Coyle - Time to go? [post-Everton]

[officer_dibble]

The davies thing was obvious, they just dropped felaini in to win goal kicks against him. we kept on kicking it to him in the same spot!

[Hoboh]

OWEN COYLE insists Bolton have made massive strides during his two years in charge.

Coyle left Burnley to succeed Gary Megson as Trotters boss in January 2010 when they were second from bottom and in danger of relegation to the Championship.

This season, Bolton are only one place better off after a difficult start which has been compounded by injuries.

But ahead of tomorrow's game with Everton at the Reebok, Coyle is adamant the club are in a much healtheir position than when he took over.

He said: "There has been huge improvement.

"We are two years down the line and the things we have put in place in terms of infrastructure have made it a better place.

"I have to stress, where we are at the moment is due to a number of things, some of which are out of our control.

"What I have to do is see through that and look at the bigger picture.

"It is not bravado, I know that by the end of the season, we will not be in the bottom three."

Sums up the blind man in charge of the team

JUST GO!

[Prufrock]

The davies thing was obvious, they just dropped felaini in to win goal kicks against him. we kept on kicking it to him in the same spot!

The complete lack of a plan in terms of actually keeping the ball means we go sideways sideways backwards sideways backwards to Jussi, who then has to boot it long. Fellaini was immense yesterday, but even when Davies went off we still continued to smash it long. Jussi would try to roll it out to Cahill, and we'd keep it for a bit but eventually end up with Jussi having to go long. It's fecking embarrassing. Coyle came in with this 'attractive football' story, but where is it. Swansea are, the two wingers aside (and I was wrong about Nathan Dyer, I thought he was shit) a set of second tier footballers, but they have a plan, they know their job and they keep the ball. Norwich are a similar story. Our 'attractive football' manager doesn't seem to have a clue as to how he gets the players to do so, if just keep saying it doesn't work. It's a myth.

I've always said I prefer ball on the deck because I think it gives you a better chance of winning games. I don't give a shit about entertainment. That it happens to be better to watch is a happy coincidence. But so many managers get this reputation for 'good football' based entirely on saying it a lot. The very few Blackburn fans who don't want rid of Kean defend him coz he plays 'good football' after the 'dross' (I fckuning hate that word, used exclusively by cnuts) of Big Sam. Have they watched them? They're exactly the same, just with some players with foreign names and a manager who isn't Allardyce. Throw-ins and set pieces. Nowt wrong with 'em if they're successful (Mr Kean's problem being obvious). Even Big Sam himself has clocked on. Post match interview yesterday started ranting about his reputation (all in the third person of course) and how his West Ham team get the ball down and play. It'll work too, if they win games. Win games, and say you play nice football, and you get away with it. Don't kick up a fuss about how nice it was and you get a reputation for being a long ball merchant. No recovering from that.

I'm not convinced the football under OC has ever been that good. The mentality was more positive, the place was happier, and we were winning more games, but they aren't the same thing. Sure we have had flashes, Mavies v Blackpool and Holden v Wolves being the best two, but then Kavies v Spurs under yon mon was pretty good too. Sometimes good players score good goals. Under Allardyce we had a game plan. We boxed teams in, won set pieces, got crosses in, and picked up all of the second balls. We had a plan. Swansea under Rodgers, play it out from the back, the keeper never goes long, every time he gets it, the centre halves split, they make the pitch big, and they play out. THey have a plan. We just muddle along on positivity. Very bad.

[Turkish Trotter]

The davies thing was obvious, they just dropped felaini in to win goal kicks against him. we kept on kicking it to him in the same spot!

The complete lack of a plan in terms of actually keeping the ball means we go sideways sideways backwards sideways backwards to Jussi, who then has to boot it long. Fellaini was immense yesterday, but even when Davies went off we still continued to smash it long. Jussi would try to roll it out to Cahill, and we'd keep it for a bit but eventually end up with Jussi having to go long. It's fecking embarrassing. Coyle came in with this 'attractive football' story, but where is it. Swansea are, the two wingers aside (and I was wrong about Nathan Dyer, I thought he was shit) a set of second tier footballers, but they have a plan, they know their job and they keep the ball. Norwich are a similar story. Our 'attractive football' manager doesn't seem to have a clue as to how he gets the players to do so, if just keep saying it doesn't work. It's a myth.

I've always said I prefer ball on the deck because I think it gives you a better chance of winning games. I don't give a shit about entertainment. That it happens to be better to watch is a happy coincidence. But so many managers get this reputation for 'good football' based entirely on saying it a lot. The very few Blackburn fans who don't want rid of Kean defend him coz he plays 'good football' after the 'dross' (I fckuning hate that word, used exclusively by cnuts) of Big Sam. Have they watched them? They're exactly the same, just with some players with foreign names and a manager who isn't Allardyce. Throw-ins and set pieces. Nowt wrong with 'em if they're successful (Mr Kean's problem being obvious). Even Big Sam himself has clocked on. Post match interview yesterday started ranting about his reputation (all in the third person of course) and how his West Ham team get the ball down and play. It'll work too, if they win games. Win games, and say you play nice football, and you get away with it. Don't kick up a fuss about how nice it was and you get a reputation for being a long ball merchant. No recovering from that.

