Is it time to change the Manager ??..

Coxside_Green wrote:

knecht wrote:

I can get at Brent for a lot but, for me, it is down to Sheridan and his back-room staff who are to blame. There has been talk here and elsewhere that the negativity filters down from the top - ie the board-room and the owner. I don't get that. I suspect that most players don't give a damn. All that matters to them is that they are taken care of and motivated. And that is down to Sheridan & his team.

What if the manager isn't motivated (for this season at least)?

Motivation surely has to come from the top?  The VIP idiots were always happy with mid-table this season, that suits the top table.  We'll probably achieve that come the season's end, at what expense?

As disappointing this crap is, I can't say it's unexpected.  Maybe I'm past caring.  

Our weakness on the footballing front, where it matters, is most definately with the tw@t who hides behind the shield of 'I admit to not knowing what I'm doing', expecting forgiveness from 7k people year on year.  He ain't fekn God, he's a Tory money grabbing cnut,

I agree with lots of that but if Sheridan needs motivating then he's not worth having.

Players do give a damn Knecht - it's called unity. The Directors I served with were all die hard Argyle fans (much more so than this grockle!). We could and would sit with the manager and talk football on a friday night before an away game. We could and would watch training sessions. We travelled on the team bus and celebrated wins and shared the sorrow of defeat with the team. We had a beer with the boys, our wives took players wives out for girls nights. We were as one. We were a club. A football club. We all knew where the parts we needed to play to ensure success.

Does it eminate from the top? Damn right it does. Right now we have a Board of Directors whose focus is not on football. So guess what - the manager doesn't look like he gives a toss and neither do the majority of the players. Today was the first game I've seen this season - there were at least 7 players in blue who really looked like they didnt care.

Just a quick response to your first sentence, Damon, I realised my first post was ambiguous so I changed it to "give a damn about the politics" (or somethin to that effect - I'm buggered if I will read back through my own stuff .... it's hard enough writing it  ). My apologies.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Players do give a damn Knecht - it's called unity. The Directors I served with were all die hard Argyle fans (much more so than this grockle!). We could and would sit with the manager and talk football on a friday night before an away game. We could and would watch training sessions. We travelled on the team bus and celebrated wins and shared the sorrow of defeat with the team. We had a beer with the boys, our wives took players wives out for girls nights. We were as one. We were a club. A football club. We all knew where the parts we needed to play to ensure success.

Does it eminate from the top? Damn right it does. Right now we have a Board of Directors whose focus is not on football. So guess what - the manager doesn't look like he gives a toss and neither do the majority of the players. Today was the first game I've seen this season - there were at least 7 players in blue who really looked like they didnt care.

That's a pretty convincing and passionate argument Damon. Is that what happens at all or most clubs?

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Players do give a damn Knecht - it's called unity. The Directors I served with were all die hard Argyle fans (much more so than this grockle!). We could and would sit with the manager and talk football on a friday night before an away game. We could and would watch training sessions. We travelled on the team bus and celebrated wins and shared the sorrow of defeat with the team. We had a beer with the boys, our wives took players wives out for girls nights. We were as one. We were a club. A football club. We all knew where the parts we needed to play to ensure success.

Does it eminate from the top? Damn right it does. Right now we have a Board of Directors whose focus is not on football. So guess what - the manager doesn't look like he gives a toss and neither do the majority of the players. Today was the first game I've seen this season - there were at least 7 players in blue who really looked like they didnt care.

Great post damon, i also believe the manager and most of the players are at argyle because no one else wants them, and the speccy messiah and his pals see the club as a development scheme to make money, they dont give a toss if the teams gash it all about the money!

knecht wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

knecht wrote:

I can get at Brent for a lot but, for me, it is down to Sheridan and his back-room staff who are to blame. There has been talk here and elsewhere that the negativity filters down from the top - ie the board-room and the owner. I don't get that. I suspect that most players don't give a damn. All that matters to them is that they are taken care of and motivated. And that is down to Sheridan & his team.

What if the manager isn't motivated (for this season at least)?

Motivation surely has to come from the top?  The VIP idiots were always happy with mid-table this season, that suits the top table.  We'll probably achieve that come the season's end, at what expense?

As disappointing this crap is, I can't say it's unexpected.  Maybe I'm past caring.  

Our weakness on the footballing front, where it matters, is most definately with the tw@t who hides behind the shield of 'I admit to not knowing what I'm doing', expecting forgiveness from 7k people year on year.  He ain't fekn God, he's a Tory money grabbing cnut,

I agree with lots of that but if Sheridan needs motivating then he's not worth having.

It costs nothing for Brent to have a man like Sheridan as a scapegoat.

