Oh I agree. It was a genuine question for once. I was curious if it was based on something they'd seen or knew or simply on a hunch
If they're good enough to compete in that division they should aim to win it, as should all the other 19
In my view, we performed better on the pitch for most of his games. Though obviously not many to go on. The main issue was results were not going our way. I think he tried getting us to play more attacking, fluid football and changing formations to do it. Hopefully with some hard fitness training, those improving performances turn into more consistent positive results. Not sure if I'm coming across properly, but I *think* I could see what he was trying to do. But as said before, if its not going well, we certainly can't afford to be sentimental.
Both Danny Wilson and Alan Clarke were appointed with no previous managerial experience. Also both made a number of close season signings. But most of all, both bought a professionalism to their roles and pushed for that professionalism to run through the club. The similarities to Conor is what makes me think we will get promoted this season.
We were fifth in January. I think with a couple more additions, particularly at right back, we could make the playoffs.
He should be getting top 6 but in reality I think we will be 10th - 15th place. Why should he be treat any differently to his two predecessors? If we're mid table I suspect people will give him the benefit of the doubt because it's Connor but in my opinion he should go along with Sormaz. No sentiment on my part. Coaches have **** on us in the past and we've **** on both Collins and Clarke. He's arguably getting a much more balanced squad than Clarke had at his disposal, he needs to get results because his last 10 games were pretty damn poor. The pressure will be on right from the outset.
Spot on mate. Think there's a few of us put sentiment to one side thinking with our heads rather than hearts.
Absolutely not, Clarke was told top 6, we ended up further off the play offs after he was sacked. Connor could arguably end up with a more balanced squad to work with. Clarke had some absolute ***** up top and at the back, some of whom have been moved on. What does that tell you? Why should Connor be treat differently? If we're out of play off contention come March time then he should go along with Sormaz.
I suppose I’ll be judging him based on what I think is fair rather than what the board considers fair. the expectation of a top 6 finish under Clarke was unfair and the nonsense about us having a top 3/4 squad was precisely that - nonsense .
We were in the top five come January under Clarke. He should have been backed properly. Instead he was ousted by a player who was his playing budget. Ironic.
I think bottom half as it stands, and possibly lower bottom half if Dunn is sold. We’ve a number of weak points in our squad and some glaring areas that need bodies let alone improvement. We’re also likely to be asking young players to find their feet. I’m expecting 2 midfielders to be sold, a keeper to be loaned out, a centre half or two to be moved on in some way and I think we then need a proper right back and probably 2 central forwards if Dallas is also being moved on. So still a lot to happen. If it pans out that way, I suspect we’d be very hit and miss. Anything better than bottom half I think would be a bonus if that’s where we get to. But as I’ve said before, it’s absolute guesswork until we know what squad we have til January. On the face of it, it also feels a stronger division with a number of teams again happy to spend.
Sums up my thoughts this. So many changes are still likely before September 1st and it’s hard to see us hitting the ground running with that uncertainty. Too many weaknesses haven’t been addressed. Also agree that it feels a stronger league overall.
Yeah Frog, I agree they should be, but... I've gone for top 10, with hopes of it being a good learning curve season for Conor etc, and is hoping to build on it the following season.