Bowen's Tenure

[SouthDownsRoyal]

This run of 9 games should not be used to judge any manager in a positive or negative light. Too many factors involved and just not a realistic barometer unless you think we'll always finish seasons in July when we had nothing to play for and a number of players involved on effectively a 1 month contract.

Exactly this. Succinctly summed up. Countless managers struggle to motivate teams in mid table, let alone in this set of circumstances.

A fair chunk of this group of players have continually failed under successive managers. Maybe we’ve consistently picked bad managers. Maybe they’re actually just not that good.

There in lies the vital question.

Surley it must be the mix of average players, good players who haven’t delivered, toxic club and ‘maybe’ not the best managers over recent years.

Not a great mix

[muirinho]

This run of 9 games should not be used to judge any manager in a positive or negative light. Too many factors involved and just not a realistic barometer unless you think we'll always finish seasons in July when we had nothing to play for and a number of players involved on effectively a 1 month contract.

Exactly this. Succinctly summed up. Countless managers struggle to motivate teams in mid table, let alone in this set of circumstances.

A fair chunk of this group of players have continually failed under successive managers. Maybe we’ve consistently picked bad managers. Maybe they’re actually just not that good.

And oddly enough, a fair chunk of them got to the play-off final one season and were dismal, with the same manager, the following season.

It's a game of small margins, and always has been. A more high-scoring game, e.g., basketball, takes more of the luck/decisions/circumstances out of it.
Stuff like Manager of the month curse, or new manager bounce, is more often than not down to statistcially reverting to the mean, than anything else.

To be honest, unless a manager, (or player) is clearly clearly out of their depth, or a toxic influence, or a criminal, chopping and changing does more harm than good, especially when it costs a load of money.

[Snowflake Royal]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

[muirinho]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

[Snowflake Royal]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

In that case, the manager was responsible for replacing those players and failed to do so. He refused to accept criticism or adapt his approach for too long. He took a PO team to a relegation side and looked utterly clueless.

I don't think there's any choice but to sack him there. He got a lot of patience. Let's say he manages to avoid relegation, where's you're faith that he can do better next season when his tactics have failed him and his signings have been poor? Remember, under him the squad were able to never be concerned they'd get relegated - Liam Kelly. There's only two manager's since we got relegated who I'd say were the main reason we were in trouble - Stam and Gomes, both looked hopelessly out of their depth and their choices directly contributed to the problems.

Other than that Clarke made it clear he wanted to go and would jump ship at the first opportunity. Plus his limited success was almost entirely based on an incredible purple patch from an otherwise poor player, which had already come to an end. So I can fully get behind that one.

Adkins, McDermott2 and Clement had massive squad issues and I think it was the players who were the main problems. Not saying any of them were brilliant, but given time might have been able to turn it around, or if we did get relegated do a reasonable rebuilding job.

Bowen, for me, is very much in that latter group. It's the squad he has that is causing the main problems, not his choices. That's not to say he doesn't make mistakes, or he won't turn out to be another Stam or Gomes.

So I think we are on the same boat about Bowen and in general, but maybe not about how we got here or about Stam.

[muirinho]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

In that case, the manager was responsible for replacing those players and failed to do so. He refused to accept criticism or adapt his approach for too long. He took a PO team to a relegation side and looked utterly clueless.

.

You can't have it both ways, Ian. If that side was a PO side, then who got them from a near-relegation side to a PO side? That would be Stam....
My point is the manager has not a huge deal more influence than a whole pile of other stuff, including players, luck, referees, other teams, sequences of games, etc

So, if changing the manager is going to cost a load of money, and be hugely disruptive, it's not worth it. This isn't about Stam, I was just using him as an extreme example.
it's more the knee-jerk reaction to blame the manager and sack the manager. It destroys clubs.

[Snowflake Royal]

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

In that case, the manager was responsible for replacing those players and failed to do so. He refused to accept criticism or adapt his approach for too long. He took a PO team to a relegation side and looked utterly clueless.

.

