Sam Allardyce

[Seanjd]

You got any evidence to support that theory mert

Out of interest, where do you think we will finish this season?

 

[orly]

Out of interest, where do you think we will finish this season?

After watching the last few, anywhere between 11th and 14th.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

Didn't want to be there.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Us looking a bit harder to break down defensively is hardly some sort of master stroke by Allardyce, and its hardly rocket science to work out why, any team is going to defend better by putting 10 men behind the ball.

 

[Goat]

We have some really bad players, a very bad director of football and a semi decent manager, sadly this combination wont help us in the short or long term.

Sack 5 star stevie
Sell 90% of the players
Hire a decent manager

 

[Seanjd]

After watching the last few, anywhere between 11th and 14th.

Wrong account?

 

[Khalekan]

I take it everyone has covered todays crap lineup, tactics and subs yeh?

Not entirely sure why he thinks we have the luxury to rotate our defence around when we have only just rectified the solidity of said defence!

Or why young lads like DCL and Kenny cant muster the energy to play 2 games within 3 days.

Worst of all was the subs today when the game was within reach. The right changes and we could have maybe got something

To be fair, one if the subs he fetched on dragged us back into the game almost single handedly.

But the wrong player wad probably pulled off to make room for him.

 

[Kenshin]

And we’ve seen some signs of improvement since his arrival.

In the basics of it, I.e not getting embarassed in scoreline then yes there has been a massive improvement. Defensively we have been much better and I think that was the main thing we needed out of this season, to stop leaking goals and go back to those basics. That is why I don't ever be too critical of allardyce as manager because that is what he does, that's his style so no point in making out any different.

I just get the feeling allardyce won't be able to connect the dots no matter how much he alludes to it. When the attitude is to start at the back then going on the players we do have it's going to be difficult to form a proper team out of it all. We realised. Months ago the squad doesn't fit together in any way and it's concerning still that we lack so many things out the team including fight and any sort of defence to attack tactic/style that isn't hoofing it.

Signing this Turkish player isn't going to solve all our issues and we isolate a striker in the team anyway. It's worrying that we essentially need a second overhaul of the squad in as many years , which is damaging in itself.

I think personally now is the time to rip up the squad and start again. We tried signing proven league players and they aren't great on the whole, pick one or two out fine but on the whole they haven't lifted the quality we have. Signing players abroad hasn't worked as sandro klassen vlasic to name a few struggle to get a place at all. So start from fresh, with youth and plan over a long term. Replace Sam with a great young coach from somewhere, whether it's tuchel or someone of that ilk then there you go, but basically a pochetino. Rip the squad apart over 2 years and look to bring young players in as a policy. Look to sign worldwide , the odd Brazilian for example to rival the .money clubs. But basically have a youth policy, early 20s and look to develop over time. You can still have experience in there , Coleman, Rooney, Turkish fella, gueye , schneiderlin, jags probably all for example. Not suggesting play a youth team, but lower the age of the squad significantly and look to develop over time so when the stadium crunch kicks in We are in a similar position to spurs where they don't need to make 4-5 signings a season

 

[nsno-chris]

Out of interest, where do you think we will finish this season?

Given that Sam always tonks badly after an initial upturn, I’d say between 10th and 15th. If he continues to put 9 behind a ball and isolate the striker, it’ll be more 15th

 

[EFC78]

The anti-Allardyce brigade are attempting to rewrite history it seems. Let's address this myth that Allardyce has got us playing 'the worst football for <insert exaggerated number> years' and is the sole reason for us being poor when up against the top sides and not creating any shots on target. In August of this season under Ronald Koeman, we travelled to Stamford Bridge where we were beaten 2-0. Here is the match report for the game so the facts are there to see:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40990428

Shots on target...0

"Everton had three touches in opposition box before the 85th minute in this match - in the final five minutes (and injury time) they had four."

The difference between the 0 shots on target game at SB, and the one at Goodison is that we actually came away with a point under Allardyce which is the main reason why we brought him in. His football may not be great, but he can get results from it, which will contribute to us staying up this season.

