Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

McClaren out

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dogsrrs
    replied
    Originally posted by 72bus
    i watched the back 4 knocking it about against sheff ud , absolutely no urgency about them when we were losing . yesterday all over the place , wrong side of the man , lazy , unable to read dangerous situations... and then they gave up , mclaren needs to do some hard work with them
    Isn't that what many of our posters said he was good at when appointed

    Leave a comment:


  • 72bus
    replied
    i watched the back 4 knocking it about against sheff ud , absolutely no urgency about them when we were losing . yesterday all over the place , wrong side of the man , lazy , unable to read dangerous situations... and then they gave up , mclaren needs to do some hard work with them

    Leave a comment:


  • dogsrrs
    replied
    Originally posted by SheepRanger
    I do blame SM for that result because no.professional team should lose by that amount. He'll be aware of that and it's not a sacking moment though.
    Only going by what I've read so could be out of order but if your team makes six howlers leading to six goals in forty five minutes you have to take the blame

    Leave a comment:


  • Undecided
    replied
    Originally posted by Ginger Ninja

    Pathetic/idiotic/stupid/foolish etc etc.
    Yeah, horrible loss yesterday, no doubt about that. Head should roll for sure but the manager's, 3 games in? Nah.
    Yeah. I DO agree.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ginger Ninja
    replied
    Originally posted by Undecided
    I'm not exactly sure what muggy means, but I'm sure I agree.
    Pathetic/idiotic/stupid/foolish etc etc.
    Yeah, horrible loss yesterday, no doubt about that. Head should roll for sure but the manager's, 3 games in? Nah.

    Leave a comment:


  • Undecided
    replied
    I'm not exactly sure what muggy means, but I'm sure I agree.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ginger Ninja
    replied
    What a muggy thread this is.

    Leave a comment:


  • SheepRanger
    replied
    I do blame SM for that result because no.professional team should lose by that amount. He'll be aware of that and it's not a sacking moment though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Undecided
    replied
    Originally posted by Hitman34

    Iee hoos has stated on many occasions that he always budgets for worst case scenarios, is this not how we find the club now?
    Plan for the worst hope for better.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonny
    replied
    Originally posted by brightonr
    We lost one of the best keepers in the division to a PL bench.

    We lost one of the quickest centre backs in the league.

    We allowed another decent centre back to run his contract down and leave.

    We haven’t bothered with adequate replacements yet, in addition to ignoring the absolutely vital need for a quality striker.

    But let’s blame the new manager. Brilliant.

    He’s trying to implement a different style of play. One which will take a bit of time to get working effectively. One in which, once sorted, will produce a far more solid and consistent team.

    He could do with a bit of support from the fans, along with a group of players who actually do what they are being asked to do properly.

    I shall reserve judgement until we’ve played say 15 games and see how things are going then.
    Super post Brighton.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hitman34
    replied
    Originally posted by QPROslo
    Of course McClaren knew the situation. It is very easy to read the P&L of 2016//2017 and calculate what the loss would be in 2017/2018 (around £25m) and thereby project that we had to cut costs from last season to this of about £17m to meet FFP requirements and a further £20m or thereabout next season, when the last bit of the parachute money goes away. Even a financial fool will understand this means we need to massively reduce player salaries and cannot recruit other than cheap players. McClaren was told this, and if he wasn't he and his advisers could find out if the cared to spend half an hour on the public accounts everyone can freely read. The only thing that has changed financially since McClaren came onboard was a very positive outcome of the FFP penalty from the 2013/2014 season (the positive thing being the fine not counting towards new FFP calculations, thereby having no impact on our future spending).
    Iee hoos has stated on many occasions that he always budgets for worst case scenarios, is this not how we find the club now?

    Leave a comment:


  • QPROslo
    replied
    Of course McClaren knew the situation. It is very easy to read the P&L of 2016//2017 and calculate what the loss would be in 2017/2018 (around £25m) and thereby project that we had to cut costs from last season to this of about £17m to meet FFP requirements and a further £20m or thereabout next season, when the last bit of the parachute money goes away. Even a financial fool will understand this means we need to massively reduce player salaries and cannot recruit other than cheap players. McClaren was told this, and if he wasn't he and his advisers could find out if the cared to spend half an hour on the public accounts everyone can freely read. The only thing that has changed financially since McClaren came onboard was a very positive outcome of the FFP penalty from the 2013/2014 season (the positive thing being the fine not counting towards new FFP calculations, thereby having no impact on our future spending).

    Leave a comment:


  • Shania
    replied
    Originally posted by 1973 ranger
    Just read a article where Holloway questions whether McClaren knew the full strength of the situation. McClaren looks lost but you have to feel for him as clearly he has not been told exactly where we are as a club. Even the loan situation is turning into a farce as yesterday highlighted how woeful we are.
    I have also read that article. Scary reading..and , I think Olli is spot on with his assumption sadly

    Leave a comment:


  • QPRDave
    replied
    Holloway spoke honestly about the Hoops and says that the constant upheaval at the club is finally taking it's toll.

    Leave a comment:


  • FurtiveFox
    replied
    Originally posted by QPROslo
    Everyone agrees to the fact the back line is weaker now than under Holloway. That's indisputable. Also Holloway would struggle with this defensive five. But McClaren's outright stupidity is to assume you can play out from the back when you have players at your disposal that are not suited for it. To play tikki-takka around your own box with sub standard players has a risk profile that is absolutely unacceptable. Everyone can see this for themselves, save for Les and a minority of our fans that think McClaren was a smart appointment and now try to defend their position. How anyone could even think for a second McClaren was a better answer for QPR than Holloway is beyond me. Holloway is not one of UKs best manager, but he is a upper half Championship manager, that got very decent results with what he had at his disposal, and improved from one year to the next and thereby created a sort of stability we desperately needed. McClaren hasn't shown anything the last ten years to indicate he was a good choice as manager given QPRs challenges. I have backed a lot of decision the board has made the last couple of years and I actually felt we were heading in the right direction, but this McClaren appointment is the most bizarre decision we have taken over the years - it is right up there with the stupid signings of costly players some years ago.

    It isn't McClaren fault. He isn't better. I don't want to have a dig at him. He was desperately looking for a job and someone gave him a way back into football management than he was dreaming of. I don't think the club has been hiding the financial constraints either - Hoos comes across as a very honest and good guy and I cannot think he hasn't been transparent. It is simply a football decision QPR got absolutely desperately wrong, despite all the applause from a section of the fans.

    The responsibility lies with Les and the board, that failed to analyze the qualities we should be looking for in a manager. Holloway did well and there was no reason to sack him. However, if ambitions were higher than a manager of Holloway's caliber, we should look at someone who has demonstrated he can get a lot out of a situation with limited resources and play a brand of football suited to what we have. Take Lagerbäck as an example, the coach that took Iceland, a country with 300.000 people, to major championships. Now he has taken over Norway, a team with equally limited players as Iceland, and now he has four wins in a row against better footballing nation. The football isn't pretty to the eye, but very effective, and his motivational skills are superb. That's the profile QPR should be looking for if we wanted to replace Holloway. We can give McClaren another ten matches to show what he can do, but we all know the end result.
    Ollie in his prime maybe upper half Championship but not been that for years. Nobody would touch him at this level until Uncle got bowled over by his enthusiasm. I doubt anyone will touch him again. Was absolutely dire for us until he was forced into making changes and effectively someone else was managing him.

    Not convinced by Mac appointment. My hope was he would be a good fit for a club with DoF set up. First three games poor. If he starts doing Ollie six game losing runs needs to go in my view.

    Leave a comment:

Working...