Rebuilding the squad

[Joe_Fox]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

 

[Babylon]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

 

[Joe_Fox]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

We'll never know really. Do you think we should have thrown micky in at the deep end?

 

[Babylon]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

We'll never know really. Do you think we should have thrown micky in at the deep end?

No not really... i wanted joe kinear in the beginning not taylor so i would have gone back for him. Long ball i know but a top manager.

 

[Malf]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

We'll never know really. Do you think we should have thrown micky in at the deep end?

Definately, then this season that had just gone possibly wouldn't of happened. Adams would of had the premiership experience that eluded us this season.

 

[Scowcroft]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

We'll never know really. Do you think we should have thrown micky in at the deep end?

No not really... i wanted joe kinear in the beginning not taylor so i would have gone back for him. Long ball i know but a top manager.

I wanted Kinnear too because you can see the amazing job he did at Wimbledon by keeping them up year after year, AND finishing in the top 10 virtually every season on such a limited budget.

However, I heard that when he was interviewed for the job, he didn't impress Elsom that much.......

 

[Malf]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

We'll never know really. Do you think we should have thrown micky in at the deep end?

No not really... i wanted joe kinear in the beginning not taylor so i would have gone back for him. Long ball i know but a top manager.

I wanted Kinnear too because you can see the amazing job he did at Wimbledon by keeping them up year after year, AND finishing in the top 10 virtually every season on such a limited budget.

However, I heard that when he was interviewed for the job, he didn't impress Elsom that much.......

It's because they both look a like and apparently if you have two people as ugly as they are in the same room for longer than an hour the whole world fcvks up. Elsom would have been more dangerous than Bin Laden if he had appointed Kinnear.

 

[Joe_Fox]

Like Elsom has such great footballing knowledge. :roll:

 

[Scowcroft]

I still reckon that had we kept Taylor we would have stayed up.

No chance... we were in free fall. The was no confidence or motivation whatsoever. If we hadn't started well his first season we would have gone down, the only reason we started well was because it was still almost all of o'neils team playing then.

We'll never know really. Do you think we should have thrown micky in at the deep end?

No not really... i wanted joe kinear in the beginning not taylor so i would have gone back for him. Long ball i know but a top manager.

I wanted Kinnear too because you can see the amazing job he did at Wimbledon by keeping them up year after year, AND finishing in the top 10 virtually every season on such a limited budget.

However, I heard that when he was interviewed for the job, he didn't impress Elsom that much.......

It's because they both look a like and apparently if you have two people as ugly as they are in the same room for longer than an hour the whole world fcvks up. Elsom would have been more dangerous than Bin Laden if he had appointed Kinnear.

Yeah, thanks for explaining that.....

 

[Naughty Fox]

This arguement comes back to comments that were aimed at Marlon a few months back concerning style of play.
Do you want more 'direct' football that will get you results in the first division and give you a chance of promotion or do you want to play 'pretty' football and take time (alot in Forest's case) to get promotion.
This is not an easy one to answer, IMO a team that plays pretty football has more of a chance of surviving in the premiership but finds it harder to get promotion, direct football just does not cut it consistantly enough at a high level but is better for gaining promotion (as we found out).
To play pretty football takes a certain type of player and those players IMO can sometimes not be physical enough for the first division, if the game is going against them they are reluctant to get stuck in. Take a player with less skill and they make up for it in graft.
I hope you can see what I mean.
MA has a massive job and he will not please all of the people all of the time.
I want my cake and eat it, Brazilian football and success, but then what fan does'nt. 8)

 

[Malf]

This arguement comes back to comments that were aimed at Marlon a few months back concerning style of play.
Do you want more 'direct' football that will get you results in the first division and give you a chance of promotion or do you want to play 'pretty' football and take time (alot in Forest's case) to get promotion.
This is not an easy one to answer, IMO a team that plays pretty football has more of a chance of surviving in the premiership but finds it harder to get promotion, direct football just does not cut it consistantly enough at a high level but is better for gaining promotion (as we found out).
To play pretty football takes a certain type of player and those players IMO can sometimes not be physical enough for the first division, if the game is going against them they are reluctant to get stuck in. Take a player with less skill and they make up for it in graft.
I hope you can see what I mean.
MA has a massive job and he will not please all of the people all of the time.
I want my cake and eat it, Brazilian football and success, but then what fan does'nt. 8)

I know what your saying, but then if we play direct and get promotion what happens then? Do we install a new style of play which the players will never of played before and that can't be successful overnight or do we carry on hacking it up pitch and go down again. You need a blend of styles, mix it up abit. Never get too predictable, it's not hard to pass a ball about, especially not for footballers that get paid 5-10 bastard grand a week.

 

[Scowcroft]

This arguement comes back to comments that were aimed at Marlon a few months back concerning style of play.
Do you want more 'direct' football that will get you results in the first division and give you a chance of promotion or do you want to play 'pretty' football and take time (alot in Forest's case) to get promotion.
This is not an easy one to answer, IMO a team that plays pretty football has more of a chance of surviving in the premiership but finds it harder to get promotion, direct football just does not cut it consistantly enough at a high level but is better for gaining promotion (as we found out).
To play pretty football takes a certain type of player and those players IMO can sometimes not be physical enough for the first division, if the game is going against them they are reluctant to get stuck in. Take a player with less skill and they make up for it in graft.
I hope you can see what I mean.
MA has a massive job and he will not please all of the people all of the time.
I want my cake and eat it, Brazilian football and success, but then what fan does'nt. 8)

I know what your saying, but then if we play direct and get promotion what happens then? Do we install a new style of play which the players will never of played before and that can't be successful overnight or do we carry on hacking it up pitch and go down again. You need a blend of styles, mix it up abit. Never get too predictable, it's not hard to pass a ball about, especially not for footballers that get paid 5-10 bastard grand a week.

