[cite]Posted By: ValleyGary[/cite]Peter Taylor set Wycombe on the way to nowhere???.....erm, he got them promoted into League 1.
I think that was AFKA's point. He was "good" and now he's "bad".
On the have to do it at two clubs to be good that rules out a lot of people including Curbs and Busby.
Steve Cotterill was a name that people didn't want but he's done well at Notts Co.
Nigel Atkins is, IMHO, an excellent manager and I and Large Addick, have been singing his praises for a while. O'Driscoll has also done well but to prove AFKA's point he was sacked by Bournemouth.
Could you rule out Curbs? I would say he has done it at two clubs as West Ham would certainly have been relegated had it not been for him.
On O'Driscoll, I may be wrong but I think he left Bournemouth for Doncaster, pretty sure he wasn't sacked.
[cite]Posted By: falconwood_1[/cite]Even if the board had the money, I doubt with his track record of spotting talent that they would give Parkinson any cash.
I know I wouldn't.
What? Really? Who has Parkinson signed that is so poor? McKenzie is injured and he's had no money to sign "better players"
I think the majority of Parkinson's signings have been good, with the possible exception of Akpo and Mckenzie.
One thing we can glean from this is that the grass is rarely greener. Whilst you cannot blame managers for wanting to "better" themselves, in most cases they would have been better off staying where they were.
For me the right manager needs a number of attributes as previously mentioned but also needs a realistic chairman and fanbase:
Darren Ferguson- up and coming manager, exceeded all expectations and Peterboro but the fact they had a poor start led to his sacking, arguably the stupidist sacking of season imho. A sacking which on the face of it does not look in any way justified. Ian Holloway- did very well everywhere until Leicester, could not save an already sinking ship despite his actual record in terms of win/loss % not being bad. Sacked without getting a chance to make things right- now replicating his previous work at Blackpool Owen Coyle- Burnley may still have gone down but would have made more of a fight with him in charge. Has saved Bolton and got them playing some decent stuff. Steve Tilson- still a good manager, this season is hard to judge him as he lost his best player when they were mid table and the financial situation there has not helped. Gary Johnson, Peter Taylor and to some extent Alan Irvine and Simon Davey were all victims of their own success and overachievement and can't be said to have become bad managers.
Phil Brown is an enigma, be interesting to see how well/badly he does at his next job. Martin Ling is also someone I am surprised has not got another League 1/2 job.
My point is therefore that one bad spell does not change whether a manager is good or not. Just as one good spell does not make a manager great -Aidy Boothroyd, Iain Dowie step forward and maybe even Brendan Rodgers.
Managers need to be judged on seasons rather than spells, for example Gary Johnson won 2 out of 12 of his last games in charge at Bristol (or similar I can't remember exactly) but his record over the 4-5 years he was there is excellent.
Some of these managers in particular are still imho good coaches/managers and if Parky was to leave, we could do a lot worse.
For a manager to be good therefore he obviously has to have the right credentials but also in todays game needs more than ever a board/chairman that is realistic and not going to be too hasty with changes. Of course this can work both ways as Gary Johnson perhaps stayed at Bristol too long but the managers that have had most success especially someone like O'Driscoll have been given plenty of time and support.
[cite]Posted By: WHAddick[/cite]Interesting and thought-provoking . Makes Curbs' continued success in his time with us even more impressive.
Maybe. Could also advocate giving the present incumbent more time to to his thing. He's been firefighting since taking over and deserves more time IMO. He's had no resources to work with, has worked very well considering the finances and doesn't whinge and bitch about it - he just gets on with it. And he's also probably pretty cheap!
Its not necessarily down to whether the manager is good at all clubs. ie Curbs at us then West Ham and Graham at Millwall and Arsenal then at Spurs.
I think its down to the chemistry that the manager has with the club like curbishley did with us and how they inspire both players and supporters who can see what they are trying to achieve.
As one of those who has "trotted" out this line i would say that Parkinson whilst perhaps a good manager at other clubs and future clubs is not and has not been a good manager for charlton.
They are out their but a lot of it is trial and error unfortunately. It is down to the club (who's full time job it is) to seek out these enigmas not the responsibilty of the fans as the club knows or should know who the best fit would be IMO.
Parky, like every other manager in the Third Division, is far from perfect.
But that's the point, maybe he's just a decent manager at this level ....?
Another point, Parky heads a management team, of which no doubt he gets to choose who he works with.