You can't have it both ways, Ian. If that side was a PO side, then who got them from a near-relegation side to a PO side? That would be Stam....
My point is the manager has not a huge deal more influence than a whole pile of other stuff, including players, luck, referees, other teams, sequences of games, etc

So, if changing the manager is going to cost a load of money, and be hugely disruptive, it's not worth it. This isn't about Stam, I was just using him as an extreme example.
it's more the knee-jerk reaction to blame the manager and sack the manager. It destroys clubs.

I most certainly can. Stam got loads of trust in the bank with that PO campaign. Which is why he lasted as long as he did with an utterly shambolic follow up season. Without the PO campaign - which was far from convincing, he'd have been gone months earlier.

Anyway. As I said, we seem to agree on the broad principle, the only difference is a couple of bits of ancient history.

[Vision]

I've posted way back ( when Gourlay was getting all the shit) on why I think the owners are mainly to blame for the malaise at the club.

I don't doubt their long term commitment ( the brand new training complex suggests they're in it for the long term) but the simple truth is they came on board January Transfer window of Stam's first season when we were already in a Play Off position.. Rewind back to the signings we made the summer of that season; Swift, Moore, Beerens, hell even Van den Berg was decent value for money . Remember again the talk of a "Young Academy based" club. A Mini Ajax as it was put.

It was working out ok. High in the table. Sure some fans weren't happy with the possesion based style ( oveemphasised in my opinion ) but it was following the remit/plan/ethos/philosophy -call it what you wiil- that was set out when Stam arrived to join Tevrenden. And more importantly it was getting short term results as well.

Then The Jogges get involved in that January Window. Why? Because they see the the Premiership ego/money train in touch and are all over it.

Wrt to the OP .

Clement and Gomes, even Stam at a push, weren't sacked because the owners thought we'd be relegated. They were sacked because the owners didn't think they would deliver promotion. Notice how the sackings have happened earlier in the season each time.
Likewise the notion that Bowen's "remit" was solely to avoid relegation flies against everything he said pre lockdown and everything the owners have demonstrated previously.

Hopefully some sanity is setting in now and the realisation that generally in football you have to build something rather than simply throw money at it has dawned on the Jongges.

IMO Bowen is no more or less likely to deliver a promotion challenging team than his immediate predecessors but he does deserve the opportunity and patience to try to do so (over more than a time period that amounts to less than a full season ) that ultimately they didn't get.

It's not all doom and gloom though. The way I see people talk here you'd think we were the only club that will find the next season or two financially really challenging. We do have an Academy that could help there and despite Bowen's understandable reluctance initially when he took the reins to include Academy players, the knowledge post lockdown that moving forward we will have to rely on them more , definately appears to have dawned on him.

There's a future for us if the owners accept what the manager has said he wants rather than what they or their influential advisors ( Hi Kia ) think they want.

The financial constraints may actually be the making of us in the long term.

[3points]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

I seem to remember losing the spine of the team, not just AAH and Kermogant but also Danny Williams with McShane and Swift injured for large parts of the season. And I think McCleary was out for long periods too, replaced by UseAluko

[Snowflake Royal]

That's a rare disagree with Vision here.

Don't think there's any credible argument Stam got sacked for not looking like delivering promotion. He went in late March with 8 games to go and in 20th position with no wins in 9 games. If it was about not looking like he could get promotion he'd have gone in late December / January, a good two or more months earlier. At the time there was even talk about having been too patient with him to turn things around, implication being they had to just give in because it was looking like he was taking us down, not doing anything to stabilise.

Clement, maybe but doubtful.

As for Gomes, how anyone could expect him to be getting us promotion given his experience, performance in the previous season and the state of the squad is beyond me. Yeah he went very early, but he had 2 wins in 11 games and we were actually in the relegation zone. So again, I can't see how you can make an argument he got the shove for not looking like he could get us promoted rather than for looking like he was going to get us relegated.

I think the reason the sackings have been getting earlier in the season, is because each one has had more of the previous season to show what they can do, and that hasn't been a whole lot, and it's been increasingly obvious sticking isn't got to see much progression. Clement got 30 games, Gomes got 38. Bowen's already on 40. Hopefully this is a trend Bowen can buck. And he's certainly managed to improve the results of the side he inherited more than Gomes or Clement did IMO.

