How long would you give Neil?

[Moosheep]

A provocative question, I know, but how long would you give Neil if the wins don't come? Will you be calling for his head if we are 10 points adrift at Christmas? Would you stick with him through a relegation and another year in the Championship? He is an unproved Premier League manager, at what point would you say 'Ok, he's not up to this'?

Moo 

 

[dj161]

I'd stick with him even if we went down, so long as the players keep giving there all for him, and we keep having a go at teams, I'd have no problem with us keeping him, rather that than then defensive displays that we had under Hughton, which wouldn't of been so bad that we kept losing 5+ nil to the big teams

 

[morty]

Pretty much what dj said.

 

[the jarrold]

If we are 10 points adrift at Christmas I think he would get the old 'by mutual consent' contract termination sometime at the start of January or before the transfer window opens. Presumably for us to be in that  theoretical position something would have to be badly going wrong and I think the board would act. Fear of losing out on the massive TV deal next season would be the main factor. Personally I would keep him as he has already proved what a great Championship manager he is and I would have no problem with another exciting promotion challenge.

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

For me it all depends how hopeless it got. If we were bottom but in most games we'd shown fight and there were signs we could still turn it round I wouldnt sack him. He got us up, he deserves the chance to have a full season to keep us up. That said if we were losing every game heavily, the players looked hopeless, there was a sense of inevitability about our defeats every week and talk of him having lost the dressing room, then I'd end it quickly

 

[Canaryboy]

Depends how humiliating things were to get I suppose, we'd soon forget about last season if we were on course to beat Derby County's record of 8 points and being pummeled every week. Thankfully I can't foresee such a set of circumstances. 

I think we need a couple more signings before we can even consider 18th to be underachieving.

 

[ZLF]

Until he shows he can't change a long bad run

 

[SussexYellow]

A provocative question, I know, but how long would you give Neil if the wins don't come? Will you be calling for his head if we are 10 points adrift at Christmas? Would you stick with him through a relegation and another year in the Championship? He is an unproved Premier League manager, at what point would you say 'Ok, he's not up to this'?

Moo 

Too provocative I think. Feet back on the ground guys. We lost one game to a very good counter attacking side that had previously won 6 out of 8 premier league away games.

The stats and the evidence of our own eyes show that we more than held our own. The referee pretty much ensured we got nothing from a game that most pundits openly have said we were enormously unlucky not to get something from.

There was nothing fatally flawed in AN's tactics in fact he probably got it right. We were undone by our own lack of clinical finishing and a bit of bad luck. 

This discussion is not even on the radar!

 

[Boyerboy]

I find this whole discussion so unwelcome and offensive that I was going to ignore it but I do accept Moon's good faith in starting it.   I suspect it is a regular topic back on the Nest of Vipers but we aspire to better things.

I would give Neil until at least Christmas 2016 unconditionally because:

We know the character of the man  

I believe that he has the talent and just needs the experience to succeed.   It will take time to gain that experience and to take the knocks and setbacks that will come.

You don't employ someone who lacks experience and sack them for inexperience.

All the evidence shows that sacking the manager actually makes very little difference to a team's performance.  Yes, Neil did a fantastic job taking over as did Lambert but did Gunn improve on Roeder or Adams improve on Hughton? Certainly there are reasonable arguments that both Roeder and Hughton might have achieved better results than their successors. They could hardly have done worse after all. 

Two years is a long enough spell to see all the abilities and limitations of anyone and fair to everyone 

 

[Wiz]

To the OP.

Jeez my friend, this isn't really cricket after 1 blooming game, you're in dangerous waters mate, come about!

Or in other words.....stick with the guy for the whole season and the first 10 games if we go down,  he's earned that loyalty at least

 

[splutcho]

I really don't think Moosheep was suggesting anyone has or should turn anytime soon. If you ask me it's actually an interesting thing to think about. How long does it take for 100% faith and confidence to turn? For me, we'd have to be relegated on a record low points total.

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

All the evidence shows that sacking the manager actually makes very little difference to a team's performance. 

It really depends on the calibre of the appointment. Roeder initially was a massive improvement on Grant, and as you say appointing Neil and Lambert resulted in a massive change in fortunes. When clubs appoint poor replacements (ie novice managers) like the Gunn appointment and like when Wolves sacked McCarthy but only his assistant wanted the job then fortunes are unlikely to change. If you're not a massive club, you dont have money and you're struggling, then you're probably going to struggle to bring in a high calibre replacement as the poor performance o the club probably doesnt come from the manager, its probably a result of other things, ie poor resources. So in those circumstances changing the manager probably wont make much difference. Take Norwich's decline following relegation under Worthy. 5 years of poor investment was always going to culminate in relegation. Roeder was enough to stave it off for a further year, but it was only papering over the cracks and ultimately that wasnt enough and Roeder could do no more. Gunn was handed a poisoned chalice and never had the ability to do anything other than be taken down by it.