These are the men who lead and train the players on a day-to-day basis - so must be massively influential with players.
This management team together devise and work with the team tactically. But once the team runs out onto the park, then it's up to the players to produce the goods - a manager can only shuffle the pack after that.
I've no idea what Parky's match day dressing room talks are like - but not every manager (or leader at any level) leads just by brash tub thumping; some have more subtle ways of coaxing players to produce their best.
Lenny Lawrence, for example, rarely spent time in the dugout - usually sitting high in the stands, to get a general overview of the game, both performance wise and tactically. Peacock as Curbs no2, did the same.
Which begs one question ...... who does Parky have up there in the stands....?
Then there's the mentality of players, both individually and collectively as a team - some players need to be beaten with a stick to get the best out of them. But most just need to be coached and coaxed.
But they are currently Third Division players in a Third Division team.
Perhaps it's some supporters who need to come to terms with that?
*********
It's been said many times already - but less than a year ago, this club was dead on it's feet and in freefall.
From where we stand today, that's clearly no longer the case.
Why are some of us so mean in spirit - surely some credit, however begrudgingly given, is owed to Parky for turning things round?
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]he's steadied a sinking ship and that's it in my opinion. Could have done a lot, lot better though. Someone else would have.
Could have done better certainly IMHO. We were top two for long periods and didn't maintain that. How much of that was down to PP is the moot point but as manager at least some of it must be IMHO.
Whether someone else would have done better neither you or anyone else can say for sure. By the same token someone else could have done a lot worse but we will never know.
Could "someone" have done better? Surely. Could "someone" have done worse? Just as surely.
Fact is, steadying a club that was caught up in what appeared to be an inexorable decline is a significant accomplishment. Doesn't necessarily make him the man for the next step, but doesn't eliminate him either.
Insipres confidence in me, but as a rule, I tend not to like the way that professional sports are so quick to cast players and managers aside.
i think having one of the biggest wage budgets in the league and getting a team relegated, in last place, breaking a few records along the road makes you a great manager.
"I think its down to the chemistry that the manager has with the club like curbishley did with us and how they inspire both players and supporters who can see what they are trying to achieve."
For example Eddie Howe has done wonders at Bournemouth with no resources and a small squad. But he knows the make up of Bournemouth, what they're about, what the fans want/expect etc as he spent virtually all his playing career there. So he clearly has a good chemistry with Bournemouth. If he went elsewhere he wouldn't have that bond with the club so he might not be a success.
could anyone have taken us down with less of a whimper than parky did -imo NO
could anyone have gotten us to where we stand now -imo there would have been a few
could anyone have done worse than parky this season- imo there would have been a few
could anyone gee our team up enough to win those must win games we just had to give us an automatic chance of promotion -(parky didn't) but i'm sure some would
will parky be good enough to stir our troops into the seige mentality a team needs to battle their way though the play offs ??? imo he wont
How many of these managers would consider coming to Charlton is more the question? We can offer a basic wages and no money to sign anyone, you will have to use the loan market to get the best deal you can.
The only way we can go is gamble on a former player who has no experience of management.
What I do know is that if will fail at promotion and the longer this debate drags on the more divide we are becoming as a club.
[cite]Posted By: McLovin[/cite]i think having one of the biggest wage budgets in the league and getting a team relegated, in last place, breaking a few records along the road makes you a great manager.
We are a London club so our wages will inevitably be higher than most, whoever is manager, so unfair to criticise Parky for having a higher wage budget than average.
The rot re the relegation set in courtesy of Pardew and Dowie. It took an awful lot of turning round and hopefully has been done now.
[quote][cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]could anyone have taken us down with less of a whimper than parky did -imo NO could anyone have gotten us to where we stand now -imo there would have been a few could anyone have done worse than parky this season- imo there would have been a few could anyone gee our team up enough to win those must win games we just had to give us an automatic chance of promotion -(parky didn't) but i'm sure some would will parky be good enough to stir our troops into the seige mentality a team needs to battle their way though the play offs ??? imo he wont[/quote]
Pretty much sums up the way i feel. Do I know who would be able to with our resources no i dont and until we do we stick with what we know.
