Poll - Sherwood - got rid

[RussellC]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

[Toronto Villa]

Tom Fox has to be rather worried that his plan beyond staying up isn't going quite to plan. I imagine he expected a period of learning and development. But I don't think he saw us sitting in the bottom 3 with 5 defeats in late September. I don't think he's about to pull the trigger but might be looking for the gun.

[PeterWithe]

He's been here a little over seven months and has had to totally restructure the playing and coaching staff, talk of the sack is simply far too premature.

[RussellC]

That told me he was capable of what he hoped he was capable of. Unfortunately he simply hasn't built on it despite being afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players.

When I read things like this I genuinely think that some of our Supporters have just forgotten that we lost 4 of our best players in the summer.

"Afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players"?? Come on - that's not serious is it?

of the players we lost Benteke is by far the best of the lot. As for the others; Delph possibly though I would say Gana is every bit as good, Vlaar and Cleverley - what have we really lost? And off course he's brought in his own players or have you missed the past few months?

Gana looks promising but he's done absolutely nothing to say he's 'every bit as good as Delph'. Vlaar and Cleverley were both very good players who'd still walk (or even limp) into our starting XI if they were still employed by us.

And of course he's brought players in. He's had to. He lost the spine from the worst team in the league. To make it sound as though he's been privileged or lucky to be able to re-invest those funds though doesn't add up. We had the 19th highest net spend in the country this summer (Sheff Wed out-spent us). That isn't conjecture, or spin, that's a fact.

For all of the criticism that can be pushed in Sherwood's direction, the idea that he had carte-blanche in the transfer market in the summer isn't a fair one.

[oldhill_avfc]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

Allardyce.

(I voted stick with Sherwood for now - but I'd go for Allardyce at the drop of hat.  He knows how to stay in the division, West Ham played decent football).

[Risso]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

People who were still supporting Lambert last season said the same thing, but we found somebody who for a short period at least, performed much better than the miserable Scot.  And I'm not a big fan of the game playing that is the main reason for asking people who want a manager sacked to name somebody else, as it's always far too easy to come up with reasons NOT to appoint somebody, but there are some good coaches out there, so I hereby submit the name of Thomas Schaaf for your ridicule.

[Clampy]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

Allardyce.

(I voted stick with Sherwood for now - but I'd go for Allardyce at the drop of hat.  He knows how to stay in the division, West Ham played decent football).

Then why did they get rid of him?

[RussellC]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

Allardyce.

No further questions Your Honour.

[Villa in Denmark]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

People who were still supporting Lambert last season said the same thing, but we found somebody who for a short period at least, performed much better than the miserable Scot.  And I'm not a big fan of the game playing that is the main reason for asking people who want a manager sacked to name somebody else, as it's always far too easy to come up with reasons NOT to appoint somebody, but there are some good coaches out there, so I hereby submit the name of Thomas Schaaf for your ridicule.

Wasting your time.

I offered 3 names and was told we'd be wasting money on someone with no premier league (not premiership) experience. Because that's worked out so well with the previous 3 appointments.
Still we've broke the mould on that one now, we've got someone with no meaningful experience.

Other than 2 games last season he's done nothing to dissuade me from the point of view that he hasn't got a bleeding clue.  Go back and look at the views that were held about him on the "Other managers" thread before he became our own lovable gobshite.

[RussellC]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

People who were still supporting Lambert last season said the same thing, but we found somebody who for a short period at least, performed much better than the miserable Scot.  And I'm not a big fan of the game playing that is the main reason for asking people who want a manager sacked to name somebody else, as it's always far too easy to come up with reasons NOT to appoint somebody, but there are some good coaches out there, so I hereby submit the name of Thomas Schaaf for your ridicule.

I think the general consensus after 3 years of Lambert was "anybody but him." But then, he'd been given a fair-crack of the whip. Numerous transfer-windows, numerous changes of back-room staff (some by choice) and had proven himself to be incapable. As I said earlier, it's not fair to judge Sherwood by Lambert's failings unless we apply the same timescales.

As for asking for suggested replacements, it's not a game, it's a fairly integral part of any decision to be made about the sacking of the current Manager at such an early stage of the season.

As for Schaaf, I know little or nothing about him.What, specifically about him, makes you think that a) he'd come to us or b) he'd be an improvement?

[Toronto Villa]

That told me he was capable of what he hoped he was capable of. Unfortunately he simply hasn't built on it despite being afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players.

When I read things like this I genuinely think that some of our Supporters have just forgotten that we lost 4 of our best players in the summer.

"Afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players"?? Come on - that's not serious is it?

of the players we lost Benteke is by far the best of the lot. As for the others; Delph possibly though I would say Gana is every bit as good, Vlaar and Cleverley - what have we really lost? And off course he's brought in his own players or have you missed the past few months?

Gana looks promising but he's done absolutely nothing to say he's 'every bit as good as Delph'. Vlaar and Cleverley were both very good players who'd still walk (or even limp) into our starting XI if they were still employed by us.

And of course he's brought players in. He's had to. He lost the spine from the worst team in the league. To make it sound as though he's been privileged or lucky to be able to re-invest those funds though doesn't add up. We had the 19th highest net spend in the country this summer (Sheff Wed out-spent us). That isn't conjecture, or spin, that's a fact.

For all of the criticism that can be pushed in Sherwood's direction, the idea that he had carte-blanche in the transfer market in the summer isn't a fair one.