I'm not convinced the football under OC has ever been that good. The mentality was more positive, the place was happier, and we were winning more games, but they aren't the same thing. Sure we have had flashes, Mavies v Blackpool and Holden v Wolves being the best two, but then Kavies v Spurs under yon mon was pretty good too. Sometimes good players score good goals. Under Allardyce we had a game plan. We boxed teams in, won set pieces, got crosses in, and picked up all of the second balls. We had a plan. Swansea under Rodgers, play it out from the back, the keeper never goes long, every time he gets it, the centre halves split, they make the pitch big, and they play out. THey have a plan. We just muddle along on positivity. Very bad.

Agree with most of this.
If you watched goals on Sunday, after the 1st Saturday of season, SKD and Sam rickets were on. Both said at the time that we don't have defensive strategy and Coyle sends the team out to play ad hoc.
I remember thinking at the time, that can't be right. It appears I was wrong, what they said made sense.

[officer_dibble]

Not disagreeing Pru

I don't think Fellaini was that good yesterday to be honest, he didn't need to be...

[Prufrock]

I thought he was class. He didn't just win every header, as plenty have done this year, whenever possible he brought it down and played the easy ball. equally whenever they won it in the middle, he kept it, drew our midfield in and then set the full back off. Unspectacular, but faultless, accepting (I'm not OC, honest) that we made it sooooo easy for him. He's a massive cnut though!

[Armchair Wanderer]

The complete lack of a plan in terms of actually keeping the ball means we go sideways sideways backwards sideways backwards to Jussi, who then has to boot it long.

We were trying to pass second half, but like Pru says, no-one was moving and demanding the ball so there was nowhere for it to go other than backwards. When Pratley came on he did that recycling thig he does which at least got a bit more movement going on. Tuncay looked like he wanted the ball up front, some kind of throughball or ball over the top to chase, but it didn't come. At the start of the game the hoofs up to SKD weren't working and I almost fell off my seat when Jussi bowled it out later in the half, it was after a break in play when someone must have said something.

[BWFC_Insane]

The davies thing was obvious, they just dropped felaini in to win goal kicks against him. we kept on kicking it to him in the same spot!

The complete lack of a plan in terms of actually keeping the ball means we go sideways sideways backwards sideways backwards to Jussi, who then has to boot it long. Fellaini was immense yesterday, but even when Davies went off we still continued to smash it long. Jussi would try to roll it out to Cahill, and we'd keep it for a bit but eventually end up with Jussi having to go long. It's fecking embarrassing. Coyle came in with this 'attractive football' story, but where is it. Swansea are, the two wingers aside (and I was wrong about Nathan Dyer, I thought he was shit) a set of second tier footballers, but they have a plan, they know their job and they keep the ball. Norwich are a similar story. Our 'attractive football' manager doesn't seem to have a clue as to how he gets the players to do so, if just keep saying it doesn't work. It's a myth.

I've always said I prefer ball on the deck because I think it gives you a better chance of winning games. I don't give a shit about entertainment. That it happens to be better to watch is a happy coincidence. But so many managers get this reputation for 'good football' based entirely on saying it a lot. The very few Blackburn fans who don't want rid of Kean defend him coz he plays 'good football' after the 'dross' (I fckuning hate that word, used exclusively by cnuts) of Big Sam. Have they watched them? They're exactly the same, just with some players with foreign names and a manager who isn't Allardyce. Throw-ins and set pieces. Nowt wrong with 'em if they're successful (Mr Kean's problem being obvious). Even Big Sam himself has clocked on. Post match interview yesterday started ranting about his reputation (all in the third person of course) and how his West Ham team get the ball down and play. It'll work too, if they win games. Win games, and say you play nice football, and you get away with it. Don't kick up a fuss about how nice it was and you get a reputation for being a long ball merchant. No recovering from that.

I'm not convinced the football under OC has ever been that good. The mentality was more positive, the place was happier, and we were winning more games, but they aren't the same thing. Sure we have had flashes, Mavies v Blackpool and Holden v Wolves being the best two, but then Kavies v Spurs under yon mon was pretty good too. Sometimes good players score good goals. Under Allardyce we had a game plan. We boxed teams in, won set pieces, got crosses in, and picked up all of the second balls. We had a plan. Swansea under Rodgers, play it out from the back, the keeper never goes long, every time he gets it, the centre halves split, they make the pitch big, and they play out. THey have a plan. We just muddle along on positivity. Very bad.

Yeah pretty much what Pru says here.

I think that the abilities of Holden disguised the lack of a clear shape and plan for large parts of last season. When that began to look shaky, Sturridge came in and gave us a boost with goals and pace up front.

We are not always going to have a player of Sturridges ability in the squad, in fact more often than not we won't.

With average players you need a workable plan, a spirit and a tactically astute man in charge to get the best out of what you have.

We are so far away from that right now it's unreal.