I still think that Nigel Adkins would leave Scunny to come to The Valley. Then it's down to him using what little money he has and an eye for a player. Wooldridge (sp) was plucked out of non league by Adkins and is now a more than decent Championship player. Adkins spend 125k on Hooper from Southend and they are now talking about him going to PL clubs for 3m. There will be plenty of players on frees who can do a job in League 1 (if we don't go up) and Adkins would get the very best out of them. What he has done at Scunny on a budget a third of what Parky had this year is nothing short of miraculous.
[cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]I don't get all the Parky bashing.
Parky, like every other manager in the Third Division, is far from perfect.
But that's the point, maybe he's just a decent manager at this level ....?
Another point, Parky heads a management team, of which no doubt he gets to choose who he works with.
These are the men who lead and train the players on a day-to-day basis - so must be massively influential with players.
This management team together devise and work with the team tactically. But once the team runs out onto the park, then it's up to the players to produce the goods - a manager can only shuffle the pack after that.
I've no idea what Parky's match day dressing room talks are like - but not every manager (or leader at any level) leads just by brash tub thumping; some have more subtle ways of coaxing players to produce their best.
Lenny Lawrence, for example, rarely spent time in the dugout - usually sitting high in the stands, to get a general overview of the game, both performance wise and tactically. Peacock as Curbs no2, did the same.
Which begs one question ...... who does Parky have up there in the stands....?
Then there's the mentality of players, both individually and collectively as a team - some players need to be beaten with a stick to get the best out of them. But most just need to be coached and coaxed.
But they are currently Third Division players in a Third Division team.
Perhaps it's some supporters who need to come to terms with that?
*********
It's been said many times already - but less than a year ago, this club was dead on it's feet and in freefall.
From where we stand today, that's clearly no longer the case.
Why are some of us so mean in spirit - surely some credit, however begrudgingly given, is owed to Parky for turning things round?
[cite]Posted By: CAFCBourne[/cite]How many of these managers would consider coming to Charlton is more the question?
We can offer a basic wages and no money to sign anyone, you will have to use the loan market to get the best deal you can.
We'd still be seen as a big club for this level, with crowds of 16k plus every week. If we don't go up and Sheff Weds survive in the championship then only Southampton will get bigger crowds than us in this next division next season.
[cite]Posted By: McLovin[/cite]i think having one of the biggest wage budgets in the league
Judging by Richard Murray's comments from time to time, none of Parky's signings has been a big wage contract.
Apart from Lloyd Sam, given a new contract in the Prem by Dowie, the damage was done with big salaries and long contracts in the Pardew era ...... those still at the club Semedo, Racon, Bailey, McLeod, Moo2, etc - of which a couple have barely kicked a ball this season.
You can be sure that if any of those players had been newly signed in the past 12 months, they would have been offered substantially less contracts. Take those on inflated Prem/Championship contracts out of the equation - then I believe the average salary of players at our club drops very noticeably.
One other thing: club transfer policy for a relatively considerable time has been not to pay a transfer fee for a player - which limits us to those out of contract or surplus to requirements.
The only way that we could attract any player of any quality at all is to use transfer fee money saved to offer them an attractive signing on fee/wages package (as Sam Alladyce pioneered at Bolton). Overall, it must have proved a more economical method than conventional transfer costs.
Sure, our team has been crying out for a million pounds spent on a striker like Lambert; or even £300 - £400,000 for forwards like Holt or Barnard.
But I believe most of us agree that overall, Parkinson has proved to have an eye for a decent player, especially considering the lack of financial clout. So again credit due.
I got slated on here for saying ian holloway would have been ideal for us when we had the 'review' at the end of the season. Having said that I agree with smudge, names that were banded around turned out to be quite poor, rodgers at reading for example. Parky can't be all that bad, look at his records with colchester and hull pretty good for a young manager really just starting out. Expectation has been the biggest problem this term we've seen norwich run away with the league and the green eyed moster uses parky as his object of complaint. I've moaned and groaned at some of his choices and tactial discisons or lack of at times, but with such a finical weight around his neck I think he's done ok to be honest. Not sure but have a feeling we havnt been out of the top 6 since very early on, we've won a few games after crimbo when usualy are season falls away. If we go up he will have to be given a chance and hopefully a new buyer or a few quid found he could still be a top manager for us, even if we miss out I think losing the big earners ala bailey racon etc could do us wonders and free up some cash for some proper league one talent and more chances for youth ie; mambo, tuna and waggy etc will do us wonders. To sum up, yes I have screamed at him at times but more due to fustration than pure anger, we have potentially 5 games left this season to get back to the championship we need to all back him and whatever 11 he choses and not moan and groan before a balls been kicked.
