McClaren: Stick or Twist?

[Northolt_Rs]

I stay stick simply because of our perilous financial position but it’s looking bleaker each weak. That was the worst game of football at LR for a long time. Two god-awful football teams.

[Clapton is God]

Stick.

There seems to be a rather bizarre feeling among a section of our support that this side could do better.

McClaren may have proved himself at the end of the season by keeping us up.

[Steve_Mac_Fan]

We’ve just had three of the most entertaining games at home in the league before this. The 3-4 against Birmingham had everything, similarly the 2-3 against WBA and the 1-0 against Leeds was a brilliant match too. Okay the circumstances weren’t great today but a 0-0 against Stoke is okay by me. They’re a tough nut to crack and McClaren has always had entertaining matches but not got enough gritty 0-0’s in his career. His promise was to work on organisation and get back to clean sheets and yes we can say against 10 men for 80 minutes but we don’t know how the match would have panned out 11 vs 11. I think we didn’t want the ball or expect as much as we’ve been better against teams like Leeds and Wednesday at home this season and been able to transition quickly.

[Northolt_Rs]

Stick.

There seems to be a rather bizarre feeling among a section of our support that this side could do better.

McClaren may have proved himself at the end of the season by keeping us up.

If the manager’s remit was just to survive in the Championship then why replace Holloway?

[Clapton is God]

If the manager’s remit was just to survive in the Championship then why replace Holloway?

Because it wasn't guaranteed that he would keep us up.

People forget that until the end of March last season we were still deep in a relegation battle and with a better squad.

Would you have trusted Holloway with a weakened squad and no money?

[qpr]

10000000% stick

[corbray]

get rid now imo. he was brought in to get the best out of our players and simply hasn't done that. we've been utterly devoid of ideas at times.

bring in ainsworth, hes more than ready to step up and has worked wonders at wycombe.

[Clapton is God]

get rid now imo. he was brought in to get the best out of our players and simply hasn't done that. we've been utterly devoid of ideas at times.

bring in ainsworth, hes more than ready to step up and has worked wonders at wycombe.

What should this squad be achieving?

[Gtleighsr3]

Don't matter who in charge,they all stuck with our ffp situation, and it won't get better as our few cherries will get picked for a steal end of season. Until or if we move it will only end up going one way.

[Abseits]

I think it's spelt Shhhtick.... In Mr McClaren we trust. Frankly we should be more worried about him getting poached from us by a richer club rather than this facile debate about do we want him. Of course we flipping well do!

[QPROslo]

Because it wasn't guaranteed that he would keep us up.

People forget that until the end of March last season we were still deep in a relegation battle and with a better squad.

Would you have trusted Holloway with a weakened squad and no money?

That's simply not correct.

We replaced Mackie, Washington and Sylla with Wells and Hemed and has Eze for a full season. That's an improvement on paper.
We kept all midfielders and added Cameron. That's an improvement.
We replaced Onuoha, Robinson and Perch with Leinstner, Rangel and a return of Hall. That's pretty much the same. A good example is Baptiste. He had to play a lot last year, but is not deemed good enough by McClaren.
We replaced Smithies with Lumley. Smithies is better, but Lumley has not been the problem this year.

Holloway improved from 2016/17 to 2017/18 - from 21st to 16th, and from marginally beating relegation to beating it by a margin of 15 points. We were never very close to relegation (nor are we this year).

I would not like to change McClaren. His job is to keep us up and he will. The team isn't much better than low mid table. But McClaren is clearly not an improvement over Holloway. No reason to assume Holloway wouldn't continue where he left off, taking us a small new step up the table.

If there is one man to trust with a small budget it must be Holloway. McClaren spent most of the money on experienced loan signings. Holloway spent a good part of the budget on prospects we can sell on. Some worked out (Freeman, BOS, Smyth), some flopped (Goss, Wheeler) and some were decent squad players (Scowen, Smith, Baptiste) but all in all he didn't have much more to spend on signings, loans fees and salaries on new signings than McClaren.

Holloway were braver in playing youngsters, while McClaren is dependent on his experienced loan and short term signing. See how we do when Cameron and Rangel are out!

