Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
- Lost Leopard Spot
- Immortal
- Posts: 18436
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
1. He isn't (the only bloke).BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:35 amNo. We started to show an ability to pick up home points. If we can somehow maintain that we'll stand a very small chance. However, if/when the player sales start this month we'll see what we are left with.
Parky is literally the only bloke capable of holding this together. Though I suspect deep down he'd love the sack.
2. He isn't (holding it together).
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください
頑張ってください
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36011
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
We're still in touch. The chaos at the club would in many cases have us down and out like Ipswich (see their fans wanting rid of steady but predictable Big Mick - wonder how they feel now?).Lost Leopard Spot wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:54 am1. He isn't (the only bloke).BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:35 amNo. We started to show an ability to pick up home points. If we can somehow maintain that we'll stand a very small chance. However, if/when the player sales start this month we'll see what we are left with.
Parky is literally the only bloke capable of holding this together. Though I suspect deep down he'd love the sack.
2. He isn't (holding it together).
There are IMHO few if any realistic managerial options who'd work here under these circumstances and do any better. I'm fairly willing to bet we'd not find one of those options.
However, that personal opinion aside, its going to matter little when we either sell several key players or enter admin in March.....
- Lost Leopard Spot
- Immortal
- Posts: 18436
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
We're only just beyond the halfway point of the season. I should bloody hope we were "still in touch".BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 12:00 pmWe're still in touch. The chaos at the club would in many cases have us down and out like Ipswich (see their fans wanting rid of steady but predictable Big Mick - wonder how they feel now?).Lost Leopard Spot wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:54 am1. He isn't (the only bloke).BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:35 amNo. We started to show an ability to pick up home points. If we can somehow maintain that we'll stand a very small chance. However, if/when the player sales start this month we'll see what we are left with.
Parky is literally the only bloke capable of holding this together. Though I suspect deep down he'd love the sack.
2. He isn't (holding it together).
There are IMHO few if any realistic managerial options who'd work here under these circumstances and do any better. I'm fairly willing to bet we'd not find one of those options.
However, that personal opinion aside, its going to matter little when we either sell several key players or enter admin in March.....
We have no "key players" left who make any difference.
I'm fairly sure, apart from, say Merebrook Tigers FC, that there isn't much of a market for any of our shower of shite.
I'm also pretty sure that we need the money from sales, but we won't get fxck all. Admin almost seems to be the only option left.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください
頑張ってください
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Regardless of how good he is with dealing with the chaos around the club, Parky doesn't seem to have much idea how to get goals out of his team or entertain the fans. I read yesterday that Billy Sharp is now the leading goalscorer in English league football this century. If he played for Bolton, instead of working out how to get the team playing to Sharp's strengths, PP would have sidelined him, pissed him off and then released him from his contract with a year to go.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36011
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Perhaps he has gotten the best possible out of this group of players? It is somewhat silly saying what he would or wouldn't have done with Billy Sharp. What we do know with Parky is that he turned Madine into a 6M striker who scored 10 goals in half a season. And has been allowed to sign two replacements from league one and two for less than a 6th of that fee combined.....Jugs wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:22 pmRegardless of how good he is with dealing with the chaos around the club, Parky doesn't seem to have much idea how to get goals out of his team or entertain the fans. I read yesterday that Billy Sharp is now the leading goalscorer in English league football this century. If he played for Bolton, instead of working out how to get the team playing to Sharp's strengths, PP would have sidelined him, pissed him off and then released him from his contract with a year to go.
- irie Cee Bee
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1078
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:55 am
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Seems to me on the contrary that a lot of the players have deteriorated under PP. Noone, Buckley, Vela, Olkowski, Little, Donaldson, Wildschut, wilson and the list goes on. We have become an awful team. I really point the finger at Ken for not selling the club to someone with money to finance it, but Phil is not without blame. Always a warning sign when a team is performing very badly but shows undying love to its manager. They all need a rocket up their behind, not loveydovey affairs.
