JOHNNIE JACKSON - managed AFC Wimbledon to 2025 League 2 Play-off Final victory(p46)

Garrymanilow said:

It is a bit shocking to me how quickly people compare Sandgaard to Duchatelet. Roland was the worst thing that could have possibly happened to our club. He didn't care, was adamant his way of doing things was the only way, but to the aggressive exclusion of the fans. He actively worked against fans, posting statements against them, ignoring absolutely all input from others, briefing against 'disgruntled ex-employees', allowing his CEO to employ people to physically assault fans with no reprimand and holding the club to the ransom of his big idea. He hired random blokes from the Belgian third division and wanted to bring in some guy who played indoor football to manage the club. I think because it was a while ago and we had Southall and then another bloke whose name I genuinely can't remember and refuse to Google people have forgotten just how desperate things were. The prick even still owns our home and won't give it back. He sold us on to an obvious pack of crooks because as far as he was concerned he either got the money for the asset off them or he didn't; if the stuff around it burned to the ground he didn't give a single one, The Valley and Sparrows lane were still good land he could make use of. Sandgaard has an ego and thinks his way is best, and he does make a concerningly large amount of first draft cock ups but we regularly do see recalibration of his choices and we have real engagement from our owner. It's not some remote nutcase in another country never appearing and remaining silent unless it's to complain about us, nor is it some charlatan sweeping through Crossbars to applause while siphoning all the cash out of the club. On Sunday Sandgaard, who lives in Colorado, presented medals to a team of 16-18 year old girls at The Valley because they won the Reserve South Central league title. He did this at a women's match with an attendance of 710. He does genuinely care, he's just got a lot to learn and a lip that he could do with buttoning. I'll take that every single day over an owner who would deliberately, actively destroy the club if it meant he got the chance to show that his brain is biggest. Sandgaard is not above scrutiny and him saving the club is credit that he has received and is now in the past, but please don't call him Roland mk II because he doesn't fancy watching us hoof the ball out of play for the 37th time that half while Morecambe run rings around us. For the first time since 2014 we have an owner that actually wants us to do well, it's not perfect but Jesus, it's not Roland.

Garrymanilow said:

It is a bit shocking to me how quickly people compare Sandgaard to Duchatelet. Roland was the worst thing that could have possibly happened to our club. He didn't care, was adamant his way of doing things was the only way, but to the aggressive exclusion of the fans. He actively worked against fans, posting statements against them, ignoring absolutely all input from others, briefing against 'disgruntled ex-employees', allowing his CEO to employ people to physically assault fans with no reprimand and holding the club to the ransom of his big idea. He hired random blokes from the Belgian third division and wanted to bring in some guy who played indoor football to manage the club. I think because it was a while ago and we had Southall and then another bloke whose name I genuinely can't remember and refuse to Google people have forgotten just how desperate things were. The prick even still owns our home and won't give it back. He sold us on to an obvious pack of crooks because as far as he was concerned he either got the money for the asset off them or he didn't; if the stuff around it burned to the ground he didn't give a single one, The Valley and Sparrows lane were still good land he could make use of. Sandgaard has an ego and thinks his way is best, and he does make a concerningly large amount of first draft cock ups but we regularly do see recalibration of his choices and we have real engagement from our owner. It's not some remote nutcase in another country never appearing and remaining silent unless it's to complain about us, nor is it some charlatan sweeping through Crossbars to applause while siphoning all the cash out of the club. On Sunday Sandgaard, who lives in Colorado, presented medals to a team of 16-18 year old girls at The Valley because they won the Reserve South Central league title. He did this at a women's match with an attendance of 710. He does genuinely care, he's just got a lot to learn and a lip that he could do with buttoning. I'll take that every single day over an owner who would deliberately, actively destroy the club if it meant he got the chance to show that his brain is biggest. Sandgaard is not above scrutiny and him saving the club is credit that he has received and is now in the past, but please don't call him Roland mk II because he doesn't fancy watching us hoof the ball out of play for the 37th time that half while Morecambe run rings around us. For the first time since 2014 we have an owner that actually wants us to do well, it's not perfect but Jesus, it's not Roland.