There is no reason to shoot McClaren, but attacking Holloway, who brought us 56 points last year is simply not fair. More than anything, this season has proved to us Holloway was quite all right.

[corbray]

What should this squad be achieving?

not losing 8 of our last 10 would be a start

[Shania]

Stick. Our squad is thin, and we need a captain.

[Shania]

That's simply not correct.

We replaced Mackie, Washington and Sylla with Wells and Hemed and has Eze for a full season. That's an improvement on paper.
We kept all midfielders and added Cameron. That's an improvement.
We replaced Onuoha, Robinson and Perch with Leinstner, Rangel and a return of Hall. That's pretty much the same. A good example is Baptiste. He had to play a lot last year, but is not deemed good enough by McClaren.
We replaced Smithies with Lumley. Smithies is better, but Lumley has not been the problem this year.

Holloway improved from 2016/17 to 2017/18 - from 21st to 16th, and from marginally beating relegation to beating it by a margin of 15 points. We were never very close to relegation (nor are we this year).

I would not like to change McClaren. His job is to keep us up and he will. The team isn't much better than low mid table. But McClaren is clearly not an improvement over Holloway. No reason to assume Holloway wouldn't continue where he left off, taking us a small new step up the table.

If there is one man to trust with a small budget it must be Holloway. McClaren spent most of the money on experienced loan signings. Holloway spent a good part of the budget on prospects we can sell on. Some worked out (Freeman, BOS, Smyth), some flopped (Goss, Wheeler) and some were decent squad players (Scowen, Smith, Baptiste) but all in all he didn't have much more to spend on signings, loans fees and salaries on new signings than McClaren.

Holloway were braver in playing youngsters, while McClaren is dependent on his experienced loan and short term signing. See how we do when Cameron and Rangel are out!

There is no reason to shoot McClaren, but attacking Holloway, who brought us 56 points last year is simply not fair. More than anything, this season has proved to us Holloway was quite all right.

Who has attacked him now??

[Clapton is God]

That's simply not correct.

We replaced Mackie, Washington and Sylla with Wells and Hemed and has Eze for a full season. That's an improvement on paper.
We kept all midfielders and added Cameron. That's an improvement.
We replaced Onuoha, Robinson and Perch with Leinstner, Rangel and a return of Hall. That's pretty much the same. A good example is Baptiste. He had to play a lot last year, but is not deemed good enough by McClaren.
We replaced Smithies with Lumley. Smithies is better, but Lumley has not been the problem this year.

Holloway improved from 2016/17 to 2017/18 - from 21st to 16th, and from marginally beating relegation to beating it by a margin of 15 points. We were never very close to relegation (nor are we this year).

I would not like to change McClaren. His job is to keep us up and he will. The team isn't much better than low mid table. But McClaren is clearly not an improvement over Holloway. No reason to assume Holloway wouldn't continue where he left off, taking us a small new step up the table.

If there is one man to trust with a small budget it must be Holloway. McClaren spent most of the money on experienced loan signings. Holloway spent a good part of the budget on prospects we can sell on. Some worked out (Freeman, BOS, Smyth), some flopped (Goss, Wheeler) and some were decent squad players (Scowen, Smith, Baptiste) but all in all he didn't have much more to spend on signings, loans fees and salaries on new signings than McClaren.

Holloway were braver in playing youngsters, while McClaren is dependent on his experienced loan and short term signing. See how we do when Cameron and Rangel are out!

There is no reason to shoot McClaren, but attacking Holloway, who brought us 56 points last year is simply not fair. More than anything, this season has proved to us Holloway was quite all right.

We were 6 points of relegation at the end of March and had won one home game out of the last 8 (or something similar) and were sinking. It was the 2-2 at Fulham which turned the tables.

We also had two runs of 6 successive defeats.

I'm not attacking Holloway but we were far from safe last season and even the board think we have a weakened squad this season. Put it this way, how many players were wanted by other clubs last season and how many are genuinely wanted now?

Even Real Madrid aren't interested in Mass anymore..