Bolton - Leeds

[boltonboris]

The wage bill was slashed because he got us relegated.

No it wasn't. It's common knowledge that the club was committed to reducing overheads while we were in the Premier League. The club wouldn't extend the contracts of Matt Taylor and Elmander as a result.

What about my other points?

[BL3]

The wage bill was slashed because he got us relegated.

No it wasn't. It's common knowledge that the club was committed to reducing overheads while we were in the Premier League. The club wouldn't extend the contracts of Matt Taylor and Elmander as a result.

What about my other points?

Lower wage bill = players who aren't as good. I thought you might have been able to make the connection without my help.

[BWFC_Insane]

The wage bill was slashed because he got us relegated.

No it wasn't. It's common knowledge that the club was committed to reducing overheads while we were in the Premier League. The club wouldn't extend the contracts of Matt Taylor and Elmander as a result.

What about my other points?

Lower wage bill = players who aren't as good. I thought you might have been able to make the connection without my help.

In which case why did we go down, and Swansea, Norwich and Wigan stay up last season?

Anyhow, are you ever going to answer my original question or would you prefer to just keep dodging it for convenience?

[BL3]

At the fans forum, Owen Coyle said it was HIS Strategy and decision, not to give "older players big money contracts" as he felt that players in their late 20's then had no incentive to perform. He stated that clearly.

Not quite sure how that relates to re-signing, Petrov, Knight etc...

His overall budget may have been reduced, however, he made it very clear that his strategy would have been not to offer Elmander or Taylor deals on the money they had previously been on anyways......

It was Eddie Davie's decision to reduce the wage bill. Phil Gartside is on the record as saying so. We re-signed Petrov and Knight on reduced terms. We got rid of Taylor because he was in the last year of his contract and the club wasn't prepared to offer him the same terms. It was either that or lose him for free like Elmander. Are there really people on here who think the manager decides what we pay players? The manager decides which players he wants, the board decides whether we can afford it.

[CAPSLOCK]

De Matteo (whatever happened to him?) was a shit manager at west brom apparently

Do you think Chelsea would've won the Chumps League with AVB?

See, I accept there's only so much you can do with players but it's the job of the manager to get the best out of those players

I don't believe Coyle is getting the best out of this set of players

Add in the fact that his 2 most recent cash buys are in the cold, I think it's reasonable to question his spending of money we haven't got

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

So these "not as good" players he has been forced to sign. Are these the same ones he is playing rather than the better player that we got relegated due to not being available last season? Elmander that was offered a contract but decided being played out of position because of a loan signing wasn't the sign of a long term thinker and turned down said contract? How about signing players for millions of pounds and then never playing them? How about not playing Petrov, then playing him on the right, when everyone knows that he has one of the best crosses from the left in the country? How about the team having no fitness? How about the team having no concentration after half time? How about taking some responsibility rather than using any excuse he can lay his hands on? How about, for once, standing in front of a camera and holding his hands up and saying he got that decision wrong?

Managers take responsibility for their team. Coyle is supposed to be a manager and you and he would have us believe none of it is his fault. We've had some bad luck and awful decisions against us. Not enough to justify the last 18+ months.

[truewhite15]

But the vast majority of it IS Coyle's fault. Alright, the players aren't performing brilliantly, but it's up to the manager to get them playing better or to drop them, and Coyle's done neither. And if we look at the games through negative eyes, it's because the past 18 months of pretty much uninterrupted dross served up under Coyle has done that to us.

So it's his fault that he inherited a team of players who were either reaching the end of their careers, or whose contracts were about to expire?
He didn't INHERIT any such thing. The players he got at the end of the Megson tenure continued for another season or two. He had plenty of time to offload them for money in if he wanted rid. He chose to let their contracts expire instead.
His fault that the owner has decided that the wage bill needed to be slashed by 50% and that those contracts wouldn't be renewed?
See BWFC-I's point. He does make sense sometimes.
His fault that Sturridge and Wilshere did so well under his management that Arsenal and Chelsea wanted them in their teams rather than extending their loans?
In which you may as well be saying that they papered over the cracks of his regime. He had plenty of time to sign players permanently to cover for their absence. He chose Ngog and Reo Coker.
His fault that we've been without CYL and Holden for the whole of last season?
No, that was dumb bad luck. But he had time to sign replacements. He didn't, not for Holden, at least. As has already been said, Eagles was fine last season in Chungy's stead. And Chungy's fit now, why isn't he being played on the right wing instead of a blatantly single-minded central midfielder? Similarly, the one midfielder who could have done the same job as Holden found himself on the bench or being subbed, always to the detriment of the team as the statistics compiled on here suggest, before his unfortunate bodily misfire (the aftermath of which, i'll admit, Coyle handled admirably).
Perhaps that's why we haven't faired as well in the last 18 months than we did in his first 18 months in charge.
The reasons you've stated could all have been avoided with an ounce of managerial quality. As I've pointed out.
To say that he's not prepared to drop players who aren't performing is pure bullshit. In fact one of the criticisms of Coyle has been that he chops and changes too much.
It isn't pure bullshit. Mark Davies isn't performing. Tyrone Mears isn't performing. Matt Mills isn't performing. Keith Andrews isn't performing. Have they been dropped? Nope, they keep being played.
He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't with some folk.