SELR_addicks said:

Covered_End_Lad said:

People keep mentioning 8th place. It has no relevance as was not his "target", it was one of the multiple place increments listed to agree different amounts of compensation owed to JJ if TS wanted to fire him, he was contracted for next season regardless of where we finished. If we had ended 8th it would have cost TS more money to fire JJ than finishing 13th for example.

To me this does have me assuming that TS only saw Jackson has a caretaker until the end of the season, no matter where he finished. 

Just had incentives for Jackson to 'perform' better for more pay at the end of the year. 

FishCostaFortune said:

Looking at JJ's first 10 league games in charge I wouldn't necessarily (apart from maybe the Plymouth at home game and second half against Rotherham) say I saw anything different in terms of overall performances and trends that we saw throughout the season.

Good away win against Sunderland (similar to our performance against Portsmouth and Rotherham).
Turgid scrappy away win against Burton.
A game of two halves against Rotherham.
A game of two halves against Morecambe
Turgid scrappy away loss to Shrewsbury 

To be honest his first 10 games in charge for me, felt much like his last 10 games, just a very mixed bag. 

The Red Robin said:

JamesSeed said:

I’m beginning to think TS has kept Jason Euell on in case he can’t find a new manager before the season starts. 

I expect Euell to slot back into his old role or stay around the first team. Unless he has a job lined up somewhere. Pretty highly rated coach. 

Garrymanilow said:

It is a bit shocking to me how quickly people compare Sandgaard to Duchatelet. Roland was the worst thing that could have possibly happened to our club. He didn't care, was adamant his way of doing things was the only way, but to the aggressive exclusion of the fans. He actively worked against fans, posting statements against them, ignoring absolutely all input from others, briefing against 'disgruntled ex-employees', allowing his CEO to employ people to physically assault fans with no reprimand and holding the club to the ransom of his big idea. He hired random blokes from the Belgian third division and wanted to bring in some guy who played indoor football to manage the club. I think because it was a while ago and we had Southall and then another bloke whose name I genuinely can't remember and refuse to Google people have forgotten just how desperate things were. The prick even still owns our home and won't give it back. He sold us on to an obvious pack of crooks because as far as he was concerned he either got the money for the asset off them or he didn't; if the stuff around it burned to the ground he didn't give a single one, The Valley and Sparrows lane were still good land he could make use of. Sandgaard has an ego and thinks his way is best, and he does make a concerningly large amount of first draft cock ups but we regularly do see recalibration of his choices and we have real engagement from our owner. It's not some remote nutcase in another country never appearing and remaining silent unless it's to complain about us, nor is it some charlatan sweeping through Crossbars to applause while siphoning all the cash out of the club. On Sunday Sandgaard, who lives in Colorado, presented medals to a team of 16-18 year old girls at The Valley because they won the Reserve South Central league title. He did this at a women's match with an attendance of 710. He does genuinely care, he's just got a lot to learn and a lip that he could do with buttoning. I'll take that every single day over an owner who would deliberately, actively destroy the club if it meant he got the chance to show that his brain is biggest. Sandgaard is not above scrutiny and him saving the club is credit that he has received and is now in the past, but please don't call him Roland mk II because he doesn't fancy watching us hoof the ball out of play for the 37th time that half while Morecambe run rings around us. For the first time since 2014 we have an owner that actually wants us to do well, it's not perfect but Jesus, it's not Roland.

balham red said:

Callumcafc said:

randy andy said:

Since Jacko got the job full time we've averaged 1.22 points per game. Extrapolated over a season that has us finishing on 56 points, which would have been good for 15th/16th this season.

Obviously his period in temporary charge was much better (over 2 points per game), but is there any proof that was anything more than a new manager bounce? I guess your answer to that comes down to how much you like Jacko, but looking at the cold hard data there is nothing to suggest he is the man to get us promoted next season. Of course a good transfer window could have done wonders, but equally there's the chance that it doesn't and the club are left looking for a new manager outside of a transfer window with a squad built to play an ineffective formation/style.

