Ronald Koeman sacked by Everton

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

Why would Ryan Giggs be offered a top flight job in England? He needs to earn his stripes in a lower league

bucketybuck wrote: »

Why?

Why not. He's been number two under one of the best in the business. If Unsworth is in with a shout why not Giggsy

Richard Hillman

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I am in my early 30s and have never seen Everton play nice football over a sustained period of time. Its a bit like "The West Ham Way"

Have to agree, though if anything think you do West Ham a disservice.

But certainly never heard of this Everton way thing. They were great in the 80s but even then had a tendency to have big men up front, Andy Gray, the very underrated Graeme Sharp etc. Maybe there was a time when Cottee played up front that they were less direct. But then you had the Duncan Ferguson and Dogs of War days.

Don't get me wrong, I always liked Everton...but just haven't heard of this tradition of attractive football. Maybe under Martinez, who I noticed has by far the best win ratio of Everton managers in the last 3 decades...but he was hounded out.

TheCitizen

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Why not. He's been number two under one of the best in the business. If Unsworth is in with a shout why not Giggsy

Unsworth is working at the club I think so maybe might just get promoted if he knows the right people

Giggs? Has done nothing for a couple of years except say he wants to be a manager. His character is questionable for someone who wants to be a manager. If he really wants to be a manager he should start in a lower division and prove himself. I'd be surprised if he got handed the Everton job, they're a decent sized club with some potential.

nice_guy80

TheCitizen wrote: »

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Pullis - no. Everton fans love him for popcorning the likes of the pool in games but he's not at that level.
Rogers - not a chance. There would be a mutiny
Big Sam - not a hope. caveman football
moyes - no. burned too many bridges.
Hughes? you don't know his history.

Everton has a tradition of going back to their own in times of crisis
Joe Royle
Howard Kendall

it'll be Unsworth with Ferguson.
Kevin Sheedy might be tempted back as a coach. even Arteta might come in

Ancellotti might take it on.
longest club in the top flight
9 league titles.
stadium in the pipeline.
billionaire owner

What's this about Mark Hughes history? What has Unsworth done in management to get the Everton job?

hughes has called everton a small club in the past
he never 'got' the club

martinez played good football in year 1
Moyes' team with arteta, pienaar and baines played good football at times

I'm interested to see what Unsworth does

lawred2

Deleted User wrote: »

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I am in my early 30s and have never seen Everton play nice football over a sustained period of time. Its a bit like "The West Ham Way"

Have to agree, though if anything think you do West Ham a disservice.

But certainly never heard of this Everton way thing. They were great in the 80s but even then had a tendency to have big men up front, Andy Gray, the very underrated Graeme Sharp etc. Maybe there was a time when Cottee played up front that they were less direct. But then you had the Duncan Ferguson and Dogs of War days.

Don't get me wrong, I always liked Everton...but just haven't heard of this tradition of attractive football. Maybe under Martinez, who I noticed has by far the best win ratio of Everton managers in the last 3 decades...but he was hounded out.

Football only started in 1992. Everyone knows that.

There was a footballing philosophy at Everton. It was dubbed the school of science.

If you know your history and all that...

The club lost its way after the heysel ban. Never righted itself.

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

Football only started in 1992. Everyone knows that.

There was a footballing philosophy at Everton. It was dubbed the school of science.

If you know your history and all that...

Ummm...science does not necessarily mean attractive football. And if you know Everton, you'd know references to Sharp and Gray predate 1992.

In fact science has often meant the opposite of attractive football. Some of the most thoughtful and analytic managers in recent times have played very direct football. One need only think of Egil Olsen at Norway who pretty much rigorously applied stats and video analysis to take his team of "lugging it to to the big man up front" to No. 2 in the world.

lawred2

Deleted User wrote: »

lawred2 wrote: »

Football only started in 1992. Everyone knows that.

There was a footballing philosophy at Everton. It was dubbed the school of science.

If you know your history and all that...

Ummm...science does not necessarily mean attractive football.

In fact it has often meant the opposite. Some of the most thoughtful and analytic managers in recent times have played very direct football. One need only think of Egil Olsen at Norway who pretty much rigorously applied stats and video analysis to take his team of "lugging it to to the big man up front" to No. 2 in the world.

Did I say anything about recent times?

bucketybuck

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Why not. He's been number two under one of the best in the business. If Unsworth is in with a shout why not Giggsy

Why not? Seriously, thats all it takes for a man to be considered a good choice for a football club the size of Everton?

