[skyclad99]

It is a cop out. The players may not be up to it, but we had the lowest budget in the division. We hired Allardyce as he was seen as a safe pair of hands, to hopefully make us more solid and get more from the players that Bilic couldn't. There was logic in the appointment but he failed on both counts up until the point where it was too late. Why are people so defensive over him? He's done some good things and made plenty of mistakes also. We could do worse than Allardyce but why can't we strive to do better? I don't buy that nobody could have possibly done a better job than him. He set us up to not lose in must win games, he broke the PL record for goals conceded in the first 10 games for a new manager. He lucked out in the Chelsea game and was practically forced to bring Robinson on, I doubt we'd have seen him otherwise. He's ignored players we will be relying on next season. For some reason he's getting all of the credit for our January signings despite them apparently being on a list of targets in the summer. 4 wins in 22 yet he's apparently our only hope.

He's not totally to blame but that doesn't make him blameless either. I don't have a personal agenda against Allardyce, just judging him on what he's achieved, which IMO is not a lot really.

The definition of 'cop out' is avoid doing something that one ought to do

Sam certainly did not cop out. He tried and failed. Is it his fault?, well yes partly, he set the team up and they were his tactics. However, we need to look deeper and he had nothing to do with what happened here before his appointment, he had nothing to do with the championship quality players he inherited, and he was not given any money to strengthen the side the way he would have liked.

You need to look no further than the circus running our club if you really want to blame someone, they are the real culprits,  Sam is just this seasons huckleberry. It will be someone else soon.........   

[hardtobeat]

Can only assume you mean automatic promotion as he has been directly promoted out of the Championship twice in his only 2 full seasons in it.

Correct because the perception on here amongst his supporters is that he will bring us back up immediately , easily , comfortably based on his past record that just isn’t true

[TheJacko2000]

Correct because the perception on here amongst his supporters is that he will bring us back up immediately , easily , comfortably based on his past record that just isn’t true

His supporters? We're Albion supporters (well most of us).

[wbatillidie]

The definition of 'cop out' is avoid doing something that one ought to do

Sam certainly did not cop out. He tried and failed. Is it his fault?, well yes partly, he set the team up and they were his tactics. However, we need to look deeper and he had nothing to do with what happened here before his appointment, he had nothing to do with the championship quality players he inherited, and he was not given any money to strengthen the side the way he would have liked.

You need to look no further than the circus running our club if you really want to blame someone, they are the real culprits,  Sam is just this seasons huckleberry. It will be someone else soon.........   

Nobody forced him to take the job. I'm sure hes getting paid very generously and would have got a huge bonus if he achieved what was expected of him. I don't blame the board for taking the punt on him but it hasn't worked. I think Sam would probably get us promoted but at what cost? He will want it all his own way and I don't think that's a good idea. Not many clubs and their supporters look back fondly on him despite never really failing anywhere else

[skyclad99]

Nobody forced him to take the job. I'm sure hes getting paid very generously and would have got a huge bonus if he achieved what was expected of him. I don't blame the board for taking the punt on him but it hasn't worked. I think Sam would probably get us promoted but at what cost? He will want it all his own way and I don't think that's a good idea. Not many clubs and their supporters look back fondly on him despite never really failing anywhere else

There is going to be a cost in getting promoted regardless of who is in charge, not sure why some are suggesting it will be worse with Sam. Sure, he had failed in keeping us up but I have been encouraged by some of the players he has brought in (or Dowling, or the groundsman - wouldn’t want to give him too much credit) so I would like to see him have a go. Not really bothered about what other clubs think of him, they need to remember he avoided relegation for them and improved their teams.
Personally I want him to take full control of the team, it is pretty obvious that there is no else there with a scooby

[ttree30]

Nobody has said he *should* have kept us up - just that was what he was hired to do and he's failed.  When Sam took the job at no point did he said there was no chance of keeping us in the Prem, it was all about how we had a good quality in the squad to give us a chance.  All this "nobody would have kept us up" is just revisionsim - when he took the job the aim was very clearly to keep us up.  If he thought 1.24 points per game was impossible with this squad then maybe he should have given the job to somebody who thought it was possible.  So either he thought we could do it, and he's failed, or he knew we couldn't and took the job anyway because he wanted to get paid. 