He bought in 14 players or something like that. Why does it matter what they cost? I would argue we did a damn good job getting them in at the price that we did which helped our net spend be what it is. I will always argue this because I don't see the relevance of net spend. For me it is what you get for the price paid, and it isn't just about the price paid and it's affect on net spend. I honestly think sometimes if we spent 20m more on the same players some people would feel a lot happier because the net spend looks better even if it doesn't make one bit of difference. The fact is we have some good players at the club now and we are not using them properly or as well as we could. Some of that is simply down to integration, and some of that is down to the manager not making good decisions. Ultimately it is leading to the same thing that we are in the bottom three when with better decisions we should be 6 or 7 spots higher.

[kippaxvilla2]

I hereby submit the name of Thomas Schaaf for your ridicule.
[/quote]

I think you need to get your coat and gloves on after that.

[chrisw1]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

Allardyce.

(I voted stick with Sherwood for now - but I'd go for Allardyce at the drop of hat.  He knows how to stay in the division, West Ham played decent football).

Fucking hell.

[Risso]

The pertinent thing for me here is that it's now Page 28 and I still haven't seen one single viable alternative suggested. And I don't mean hypothetically, I mean realistically. I mean a Manager who is going to come in and justify the cost of sacking Sherwood and his backroom team and as-close-as-possible guarantee an immediate improvement. One who, if you were Tom Fox, you'd genuinely and honestly flip the coin for.

People who were still supporting Lambert last season said the same thing, but we found somebody who for a short period at least, performed much better than the miserable Scot.  And I'm not a big fan of the game playing that is the main reason for asking people who want a manager sacked to name somebody else, as it's always far too easy to come up with reasons NOT to appoint somebody, but there are some good coaches out there, so I hereby submit the name of Thomas Schaaf for your ridicule.

I think the general consensus after 3 years of Lambert was "anybody but him." But then, he'd been given a fair-crack of the whip. Numerous transfer-windows, numerous changes of back-room staff (some by choice) and had proven himself to be incapable. As I said earlier, it's not fair to judge Sherwood by Lambert's failings unless we apply the same timescales.

As for asking for suggested replacements, it's not a game, it's a fairly integral part of any decision to be made about the sacking of the current Manager at such an early stage of the season.

As for Schaaf, I know little or nothing about him.What, specifically about him, makes you think that a) he'd come to us or b) he'd be an improvement?

To be honest I don't, and to be even more honest you have to say that every single managerial decision is a punt, you just have to give yourself a reasonable chance of getting it right.  Take for example, Leicester and West Ham with Perason and Fat Sam respectively.  On the face of it, the decision to sack them both was harsh and unjustified, as both had performed well under difficult circumstances.  Also on the face of it, replacing them with Ranieri and Bilic was risky, as one had just performed abysmally with the Greece national team, and the other Has No Premier League Experience, but both are doing very well indeed so far.

What is clear though, is that there comes a certain point when it's clear that a manager IS going to take you down, and we had hit that point with Lambert last season.  Sherwood came in and did well enough to keep us up, and for that I will be forever monumentally grateful, but I think he's been desperately shit this season, and there's no room for sentiment in football. 

To be absolutely truthful, it would be silly to get rid of him now, but I honestly don't think we're far off reaching the point of no return if he doesn't improve performances by at least 50%.  Lose to Stoke and Chelsea and it would be an enormous task to turn things round, and one that I don't think he'd be capable of.  But we'll see in a couple of weeks I suppose where we are.  Just to reiterate, I hope he proves me wrong, as I do want him to succeed.  I've had enough of sacking managers, but not as much as I've had enough of us pissing about in the bottom four or five places in the league.

[RussellC]

That told me he was capable of what he hoped he was capable of. Unfortunately he simply hasn't built on it despite being afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players.

When I read things like this I genuinely think that some of our Supporters have just forgotten that we lost 4 of our best players in the summer.

"Afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players"?? Come on - that's not serious is it?

of the players we lost Benteke is by far the best of the lot. As for the others; Delph possibly though I would say Gana is every bit as good, Vlaar and Cleverley - what have we really lost? And off course he's brought in his own players or have you missed the past few months?

Gana looks promising but he's done absolutely nothing to say he's 'every bit as good as Delph'. Vlaar and Cleverley were both very good players who'd still walk (or even limp) into our starting XI if they were still employed by us.

And of course he's brought players in. He's had to. He lost the spine from the worst team in the league. To make it sound as though he's been privileged or lucky to be able to re-invest those funds though doesn't add up. We had the 19th highest net spend in the country this summer (Sheff Wed out-spent us). That isn't conjecture, or spin, that's a fact.

For all of the criticism that can be pushed in Sherwood's direction, the idea that he had carte-blanche in the transfer market in the summer isn't a fair one.

He bought in 14 players or something like that. Why does it matter what they cost? I would argue we did a damn good job getting them in at the price that we did which helped our net spend be what it is. I will always argue this because I don't see the relevance of net spend. For me it is what you get for the price paid, and it isn't just about the price paid and it's affect on net spend. I honestly think sometimes if we spent 20m more on the same players some people would feel a lot happier because the net spend looks better even if it doesn't make one bit of difference. The fact is we have some good players at the club now and we are not using them properly or as well as we could. Some of that is simply down to integration, and some of that is down to the manager not making good decisions. Ultimately it is leading to the same thing that we are in the bottom three when with better decisions we should be 6 or 7 spots higher.

Of course net spend matters. You can't say thing like 'he's been afforded the liberty of bringing in his own players' but then pay no consideration to how much he's been allowed to spend on them. There's always going to be a correlation between the cost of the player and the quality, if not in transfer fees then in wages. The net spend is crucial because it reflects the quality of the assets he's lost in the first place. In this case, it'seven more relevant because (as we all know) Delph's valuation was much lower than his actual worth.