2022/23 Sean Dyche

[TheBigIguana]

With hindsight, Lampard should have gone before the WC or at least straight after this. We may (well, likely will) have picked up more invaluable points...

... and, perhaps more importantly, got a striker in as I suspect the instability behind the scenes played a huge part in our window being such a disaster.

I'd have had the cart horse that's Weghorst over what we've got now. Why they kept on with Lampard is another discussion...

Not even hindsight Lampard should have been sacked in May and it was insanity for him to keep his job through the WC window.

 

[PhilM]

Not even hindsight Lampard should have been sacked in May and it was insanity for him to keep his job through the WC window.

I wouldn't go as far as May. Admittedly, there were lots of poor performances at the back end of last season, but he got enough to keep us up.

For the Leicester, Palace games et al., he at least earned a chance to keep on at the reins, and he was given an opportunity to revitalise a pretty crap squad.

Yet, taking until West Ham in mid-September to get a win should have had the alarm bells ringing loudly.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I wouldn't go as far as May. Admittedly, there were lots of poor performances at the back end of last season, but he got enough to keep us up.

For the Leicester, Palace games et al., he at least earned a chance to keep on at the reins, and he was given an opportunity to revitalise a pretty crap squad.

Yet, taking until West Ham in mid-September to get a win should have had the alarm bells ringing loudly.

Nope. The team was absolute crap and a bit of luck on the results front shouldn't have been enough to ignore how poorly we played. He didn't earn anything because he managed 18 games and we were as clueless in game 18 as we were in game 1. A smart club would have thanked him and hired someone with a real plan.

And we're going to be back there in about 10 weeks with Dyche. The same logic will apply. If we see improvement then we can keep him but if this is what we're getting he'll need to go in the summer regardless of the league we find ourselves in. Nearly 20 games is enough to show some progress.

 

[twoblue]

Not even hindsight Lampard should have been sacked in May and it was insanity for him to keep his job through the WC window.

It is hindsight. Most of us wanted him to carry on at the time. Think we are all sick of changing managers and having no direction. We all hoped lampard would grow into the role.

 

[TheBigIguana]

It is hindsight. Most of us wanted him to carry on at the time. Think we are all sick of changing managers and having no direction. We all hoped lampard would grow into the role.

For me it is most certainly not hindsight.

2021/22 - Frank Lampard

I think we can. I'd say we have a better chance than not of staying up, but it's still too close for comfort. Burnley stringing 3 wins together has shocked me. Had they not done that we would have been safe by now we just have to keep winning now to we’re we get out and then enough to stay up...

www.grandoldteam.com

 

[Lanolin]

Nope. The team was absolute crap and a bit of luck on the results front shouldn't have been enough to ignore how poorly we played. He didn't earn anything because he managed 18 games and we were as clueless in game 18 as we were in game 1. A smart club would have thanked him and hired someone with a real plan.

And we're going to be back there in about 10 weeks with Dyche. The same logic will apply. If we see improvement then we can keep him but if this is what we're getting he'll need to go in the summer regardless of the league we find ourselves in. Nearly 20 games is enough to show some progress.

I get what you’re saying but I think the more pertinent point to make if we’re going down that road would be ‘he should never have been appointed’. Once he had been, and had kept us up, I think sacking him would have been seen by most as a bad move because the fans liked him and he’d done what we’d asked him to do. Obviously if we’d appointed a top class replacement people would have shrugged and said it’s business but we wouldn’t would we. Sacking him and replacing him with dyche or bielsa would have been seen as a bizarre move and we all know that’s what would have happened.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I get what you’re saying but I think the more pertinent point to make if we’re going down that road would be ‘he should never have been appointed’. Once he had been, and had kept us up, I think sacking him would have been seen by most as a bad move because the fans liked him and he’d done what we’d asked him to do. Obviously if we’d appointed a top class replacement people would have shrugged and said it’s business but we wouldn’t would we. Sacking him and replacing him with dyche or bielsa would have been seen as a bizarre move and we all know that’s what would have happened.

I don't think between seasons the only options would have been those guys though. And while I don't expect our board would have done the required work to find a worthwhile replacement at least it could have happened at that point. We probably pay well enough to lure people out of jobs between seasons too in a way that won't happen midseason. So while I agree replacing Frank with similar level managers (reputationally at that point, Frank is a poor poor manager and most everyone is solidly better) would have been a bit off putting it didn't have to go that way.

Ultimately our inability to be proactive about anything continues to be a problem. We have no ability to anticipate what might happen in 6 months or 12 months or 3 years.

 

[LucBesson]

The whole point of implementing a Director of Football was less reliance on a managerial figurehead. There was nothing wrong with keeping Lampard on. He'd earned it and his ability as a manager was yet to be determined. The problem was / is on signing several duds that no manager can get anything out of again and again.