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36011
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Deteriorated from what? We got those players because their clubs wanted shut. Buckley was walking wounded for years and still is.irie Cee Bee wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:29 pmSeems to me on the contrary that a lot of the players have deteriorated under PP. Noone, Buckley, Vela, Olkowski, Little, Donaldson, Wildschut, wilson and the list goes on. We have become an awful team. I really point the finger at Ken for not selling the club to someone with money to finance it, but Phil is not without blame. Always a warning sign when a team is performing very badly but shows undying love to its manager. They all need a rocket up their behind, not loveydovey affairs.
Noone had one good season in his whole career.
Vela was nowhere till Parky came in and put him in the first team but league one might be his level.
Olkowski hasn't deteriorated - his honeymoon period just ended.
Wildschutt - ask Norwich fans.
Wilson - ask Sunderland fans.
I think there is some serious delusion about how good these players are. They aren't here because they were playing well, lets put it that way.
- irie Cee Bee
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1078
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:55 am
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Didn't say they were world beaters, but they were not this bad. As far as I can see they are far worse now than their reputation when they came here.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:33 pmDeteriorated from what? We got those players because their clubs wanted shut. Buckley was walking wounded for years and still is.irie Cee Bee wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:29 pmSeems to me on the contrary that a lot of the players have deteriorated under PP. Noone, Buckley, Vela, Olkowski, Little, Donaldson, Wildschut, wilson and the list goes on. We have become an awful team. I really point the finger at Ken for not selling the club to someone with money to finance it, but Phil is not without blame. Always a warning sign when a team is performing very badly but shows undying love to its manager. They all need a rocket up their behind, not loveydovey affairs.
Noone had one good season in his whole career.
Vela was nowhere till Parky came in and put him in the first team but league one might be his level.
Olkowski hasn't deteriorated - his honeymoon period just ended.
Wildschutt - ask Norwich fans.
Wilson - ask Sunderland fans.
I think there is some serious delusion about how good these players are. They aren't here because they were playing well, lets put it that way.
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
a good team can carry a couple of poor players and still function
put all those poor players in a team together and you get Bolton Wanderers
put all those poor players in a team together and you get Bolton Wanderers
The Whites Are Going Up 2021
- irie Cee Bee
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1078
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:55 am
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
No arguments from me RE Madine, and I'm also grateful for PP getting us up and keeping us up (albeit just about). But this season things have just gone from bad to worse, and he's even admitting himself that he's chopped and changed too much. He's always bought players to fit his preferred system, but it's one that's not producing the goods anymore, in terms of goals, entertainment or passion. I still think he can keep us up, and this season is far from over with him in charge. But his decision making has been so erratic for so long now - remember when he persisted with the utterly shite Flanagan instead of Little last season? - that it's making it hard to sustain the effort required to go and watch Bolton ATM. It really is reaching Freedman levels of ridiculousness IMO, and that's a shame because I happen to like Parky.BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:08 pmPerhaps he has gotten the best possible out of this group of players? It is somewhat silly saying what he would or wouldn't have done with Billy Sharp. What we do know with Parky is that he turned Madine into a 6M striker who scored 10 goals in half a season. And has been allowed to sign two replacements from league one and two for less than a 6th of that fee combined.....Jugs wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 2:22 pmRegardless of how good he is with dealing with the chaos around the club, Parky doesn't seem to have much idea how to get goals out of his team or entertain the fans. I read yesterday that Billy Sharp is now the leading goalscorer in English league football this century. If he played for Bolton, instead of working out how to get the team playing to Sharp's strengths, PP would have sidelined him, pissed him off and then released him from his contract with a year to go.
- officer_dibble
- Immortal
- Posts: 13819
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
We got bummed by Hull 6-0 - not a premier league team, not even one of the better teams in this league FFS. He has to go, he’s utter garbage at this level, same as most of the players he’s signed.