Anyway, it's not so much the results, it's the performances and the mindset.  It's setting out to get draws against relegation rivals, it's sitting on the edge of your own 18 yard box for most of the match, it's averaging around 30% possession game after game, it's conceding 3+ goals in several games running, it's picking Kanu, it's getting a poor defence to spend 70% of the game defending, it's moaning about the fixture list but not using all your subs, it's watching your goal difference get hammered, it's refusing to play Diangana, it's having a must win game against your rivals and starting with 5 defenders on the pitch and dropping the player who was the catalyst for the few good results.

These aren't unlucky things, or factors of a poor squad, it's the mindset of a manager who still thinks you can defend the edge of your box for 80 mins and nick a goal.  A few good results and performances and suddenly it's like the rest of his tenure didn't happen.  Let's face it, he was forced into the change against Chelsea and we lucked out, we followed that up against Southampton, and then he's very quickly reverted back to "must. defend. goal." even in games where we HAVE to win.

In a must win match, against our local rivals, he starts with 5 defenders on the pitch, and 3 midfielders who are all known to be better defensively.  The only attacking intent on the pitch was Pierera and Diagne.  In a must win match.  I genuinely wouldn't have criticised him if he'd have gone for it and we lost - because we have to go for it.  Likewise I didn't blame him for the team he picked against Leicester.

Not “revisionism” for me.

The more apposite noun is “realism”

[wbasoprano]

I keep reading that Wolves was a 'must win' game from the Allardici doubters. Why was it? We were down weeks ago. It was a 'must not lose' game for me and that was comfortably achieved.

[boinging_along]

I keep reading that Wolves was a 'must win' game from the Allardici doubters. Why was it? We were down weeks ago. It was a 'must not lose' game for me and that was comfortably achieved.

Because until it's mathematical impossible your team shouldn't give up. 

And I'd still rather we went into games against our rivals looking to win rather than to draw.

And when we set up to draw we invariably look very poor.

[baggiejohn]

There is going to be a cost in getting promoted regardless of who is in charge, not sure why some are suggesting it will be worse with Sam. Sure, he had failed in keeping us up but I have been encouraged by some of the players he has brought in (or Dowling, or the groundsman - wouldn’t want to give him too much credit) so I would like to see him have a go. Not really bothered about what other clubs think of him, they need to remember he avoided relegation for them and improved their teams.
Personally I want him to take full control of the team, it is pretty obvious that there is no else there with a scooby

I believe I have explained why I think the costs are likely to be higher with SA.

Undoubtedly, there will be players that clubs will want to unload, & they might be willing to sell without a transfer fee, but players will demand that contracts are fulfilled, which means that even player loans & wages would be expensive.

Just to give the argument a benchmark, a squad of 26 players on an average £20,000 a week would give an annual wages bill of £26 million.

We have a 26 man squad & I believe we have 6 players who will be out of contract this June 30th. Our wage bill last season was around £59 million (2019 £42 million) so there might be opportunities to replace those 6 with less expensive versions, but it's unlikely if we're focusing on experienced EPL players.

There is also the small matter of Diangana & Grant sitting on our books with an asset value of around £33 million, who are not being used. As things stand, I couldn't see us getting anywhere near that sum if we moved them on, so a write off just isn't an option.

We showed an operating loss last year of £23 million (when we had gate receipts up to March). This season we will have had zero gate receipts & it's likely that most of the media money from promotion was spent on wages, so I'm expecting another loss this year.
I believe that parachute payments next season will also be reduced due to additional "claw backs" from media companies, so I'm not sure have much income we're going to have.

Really don't think we're going to have the available income to give SA the assurances he will demand.

If he takes the job on that basis, he's going to have to be more pragmatic, than he's been up to now.

[boinging_along]

Not “revisionism” for me.

The more apposite noun is “reality.”

3 pts off safety, 25 games to play and a transfer window, is not impossible.

Just curious, why do you think we hired Sam on the contract we did if everyone involved thought staying up was impossible?

[TheJacko2000]

It wasn't impossible, it has only turned out to be impossible.  We needed the safety line to be a lot lower and it simply hasn't transpired that way.

[wbasoprano]

Because until it's mathematical impossible your team shouldn't give up. 

And I'd still rather we went into games against our rivals looking to win rather than to draw.

And when we set up to draw we invariably look very poor.

We set up to be in the game, keep it tight and try to take our chances when they come. We aren't good enough to go gung ho against anyone in this league. Wolves didn't set up as expected so Sam changed it early on. With better finishing and/or barring a freak goal we win that game.