So you put the entire relegation season down to the absence of Stuart Holden and Chung-Yong Lee. Right.

I don't think I need to address idiotic naivety like that.

Try reading it properly.

Ok.

[BWFC_Insane]

At the fans forum, Owen Coyle said it was HIS Strategy and decision, not to give "older players big money contracts" as he felt that players in their late 20's then had no incentive to perform. He stated that clearly.

Not quite sure how that relates to re-signing, Petrov, Knight etc...

His overall budget may have been reduced, however, he made it very clear that his strategy would have been not to offer Elmander or Taylor deals on the money they had previously been on anyways......

It was Eddie Davie's decision to reduce the wage bill. Phil Gartside is on the record as saying so. We re-signed Petrov and Knight on reduced terms. We got rid of Taylor because he was in the last year of his contract and the club wasn't prepared to offer him the same terms. It was either that or lose him for free like Elmander. Are there really people on here who think the manager decides what we pay players? The manager decides which players he wants, the board decides whether we can afford it.

Owen Coyle, has said that he presented a plan to Phil and Eddie outlining his plans to remove the "older" high earners and "buy exciting young talent" reducing the wage bill and "making the club more self sufficient". That may well have been against a backdrop of a requirement for reducing the overall wage bill, however, those OC quotes are out there, and he talked about it at the forum.

As a manager he would decide the recruitment and player release strategy and within his budget decide who to buy/release.

Now there is a problem here, where are these "exciting young players" we were promised he would recruit with the money he saved on Elmander and Taylor. Again quotes are out there.

Are we saying the 4M he spent on NGog and the 3M he spent on Sordell?

Pretty damning indictment of any "strategy" I'd say. And even if there is no strategy, £7M quid wasted.

Seeing as we're below them in the table, I wonder when the last time Crystal Palace spent money like that was? I bet they've not spent 7M in total for the past 6 seasons.

Now, I'll try again, at what point IS a manager responsible for results? Or are they never responsible?

[BL3]

Owen Coyle, has said that he presented a plan to Phil and Eddie outlining his plans to remove the "older" high earners and "buy exciting young talent" reducing the wage bill and "making the club more self sufficient". That may well have been against a backdrop of a requirement for reducing the overall wage bill however, those OC quotes are out there, and he talked about it at the forum.

Finally, the penny fecking drops.

[CAPSLOCK]

Are we saying the 4M he spent on NGog and the 3M he spent on Sordell?

What about Ream

he's exciting

The Hull fans were on their feet every time it went near him


Joking aside, I think Coyle has made him look worse than he actually is

Just think about it, every full back (and most CB's, including Cahill) who has played under Coyle gets slated by the majority

Maybe they are all shit

Maybe it's something else.........

[CAPSLOCK]

Owen Coyle, has said that he presented a plan to Phil and Eddie outlining his plans to remove the "older" high earners and "buy exciting young talent" reducing the wage bill and "making the club more self sufficient". That may well have been against a backdrop of a requirement for reducing the overall wage bill however, those OC quotes are out there, and he talked about it at the forum.

Finally, the penny fecking drops.

Would he not have been better spending the 9 million + wages, spent on Sordell, Ream, Petrov and NGog, on keeping one or two of the too old, too shit, too expensive ones he inherited

[BWFC_Insane]

Owen Coyle, has said that he presented a plan to Phil and Eddie outlining his plans to remove the "older" high earners and "buy exciting young talent" reducing the wage bill and "making the club more self sufficient". That may well have been against a backdrop of a requirement for reducing the overall wage bill however, those OC quotes are out there, and he talked about it at the forum.

Finally, the penny fecking drops.

The penny has dropped that you either are Owen Coyle, or his wife, or his dog..........

[BL3]

He didn't INHERIT any such thing. The players he got at the end of the Megson tenure continued for another season or two. He had plenty of time to offload them for money in if he wanted rid. He chose to let their contracts expire instead.

No he didn't. The players chose to sit out their contracts because they couldn't get the money they were on elsewhere.

In which you may as well be saying that they papered over the cracks of his regime. He had plenty of time to sign players permanently to cover for their absence. He chose Ngog and Reo Coker.