[cite]Posted By: adamtheaddick[/cite]we have potentially 5 games left this season to get back to the championship we need to all back him and whatever 11 he choses and not moan and groan before a balls been kicked.
[cite]Posted By: AFKABartram[/cite]Can you please tell me definitively what makes a good manager and what makes a bad one ?
Such a straightforward question, Danny ... but with less than straightforward answers.
Forget about football for a moment, and apply the question to the general business environment. A good manager achieves the objectives of the team, usually in the most cost-effective manner. So, if you are worried about the financial aspects, a good manager will ensure that he/she always operates within budget, reduces waste and maximises the profit margin. That may mean operating with reduced resource (including people) or outsourcing. In doing so, a good manager must (among other things) ensure that he/she gets the best out of people, that he/she engenders loyalty and team spirit and has a long-term plan for success that team members can buy into.
Now apply that to football ... and to Phil Parkinson. Has he achieved the team objectives? Richard Murray was reported as saying that promotion is "imperative". So, the play-offs will answer that question. Cost-effective? Not if you agree that our wage bill is around the third or fourth highest in this division. That wage bill is hardly Parkinson's fault, but let's not trot out the 'limited resouces' mantra. He has access to players that other teams would love to have.
Waste reduction? The likes of McKenzie, Moutaouakil, Dickson, Fleetwood, McLeod are all clearly surplus to Parkinson's requirements. Once these get off-loaded, I think he can claim that one, although Steve Waggott may have a bit more to do on that front than the First Team Manager. Parkinson's outsourcing strategy (loan players) divides opinion, but the question to ask is "do we get more value from our loanees than we do from our existing players?". I think the answers would be mixed.
Does he get the best out of his players? I have to say that the overall performances of Sam and Racon this season, and Bailey since Christmas, are disappointing to many of us. Shelvey - no comment. Others have played consistently well, but I don't think Parkinson can claim that this team generally fires on all cylinders.
Loyalty and team spirit? I'd say 'yes' to that. Fair play to the guy.
Long-term strategy? For me this is the key question. I raised this right at the start of his appointment ... irrespective of whether he takes us out of League 1 this year or next, do you see Phil Parkinson as the man to take us back to the Premier League in five years or so?
So, overall ... I think he does well enough, but League 1 is his level. If we don't go up this year and he stays in post, next season will allow us to see the true capabilities of the man. His budget will be reduced even more, he will need to rely on young players and whoever he can sweet-talk over the summer using his networking skills. I would be very surprised if he gets the team anywhere near where we are at the moment.
Here's the irony. The better a manager is, the higher he goes ... and then the poorer he looks (Jose Mourinho and Alex Ferguson etc excepted). The reverse is also true. Parkinson has dropped down the divisions and is OK at this level. So, if you define 'good' as finding your own level and doing OK, then he is OK. But fans generally want more than that. The later stages of the Curbishley era is a good example of that. Was Curbishley 'good' at the end ... or had he simply reached a level at which he then became poor?
My view on it all is that we need someone with the potential to take us somewhere near Premier League level within about a five year period. At League 1 level that means finding a rising star in management terms, not someone who has already shown their limitations (and I include the likes of Paul Ince in that). Darren Ferguson is the best example, but there will be others out there ... it's just that they are not obvious to most of us. That is the real challenge for the Board ... and that is why Richard Murray (or whoever) probably needs help to get the next choice right.
Surely the important point to note in that list of up and coming managers is that most were sacked fairly quickly once it was clear things were not working out.
I would love to see Tony Mowbray or Phil Brown take over at Charlton. I have seen enough of the football played by the teams these two have sent out over the last few years to know that we would see attractive and entertaining football again. Good managers do not become bad managers after one sacking.
If we don't go up this season I hope that over the next few seasons rather than having one of the highest paid playing squads in Division 1 (and we won’t anymore more because most of the highest earners will have to be sold) we have the highest paid manager and coaching staff in the division. And it has got to be a manager who we can afford to sack after 6 months if the results and performances are not good enough so no silly contracts!
although curbs was clearly a success he left us in a state also imo which is a completely different arguement altogether
as for parky i have been borderline with him all season, one minute his ****, next he is doing a job. but the fact is beginning of the season all of us would of been happy for play offs so he cant be doing to bad can he??
