am.

Coyle deserved to be sacked as he skid for 2 and a half years. The new bloke should get some time, but nowhere near the time Coyle was allowed. Keeping managers can be more damaging than cutting ties.

But he didn't because he constantly argued that results were not Coyle's fault and that he should be given more time. When Coyle was in charge that is.

tsk... digging up what a poster has said in the past!! whatever next!!

(joke!)

[BWFC_Insane]

Perhaps he thinks the last bloke was shit and that the new bloke is showing himself to be no better at the moment. And is questioning what the managerial change has actually achieved..?

Which is pretty much where I am.

Coyle deserved to be sacked as he skid for 2 and a half years. The new bloke should get some time, but nowhere near the time Coyle was allowed. Keeping managers can be more damaging than cutting ties.

But he didn't because he constantly argued that results were not Coyle's fault and that he should be given more time. When Coyle was in charge that is.

The circumstances were completely different. Coyle had a track record of success before he joined us and had been fairly successful during his time with us up to his third season. At that point he lost two of his better players before the season even started, not to mention Elmander and Sturridge, who contributed most of the goals the season before. It's no real surprise that we struggled and yet even then we almost managed to stay up. I certainly don't think that he deserves some of the insults you've thrown his way.

He was sacked because the club thought we needed someone to 'get us back on track'. You can excuse Freedman by saying he's doing no worse than Coyle did this season, but he was brought in to do better and he isn't. He has failed to 'get us back on track' and arguing that he's inherited a load of shite players is a lame excuse when other managers are doing far better with far fewer resources.

Ok, I can't say I agree, but thanks for the post because at least there is a debate to be had there.

The thing with Coyle was that he had a history of going to a club, being positive and enthusiastic achieving some upwards momentum, then moving elsewhere. At Bolton it was really the first time, he faced criticism, things went wrong over a prolonged period, and I'd argue the first time his managerial skills were genuinely tested.

You can call it an impossible task if you wish, but I don't believe it really was.

As has been shown last year our wage bill dwarfed several teams who finished well above us. It was a larger wage bill than the one Coyle himself inherited. So it's not like we can argue that we were a bottom 3 team on resources.

The injuries were terribly unlucky, yes. But having said that, we went down, primarily because we were not able to grind out a few more draws. And the majority of that blame lies with a manager who continually would throw away relatively safe points chasing a win that never came. It was a recurring theme last season.

You then have to factor in considerable amounts of money spent on Sordell, NGog, Alonso and Ream. None of which look even now like money well spent. Freedman is finally starting to get something out of Sordell, but Coyle seemed prepared to virtually write off his 3M buy. Alonso has only really now started showing any sort of prolonged form and even when fit was often not selected by Coyle. And NGog has been quite dissapointing considering the amount we spent on him. Given the nature of where we were as a club the fact we needed to stay in the league, and the amounts spent, it just wasn't a sound transfer policy. It didn't at times make any sense. And it was ultimately very costly.

As for your points on Freedman, I'd still say it's very early days. And I'd also say you didn't seem to berate Coyle for managers doing far better on lower resources last season, so perhaps, it's time to just cut Freedman a little bit of slack?

[BL3]

Ok, I can't say I agree, but thanks for the post because at least there is a debate to be had there.

There's nothing there that i haven't said before. You even referred to my opinion in your previous post, so it's not like you didn't know what my views were either.

The thing with Coyle was that he had a history of going to a club, being positive and enthusiastic achieving some upwards momentum, then moving elsewhere. At Bolton it was really the first time, he faced criticism, things went wrong over a prolonged period, and I'd argue the first time his managerial skills were genuinely tested. You can call it an impossible task if you wish, but I don't believe it really was.

I didn't call it an 'impossible task' but the set of circumstances he faced last season would have tested the most experienced manager's ability.

As has been shown last year our wage bill dwarfed several teams who finished well above us. It was a larger wage bill than the one Coyle himself inherited. So it's not like we can argue that we were a bottom 3 team on resources.

Our wage bill is currently dwarfing those of most of the Championship, so if it wasn't an excuse for Coyle, why is it an excuse for Freedman?

You then have to factor in considerable amounts of money spent on Sordell, NGog, Alonso and Ream. None of which look even now like money well spent.

That's just plain bollocks. Even if you argue that they weren't good enough for the Premier League, they're plenty good enough for this league.

Freedman is finally starting to get something out of Sordell, but Coyle seemed prepared to virtually write off his 3M buy.

Coyle didn't 'write him off', it's now clear why he wasn't playing at the time, even Freedman has confirmed it.

As for your points on Freedman, I'd still say it's very early days. And I'd also say you didn't seem to berate Coyle for managers doing far better on lower resources last season, so perhaps, it's time to just cut Freedman a little bit of slack?

I've already answered both those points in your previous post.

[BWFC_Insane]

Ok, I can't say I agree, but thanks for the post because at least there is a debate to be had there.

There's nothing there that i haven't said before. You even referred to my opinion in your previous post, so it's not like you didn't know what my views were either.

The thing with Coyle was that he had a history of going to a club, being positive and enthusiastic achieving some upwards momentum, then moving elsewhere. At Bolton it was really the first time, he faced criticism, things went wrong over a prolonged period, and I'd argue the first time his managerial skills were genuinely tested. You can call it an impossible task if you wish, but I don't believe it really was.

I didn't call it an 'impossible task' but the set of circumstances he faced last season would have tested the most experienced manager's ability.

As has been shown last year our wage bill dwarfed several teams who finished well above us. It was a larger wage bill than the one Coyle himself inherited. So it's not like we can argue that we were a bottom 3 team on resources.

Our wage bill is currently dwarfing those of most of the Championship, so if it wasn't an excuse for Coyle, why is it an excuse for Freedman?

You then have to factor in considerable amounts of money spent on Sordell, NGog, Alonso and Ream. None of which look even now like money well spent.

That's just plain bollocks. Even if you argue that they weren't good enough for the Premier League, they're plenty good enough for this league.

Freedman is finally starting to get something out of Sordell, but Coyle seemed prepared to virtually write off his 3M buy.

Coyle didn't 'write him off', it's now clear why he wasn't playing at the time, even Freedman has confirmed it.

As for your points on Freedman, I'd still say it's very early days. And I'd also say you didn't seem to berate Coyle for managers doing far better on lower resources last season, so perhaps, it's time to just cut Freedman a little bit of slack?

I've already answered both those points in your previous post.

The bit in bold. You said it yourself, we were a team looking to survive in the premiership.

He spent considerable money on players that were either not suitable for that job, or not good enough to do it.

And thats my point, they may well in time be decent players at one level or another. But what we needed was players to come in and do a job THERE and THEN. Sure if he'd spent far less than he did, we could say that was ok. But 7M on Sordell and NGog given their contributions to keeping us up, was a shocking use of resources at the time.

And to further the point re Sordell, yes we know why he wasn't playing. But Coyle had him for far longer than Freedman has, so why wasn't Coyle doing the fitness and off the field work Dougie is to enable Sordell to be on the pitch? It's even worse when you consider Coyle was the one who spent the £3M on him, yet didn't appear to be doing anything to rectify the situation!