[Lower West]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

Beerans was a major loss. Technically one of the best players we've ever had.

Stam ousted Cooper , Dickie amongst others.

[URZZZZ]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

Beerans was a major loss. Technically one of the best players we've ever had.

Stam ousted Cooper , Dickie amongst others.

He lost all confidence when he was played up top, or part of a “revolving” front three with no strikers

Was the wrong decision from Stam to mess the system and his role about but ultimately the right decision to move him on eventually as he was contributing very little towards the end

Cooper was correctly let go by Stam, too clumsy and would have given away plenty of goals trying to pass it out. Works well in a traditional style, hence his form for Millwall

[Vision]

That's a rare disagree with Vision here.

Don't think there's any credible argument Stam got sacked for not looking like delivering promotion. He went in late March with 8 games to go and in 20th position with no wins in 9 games. If it was about not looking like he could get promotion he'd have gone in late December / January, a good two or more months earlier. At the time there was even talk about having been too patient with him to turn things around, implication being they had to just give in because it was looking like he was taking us down, not doing anything to stabilise.

Clement, maybe but doubtful.

As for Gomes, how anyone could expect him to be getting us promotion given his experience, performance in the previous season and the state of the squad is beyond me. Yeah he went very early, but he had 2 wins in 11 games and we were actually in the relegation zone. So again, I can't see how you can make an argument he got the shove for not looking like he could get us promoted rather than for looking like he was going to get us relegated.

I think the reason the sackings have been getting earlier in the season, is because each one has had more of the previous season to show what they can do, and that hasn't been a whole lot, and it's been increasingly obvious sticking isn't got to see much progression. Clement got 30 games, Gomes got 38. Bowen's already on 40. Hopefully this is a trend Bowen can buck. And he's certainly managed to improve the results of the side he inherited more than Gomes or Clement did IMO.

You've kind've missed the point of the post but simply taking the points you've made.

Stam's remit as the start of 16/17 = Long term plan to build a team based on philosophy of Ajax with focus on Academy youth development and a possession based style.

Jan 17 - Jongges loan club money for transfer window to push on for promotion (Oxford/Mutch/Grabban/Illori etc) immediatey come in.

Jongges take over.

Stam Remit Aug 17 - After multi millions spent in window = Promotion - Sacked: Replaced by Clement, immediate remit = Stay Up : Achieved

Clement Remit Aug 18 - After multi millions spent in window = Promotion - Result? Sacked: Repaced by Gomes, Immediate remit = Stay Up : Achieved

Gomes Remit Aug 19 - After multi millions spent in window = Promotion - Result? = Sacked. Replaced by Bowen , immediate remit = Stay Up?: Achieved.

Bowen Remit Aug 20 ? . It would be nice to think that his remit would be, as many think it should, mid-table/Top Ten.

Finally this is the chance to understand that it is possible to try to build something without the immediate pressure of owners who took over a play -off bound Championship team with the heady notion of owning a premier league team.

This isn't about the validity of the sacking of any individual manager. That's always about opinions. It's about acknowledging that in theory (like Bowen) all those managers in the previous season delivered the base level of what was required. Then weren't afforded the patience to complete the following season in ever decreasing degrees.

More importantly it's acknowledging from the very beginning the current owners have not allowed any manager to truly set up a team as they wish and then give them the time to make it happen. (Clement perhaps might have come the closest due to his relationship with Gourlay)

Bowen wants a young high tempo team. Lets hope thats what he gets. Bear in mind though, the previous 3 managers had their own ( in Stam and Gomes' cases well publicised) wants and philosophies. Unfortunately what they got delivered under the Jongges ( via Kia , The DOF or whomever ) wasn't the same. Saying a manager has had millions to spend when it wasn't the manager doing the spending isn't necessarily "backing them" unless we accept that we no longer have managers in the old fashioned sense but Head Coaches who's job is purely on the training ground and Matchdays. If this is the case though it's hardly the fault of the Head Coach if a squad is lopsided.

Hopefully that will change now and Bowen will be allowed to at least try to build the typeof team he wants with recruitment that matches that his ideal. My point is that I'm not sure they (the owners) have demonstrated thats what will happen.