- TonyDomingos
- Passionate
- Posts: 2751
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:27 pm
- Location: Sarf East London
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
officer_dibble wrote: ↑Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:50 pmWe got bummed by Hull 6-0 - not a premier league team, not even one of the better teams in this league FFS.
Not making excuses for what appears to have been a shocking performance, but over the past 12 games, Hull have acquired more points than every other team in the league bar Leeds (who are ahead of them by one point).
Às armas, às armas!
Sobre a terra, sobre o mar,
Às armas, às armas!
Pela Pátria lutar!
Contra os canhões marchar, marchar!
Sobre a terra, sobre o mar,
Às armas, às armas!
Pela Pátria lutar!
Contra os canhões marchar, marchar!
- officer_dibble
- Immortal
- Posts: 13819
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
They are bang average at best in this league. Parky out.
-
- Dedicated
- Posts: 1713
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:53 pm
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
My current thoughts:
1.) I don't think overall we have bad players at this level. With the exception of left back, Our goalkeepers, defence and central midfield are decent imho, mid table standard. Our strikeforce and attack is probably better than Rotherham and Ipswich, but not many others. However:
2.) Parky doesn't set the team up to create chances. Moreover he gets the attackers doing a lot of defensive work meaning that they aren't mentally and physically sharp when situations and opportunities arise, or when we have a number of games in quick succession. There is no attempt at clever interplay or movement. This is down to Parky and his team I feel meaning he isn't up to it at this level, sadly, as Parky does a great job of keeping the wheels on, which brings me to:
3.) Ken. Simply nothing good can happen at this club whilst Ken remains. This isn't necessarily a brutal criticism of Ken, although I have grave doubts about his integrity and honesty, but he simply doesn't have the funds to cope with running this club, and unless there is something going on behind the scenes that hasn't been reported (I have heard a couple of things but they are so speculative I won't mention them here), then he is in the nightmare situation I imagined when he got control of the club; On the verge of administration, losing lots each month, media pressure, and no funds to provide a solution. He should have got rid as soon as there was interest, but either there wasn't serious interest or Ken was too ambitious in what he was asking for. Judging by how Blumarble appeared to have a purchaser lined up, and the way Ken negotiates generally, and his public comments it looks like the latter. Now there is likely big trouble at mill.
Happy New Year
1.) I don't think overall we have bad players at this level. With the exception of left back, Our goalkeepers, defence and central midfield are decent imho, mid table standard. Our strikeforce and attack is probably better than Rotherham and Ipswich, but not many others. However:
2.) Parky doesn't set the team up to create chances. Moreover he gets the attackers doing a lot of defensive work meaning that they aren't mentally and physically sharp when situations and opportunities arise, or when we have a number of games in quick succession. There is no attempt at clever interplay or movement. This is down to Parky and his team I feel meaning he isn't up to it at this level, sadly, as Parky does a great job of keeping the wheels on, which brings me to:
3.) Ken. Simply nothing good can happen at this club whilst Ken remains. This isn't necessarily a brutal criticism of Ken, although I have grave doubts about his integrity and honesty, but he simply doesn't have the funds to cope with running this club, and unless there is something going on behind the scenes that hasn't been reported (I have heard a couple of things but they are so speculative I won't mention them here), then he is in the nightmare situation I imagined when he got control of the club; On the verge of administration, losing lots each month, media pressure, and no funds to provide a solution. He should have got rid as soon as there was interest, but either there wasn't serious interest or Ken was too ambitious in what he was asking for. Judging by how Blumarble appeared to have a purchaser lined up, and the way Ken negotiates generally, and his public comments it looks like the latter. Now there is likely big trouble at mill.