It's a bold move by TS. He will have felt he wasn't decisive last autumn, and that directly led to him having to give Jacko the job despite clearly not being convinced. If he'd have acted sooner he could have got away with a temporary deal to the end of the season, but the longer the good run went on the harder it was to do anything other than make him permanent.

The January window can then be seen in a different light. With the injuries we had and the drop in form the play-offs became almost unattainable. The options then were a) go all out for the play-offs, spending more than you want (January is a terrible time to do business) and handing that cheque book to a manager you don't necessarily trust, or b) keep your powder dry, accept this season was almost certain to end in a mid-table finish, spend just enough to ensure safety and give yourself 4-5 months to really take stock and decide what to do the following season.

TS obviously took option B, and I would hope factored in the possibility that Jacko would/could get the results to convince TS he was the man to take us up next year. 1.22 points per game would only have confirmed TS' original hesitancy and I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't start looking for a replacement quite some time ago.

I've never subscribed to the 'new manager bounce' - it's a bit of a myth as Ben McAleer from WhoScored concludes below.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/who-scored-blog/2021/nov/25/investigating-new-manager-bounce-premier-league

"The 'bounce' that comes when a new manager is appointed is often because things cannot get any worse. An uptick is almost inevitable. The bounce is an illusion and the new manager is the beneficiary"


If we had sacked Jacko in March and gone on to win six of the last 10 under Euell, would that have been reasoned away by a new manager bounce too? Why did we have two spells of awful form followed by two spells of promotion form this season and only one can be explained by a new manager bounce? What delivered the second turn around?

The ultimate conclusion to draw here is that Jackson isn't a messiah that can turn average players into world beaters and that the form may well have turned around under Adkins anyway, meaning he is probably better than we gave him credit. But neither of them were able to turn this squad into a team that is going to consistently deliver promotion form.

Sometimes you have to use your eyes instead of stats. The style of play and effort from the players while he was caretaker was completely different to once he was permanent. A world away in fact.

We picked up some wins in a purple patch towards the end not from good team performances, but from individuals doing something good. It was abysmal football, even with everyone fit.

Callumcafc said:

balham red said:

Callumcafc said:

randy andy said:

Since Jacko got the job full time we've averaged 1.22 points per game. Extrapolated over a season that has us finishing on 56 points, which would have been good for 15th/16th this season.

Obviously his period in temporary charge was much better (over 2 points per game), but is there any proof that was anything more than a new manager bounce? I guess your answer to that comes down to how much you like Jacko, but looking at the cold hard data there is nothing to suggest he is the man to get us promoted next season. Of course a good transfer window could have done wonders, but equally there's the chance that it doesn't and the club are left looking for a new manager outside of a transfer window with a squad built to play an ineffective formation/style.

It's a bold move by TS. He will have felt he wasn't decisive last autumn, and that directly led to him having to give Jacko the job despite clearly not being convinced. If he'd have acted sooner he could have got away with a temporary deal to the end of the season, but the longer the good run went on the harder it was to do anything other than make him permanent.

The January window can then be seen in a different light. With the injuries we had and the drop in form the play-offs became almost unattainable. The options then were a) go all out for the play-offs, spending more than you want (January is a terrible time to do business) and handing that cheque book to a manager you don't necessarily trust, or b) keep your powder dry, accept this season was almost certain to end in a mid-table finish, spend just enough to ensure safety and give yourself 4-5 months to really take stock and decide what to do the following season.

TS obviously took option B, and I would hope factored in the possibility that Jacko would/could get the results to convince TS he was the man to take us up next year. 1.22 points per game would only have confirmed TS' original hesitancy and I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't start looking for a replacement quite some time ago.

I've never subscribed to the 'new manager bounce' - it's a bit of a myth as Ben McAleer from WhoScored concludes below.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/who-scored-blog/2021/nov/25/investigating-new-manager-bounce-premier-league

"The 'bounce' that comes when a new manager is appointed is often because things cannot get any worse. An uptick is almost inevitable. The bounce is an illusion and the new manager is the beneficiary"


If we had sacked Jacko in March and gone on to win six of the last 10 under Euell, would that have been reasoned away by a new manager bounce too? Why did we have two spells of awful form followed by two spells of promotion form this season and only one can be explained by a new manager bounce? What delivered the second turn around?