As I said, I'm hopeful the financial constraints will force ther hand somewhat.

[Snowflake Royal]

That's a rare disagree with Vision here.

Don't think there's any credible argument Stam got sacked for not looking like delivering promotion. He went in late March with 8 games to go and in 20th position with no wins in 9 games. If it was about not looking like he could get promotion he'd have gone in late December / January, a good two or more months earlier. At the time there was even talk about having been too patient with him to turn things around, implication being they had to just give in because it was looking like he was taking us down, not doing anything to stabilise.

Clement, maybe but doubtful.

As for Gomes, how anyone could expect him to be getting us promotion given his experience, performance in the previous season and the state of the squad is beyond me. Yeah he went very early, but he had 2 wins in 11 games and we were actually in the relegation zone. So again, I can't see how you can make an argument he got the shove for not looking like he could get us promoted rather than for looking like he was going to get us relegated.

I think the reason the sackings have been getting earlier in the season, is because each one has had more of the previous season to show what they can do, and that hasn't been a whole lot, and it's been increasingly obvious sticking isn't got to see much progression. Clement got 30 games, Gomes got 38. Bowen's already on 40. Hopefully this is a trend Bowen can buck. And he's certainly managed to improve the results of the side he inherited more than Gomes or Clement did IMO.

You've kind've missed the point of the post but simply taking the points you've made.

Stam's remit as the start of 16/17 = Long term plan to build a team based on philosophy of Ajax with focus on Academy youth development and a possession based style.

Jan 17 - Jongges loan club money for transfer window to push on for promotion (Oxford/Mutch/Grabban/Illori etc) immediatey come in.

Jongges take over.

Stam Remit Aug 17 - After multi millions spent in window = Promotion - Sacked: Replaced by Clement, immediate remit = Stay Up : Achieved

Clement Remit Aug 18 - After multi millions spent in window = Promotion - Result? Sacked: Repaced by Gomes, Immediate remit = Stay Up : Achieved

Gomes Remit Aug 19 - After multi millions spent in window = Promotion - Result? = Sacked. Replaced by Bowen , immediate remit = Stay Up?: Achieved.

Bowen Remit Aug 20 ? . It would be nice to think that his remit would be, as many think it should, mid-table/Top Ten.

Finally this is the chance to understand that it is possible to try to build something without the immediate pressure of owners who took over a play -off bound Championship team with the heady notion of owning a premier league team.

This isn't about the validity of the sacking of any individual manager. That's always about opinions. It's about acknowledging that in theory (like Bowen) all those managers in the previous season delivered the base level of what was required. Then weren't afforded the patience to complete the following season in ever decreasing degrees.

More importantly it's acknowledging from the very beginning the current owners have not allowed any manager to truly set up a team as they wish and then give them the time to make it happen. (Clement perhaps might have come the closest due to his relationship with Gourlay)

Bowen wants a young high tempo team. Lets hope thats what he gets. Bear in mind though, the previous 3 managers had their own ( in Stam and Gomes' cases well publicised) wants and philosophies. Unfortunately what they got delivered under the Jongges ( via Kia , The DOF or whomever ) wasn't the same. Saying a manager has had millions to spend when it wasn't the manager doing the spending isn't necessarily "backing them" unless we accept that we no longer have managers in the old fashioned sense but Head Coaches who's job is purely on the training ground and Matchdays. If this is the case though it's hardly the fault of the Head Coach if a squad is lopsided.

Hopefully that will change now and Bowen will be allowed to at least try to build the typeof team he wants with recruitment that matches that his ideal. My point is that I'm not sure they (the owners) have demonstrated thats what will happen.

As I said, I'm hopeful the financial constraints will force ther hand somewhat.

Don't disagree with your general argument, but I do think that if any of Stam, Clement or Gomes hadn't been heading firmly towards a relegation then they wouldn't have been sacked.

If, for example they were knocking around 13th to 16th like Bowen was, I think they'd have seen out the season and got another, despite failing in the actual goal of promotion.