Happy New Year
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 28435
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
HNY. This is a very good post which chimes with much of what I'm thinking. Maybe our back half isn't mid-table but it should be good enough to stay up. Manager is limited. Going forward we've nothing, and that's partly finance but also partly how the manager sets them up, as you've noted. But all that is a distraction from the bigger problem which is that the club essentially seems insolvent on a month-to-month basis. You may well be right that Ken wanted too much; what might also be true is that any potential buyers are waiting for admin because (1) it's cheaper (2) they wouldn't be shaking hands with Ken but a die-straight official receiver who wouldn't have any personal stake and would be genuinely wanting to wash his/her metaphorical hands of the club. Speculation, perhaps, and one could argue that the inevitable relegation makes the buyer's job harder, but it's hardly a cakewalk now.bristol_Wanderer3 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:00 amMy current thoughts:
1.) I don't think overall we have bad players at this level. With the exception of left back, Our goalkeepers, defence and central midfield are decent imho, mid table standard. Our strikeforce and attack is probably better than Rotherham and Ipswich, but not many others. However:
2.) Parky doesn't set the team up to create chances. Moreover he gets the attackers doing a lot of defensive work meaning that they aren't mentally and physically sharp when situations and opportunities arise, or when we have a number of games in quick succession. There is no attempt at clever interplay or movement. This is down to Parky and his team I feel meaning he isn't up to it at this level, sadly, as Parky does a great job of keeping the wheels on, which brings me to:
3.) Ken. Simply nothing good can happen at this club whilst Ken remains. This isn't necessarily a brutal criticism of Ken, although I have grave doubts about his integrity and honesty, but he simply doesn't have the funds to cope with running this club, and unless there is something going on behind the scenes that hasn't been reported (I have heard a couple of things but they are so speculative I won't mention them here), then he is in the nightmare situation I imagined when he got control of the club; On the verge of administration, losing lots each month, media pressure, and no funds to provide a solution. He should have got rid as soon as there was interest, but either there wasn't serious interest or Ken was too ambitious in what he was asking for. Judging by how Blumarble appeared to have a purchaser lined up, and the way Ken negotiates generally, and his public comments it looks like the latter. Now there is likely big trouble at mill.
Happy New Year
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36011
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
The business currently carries a £20M debt. Add whatever fee Ken wants onto that. Any buyer will need £25M initially (for sake of argument). Plus then £3M to fund the club till the end of the season. (and on an ongoing basis). Plus any investment into the team.Dave Sutton's barnet wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:23 amHNY. This is a very good post which chimes with much of what I'm thinking. Maybe our back half isn't mid-table but it should be good enough to stay up. Manager is limited. Going forward we've nothing, and that's partly finance but also partly how the manager sets them up, as you've noted. But all that is a distraction from the bigger problem which is that the club essentially seems insolvent on a month-to-month basis. You may well be right that Ken wanted too much; what might also be true is that any potential buyers are waiting for admin because (1) it's cheaper (2) they wouldn't be shaking hands with Ken but a die-straight official receiver who wouldn't have any personal stake and would be genuinely wanting to wash his/her metaphorical hands of the club. Speculation, perhaps, and one could argue that the inevitable relegation makes the buyer's job harder, but it's hardly a cakewalk now.bristol_Wanderer3 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:00 amMy current thoughts:
1.) I don't think overall we have bad players at this level. With the exception of left back, Our goalkeepers, defence and central midfield are decent imho, mid table standard. Our strikeforce and attack is probably better than Rotherham and Ipswich, but not many others. However:
2.) Parky doesn't set the team up to create chances. Moreover he gets the attackers doing a lot of defensive work meaning that they aren't mentally and physically sharp when situations and opportunities arise, or when we have a number of games in quick succession. There is no attempt at clever interplay or movement. This is down to Parky and his team I feel meaning he isn't up to it at this level, sadly, as Parky does a great job of keeping the wheels on, which brings me to:
3.) Ken. Simply nothing good can happen at this club whilst Ken remains. This isn't necessarily a brutal criticism of Ken, although I have grave doubts about his integrity and honesty, but he simply doesn't have the funds to cope with running this club, and unless there is something going on behind the scenes that hasn't been reported (I have heard a couple of things but they are so speculative I won't mention them here), then he is in the nightmare situation I imagined when he got control of the club; On the verge of administration, losing lots each month, media pressure, and no funds to provide a solution. He should have got rid as soon as there was interest, but either there wasn't serious interest or Ken was too ambitious in what he was asking for. Judging by how Blumarble appeared to have a purchaser lined up, and the way Ken negotiates generally, and his public comments it looks like the latter. Now there is likely big trouble at mill.