The ultimate conclusion to draw here is that Jackson isn't a messiah that can turn average players into world beaters and that the form may well have turned around under Adkins anyway, meaning he is probably better than we gave him credit. But neither of them were able to turn this squad into a team that is going to consistently deliver promotion form.

Sometimes you have to use your eyes instead of stats. The style of play and effort from the players while he was caretaker was completely different to once he was permanent. A world away in fact.

We picked up some wins in a purple patch towards the end not from good team performances, but from individuals doing something good. It was abysmal football, even with everyone fit.

I contend that the style of play was never very good at any point in the season, although it was perhaps the hardest working spell of the campaign. Looking back at the nine games he had as caretaker, none of them were particularly convincing victories (Doncaster aside).

Sunderland 0-1 Charlton - got dominated, scored with one of our three shots on target and clung on at the end
Charlton 4-0 Doncaster - our best win of the season and we played well, regardless of how poor the opposition were
Charlton 1-1 Rotherham - probably a game we should have lost, late equaliser from a deflected pot shot
Burton 0-1 Charlton - again dominated by the home team and somehow kept the ball out of the net
Charlton 2-0 Plymouth - had to grind them down and eventually put the seal on it 84th minute
Morecambe 2-2 Charlton - bright start but dominated thereafter
Shrewsbury 1-0 Charlton - perhaps the worst quality game I saw all season on both sides
Charlton 2-0 Ipswich - again not the best football and took a goal late on to guarantee the win
Charlton 2-0 Cambridge - away side made this one really uncomfortable and would've felt disappointed not to take a point


Oops, just seen @FishCostaFortune make the same point above.

Garrymanilow said:

It is a bit shocking to me how quickly people compare Sandgaard to Duchatelet. Roland was the worst thing that could have possibly happened to our club. He didn't care, was adamant his way of doing things was the only way, but to the aggressive exclusion of the fans. He actively worked against fans, posting statements against them, ignoring absolutely all input from others, briefing against 'disgruntled ex-employees', allowing his CEO to employ people to physically assault fans with no reprimand and holding the club to the ransom of his big idea. He hired random blokes from the Belgian third division and wanted to bring in some guy who played indoor football to manage the club. I think because it was a while ago and we had Southall and then another bloke whose name I genuinely can't remember and refuse to Google people have forgotten just how desperate things were. The prick even still owns our home and won't give it back. He sold us on to an obvious pack of crooks because as far as he was concerned he either got the money for the asset off them or he didn't; if the stuff around it burned to the ground he didn't give a single one, The Valley and Sparrows lane were still good land he could make use of. Sandgaard has an ego and thinks his way is best, and he does make a concerningly large amount of first draft cock ups but we regularly do see recalibration of his choices and we have real engagement from our owner. It's not some remote nutcase in another country never appearing and remaining silent unless it's to complain about us, nor is it some charlatan sweeping through Crossbars to applause while siphoning all the cash out of the club. On Sunday Sandgaard, who lives in Colorado, presented medals to a team of 16-18 year old girls at The Valley because they won the Reserve South Central league title. He did this at a women's match with an attendance of 710. He does genuinely care, he's just got a lot to learn and a lip that he could do with buttoning. I'll take that every single day over an owner who would deliberately, actively destroy the club if it meant he got the chance to show that his brain is biggest. Sandgaard is not above scrutiny and him saving the club is credit that he has received and is now in the past, but please don't call him Roland mk II because he doesn't fancy watching us hoof the ball out of play for the 37th time that half while Morecambe run rings around us. For the first time since 2014 we have an owner that actually wants us to do well, it's not perfect but Jesus, it's not Roland.

seth plum said:

If Euell goes for the Wimbledon job surely Mark Bowen has to depart first?

The Red Robin said:

Blaming a 3-5-2 when this squad has also demonstrated they’re just as useless in a 4-3-3 and a 4-4-2.