I dont think even a top manager could have saved Norwich from relegation to League One that season, so I agree that in hopeless situations like that changing the manager isnt going to do much. But Pulis has come into a number of clubs for example and turned them around, as A he's a very effective manager and B he usually has at least some resources to work with

 

[Boyerboy]

No ,it goes further than that   There has been validated research that shows that in most cases, changing the manager doesn't make a significant or lasting difference to a team's performance.   Two good current examples would be Villa and Sunderland whose fortunes have varied very little despite numerous changes.   Liverpool have changed little after several changes of manager.   The size of the wage bill is a far better determinant of likely performance than the manager. 

It is the human condition to vastly overestimate the effect that we have on events and this is very prevalent in sports.  It is brilliant captaincy if we win the Ashes or the Ryder Cup and poor if we do not.

 

[Moosheep]

Ok, I should have started this thread prior to the Palace game so people wouldn't see it as a knee jerk reaction topic prompted by the defeat. It is not that, and in fact I was thinking of starting something similar just after our play off victory, just never got around to it. I am genuinely interested in understanding at what point people would draw the line and turn on a manager who, up until now, has pretty much not put a foot wrong. Of course this will vary from person to person. Who can forget LDC's loyalty towards Hughton over on ThePinkUn forum right until the end (a saga which summed up the best and the worst of that forum).

Sitting here now, if come the end of the season Norwich were to be relegated, I'd still want Neil as our Manager next season. This is however, a movable opinion which is constantly being reassessed based on numerous factors including results, style of play, attitude, players opinions (spoken or perceived) and many more.

 

[Moosheep]

You don't employ someone who lacks experience and sack them for inexperience

Adams & Gunn would probably beg to differ!

Sadly, to use the cliche, this is a results business. Rightly or wrongly, regardless of experience, if the manager doesn't get the results they will sooner or later be gone. But this thread was more about when we as individual fans would start getting restless. 

 

[Boyerboy]

I've no doubt that they would and Adams might have a point.  Gunn was incompetent and inexperience was just the detail.

I understand your point and indeed your wider point.   I also accept the reason for your thread.

As I've mentioned above, your sentence " Rightly or wrongly, regardless of experience, if the manager doesn't get the results they will sooner or later be gone." is the nub of the issue.  It is also the underlying fallacy.  The manager is changed even though that change is unlikely to change things. In many cases, changing the manager is as effective as changing the wiper blades on a misfiring car.  It may help but the real problem lies under the bonnet.

 

[SussexYellow]

Ok, I should have started this thread prior to the Palace game so people wouldn't see it as a knee jerk reaction topic prompted by the defeat. It is not that, and in fact I was thinking of starting something similar just after our play off victory, just never got around to it. I am genuinely interested in understanding at what point people would draw the line and turn on a manager who, up until now, has pretty much not put a foot wrong. Of course this will vary from person to person. Who can forget LDC's loyalty towards Hughton over on ThePinkUn forum right until the end (a saga which summed up the best and the worst of that forum).

Sitting here now, if come the end of the season Norwich were to be relegated, I'd still want Neil as our Manager next season. This is however, a movable opinion which is constantly being reassessed based on numerous factors including results, style of play, attitude, players opinions (spoken or perceived) and many more.

Fair point, and yes bad timing.

For me AN has shown that he has got what it takes at the top of the championship and the SPL. He will only get better with experience, even if there are mixed fortunes in gaining that experience. So why change.

So for me about as long as Crewe stuck with Dario Gradi.

 

[eatonparkboy]

As one of my favourite bands The Tubes sang "What do you want from life".

Obviously some supporters can see no further that being important, big and in the Prem.

Hopefully, the real reason they watch City is that they enjoy football, love the club and want to be entertained.

Hughton had to go because not only were we going down but he was boring the pants off everyone.

As long as AN entertains the home supporters and we don't go below halfway in the Championship, I don't see how you could expect anyone else to do better. If we go down this season but give it an honest, attacking attempt then what more could you expect from a club that has been relegated from the top echelon so many times but been promoted so many times as well. It tells you what our expectation level should be drawn at.

 

[Gaffer]

Can't see any chance of AN doing worse than Hughton with a similar squad so it's a non-issue at the moment. Even if we were bottom at Christmas we could 'do a Leicester' and go on a winning run.

 

[Dubai Mark]

This is one question I really dont want to answer or debate, for the same reason i have nit not been  going over to the "other side" recently, other than to read Rucardo's match report.