39 minutes ago, Bruce said:

I think this is spot on. The issue with Wilder was Wilder. He had, as it turned out, a really good squad but he was so busy raging against everything that he eventually broke the team. All Leo and then Carrick did was to purge the poison and set the team up in a way that worked for them. Plus, almost by accident, Carrick unlocked the Chuba cheat code. Carrick didn't do nothing but he wasn't the be-all and end-all of that team's success.

It seems to me that there were two factors in our under-performance under Wilder. One was the formation. He was so emotionally wedded to proving it worked that he couldn't bear to change it. The other was his personality. Right now, Carrick seems to be making the same first mistake. Instead of fitting a system to players he is trying to shoe-horn them into something they simply can't make work (yet). Unlike Wilder, though, Carrick's personality and manner with the players is a positive. Wilder was part of the problem, Carrick could still be part of the solution if he finds a way through this.

Carrick seems to have same floor as majority of our recent previous managers they stubborn on certain players/formations or way we played so eventually they got found out and they didn't adapt.

Karanka played one way which didn't work in premier league with players we had, Wilder stuck with very old midfield that allowed teams to run through us (Leo immediately changed that the min he was out the door and results picked up), Pulis (don't need to explain this one) and Monk immediately started implementing square pegs in round holes. Carrick with way we play (thinking we can outscore opposition) like last season with not as good attacking players and things like playing Crooks upfront, Howson when he's clearly getting too old/slow is displaying the same stubbornness that end up hanging him if not careful.

I don't want Gibson to swing from ultra offensive to ultra defensive manager if Carrick went but I'd love someone who was adaptable/pragmatic like Mowbray, that just designs football around the strength of squad.

I don’t even mind Carricks system tbh it’s the basic/repetitive mistakes and apparent ghost midfield alongside player selection that annoys me.

Even if we’d have been beat against Blackburn if we’d just looked more assured and cohesive as a team I wouldn’t have minded, it’s the fact the goals are seemingly self inflicted, players walking through multiple defenders, free shots at goal left right and center and leaving players totally unmarked in the box.

they don’t even feel like system related issues more down to rank bad defensive organisation and or communication. It’s frustrating because our defenders aren’t bad players and neither are our midfielders, it seems like it should be a simple problem to iron out.

It’s how we set up that frustrates me.  Why is Hackney as a deep midfielder the one who has to push up and instigate attacks which will leave us exposed? I just don’t get why either himself of Howson rotate as a sitting option (preferably Howson) to offer that protection.

Then teams will attack the vulnerable areas and score goals from the edge of the area 

You can take your xG and shove it up your bum, we're bottom of the league and that's all that matters.

Matchday, lets get our first league win tonight. UTB

@Robis going to be spot on tonight 👌

4-0 to the Boro 💪

Can’t help but have a bad feeling

 

9 hours ago, thomas said:

Carrick seems to have same floor as majority of our recent previous managers they stubborn on certain players/formations or way we played so eventually they got found out and they didn't adapt.

Karanka played one way which didn't work in premier league with players we had, Wilder stuck with very old midfield that allowed teams to run through us (Leo immediately changed that the min he was out the door and results picked up)

I know he brought in Hackney and we won the first game, but we were still playing really poorly under Leo.

We got 2 wins against two struggling sides under him with poor performances throughout his tenure, bar the game against Wigan but that was as much down to how terrible they were as anything else.

Even ignoring the two losses, that 0-0 against Huddersfield in his final game in charge was one of the most depressing matches I watched last season.

I think it’s going to be ugly and brutal and If anything this will tell us just how good or bad we are. Loose and Carrick foundations are going to be undermined. Desperate times influence desperate measures which are hard to recover from and that concerns me. 
Carrick is running out of time and excuses and needs to produce results and from what we have witnessed from starting lineups, leaking defence and late second half flourish that isn’t going to cut it. Loose and it’s 1 point from a possible 21 points and heading for the danger zone which may not see him around for the 15 games I set as a bench mark. If there isn’t signs of improvement I think it likely he won’t make the 10th game. 
 

 

It would take more than a win to convince me tonight. We could win by virtue of simply having better players or Sheff Wed being even worse than us on the night. 

I want to see evidence of them addressing the issues which have plagued this team for months now. Evidence of something new being tried, underperformers dropped, and players moved to positions where they can have an impact. 

Otherwise what's the point? Who cares if we beat Sheff Wed if it's back to square one against the first competent team we play. 

1 hour ago, Riverside94 said:

good times

22 minutes ago, SouthernSmoggie said:

It would take more than a win to convince me tonight. We could win by virtue of simply having better players or Sheff Wed being even worse than us on the night. 

I want to see evidence of them addressing the issues which have plagued this team for months now. Evidence of something new being tried, underperformers dropped, and players moved to positions where they can have an impact. 

Otherwise what's the point? Who cares if we beat Sheff Wed if it's back to square one against the first competent team we play. 

Same I think we need a good win and by that I mean a 3/4-0 with a performance to match. Solid at the back, fluid in attack, looking the business

Even a brilliant win would only be the beginning anyway.

I'll take any sort of win, and then hope that Southampton's flapping continues.

11 hours ago, LinoJo3 said:

I don’t even mind Carricks system tbh it’s the basic/repetitive mistakes and apparent ghost midfield alongside player selection that annoys me.

Even if we’d have been beat against Blackburn if we’d just looked more assured and cohesive as a team I wouldn’t have minded, it’s the fact the goals are seemingly self inflicted, players walking through multiple defenders, free shots at goal left right and center and leaving players totally unmarked in the box.

they don’t even feel like system related issues more down to rank bad defensive organisation and or communication. It’s frustrating because our defenders aren’t bad players and neither are our midfielders, it seems like it should be a simple problem to iron out.

Its a weird one.

When we're attacking we don't look that bad at all. Its usually only the final ball or finishing that lets us down.

In possession we can look good for spells but often give the ball away cheaply through sloppy passing.

Which leads to my biggest criticism of the team...how woeful we are at closing down & winning the ball back. As you mentioned we so often just allow teams to run at us and have free shots in and around the 18 yard box. Our midfield just cannot contain teams, or break up play when they attack.

Defensively there seems little to no co-ordination. We seem to need at least 8 players back and pack the box, almost like a siege...and even then it doesn't always work because of our tendency to leave players unmarked and failure to spot runners into the box.

 

This is why I've been questioning what goes on in training because there are so many areas where we simply do not function as a team.