[ttree30]

3 pts off safety, 25 games to play and a transfer window, is not impossible.

Just curious, why do you think we hired Sam on the contract we did if everyone involved thought staying up was impossible?

Because repeating the same thing and expecting different results is madness. You must try something different, even if you have grave doubts it will succeed.

Signings were too late, the points distribution this season hasn’t helped, but by far the biggest problem is the team was totally inadequate.

[timdon]

Because repeating the same thing and expecting different results is madness. You must try something different, even if you have grave doubts it will succeed.

Signings were too late, the points distribution this season hasn’t helped, but by far the biggest problem is the team was totally inadequate.

If the team was totally inadequate, there really wasn't any point in trying something different.

[smethwickw]

We set up to be in the game, keep it tight and try to take our chances when they come. We aren't good enough to go gung ho against anyone in this league. Wolves didn't set up as expected so Sam changed it early on. With better finishing and/or barring a freak goal we win that game.

If we’d have set up like we did against Southampton then I’m pretty sure we’d have won comfortably. It is probably the only time the handbrake has been off this season and resulted in a great performance and win. We had absolutely nothing to lose yesterday yet still approached the game in a defensive manner.

[wbasoprano]

If we’d have set up like we did against Southampton then I’m pretty sure we’d have won comfortably. It is probably the only time the handbrake has been off this season and resulted in a great performance and win. We had absolutely nothing to lose yesterday yet still approached the game in a defensive manner.

We had our BCD home undefeated streak to lose and we didn't lose it. We took our chances against Southampton, we didn't take them yesterday, regardless of how you think we did or didn't set up.

[costa blanca baggie]

For the the first time in yonks, I’ve just skimmed through this thread. Football has now joined up with with religion and politics as none winnable subjects to discuss.

[ttree30]

If the team was totally inadequate, there really wasn't any point in trying something different.

Perhaps there wasn’t. But a drowning man will look in desperation for any passing driftwood that might just carry him to shore, rather than just accept his fate.

[KN22]

It wasn't impossible, it has only turned out to be impossible.  We needed the safety line to be a lot lower and it simply hasn't transpired that way.

The safety line would have to have been 30 points maximum which it never is. Why 30 points? Let’s see how many we end up with.

[TheJacko2000]

The safety line would have to have been 30 points maximum which it never is. Why 30 points? Let’s see how many we end up with.

Just not the case. If Burnley and or Newcastle CURRENTLY had 30 points there would be a lot more riding on our and their games. As it stands any slip up on our part and they're all dead rubbers.

33 or 34 is what we needed the high tide line to be imo, and it would still have been one of the great escapes.

[LiamTheBaggie]

I keep seeing posters referring to us being unable to defend and therefore our set up wrong.

Our best premier league form has always been when we have been pragmatic, hard to beat and clinical when needed. The assumption from some is that we need to go full throttle attack which will clearly open up the team and actually make us more vulnerable to defeats.

If you review our form from match day 23 which was a defeat against Spurs then our record is the following:

14 points from 12 games, 12th in the league. In that time we’ve scored 13 goals and conceded 13. Worth noting that those period of fixtures included Chelsea, man United, Leicester and Tottenham whereby we conceded 8 of those 13 goals.

Our defensive record in that time are joint 5th for the best in the division. Throughout that period only 9 teams have scored more goals than us and those teams are the top 7.

This side is hard to beat, it is competitive and with a distinctly average bunch of players is showing the hallmarks of a good side in this division.

This notion that we’re not any good at defending and that it does not suit us is simply untrue. They are demonstrating that they are capable of defending in this division. Furthermore, some of our forward play has been easy on the eye and had we been more clinical in some games then our points tally would be greater.

I’ve used the benchmark of week 23 as that is when SA had the full quota of loan signings to choose from. I accept that it has taken to long to get here, but for a side which were whipping boys before Christmas, then I am pleased to finally see this bunch of players showing some resolve in this division.

[SmethDan]

For the the first time in yonks, I’ve just skimmed through this thread. Football has now joined up with with religion and politics as none winnable subjects to discuss.

Got to the point where I'm not skimming so much as taking leaps and bounds across a lilly pond, surprisingly supple and athletic for a bloke of my age. Mind you the water's kinder on my knees than hard surfaces.