Even the inexperienced Fletch would have a tale or two to tell if it wasn't for confidentiality BS they all have to sign these days.  Football's corrupt, Tory cnuts like Brent can fill their boots.

Without doubt Sheridan and his players are underperforming in an environment where there's no reason to succeed.  Brent will not tolerate success this season, it's too early.

Some did, others didn't. I can remeber the directors of Watford, Burnley, Barnsley, Derby, Forest even Stoke all being proper football fans. I can remember others being total wankers (Bates, Jordan spring to mind). But practically every club used to ask us how we were punching above our weight. The only answer I could give then as now was unity - we were truly a football 'club'.

So it isn't a requisite for things to be led from the top.

Maybe I'm pursuing this to avoid the knee-jerk blaming of everything on Brent. He may not be the Messiah that some have claimed but I suspect he's not Satan either.

Disagree Knecht. Bates and Jordan did lead, just in a very different way to the way we worked. The problem comes when the football is just an annoying irrelevance to the masterplan.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Some did, others didn't. I can remeber the directors of Watford, Burnley, Barnsley, Derby, Forest even Stoke all being proper football fans. I can remember others being total wankers (Bates, Jordan spring to mind). But practically every club used to ask us how we were punching above our weight. The only answer I could give then as now was unity - we were truly a football 'club'.

Hate that expression.How were Argyle "punching above their weight" with gates averaging 16400 in the CCC first season? Plenty of clubs since then have been promoted to the premier league on gates less than that,Burnley and Swansea to name but two-Stoke's gates were about the same level until they started to take off under Pulis.

And as average gates fell about 2000 a season we continued to finish higher. We were mixing it with a whole group of clubs who were yoyoing between Prem and Championship with all the financial parachute benefits that brings. Were we better than our finances suggested, yes - but isnt that what everyone strives for?

Coxside_Green wrote:

knecht wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

knecht wrote:

I can get at Brent for a lot but, for me, it is down to Sheridan and his back-room staff who are to blame. There has been talk here and elsewhere that the negativity filters down from the top - ie the board-room and the owner. I don't get that. I suspect that most players don't give a damn. All that matters to them is that they are taken care of and motivated. And that is down to Sheridan & his team.

What if the manager isn't motivated (for this season at least)?

Motivation surely has to come from the top?  The VIP idiots were always happy with mid-table this season, that suits the top table.  We'll probably achieve that come the season's end, at what expense?

As disappointing this crap is, I can't say it's unexpected.  Maybe I'm past caring.  

Our weakness on the footballing front, where it matters, is most definately with the tw@t who hides behind the shield of 'I admit to not knowing what I'm doing', expecting forgiveness from 7k people year on year.  He ain't fekn God, he's a Tory money grabbing cnut,

I agree with lots of that but if Sheridan needs motivating then he's not worth having.

It costs nothing for Brent to have a man like Sheridan as a scapegoat.

Even the inexperienced Fletch would have a tale or two to tell if it wasn't for confidentiality BS they all have to sign these days.  Football's corrupt, Tory cnuts like Brent can fill their boots.

Without doubt Sheridan and his players are underperforming in an environment where there's no reason to succeed.  Brent will not tolerate success this season, it's too early.

Funnily enough,Fletch was on that TV programme which covered the South clubs from Southampton westwards back in the summer,can't remember what it was called but they were previewing the season for all the relevant clubs.The link man asked Fletch what was needed for Argyle to be more successful and he replied along the lines of unless more money was put into the budget than was the case under his management,then the club could not hope to progress all that much further.Which certainly doesn't tally with what he was saying at the time [happy with budget,4th biggest in the division,save some for January etc] and makes you wonder if the public pronouncements from Sheridan are the whole truth and nothing but the truth.Food for thought.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Disagree Knecht. Bates and Jordan did lead, just in a very different way to the way we worked. The problem comes when the football is just an annoying irrelevance to the masterplan.

You may be right - and you certainly have far more experience of running a football club than I do or anyone else on here. There are certainly different ways of leading.

I have opposed his plans for the stand in all ways I am able but I don't think he is to blame for everything.

I'm off to bed - struggling with terminal man-flu - but I couldn't resist posting a copy of what with-menace has posted on pasoti:
"Thanks for 'saving' our club mr Brent. How about you leave a detailed account of how much YOUVE spent out of your own pocket with receipts and I will reimburse you.
Of course on condition you leave and leave the land you intend to develop. If we even have to start again as an AFC then so be it, NOTHING could be worse than being run by you. Once the land has been divorced from the the club forever I believe it will be a matter of months before we are plunged back into administration anyway. I don't believe a word of this BS about extra revenue in fact the way things are going under Brent revenue will soon be at an all time low.
Please go, leave this club and leave all the attached land so the club can develop it and profit not you. If you don't make the profit you were hoping for that's bad luck,if you're owed a bit of money then join the back of the very long queue of creditors."