As for signings he has done well with practically no resources available other then let player go on loan, sign loan and a few freebies. I think if we did have money available he would show he has a good eye for a player, as with most his loan signings & freebies.
[cite]Posted By: johnnybev1987[/cite]completely agree with oggy on all his points!
although curbs was clearly a success he left us in a state also imo which is a completely different arguement altogether
as for parky i have been borderline with him all season, one minute his ****, next he is doing a job. but the fact is beginning of the season all of us would of been happy for play offs so he cant be doing to bad can he??
As for signings he has done well with practically no resources available other then let player go on loan, sign loan and a few freebies. I think if we did have money available he would show he has a good eye for a player, as with most his loan signings & freebies.
Curbs would not have left us in a state had Richard Murray accepted his offer to see out his contract.
Mr Murray preferred to give £12 million to Iain Dowie instead.
Comments
Could you rule out Curbs? I would say he has done it at two clubs as West Ham would certainly have been relegated had it not been for him.
On O'Driscoll, I may be wrong but I think he left Bournemouth for Doncaster, pretty sure he wasn't sacked.
I think the majority of Parkinson's signings have been good, with the possible exception of Akpo and Mckenzie.
You are right about O'Driscoll, he wasn't sacked, he left for Donny. My mistake.
Darren Ferguson- up and coming manager, exceeded all expectations and Peterboro but the fact they had a poor start led to his sacking, arguably the stupidist sacking of season imho. A sacking which on the face of it does not look in any way justified.
Ian Holloway- did very well everywhere until Leicester, could not save an already sinking ship despite his actual record in terms of win/loss % not being bad. Sacked without getting a chance to make things right- now replicating his previous work at Blackpool
Owen Coyle- Burnley may still have gone down but would have made more of a fight with him in charge. Has saved Bolton and got them playing some decent stuff.
Steve Tilson- still a good manager, this season is hard to judge him as he lost his best player when they were mid table and the financial situation there has not helped.
Gary Johnson, Peter Taylor and to some extent Alan Irvine and Simon Davey were all victims of their own success and overachievement and can't be said to have become bad managers.
Phil Brown is an enigma, be interesting to see how well/badly he does at his next job. Martin Ling is also someone I am surprised has not got another League 1/2 job.
My point is therefore that one bad spell does not change whether a manager is good or not. Just as one good spell does not make a manager great -Aidy Boothroyd, Iain Dowie step forward and maybe even Brendan Rodgers.
Managers need to be judged on seasons rather than spells, for example Gary Johnson won 2 out of 12 of his last games in charge at Bristol (or similar I can't remember exactly) but his record over the 4-5 years he was there is excellent.
Some of these managers in particular are still imho good coaches/managers and if Parky was to leave, we could do a lot worse.
For a manager to be good therefore he obviously has to have the right credentials but also in todays game needs more than ever a board/chairman that is realistic and not going to be too hasty with changes. Of course this can work both ways as Gary Johnson perhaps stayed at Bristol too long but the managers that have had most success especially someone like O'Driscoll have been given plenty of time and support.
Maybe. Could also advocate giving the present incumbent more time to to his thing. He's been firefighting since taking over and deserves more time IMO. He's had no resources to work with, has worked very well considering the finances and doesn't whinge and bitch about it - he just gets on with it. And he's also probably pretty cheap!
I think its down to the chemistry that the manager has with the club like curbishley did with us and how they inspire both players and supporters who can see what they are trying to achieve.
As one of those who has "trotted" out this line i would say that Parkinson whilst perhaps a good manager at other clubs and future clubs is not and has not been a good manager for charlton.
They are out their but a lot of it is trial and error unfortunately. It is down to the club (who's full time job it is) to seek out these enigmas not the responsibilty of the fans as the club knows or should know who the best fit would be IMO.
Parky, like every other manager in the Third Division, is far from perfect.
But that's the point, maybe he's just a decent manager at this level ....?
Another point, Parky heads a management team, of which no doubt he gets to choose who he works with.
These are the men who lead and train the players on a day-to-day basis - so must be massively influential with players.
This management team together devise and work with the team tactically. But once the team runs out onto the park, then it's up to the players to produce the goods - a manager can only shuffle the pack after that.
I've no idea what Parky's match day dressing room talks are like - but not every manager (or leader at any level) leads just by brash tub thumping; some have more subtle ways of coaxing players to produce their best.