[wbasoprano]

I keep seeing posters referring to us being unable to defend and therefore our set up wrong.

Our best premier league form has always been when we have been pragmatic, hard to beat and clinical when needed. The assumption from some is that we need to go full throttle attack which will clearly open up the team and actually make us more vulnerable to defeats.

If you review our form from match day 23 which was a defeat against Spurs then our record is the following:

14 points from 12 games, 12th in the league. In that time we’ve scored 13 goals and conceded 13. Worth noting that those period of fixtures included Chelsea, man United, Leicester and Tottenham whereby we conceded 8 of those 13 goals.

Our defensive record in that time are joint 5th for the best in the division. Throughout that period only 9 teams have scored more goals than us and those teams are the top 7.

This side is hard to beat, it is competitive and with a distinctly average bunch of players is showing the hallmarks of a good side in this division.

This notion that we’re not any good at defending and that it does not suit us is simply untrue. They are demonstrating that they are capable of defending in this division. Furthermore, some of our forward play has been easy on the eye and had we been more clinical in some games then our points tally would be greater.

I’ve used the benchmark of week 23 as that is when SA had the full quota of loan signings to choose from. I accept that it has taken to long to get here, but for a side which were whipping boys before Christmas, then I am pleased to finally see this bunch of players showing some resolve in this division.

Top post. Fully agree

[skyclad99]

I keep seeing posters referring to us being unable to defend and therefore our set up wrong.

Our best premier league form has always been when we have been pragmatic, hard to beat and clinical when needed. The assumption from some is that we need to go full throttle attack which will clearly open up the team and actually make us more vulnerable to defeats.

If you review our form from match day 23 which was a defeat against Spurs then our record is the following:

14 points from 12 games, 12th in the league. In that time we’ve scored 13 goals and conceded 13. Worth noting that those period of fixtures included Chelsea, man United, Leicester and Tottenham whereby we conceded 8 of those 13 goals.

Our defensive record in that time are joint 5th for the best in the division. Throughout that period only 9 teams have scored more goals than us and those teams are the top 7.

This side is hard to beat, it is competitive and with a distinctly average bunch of players is showing the hallmarks of a good side in this division.

This notion that we’re not any good at defending and that it does not suit us is simply untrue. They are demonstrating that they are capable of defending in this division. Furthermore, some of our forward play has been easy on the eye and had we been more clinical in some games then our points tally would be greater.

I’ve used the benchmark of week 23 as that is when SA had the full quota of loan signings to choose from. I accept that it has taken to long to get here, but for a side which were whipping boys before Christmas, then I am pleased to finally see this bunch of players showing some resolve in this division.

A common sense post at last.

[skyclad99]

I believe I have explained why I think the costs are likely to be higher with SA.

Undoubtedly, there will be players that clubs will want to unload, & they might be willing to sell without a transfer fee, but players will demand that contracts are fulfilled, which means that even player loans & wages would be expensive.

Just to give the argument a benchmark, a squad of 26 players on an average £20,000 a week would give an annual wages bill of £26 million.

We have a 26 man squad & I believe we have 6 players who will be out of contract this June 30th. Our wage bill last season was around £59 million (2019 £42 million) so there might be opportunities to replace those 6 with less expensive versions, but it's unlikely if we're focusing on experienced EPL players.

There is also the small matter of Diangana & Grant sitting on our books with an asset value of around £33 million, who are not being used. As things stand, I couldn't see us getting anywhere near that sum if we moved them on, so a write off just isn't an option.

We showed an operating loss last year of £23 million (when we had gate receipts up to March). This season we will have had zero gate receipts & it's likely that most of the media money from promotion was spent on wages, so I'm expecting another loss this year.
I believe that parachute payments next season will also be reduced due to additional "claw backs" from media companies, so I'm not sure have much income we're going to have.

Really don't think we're going to have the available income to give SA the assurances he will demand.

If he takes the job on that basis, he's going to have to be more pragmatic, than he's been up to now.

Thanks John, I missed your earlier post.

You make some relevant points. In short, money is tight but I think that applies to the majority of clubs in the league. I also think that Diangana and Grant will be fully utilised next season as well, so if we can get a tune out of them hopefully they will attract the type of fee we laid out for them. Both proven in the championship but not so in the Premier.

We will have to wait and see if Sam fancies the challenge but I remain unconvinced that it will be any more expensive than under anyone else.