I especially liked his last sentence.

As long as the current board remain EVERY manager will struggle in the exact same way as Fletcher and Sheridan have. Those two are very different types of manager yet both experience the exact same problems. lack of interest from the owner and lack of funds where they matter.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

And as average gates fell about 2000 a season we continued to finish higher. We were mixing it with a whole group of clubs who were yoyoing between Prem and Championship with all the financial parachute benefits that brings. Were we better than our finances suggested, yes - but isnt that what everyone strives for?

Point taken but on the other hand we were overtaken by other emerging clubs [Blackpool,Swansea,Hull] who were also facing the same parachute payments scenario and whose basic raw material was no better than ours and in one case considerably worse,with a 3 sided ground and gates of 5000 per match less than ours.

Agree Greenskin, we weren't the only club 'punching above our weight'!

On the pitch maybe. But off the pitch it was always Micky mouse

Greenskin wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

knecht wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

knecht wrote:

I can get at Brent for a lot but, for me, it is down to Sheridan and his back-room staff who are to blame. There has been talk here and elsewhere that the negativity filters down from the top - ie the board-room and the owner. I don't get that. I suspect that most players don't give a damn. All that matters to them is that they are taken care of and motivated. And that is down to Sheridan & his team.

What if the manager isn't motivated (for this season at least)?

Motivation surely has to come from the top?  The VIP idiots were always happy with mid-table this season, that suits the top table.  We'll probably achieve that come the season's end, at what expense?

As disappointing this crap is, I can't say it's unexpected.  Maybe I'm past caring.  

Our weakness on the footballing front, where it matters, is most definately with the tw@t who hides behind the shield of 'I admit to not knowing what I'm doing', expecting forgiveness from 7k people year on year.  He ain't fekn God, he's a Tory money grabbing cnut,

I agree with lots of that but if Sheridan needs motivating then he's not worth having.

It costs nothing for Brent to have a man like Sheridan as a scapegoat.

Even the inexperienced Fletch would have a tale or two to tell if it wasn't for confidentiality BS they all have to sign these days.  Football's corrupt, Tory cnuts like Brent can fill their boots.

Without doubt Sheridan and his players are underperforming in an environment where there's no reason to succeed.  Brent will not tolerate success this season, it's too early.

Funnily enough,Fletch was on that TV programme which covered the South clubs from Southampton westwards back in the summer,can't remember what it was called but they were previewing the season for all the relevant clubs.The link man asked Fletch what was needed for Argyle to be more successful and he replied along the lines of unless more money was put into the budget than was the case under his management,then the club could not hope to progress all that much further.Which certainly doesn't tally with what he was saying at the time [happy with budget,4th biggest in the division,save some for January etc] and makes you wonder if the public pronouncements from Sheridan are the whole truth and nothing but the truth.Food for thought.

The inexperienced Fletch would've always required a bigger budget to be fair.

Sheridan proclaiming we'll have the best stadium in division 4 would be more telling.  That's our ambition for the next 3 years IMO.  By then Brent will feck off but I'd expect him to leave a club on the up.  I think Sheridan is a decent manager but he doesn't trust Brent enough to fulfil the 3 year challenge.

We're always hearing about what an astute businessman Brent is, but I no longer believe it. If he was, and given he always admitted he knows nothing about football, he'd have listened to some proper advice by now.

Like that you can get away with pretty much anything off the pitch - even fans bullying and threatening other fans and then sitting in the directors' box - if you pay enough attention to what happens on it. Ignoring both, though, is just idiocy.

Dane. wrote:

On the pitch maybe. But off the pitch it was always Micky mouse

So when we are not doing well it's the Board's fault, but when we were doing well it had nothing to do with the Board?

Let's be honest. You got lucky with the sturrock appointment. Then you rode the wave his success created.

I always use to comment on how I felt that while he club had progressed on the field. The club always felt like a div 3 outfit off it.

Don't take it personally.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Dane. wrote:

On the pitch maybe.   But off the pitch it was always Micky mouse

So when we are not doing well it's the Board's fault, but when we were doing well it had nothing to do with the Board?

when we are talking about James Brent then yes i would say thats the case. He has absolutely no interest in football let alone this club.

pssss:

To be fair Damon, the club did get carried by a couple of premiership bound managers. Full credit for employing them, a pity we couldn't keep hold of them.

Any particular reason we couldn't keep hold of them?

Dane I had nothing to do with Sturrock's appointment. What Luggy did for our club was magnificent but the man himself will tell you that it was down to a partnership and friendship between himself and the Board.