Not about whether those decisions were right either, I thought Clement should have got longer, IMO he actually had quite a lot of control on signings and you could mostly see a clear management plan in them.

But a couple of key things went wrong, which I think led the owners to fall back on their advisers again, especially given the financials.

Hopefully, as you say, Bowen gets the control and time he needs. And providing he can avoid relegation fights and hanging around the bottom six with long winless streaks I think he'll definitely get the time. Control is the bigger question.

[SCIAG]

Did the Dais give us the money for Ilori? I’d honestly forgotten that. My memory is that they announced they were buying the club either during or after the Play Off semi final.

[Ascotexgunner]

It wasn't really the same side under Stam in his second season though.

Our two best and most influential players on the season, at GK and ST, left or basically played no part. We replaced Beerens with Barrow - fine, but our midfield also fell apart.

Williams, Swift, Kelly, Berg and Evans

vs

Berg, Kelly, Edwards, Swift and Bacuna

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

Beerans was a major loss. Technically one of the best players we've ever had.

Stam ousted Cooper , Dickie amongst others.

Gutted when Beerens left.
Useless bloody managers played him all wrong, he never got a chance to play in the right system.

[gazzer, loyal royal]

Did the Dais give us the money for Ilori? I’d honestly forgotten that. My memory is that they announced they were buying the club either during or after the Play Off semi final.

The Thais meant the money for Ilori before they bought the club.

The next transfer window is obviously key for the club, but what’s also key is how the owners treat Bowen. If he has very little credit in the bank left, which the results in lockdown May well have seen, then the owners have 2 choices.

1) they either get rid now and give the new manager time to get in the players he wants and time to get tactics in place

2) Bowen gets the chance to remodel his squad but has to be given as much time as Gomes got to get the team playing.

While I’m more aligned to point 1 due to the home record and Bowen making wrong team selections and seeing the team make the same mistake time after time, the signing of Laurent and the sound bites from Bowen make it sound like point 2 is what’s going to happen. I’m happy to be proved wrong but if we only win one of our first 5 or 6 home games when we restarted and I can see Bowen going quickly.

[Westwood52]

I appreciate I am in the minority regarding Bowen s tenure.I just don’t believe in his and his coaching teams validity.Despite our final finishing position ,it has been a chronic season in terms of performance;with very few highlights.I believe this seasons squad had a lot of talent;but Bowen has been unable to harness their abilities;even though it would mean adopting a system not necessarily of his choice.
The worst scenario would be allowing him to develop a system,get the two or three players in that he wants;see him fail and then ditch him in say December, because the results are so bad.It will be deja vue all over again.

[Lower West]

Same manager though. So, if it was just a couple of players making the difference, what was the point of changing the manager? Or, if it wasn't those players, but we were just really lucky the season before, and really unlucky that season - again, what was the point of changing the manager?
That's my point.

Beerans was a major loss. Technically one of the best players we've ever had.

Stam ousted Cooper , Dickie amongst others.

He lost all confidence when he was played up top, or part of a “revolving” front three with no strikers

Was the wrong decision from Stam to mess the system and his role about but ultimately the right decision to move him on eventually as he was contributing very little towards the end

Cooper was correctly let go by Stam, too clumsy and would have given away plenty of goals trying to pass it out. Works well in a traditional style, hence his form for Millwall

Cooper played in a team that finished above us in the league. Sometimes effort and committment add more to a team than technical players do, Aluko and Barrow spring to mind.

[Mid Sussex Royal]

Beerans was a major loss. Technically one of the best players we've ever had.

Stam ousted Cooper , Dickie amongst others.

He lost all confidence when he was played up top, or part of a “revolving” front three with no strikers

Was the wrong decision from Stam to mess the system and his role about but ultimately the right decision to move him on eventually as he was contributing very little towards the end

Cooper was correctly let go by Stam, too clumsy and would have given away plenty of goals trying to pass it out. Works well in a traditional style, hence his form for Millwall

Cooper played in a team that finished above us in the league. Sometimes effort and committment add more to a team than technical players do, Aluko and Barrow spring to mind.

Yes but the point being made was it was correct to let him go at the time in a possession based team. Millwall are functional, which suits him down to the ground.