Nick
Administrator
Nope, a few pointed out he was quite clueless if it came to needing to change things.
Wasn't he?
Last season he had his arse covered by Wilson and Clarke scoring for fun. Once he didn't have them we were in the shit. This gave us a glimpse of what was to come this season. I said pre season that we were going to have a long hard season once I saw our players. But those who love to disagree with me on here told me how wrong I was. Normal day I suppose
Was I the only one who noticed last season that he didn't know how to organise a team?
Wasn't he?
Last season he had his arse covered by Wilson and Clarke scoring for fun. Once he didn't have them we were in the shit. This gave us a glimpse of what was to come this season. I said pre season that we were going to have a long hard season once I saw our players. But those who love to disagree with me on here told me how wrong I was. Normal day I suppose
Was I the only one who noticed last season that he didn't know how to organise a team?
So which is it then?
a) the players who are in the current squad are good enough but just not performing anywhere near their maximum potential?
b) the players that have been brought in are poor and in no way good enough replacements for those that we've let go?
Whichever option you select, where does the majority of the blame lie? Does that make you consider your vote?
===
However you look at it, we're letting players go that are good enough at this level and at CCFC, it's just useless tactics, squad selection and poor management that doesn't get the best out of them. The players that have been brought in have been poor, and are in fact not at the ability level of many that we have let go so poor scouting / activity in the transfer/loan market.
Getting those issues above right will make the team perform better and gain better results. And another manager COULD step in and do that.
Haven't got a fucking clue what you're banging on about mate.
He's being patronising, he's giving 2 options, believing that both options are Pressley's fault and that once you have thought about it carefully you will realise the error of your ways and see the light as he does.
Personally I think if the players he brought in aren't good enough it might be Presley's fault it's more more likely to be Sisus, if the players aren't performing to what they can though that is Pressleys and the players fault.
His comments about bringing in a keeper in the CET make me believe more than ever that his hands are tied when it comes to recruitment and thus our league position is mostly sisus fault.
He's being patronising, he's giving 2 options, believing that both options are Pressley's fault and that once you have thought about it carefully you will realise the error of your ways and see the light as he does.
Personally I think if the players he brought in aren't good enough it might be Presley's fault it's more more likely to be Sisus, if the players aren't performing to what they can though that is Pressleys and the players fault.
His comments about bringing in a keeper in the CET make me believe more than ever that his hands are tied when it comes to recruitment and thus our league position is mostly sisus fault.
..............which is why I didn't get Houchens Head's reason for voting no, don't sack him. It was a flawed reason.
More mis-quotes!! Where did I actually say "DON'T" sack him? I said he "SHOULDN'T" be sacked, which is an entirely different concept! If you'd taken the time to read through what I said, I stated that I didn't think he should be sacked because there's no-one who would come in to replace him - it's the wrong time. I also said (in a later post) that although I thought he shouldn't be sacked, I would still love him to go if the right person DID come along! What part of this simple opinion do you not understand? Fuck me, it's not rocket science!
Jesus. I'd go back to bed pal then try and approach this day again.
Okay, so I didn't go back to the original post to get the wording correct. My response still stands even though the correct word is "shouldn't". I simply meant, you selected no on the poll.
There is another manager that could come in and do a better job I think. Regardless of what time of the season it is. SP has made a catalogue of errors whether the players are shit or are they are actually better than they are playing and SP can't get them to play to their potential. I was just providing a counter-argument to your poll response.
I was merely responding to Astute's post at #128: "I bet that he can't believe that nearly 18% of us want him to stay as manager at our club." I was putting my point across by saying I DON'T want him as manager but feel now isn't the right time to sack him. Why can't morons like you read posts properly before sticking your oar in?
Pretty much although I wasn't intentionally being patronising...
It's true though, whether SP and his coaching staff can't get the current players to play at their true ability or whether the players that he has bought in are just crap, its his fault and another manager can do better which is why I didn't get Houchens Head's reason for voting no, don't sack him. It was a flawed reason.
Unless of course SISU are to blame for the player purchases but really, are SISU going to be involved with scouting who and telling SP who to buy? I think not.
It's not a flawed reason, while its quite possible poor signings are Pressleys fault, its much more likely imo that poor signings are Sisu's fault. Do we really believe the 3 loans from Bournemouth were his choice? or did they just come free with the Wilson sale and so it had to make the best of it? Listen to him talk about signing an experienced keeper, he can't do it, the money isn't there and he only gets to chose from those that "are thrown at him"
Sisu arn't scouting no, they are providing the resources. If I give you £2 and ask you to shop for and cook me a steak dinner, are you a shit chef and made bad purchases when you serve me stewing steak and a tin of beans? or did I just not provide the necessary resources?