 

[Lanolin]

I don't think between seasons the only options would have been those guys though. And while I don't expect our board would have done the required work to find a worthwhile replacement at least it could have happened at that point. We probably pay well enough to lure people out of jobs between seasons too in a way that won't happen midseason. So while I agree replacing Frank with similar level managers (reputationally at that point, Frank is a poor poor manager and most everyone is solidly better) would have been a bit off putting it didn't have to go that way.

Ultimately our inability to be proactive about anything continues to be a problem. We have no ability to anticipate what might happen in 6 months or 12 months or 3 years.

It wouldn’t have been our only option but then it wasn’t our only option this time either. It’s just what the board do. The cumulative shortlist for the job the last 3 times it’s been available has basically been Benitez, NES, Duncan, lampard, pereira, Martinez, bielsa and dyche. There’s no reason to think we’d have deviated far from that in the summer.

 

[TheBigIguana]

It wouldn’t have been our only option but then it wasn’t our only option this time either. It’s just what the board do. The cumulative shortlist for the job the last 3 times it’s been available has basically been Benitez, NES, Duncan, lampard, pereira, Martinez, bielsa and dyche. There’s no reason to think we’d have deviated far from that in the summer.

I guess we're just screwed then. I won't stop advocating for the right decisions.

 

[Lanolin]

I guess we're just screwed then. I won't stop advocating for the right decisions.

And I’m not saying you should. Like I said though, the logical point there would have just been to appoint someone better than lampard in the first place. Sacking him in the summer would have been odd.

 

[Brownie]

This is the thing though we do have a few guys who can do a few things in attack. None of them are going to be playing for Real Madrid but maybe you try to put Gray and Iwobi in better places and sacrifice a bit of the defensive side to try and score some? You've said McNeil can shoot and I agree so maybe put him on the other side where he'll luck into a few positions to shoot on his strong foot?

It just feels like we're not really trying anything and then wondering why nothing is working. This attack is very similar to the one Lampard was using. That was one of my fears with Dyche, that Lampard was just doing a really bad impression and even the better version wouldn't actually be any good.

If McNeil's on the right, he can't cross. If he's on the left, he can't shoot. He's been tried in both positions and neither are ideal because he's so one-footed. But then you have to put him wide because he works hard and has enough stamina to play the position (lately, at least).

Likewise Iwobi. I agree he's much better centrally. But if he's playing central, who's out wide? Gray? Then as well as the defensive system breaking down, you can't press, so we get even less of the ball and have less chance to score. We don't even Gordon as a wide option anymore. I also think it's actually quite a big deal that Townsend has been out for so long. As limited as he is, he has some work ethic and can strike a ball decently with both feet. He'd be useful at the moment.

 

[TheBigIguana]

And I’m not saying you should. Like I said though, the logical point there would have just been to appoint someone better than lampard in the first place. Sacking him in the summer would have been odd.

I think you just make the right decision when it's there to be made. At any point sacking the manager and hiring a decent one would be sensible. We could sack Dyche tomorrow and I'd be fine with it so long as there was a real process to find a good appointment afterward. I think we all know there won't be.

 

[Lanolin]

If McNeil's on the right, he can't cross. If he's on the left, he can't shoot. He's been tried in both positions and neither are ideal because he's so one-footed. But then you have to put him wide because he works hard and has enough stamina to play the position (lately, at least).

Likewise Iwobi. I agree he's much better centrally. But if he's playing central, who's out wide? Gray? Then as well as the defensive system breaking down, you can't press, so we get even less of the ball and have less chance to score. We don't even Gordon as a wide option anymore. I also think it's actually quite a big deal that Townsend has been out for so long. As limited as he is, he has some work ethic and can strike a ball decently with both feet. He'd be useful at the moment.

This is pretty much how I see it. I’d have taken 6 points from the games since he took over so I’m not going to go overboard about what he’s doing wrong. There’s no magic bullet that’s going to fix everything, any side we put out is going to be poor and it’s a coin toss over whether it works any better or not. If we have a bad run and just keep doing the same things I’ll have issues with it but at the moment it’s pretty easy to see why he’s doing what he’s doing.

 

[TheBigIguana]

If McNeil's on the right, he can't cross. If he's on the left, he can't shoot. He's been tried in both positions and neither are ideal because he's so one-footed. But then you have to put him wide because he works hard and has enough stamina to play the position (lately, at least).

Likewise Iwobi. I agree he's much better centrally. But if he's playing central, who's out wide? Gray? Then as well as the defensive system breaking down, you can't press, so we get even less of the ball and have less chance to score. We don't even Gordon as a wide option anymore. I also think it's actually quite a big deal that Townsend has been out for so long. As limited as he is, he has some work ethic and can strike a ball decently with both feet. He'd be useful at the moment.

Patterson RW when he's fit. Doucoure. Get wild with it.