I do think Coyle is a Keegan character, once you are on the slide, he isn't the right man to stop you slipping!

[Lord Kangana]

And a player of Holden's ability?

Its a little disingenuous to tie-in the absence of Holden with our slump and at the same time not give Coyle the credit for signing a player of such calibre that his system works.

[BWFC_Insane]

And a player of Holden's ability?

Its a little disingenuous to tie-in the absence of Holden with our slump and at the same time not give Coyle the credit for signing a player of such calibre that his system works.

Yeah absolutely. But you know Holden was always going to miss a portion of this season. Either he needed replacing with someone else who could make the system work, OR e system needed to be changed to one that could operate without him.

Which of those have we done?

[Lord Kangana]

We haven't the money to sign new players. Had we not had so many injuries to key players, we may well have had the quality to change the system and for it to actually work. Changing a system alone will not win football matches.

[Prufrock]

Having one might do though!

I hear what you are saying about money LK, and I agree he deserves credit for signing Holden, and indeed for the vast majority of last year where the impressive force of his personality combined with the attributes of our better players, playing with freedom and confidence meant we did very well. Now we don't have the same quality of player, for reasons beyond his control, but the crucial question is is he getting the best out of the players he does have, and IMO the question is an undoubted, and resounding no. Swansea have kept six clean sheets this season. There is no way anyone can argue Ashley Williams, Gary Monk, Mark Gower and Leon Britton are as good as Cahill, Wheater, Muamba and Reo-Coker. They just aren't. But they are organised without the ball, and they have a game plan with it.

I disagree that this is worse than under Megson, and certainly than under Lee, but it is very, very bad, he didn't have a clue what to do yesterday. I like the guy, and I want him to succeed so very much but I just can't see how he is going to turn this around. I hope he proves me wrong, because he has shown personality wise he certainly has what it takes.

[Lord Kangana]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zfk89hBNO9g" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BWFC_Insane]

We haven't the money to sign new players. Had we not had so many injuries to key players, we may well have had the quality to change the system and for it to actually work. Changing a system alone will not win football matches.

Remind me how many new players we signed in the summer?

And also whilst we are at it, how much did Holden cost?

It is entirely possible, given the weight of evidence that Holdens signing was a pure fluke on Coyles part rather than some amazing stroke of genius.

Coyle chose the players he signed. And he was given more to spend than Sammy Lee as an example. Don't remember Lee getting sympathy over his lack of resources.

Coyle has had enough and got enough in this squad for us to be doing considerably better than we are. That's the bottom line. The lack of shape and a clear strategy has nothing to do wi quality and EVERYTHING to do with Coyles lack of managerial ability!

[Lord Kangana]

I would say alongside Wheater, Wilshire, Sturridge and NRC it looks like a stroke of genius. Considering the funds we have and the market we're in.

[BWFC_Insane]

I would say alongside Wheater, Wilshire, Sturridge and NRC it looks like a stroke of genius. Considering the funds we have and the market we're in.

Wheater is a decent centre half. Hardly anything to be massively thrilled about. Sturridge and Wilshere were loans, did well to get them sure, but hardly shows a great eye for picking players. Everyone knew they were good players. Let's face it we only got Sturridge cos Coyle couldn't get Vela. Another example of a bit of luck rather than great vision.

NRC good signing, did well to get him, but again a highly sort after free transfer not exactly a measure of super eye for a player.

I wouldn't trust Coyle to spend whatever we get from Cahills sale personally.

Alonso, Petrov, Eagles, Boyata, Tuncay, NGog, Pratley

None of those fill me with massive confidence based on what weve seen of them and how they've been utilised.

[Lord Kangana]

Cost less than Danny Shittu. All of them. We need to face the new reality.

[BWFC_Insane]

Cost less than Danny Shittu. All of them. We need to face the new reality.

NGog cost 4M Shittu 2.

Alosno cost more than Shittu.

Can't just keep making stuff up.

Lee cost less than Wheater, Eagles and NGog. Now that's a scary reality!

[Lord Kangana]

All the ones I mentioned.

Elmander cost (insert your figure here) more than £8m quid. I could go on and mention the fees for Steinsson, Ricketts, Robinson, Taylor, Cahill, Muamba, Knight. On top of the others.

But why would I? Its so f*cking obvious a five year old could get this. Do you have one handy?

[Jokers in White]

We haven't the money to sign new players. Had we not had so many injuries to key players, we may well have had the quality to change the system and for it to actually work. Changing a system alone will not win football matches.

Remind me how many new players we signed in the summer?

And also whilst we are at it, how much did Holden cost?

It is entirely possible, given the weight of evidence that Holdens signing was a pure fluke on Coyles part rather than some amazing stroke of genius.

Coyle chose the players he signed. And he was given more to spend than Sammy Lee as an example. Don't remember Lee getting sympathy over his lack of resources.

Coyle has had enough and got enough in this squad for us to be doing considerably better than we are. That's the bottom line. The lack of shape and a clear strategy has nothing to do wi quality and EVERYTHING to do with Coyles lack of managerial ability!

I have to say mate i agree with this, you are bang on.