He was number 2 at United when they played by far the worst football I have ever seen at the club, under a clown who couldn't have done worse had he tried. He has effectively zero experience or pedigree as a manager and his only connection to Everton is that he knows Phil Neville.

If thats a good choice I'd hate to see the bad choices.

Richard Hillman

Giggs seems a bit work-shy or has notions that he is entitled to a big premier league job. Then there are the other 'character' issues.

Iused2likebusts

The recruitment at Everton in the summer was so bad. A lot of people got sucked into thinking they would challenge for the top 4 or make the top 4 which was madness. No real pace in the team and the likes of jageilka, Williams,baines have declined a lot recently. Coleman being out is also a huge miss for them. Tough enough job for whoever takes it. A striker with pace is a must in January .

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

Did I say anything about recent times?

Sure we'll rule out the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and 2010s so.

When one refers to Everton's tradition of playing attractive football, could you specify the decade that one refers to?

thebaz

Deleted User wrote: »

Ummm...science does not necessarily mean attractive football. And if you know Everton, you'd know references to Sharp and Gray predate 1992.

In fact science has often meant the opposite of attractive football. Some of the most thoughtful and analytic managers in recent times have played very direct football. One need only think of Egil Olsen at Norway who pretty much rigorously applied stats and video analysis to take his team of "lugging it to to the big man up front" to No. 2 in the world.

well Everton had a tradition of playing the right way - School of science was a reference to this , not a literal translation of the word science. As a club Everton started to decline around '92 - Moyes brought success on a budget , but I found the football tedious to watch ; today I struggle watching the current Irish team for this reason - still support Ireland , but not as much as I did years ago. For this reason would like to get a manager that encourages good
football, particularly when ther is good group of young talented players coming through that need leadership & direction and management , not a crash course in hoofball, to reach mid-table mediocracy , the way I feal today any half decent manager could get that group to mid table, but a good manager would do better.

Gavlor

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sure we'll rule out the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and 2010s so.

When one refers to Everton's tradition of playing attractive football, could you specify the decade that one refers to?

In fairness the team of the 80's played super football, particularly for the short period that lineker played.

Outside of that you'd have to go back to black and white TV to the alan ball days of the school of science.

https://youtu.be/AOW3g-Kp1ws

lawred2

Deleted User wrote: »

lawred2 wrote: »

Did I say anything about recent times?

Sure we'll rule out the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and 2010s so.

When one refers to Everton's tradition of playing attractive football, could you specify the decade that one refers to?

There was little wrong with the football played in the 80s ffs. I'm not sure where you've got the notion that it was plain old grok ball.

Having said that British football wasn't exactly Pep's Man City at any stage either..

Either way Everton have/had a tradition of attractive attacking football. That way has been lost.

The teams of the 60s were generally highly regarded among Evertonians for the quality of football. Kendall, Harvey and Ball were dubbed the holy Trinity at the time.

But that's so long ago as to be irrelevant to modern football.

But the rise in average Everton attendances for Martinez's first two seasons speak volumes to the type of football that Everton fans want to see. And it wasn't Koeman's.

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

There was little wrong with the football played in the 80s ffs. I'm not sure where you've got the notion that it was plain old grok ball.

Having said that British football wasn't exactly Pep's Man City at any stage either..

Either way Everton have/had a tradition of attractive attacking football. That way has been lost.

Oh don't get me wrong, I loved the Everton team of the 80s, and the way they completely upset the whole Liverpool/ ManU/ Arsenal assumption that they should dominate. When it comes to English football, I like Leeds United, so I fully appreciate that when a club outside the usual few muscles in they will face vitriol about tactics etc...Revie's team ended up as one of the best ever collection of gifted footballers. I just don't think some romantic dream about an "Everton way" should feature in the debate about the next manager. Let's face it, if by some miracle Mourinho decides he's had enough at Old Trafford and wants a new challenge, ugly football or not you'd bite the arm off him up to his neck...

Laois_Man

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe under Martinez, who I noticed has by far the best win ratio of Everton managers in the last 3 decades...but he was hounded out.

Eh?

Moyes' win record was higher than Martinez' and even at that, Martinez' win record was only a touch above Koeman's (and included a lot of cup match wins against low division teams across 6 domestic cup campaigns).