It's not a flawed reason, while its quite possible poor signings are Pressleys fault, its much more likely imo that poor signings are Sisu's fault. Do we really believe the 3 loans from Bournemouth were his choice? or did they just come free with the Wilson sale and so it had to make the best of it? Listen to him talk about signing an experienced keeper, he can't do it, the money isn't there and he only gets to chose from those that "are thrown at him"
Sisu arn't scouting no, they are providing the resources. If I give you £2 and ask you to shop for and cook me a steak dinner, are you a shit chef and made bad purchases when you serve me stewing steak and a tin of beans? or did I just not provide the necessary resources?
The three loans as part of the CW sale I can understand that was probably down to SISU.
As for all other loans and signings though, that's down to SP most probably though. Sure, there isn't many resources handed his way for spending but it is still possible to shop wisely and make some decent signings on a budget - as other clubs have proved.
I think, the amount of free signings and loan signings other clubs in the same league as us are currently making goes to show that there have been plenty of options and opportunities at next to no cost. I guess none of us no just how much of a role/influence SISU have but there still have to some onus on SP to scout and sign players. I don't believe that Nouble, Jackson, Martin and Madine were all down to SISU's restrictions. SP chose and wanted them.
Loan signings and free signings are not all created equal, it's a serious oversimplification, one team who made 5 loan signings and 5 free signings might have seriously invested in their team, carefully picking their loan signings and paying a decent percentage of that players wages to the parent club to attract them and paying decent wages to the free signings. Another club might make 5 free signings and 5 loan signings and have made a significant Negative investment in their club, selling their best player then taking whatever loan players are "thrown at them", not getting a decent choice and ending up with crappy deals like where a player heads back to play for his youth team regularly, then paying wages for the free signings that means you can to chose mostly from those others dont want, that the ones you are signing are all gambles and you are often having to take injury prone or bad attitude players. Not to mention this second club might only take people on short deals meaning the gambles can't even pay off when they do work.
I understand that and if SISU basically presented SP with a list of possibles (loan players who were injury prone, loan players which wouldn't require much % of their wages paid, players unwanted by their club for whatever reason), then sure, SP can't be solely at fault for what he's had to work with.
But is that what we all believe....? I think SP had some say in who they were signing up/trying to bring in. Even Fleck and O'Brien weren't even adequate replacements for Baker and Moussa, just like any of the new players aren't of the same level as the players we've let go. And apparently it has been SP's choice to let a lot of these players go...
I don't know. Sure, SISU are to blame for a lot and they've destroyed our club but SP seems to be doing a pretty dismal job himself of anything as well. Even if we go as far as thinking he didn't have much to no say at all on any loans, signings or players in/out - his choices on match days have still been stupid - formation, positions etc.
I don't believe sisu provided Pressley with a list of injury prone cheap players no, I believe it's likely that sisu provided the amount of resources so low that the manager is forced to gamble on injury prone and bad attitude people in order to get the most for the money, I believe they are willing to provide so little of a loan players wages that we only get those that other clubs don't want.
It's not a flawed reason, while its quite possible poor signings are Pressleys fault, its much more likely imo that poor signings are Sisu's fault. Do we really believe the 3 loans from Bournemouth were his choice? or did they just come free with the Wilson sale and so it had to make the best of it? Listen to him talk about signing an experienced keeper, he can't do it, the money isn't there and he only gets to chose from those that "are thrown at him"
Sisu arn't scouting no, they are providing the resources. If I give you £2 and ask you to shop for and cook me a steak dinner, are you a shit chef and made bad purchases when you serve me stewing steak and a tin of beans? or did I just not provide the necessary resources?
You really think we're one of the lowest financial resourced teams in the league?
Oh look top of the League Swindon trimming their wage bill 2 years running...not renewing contracts until towards the end of the season...moving towards self sustainability.
http://m.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sp...e_for_Swindon_Town_s_out_of_contract_players/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Well if another chef could do a better job of it on a similar budget then yes I'd call you a shit chef.
Which would be fair enough but I don't see any evidence that any other club is doing well under similar circumstances. Like i said I think the answer of well most other clubs haven't paid for players is a massive massive over simplification of an issue that is much more complicated.
That's where we differ on opinion.
You think we can't compete in attracting players to the club (either through club reputation or with the financial package we can offer) with teams like Rochdale, Bradford, Notts County, Chesterfield, Doncaster, Port Vale, Walsall, Scunthorpe. I think we can.
You really think we're one of the lowest financial resourced teams in the league?
Oh look top of the League Swindon trimming their wage bill 2 years running...not renewing contracts until towards the end of the season...moving towards self sustainability.
http://m.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sp...e_for_Swindon_Town_s_out_of_contract_players/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
The vote was put up over a month ago2 things. Yes he should have been sacked and why vote on a decision that's happened? This vote achieves nothing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The vote was put up over a month ago
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?