That is the key - We have to be able to mix it up. I think you can see from the way we were playing at the end of the season, we do have the players who can actually pass the ball well - Especially with someone like Nalis in midfield initiating some slick passing moves......

 

[sheffield_fox]

although i know we would really struggle if we went back up, i think the financial aspect of it is so big to us that we should be looking to go straight back up even if we do go straight back down. i know its doubtful that we will go up this time and im certainly not expecting big things this season, but it can not be denied how valuable the money would come in useful in the long term.

 

[Steven]

This arguement comes back to comments that were aimed at Marlon a few months back concerning style of play.
Do you want more 'direct' football that will get you results in the first division and give you a chance of promotion or do you want to play 'pretty' football and take time (alot in Forest's case) to get promotion.
This is not an easy one to answer, IMO a team that plays pretty football has more of a chance of surviving in the premiership but finds it harder to get promotion, direct football just does not cut it consistantly enough at a high level but is better for gaining promotion (as we found out).
To play pretty football takes a certain type of player and those players IMO can sometimes not be physical enough for the first division, if the game is going against them they are reluctant to get stuck in. Take a player with less skill and they make up for it in graft.
I hope you can see what I mean.
MA has a massive job and he will not please all of the people all of the time.
I want my cake and eat it, Brazilian football and success, but then what fan does'nt. 8)

I know what your saying, but then if we play direct and get promotion what happens then? Do we install a new style of play which the players will never of played before and that can't be successful overnight or do we carry on hacking it up pitch and go down again. You need a blend of styles, mix it up abit. Never get too predictable, it's not hard to pass a ball about, especially not for footballers that get paid 5-10 bastard grand a week.

That is the key - We have to be able to mix it up. I think you can see from the way we were playing at the end of the season, we do have the players who can actually pass the ball well - Especially with someone like Nalis in midfield initiating some slick passing moves......

Mark my words, Nalis, unless he has a get out clause :roll: , will be a star in the Fizzy.

 

[Malf]

Possibly division one player of the year IMO

 

[Naughty Fox]

This arguement comes back to comments that were aimed at Marlon a few months back concerning style of play.
Do you want more 'direct' football that will get you results in the first division and give you a chance of promotion or do you want to play 'pretty' football and take time (alot in Forest's case) to get promotion.
This is not an easy one to answer, IMO a team that plays pretty football has more of a chance of surviving in the premiership but finds it harder to get promotion, direct football just does not cut it consistantly enough at a high level but is better for gaining promotion (as we found out).
To play pretty football takes a certain type of player and those players IMO can sometimes not be physical enough for the first division, if the game is going against them they are reluctant to get stuck in. Take a player with less skill and they make up for it in graft.
I hope you can see what I mean.

Oh and agree totally Steven regarding Nalis
MA has a massive job and he will not please all of the people all of the time.
I want my cake and eat it, Brazilian football and success, but then what fan does'nt. 8)

I know what your saying, but then if we play direct and get promotion what happens then? Do we install a new style of play which the players will never of played before and that can't be successful overnight or do we carry on hacking it up pitch and go down again. You need a blend of styles, mix it up abit. Never get too predictable, it's not hard to pass a ball about, especially not for footballers that get paid 5-10 bastard grand a week.

I hope we do not play just direct football and MA can show us what he can do, but it is diffecult enough to get the right blend of players and style when you have the buying power let alone the situation we have.
My comment about not pleasing everyone is because next season is a re-build job and promotion will be a bonus, I think it will be an even bigger achievment than the last promotion if MA pulls it off, but unfortunatly alot of fans will see nothing but promotion a failure.

...and agree totally Steven about Nalis, he could be the trump card next season.

 

[Joe_Fox]

In the last few games this season we were knocking the ball around wonderfully. Hopefully we will become a passing team rather than a load of hoofers.

 

[Scowcroft]

In the last few games this season we were knocking the ball around wonderfully. Hopefully we will become a passing team rather than a load of hoofers.

As I said, hopefully this is an indication of what type of football we play next year. However, I think it was more down to the players relaxing and the pressure being off knowing that we were already relegated.

Naughty Fox: I totally agree with you about if we get promotion next year - It will, in my eyes, be an even bigger achievement than last time, merely because at the moment we're so thin on the ground in terms of depth in the squad, and Micky is attempting to rebuild.

 

[slyfox]

why does most people assume the long ball is the only way of getting promoted,swindon.pompey and dare i say it forest got promoted playing the passing game,when mark mcgee was in charge the football was superb to watch and in the long run will attract the better players

 

[Joe_Fox]

I think to be a successful team you need to be able to adapt to each and every scenario. Sure, passing it around looks good, but if the goals don't come then you should be able to change tactics and play long ball or more direct play. Mix it up, shake it all about IMO.