Everyone loved watching Everton under Martinez.....except Evertonians....even when it was 2-0 to Everton with 10 minutes to go, you weren't sure who was going to win. Totally incompetent tactically and the players were all about 2 stone over weight after year 1!

As for Koeman. I honestly think he wanted to get sacked.

nice_guy80

Everton have more league titles than Spurs and Chelsea combined

they must have played good football at some stage...

Laois_Man

Anyone wrote: »

Everton are in the relegation zone, so staying up has to be their main priority, only 1 person for that Sam Allerdyce.

FFS. Its October....when being 18th means being 6 points off 7th....not March when 18th means 6 points from 17th

Everton have good players once they are put into a system. Need the likes of Coleman and Bolassie back from injury which is coming soon I think. Need Siguardsson playing in his actual position (alot of scoffing at the price but he is the second highest goals assister over the last 3 seasons behind Christian Eriksen). Need young players like Lookman in the team, even off the bench. Even the likes of Aaron Lennon and Mirallas can do a good job and provide width in the short term. Kenny needs chances. Also needs a striker but there's enough there to have Everton well up that table in the next couple of months if the players are given a manager they actually like working with.

Tom Mann Centuria

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Everton have more league titles than Spurs and Chelsea combined

they must have played good football at some stage...

Winning football doesn't always equate to good football to some. (Not that I necessarily agree)

citytillidie

lawred2 wrote: »

Football only started in 1992. Everyone knows that.

There was a footballing philosophy at Everton. It was dubbed the school of science.

If you know your history and all that...

The club lost its way after the heysel ban. Never righted itself.

Must be a bad run club then if they are still blaming that.

They missed out in playing in the European Cup 2 times
Liverpool missed out in playing in it 3 times and Arsenal once and they seem to be doing just fine.

lawred2

citytillidie wrote: »

Must be a bad run club then if they are still blaming that.

They missed out in playing in the European Cup 2 times
Liverpool missed out in playing in it 3 times and Arsenal once and they seem to be doing just fine.

They were for quite a while. The 90s were an absolute disaster for Everton. Badly run from top to bottom. Shady dealings at board room level. No investment in facilities and still playing out of one of the oldest grounds in England. Everton are one of only 6 founder members of the premier league not to be relegated but haven't progressed remotely like the other 5 have done as football clubs or businesses.

It's very hard to measure lost opportunity. However Everton were widely regarded as one of the favorites for the European Cup in 1986 and they were an even better side again in 1987. The Heysel ban meant the likes of Lineker having to move away. That side was quickly dismantled over the following couple of seasons. Everton have barely mustered a handful of competitive seasons since then.

Are Liverpool doing just 'fine'? From the number one club by far in England they haven't won the league in 27 years. Fairly dismal return I would have thought by the standards set in the 70s and 80s. I suppose that they do have Istanbul which was a massive achievement but I doubt many Liverpool fans would think 27 years without a title was doing just fine.

citytillidie

lawred2 wrote: »

They were for quite a while. The 90s were an absolute disaster for Everton. Badly run from top to bottom. Shady dealings at board room level. No investment in facilities and still playing out of one of the oldest grounds in England. Everton are one of only 6 founder members of the premier league not to be relegated but haven't progressed remotely like the other 5 have done as football clubs or businesses.

It's very hard to measure lost opportunity. However Everton were widely regarded as one of the favorites for the European Cup in 1986 and they were an even better side again in 1987. The Heysel ban meant the likes of Lineker having to move away. That side was quickly dismantled over the following couple of seasons. Everton have barely mustered a handful of competitive seasons since then.

Are Liverpool doing just 'fine'? From the number one club by far in England they haven't won the league in 27 years. Fairly dismal return I would have thought by the standards set in the 70s and 80s. I suppose that they do have Istanbul which was a massive achievement but I doubt many Liverpool fans would think 27 years without a title was doing just fine.

There were other factors for Liverpool other than that ban, they had Hillsborough and then how it was ran at the start of the premier league, but that is not all coming from Heysel,

Lumbo

Article about the “School of Science”

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/oct/27/a-brief-guide-to-everton-and-why-they-think-they-deserve-better

Rekop dog

Rekop dog wrote: »

This one smells of Allardyce imo. Carlo ain't going there, he's the best available option.

Yeah he's gone favourite now.

Be funny how many basic thinking fans will only want him for a season to escape relegation.