Happy New Year
The debt level is low but its not hard to see why a loss making business that will cost ~£28M intially is not attractive to many, given the costs skyrocket if the aim is premiership football. If I was a buyer looking to proper a club to the premiership I'd prefer one where an owner is able to write off his debt even if that does run into the 100's of millions as part of the deal. Because then at least my investment goes on improving things on the pitch and hopefully cashing in on the premiership millions.
This is the problem we've got - the risk reward is skewed the wrong way.
However, the idea that admin suddenly makes everything attractive - is flawed. The penalties automatically imposed mean that whilst in theory someone gets a debt free business for a lot less money they are then hamstrung for a number of years propping up a club in league one and at best the lower end of the championship. That doesn't fit with a new shiny owner coming in to invest and propel the club forwards. So the big risk is we end up with another Ken - a guy who wants to own a football club without spending much of his own money.
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
Parkinson's problem is he thinks he is a big Sam clone, he ain't, far from it.
- Dave Sutton's barnet
- Immortal
- Posts: 28435
- Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
- Contact:
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
(earlier quotes removed for sake of post length)BWFC_Insane wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:35 amThe business currently carries a £20M debt. Add whatever fee Ken wants onto that. Any buyer will need £25M initially (for sake of argument). Plus then £3M to fund the club till the end of the season. (and on an ongoing basis). Plus any investment into the team.
The debt level is low but its not hard to see why a loss making business that will cost ~£28M intially is not attractive to many, given the costs skyrocket if the aim is premiership football. If I was a buyer looking to proper a club to the premiership I'd prefer one where an owner is able to write off his debt even if that does run into the 100's of millions as part of the deal. Because then at least my investment goes on improving things on the pitch and hopefully cashing in on the premiership millions.
This is the problem we've got - the risk reward is skewed the wrong way.
However, the idea that admin suddenly makes everything attractive - is flawed. The penalties automatically imposed mean that whilst in theory someone gets a debt free business for a lot less money they are then hamstrung for a number of years propping up a club in league one and at best the lower end of the championship. That doesn't fit with a new shiny owner coming in to invest and propel the club forwards. So the big risk is we end up with another Ken - a guy who wants to own a football club without spending much of his own money.
Yeah, fair points. I mean, if I were buying a club, I'd be more likely to be ringing Dejphon Chansiri, who put Sheffield Wednesday up for sale a fortnight ago. He bought the Owls off Milan Mandaric for £37.5m in January 2015, watched them lose the play-off final in 2016 and semis in 2017, then go under embargo this summer after missing FFP ("We didn't just break [the rules] a little, we broke them a lot - eight figures"). And now they've hired Steve Bruce, who despite his penchant for writing crime thrillers is hardly a man who does things on a Shoestring (sorry). It'll be interesting to see what Chansiri is asking – assuming he's neither asking for his input returned nor leaving them with debts.
- officer_dibble
- Immortal
- Posts: 13819
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
- Location: Leeds
Re: Should Phil Parkinson be sacked?
I have sympathy with the shit he puts up with. But for me the man is so defeatist now - probably since throwing Oztumer on at Hull - he really needs to go for his own sake. His latest offering is to tell us we “might not” get promoted from a league one - I’d suggest not with you in charge Phil. Thanks, but we need a change. Both you and the club. https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/1 ... west-brom/
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 91 guests