Any manager would struggle to replace the quality of Sturridge and Wilshere, regardless of how much time they had. Perhaps it's Coyle's fault for raising our expectations.

No, that was dumb bad luck. But he had time to sign replacements. He didn't, not for Holden, at least.

CYL was injured in pre-season. How much time did that give him? What would CYL's value have been at the time? Best part of £10M? Did we spend that on a replacement? He's tried to replace Holden, first with Reo-Coker and then with Keith Andrews.

The reasons you've stated could all have been avoided with an ounce of managerial quality. As I've pointed out.

Bullshit.

It isn't pure bullshit. Mark Davies isn't performing. Tyrone Mears isn't performing. Matt Mills isn't performing. Keith Andrews isn't performing. Have they been dropped? Nope, they keep being played.

...and you'd be on here complaining that he still didn't know what his best team was if he had.

[CAPSLOCK]

Any manager would struggle to replace the quality of Sturridge and Wilshere, regardless of how much time they had. Perhaps it's Coyle's fault for raising our expectations.

Without Sturridge and Wilshere, we were nearly safe by January 2011

We then brought in Sturridge and relegated OUR striker to a midfield role

So, Sturridge, like many of your other points, is a red herring

The players were good enough

[truewhite15]

He didn't INHERIT any such thing. The players he got at the end of the Megson tenure continued for another season or two. He had plenty of time to offload them for money in if he wanted rid. He chose to let their contracts expire instead.

No he didn't. The players chose to sit out their contracts because they couldn't get the money they were on elsewhere.

In which you may as well be saying that they papered over the cracks of his regime. He had plenty of time to sign players permanently to cover for their absence. He chose Ngog and Reo Coker.

Any manager would struggle to replace the quality of Sturridge and Wilshere, regardless of how much time they had. Perhaps it's Coyle's fault for raising our expectations.

No, that was dumb bad luck. But he had time to sign replacements. He didn't, not for Holden, at least.

CYL was injured in pre-season. How much time did that give him? What would CYL's value have been at the time? Best part of £10M? Did we spend that on a replacement? He's tried to replace Holden, first with Reo-Coker and then with Keith Andrews.

The reasons you've stated could all have been avoided with an ounce of managerial quality. As I've pointed out.

Bullshit.

It isn't pure bullshit. Mark Davies isn't performing. Tyrone Mears isn't performing. Matt Mills isn't performing. Keith Andrews isn't performing. Have they been dropped? Nope, they keep being played.

...and you'd be on here complaining that he still didn't know what his best team was if he had.

Clearly, you've got some sort of inside track on player contracts and motivations.

Oh, and by the way, if he actually PLAYED his best team, and coached them well, and played them in a flexible formation that could keep a clean sheet more than once in a blue moon, then no, I wouldn't be on here complaining.

[officer_dibble]

Owen

shouldnt you be taking training?
oh yeah

ok,.how about tactics for the weekend, they sorted? who is marking who at corners etc?

oh, right

carry on then

[BL3]

Owen

shouldnt you be taking training?
oh yeah

ok,.how about tactics for the weekend, they sorted? who is marking who at corners etc?

oh, right

carry on then

You need some new material officer_drivel. The whole, 'you must either be Owen himself, or a relative of Owen's, if you don't agree with me' routine, is getting a bit tedious.

[BWFC_Insane]

Owen

shouldnt you be taking training?
oh yeah

ok,.how about tactics for the weekend, they sorted? who is marking who at corners etc?

oh, right

carry on then

You need some new material officer_drivel. The whole, 'you must either be Owen himself, or a relative of Owen's, if you don't agree with me' routine, is getting a bit tedious.

You have to admit, that just like Owen, you like to duck and dive the questions you don't fancy answering. There are quite a few similarities.........burying your head firmly in the sand being one. How did that work out last season? When you kept telling us that we'd be fine and Swansea and Norwich would really struggle in the second half of the season?

[TANGODANCER]

Just as an aside, Dioufy has just been ofered an eighteen month contract and a tidy wage rise by Leeds. He was on five grand a week.

[BL3]

Any manager would struggle to replace the quality of Sturridge and Wilshere, regardless of how much time they had. Perhaps it's Coyle's fault for raising our expectations.

Without Sturridge and Wilshere, we were nearly safe by January 2011

We then brought in Sturridge and relegated OUR striker to a midfield role

So, Sturridge, like many of your other points, is a red herring

The players were good enough

From Boxing Day onwards we took 4 points from 21 in seven league games. Elmander scored once during that run.

Coyle then moved to sign Sturridge and the slide was arrested with a 1-0 home win against Wolves. Sturridge got the winner. He then went on to score in each of the next four league games during which we picked up more points than we had in the previous seven.

Piss poor effort at getting your facts right but at least you're giving him credit for 'nearly' getting us to safety with only half the season gone.