What about Southampton away where we were absolutely humiliated by a side that had scored just 9 goals all season.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42042018

Shots on target...2

Against West Brom we had 3 shots on target and again, earned a point, even if the performance was a disappointment. So can someone please explain how 0-0s where we have 0 shots on target are worse than the 2-0 defeat to Chelsea at Stamford Bridge, or the 4-1 drubbing against an awful Southampton side?

Or we could go back to the free flowing classy football under Martinez:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35624290

Liverpool 4 - 0 Everton

Shots - LFC 37, EFC 3.
Shots on target - LFC 13, EFC 0.

 

[MikeH72]

Proper turgid to watch under Sam aren’t we. Keep us top 10 then get a tasty pay off in the summer, marriage of convenience this.

Fixed

 

[orly]

The anti-Allardyce brigade are attempting to rewrite history it seems. Let's address this myth that Allardyce has got us playing 'the worst football for <insert exaggerated number> years' and is the sole reason for us being poor when up against the top sides and not creating any shots on target. In August of this season under Ronald Koeman, we travelled to Stamford Bridge where we were beaten 2-0. Here is the match report for the game so the facts are there to see:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40990428

Shots on target...0

"Everton had three touches in opposition box before the 85th minute in this match - in the final five minutes (and injury time) they had four."

The difference between the 0 shots on target game at SB, and the one at Goodison is that we actually came away with a point under Allardyce which is the main reason why we brought him in. His football may not be great, but he can get results from it, which will contribute to us staying up this season.

What about Southampton away where we were absolutely humiliated by a side that had scored just 9 goals all season.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42042018

Shots on target...2

Against West Brom we had 3 shots on target and again, earned a point, even if the performance was a disappointment. So can someone please explain how 0-0s where we have 0 shots on target are worse than the 2-0 defeat to Chelsea at Stamford Bridge, or the 4-1 drubbing against an awful Southampton side?

Or we could go back to the free flowing classy football under Martinez:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35624290

Liverpool 4 - 0 Everton

Shots - LFC 37, EFC 3.
Shots on target - LFC 13, EFC 0.

All this and you have totally missed the point.

Two HOME games in a row without a shot on target. If you're finding an excuse for that, you must be very very desperate.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

I think the wine has turned back to water.
He's not the Messiah just a back street conjurer.

 

[MikeH72]

The anti-Allardyce brigade are attempting to rewrite history it seems. Let's address this myth that Allardyce has got us playing 'the worst football for <insert exaggerated number> years' and is the sole reason for us being poor when up against the top sides and not creating any shots on target. In August of this season under Ronald Koeman, we travelled to Stamford Bridge where we were beaten 2-0. Here is the match report for the game so the facts are there to see:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40990428

Shots on target...0

"Everton had three touches in opposition box before the 85th minute in this match - in the final five minutes (and injury time) they had four."

The difference between the 0 shots on target game at SB, and the one at Goodison is that we actually came away with a point under Allardyce which is the main reason why we brought him in. His football may not be great, but he can get results from it, which will contribute to us staying up this season.

What about Southampton away where we were absolutely humiliated by a side that had scored just 9 goals all season.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42042018

Shots on target...2

Against West Brom we had 3 shots on target and again, earned a point, even if the performance was a disappointment. So can someone please explain how 0-0s where we have 0 shots on target are worse than the 2-0 defeat to Chelsea at Stamford Bridge, or the 4-1 drubbing against an awful Southampton side?

Or we could go back to the free flowing classy football under Martinez:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35624290

Liverpool 4 - 0 Everton

Shots - LFC 37, EFC 3.
Shots on target - LFC 13, EFC 0.

Don't forget Everton 0-3 Spurs where we failed to force the goalkeeper to make a save. Last season's Goodison Derby is a good one too.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

Don't forget Everton 0-3 Spurs where we failed to force the goalkeeper to make a save. Last season's Goodison Derby is a good one too.

Is your argument then that he is merely the latest in an increasingly long line of poor managers?
If so I concur wholeheartedly.