Lenny Lawrence, for example, rarely spent time in the dugout - usually sitting high in the stands, to get a general overview of the game, both performance wise and tactically. Peacock as Curbs no2, did the same.
Which begs one question ...... who does Parky have up there in the stands....?
Then there's the mentality of players, both individually and collectively as a team - some players need to be beaten with a stick to get the best out of them. But most just need to be coached and coaxed.
But they are currently Third Division players in a Third Division team.
Perhaps it's some supporters who need to come to terms with that?
*********
It's been said many times already - but less than a year ago, this club was dead on it's feet and in freefall.
From where we stand today, that's clearly no longer the case.
Why are some of us so mean in spirit - surely some credit, however begrudgingly given, is owed to Parky for turning things round?
Could have done better certainly IMHO. We were top two for long periods and didn't maintain that. How much of that was down to PP is the moot point but as manager at least some of it must be IMHO.
Whether someone else would have done better neither you or anyone else can say for sure. By the same token someone else could have done a lot worse but we will never know.
Could "someone" have done better? Surely. Could "someone" have done worse? Just as surely.
Fact is, steadying a club that was caught up in what appeared to be an inexorable decline is a significant accomplishment. Doesn't necessarily make him the man for the next step, but doesn't eliminate him either.
Insipres confidence in me, but as a rule, I tend not to like the way that professional sports are so quick to cast players and managers aside.
"I think its down to the chemistry that the manager has with the club like curbishley did with us and how they inspire both players and supporters who can see what they are trying to achieve."
For example Eddie Howe has done wonders at Bournemouth with no resources and a small squad. But he knows the make up of Bournemouth, what they're about, what the fans want/expect etc as he spent virtually all his playing career there. So he clearly has a good chemistry with Bournemouth. If he went elsewhere he wouldn't have that bond with the club so he might not be a success.
could anyone have gotten us to where we stand now -imo there would have been a few
could anyone have done worse than parky this season- imo there would have been a few
could anyone gee our team up enough to win those must win games we just had to give us an automatic chance of promotion -(parky didn't) but i'm sure some would
will parky be good enough to stir our troops into the seige mentality a team needs to battle their way though the play offs ??? imo he wont
We can offer a basic wages and no money to sign anyone, you will have to use the loan market to get the best deal you can.
The only way we can go is gamble on a former player who has no experience of management.
What I do know is that if will fail at promotion and the longer this debate drags on the more divide we are becoming as a club.
We are a London club so our wages will inevitably be higher than most, whoever is manager, so unfair to criticise Parky for having a higher wage budget than average.
The rot re the relegation set in courtesy of Pardew and Dowie. It took an awful lot of turning round and hopefully has been done now.
could anyone have gotten us to where we stand now -imo there would have been a few
could anyone have done worse than parky this season- imo there would have been a few
could anyone gee our team up enough to win those must win games we just had to give us an automatic chance of promotion -(parky didn't) but i'm sure some would
will parky be good enough to stir our troops into the seige mentality a team needs to battle their way though the play offs ??? imo he wont[/quote]
Pretty much sums up the way i feel. Do I know who would be able to with our resources no i dont and until we do we stick with what we know.
Parky is that. At the moment.
Time will tell but I feel it would be a mistake to sack him in the summer - better the devil yo uknow and all that!
Tim Breacker is in the stands every single game.
We'd still be seen as a big club for this level, with crowds of 16k plus every week. If we don't go up and Sheff Weds survive in the championship then only Southampton will get bigger crowds than us in this next division next season.
Judging by Richard Murray's comments from time to time, none of Parky's signings has been a big wage contract.
Apart from Lloyd Sam, given a new contract in the Prem by Dowie, the damage was done with big salaries and long contracts in the Pardew era ...... those still at the club Semedo, Racon, Bailey, McLeod, Moo2, etc - of which a couple have barely kicked a ball this season.
You can be sure that if any of those players had been newly signed in the past 12 months, they would have been offered substantially less contracts. Take those on inflated Prem/Championship contracts out of the equation - then I believe the average salary of players at our club drops very noticeably.
One other thing: club transfer policy for a relatively considerable time has been not to pay a transfer fee for a player - which limits us to those out of contract or surplus to requirements.
The only way that we could attract any player of any quality at all is to use transfer fee money saved to offer them an attractive signing on fee/wages package (as Sam Alladyce pioneered at Bolton). Overall, it must have proved a more economical method than conventional transfer costs.
Sure, our team has been crying out for a million pounds spent on a striker like Lambert; or even £300 - £400,000 for forwards like Holt or Barnard.
But I believe most of us agree that overall, Parkinson has proved to have an eye for a decent player, especially considering the lack of financial clout. So again credit due.
Adam is spot on.
Forget about football for a moment, and apply the question to the general business environment. A good manager achieves the objectives of the team, usually in the most cost-effective manner. So, if you are worried about the financial aspects, a good manager will ensure that he/she always operates within budget, reduces waste and maximises the profit margin. That may mean operating with reduced resource (including people) or outsourcing. In doing so, a good manager must (among other things) ensure that he/she gets the best out of people, that he/she engenders loyalty and team spirit and has a long-term plan for success that team members can buy into.
Now apply that to football ... and to Phil Parkinson. Has he achieved the team objectives? Richard Murray was reported as saying that promotion is "imperative". So, the play-offs will answer that question. Cost-effective? Not if you agree that our wage bill is around the third or fourth highest in this division. That wage bill is hardly Parkinson's fault, but let's not trot out the 'limited resouces' mantra. He has access to players that other teams would love to have.
Waste reduction? The likes of McKenzie, Moutaouakil, Dickson, Fleetwood, McLeod are all clearly surplus to Parkinson's requirements. Once these get off-loaded, I think he can claim that one, although Steve Waggott may have a bit more to do on that front than the First Team Manager. Parkinson's outsourcing strategy (loan players) divides opinion, but the question to ask is "do we get more value from our loanees than we do from our existing players?". I think the answers would be mixed.
Does he get the best out of his players? I have to say that the overall performances of Sam and Racon this season, and Bailey since Christmas, are disappointing to many of us. Shelvey - no comment. Others have played consistently well, but I don't think Parkinson can claim that this team generally fires on all cylinders.
Loyalty and team spirit? I'd say 'yes' to that. Fair play to the guy.
Long-term strategy? For me this is the key question. I raised this right at the start of his appointment ... irrespective of whether he takes us out of League 1 this year or next, do you see Phil Parkinson as the man to take us back to the Premier League in five years or so?
So, overall ... I think he does well enough, but League 1 is his level. If we don't go up this year and he stays in post, next season will allow us to see the true capabilities of the man. His budget will be reduced even more, he will need to rely on young players and whoever he can sweet-talk over the summer using his networking skills. I would be very surprised if he gets the team anywhere near where we are at the moment.
Here's the irony. The better a manager is, the higher he goes ... and then the poorer he looks (Jose Mourinho and Alex Ferguson etc excepted). The reverse is also true. Parkinson has dropped down the divisions and is OK at this level. So, if you define 'good' as finding your own level and doing OK, then he is OK. But fans generally want more than that. The later stages of the Curbishley era is a good example of that. Was Curbishley 'good' at the end ... or had he simply reached a level at which he then became poor?
My view on it all is that we need someone with the potential to take us somewhere near Premier League level within about a five year period. At League 1 level that means finding a rising star in management terms, not someone who has already shown their limitations (and I include the likes of Paul Ince in that). Darren Ferguson is the best example, but there will be others out there ... it's just that they are not obvious to most of us. That is the real challenge for the Board ... and that is why Richard Murray (or whoever) probably needs help to get the next choice right.
I would love to see Tony Mowbray or Phil Brown take over at Charlton. I have seen enough of the football played by the teams these two have sent out over the last few years to know that we would see attractive and entertaining football again. Good managers do not become bad managers after one sacking.
If we don't go up this season I hope that over the next few seasons rather than having one of the highest paid playing squads in Division 1 (and we won’t anymore more because most of the highest earners will have to be sold) we have the highest paid manager and coaching staff in the division. And it has got to be a manager who we can afford to sack after 6 months if the results and performances are not good enough so no silly contracts!
although curbs was clearly a success he left us in a state also imo which is a completely different arguement altogether
as for parky i have been borderline with him all season, one minute his ****, next he is doing a job. but the fact is beginning of the season all of us would of been happy for play offs so he cant be doing to bad can he??
As for signings he has done well with practically no resources available other then let player go on loan, sign loan and a few freebies. I think if we did have money available he would show he has a good eye for a player, as with most his loan signings & freebies.
Curbs would not have left us in a state had Richard Murray accepted his offer to see out his contract.
Mr Murray preferred to give £12 million to Iain Dowie instead.