How much is Evans to blame? 12:52 - Oct 29 with 5318 views | FrimleyBlue | Genuine question. After watching the wembley video and seeing sheepy... There's lot of people that hated sheepy and still do. I love the guy I will add and think he was Mr Ipswich and still is. So with that in mind. How many would take Sheepshanks back now.. or are you behind Evans.. | |
| | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:00 - Oct 29 with 2495 views | Bluefish | Without Evans we would have been in admin at least once. It is a different world compared to when Sheepy was here | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:02 - Oct 29 with 2490 views | Fixed_It |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:00 - Oct 29 by Bluefish | Without Evans we would have been in admin at least once. It is a different world compared to when Sheepy was here |
Correct. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:04 - Oct 29 with 2488 views | Guthrum |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:00 - Oct 29 by Bluefish | Without Evans we would have been in admin at least once. It is a different world compared to when Sheepy was here |
Indeed. I think the same when people refer back to the Cobbold era. There's no way the owners of a smallish regional brewery would be able to fund and maintain a team at the top end of England's highest football division nowadays. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:04 - Oct 29 with 2485 views | DanTheMan |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:00 - Oct 29 by Bluefish | Without Evans we would have been in admin at least once. It is a different world compared to when Sheepy was here |
Potentially, however I'd say "not running the club into administration" is a fairly low bar for owning the club. Under his ownership we have regressed in every conceivable measure. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:05 - Oct 29 with 2485 views | dickie |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:00 - Oct 29 by Bluefish | Without Evans we would have been in admin at least once. It is a different world compared to when Sheepy was here |
It's also a different world to when Evans first came here | | | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:06 - Oct 29 with 2461 views | Bluefish |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:04 - Oct 29 by DanTheMan | Potentially, however I'd say "not running the club into administration" is a fairly low bar for owning the club. Under his ownership we have regressed in every conceivable measure. |
We have progressed but the game has progressed quicker for the elite | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:12 - Oct 29 with 2455 views | Guthrum |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:05 - Oct 29 by dickie | It's also a different world to when Evans first came here |
To an extent, that is also true. The financial train is running much faster out of control now than it was in 2007 - at least until Covid came along. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:19 - Oct 29 with 2447 views | Steve_M | Without Sheepshanks misjudgements we wouldn't have been where we were when Evans bought us; had Evans made a decent job of owning the club then we wouldn't be in the third division now. Administration and screwing local businesses was a genuinely shameful moment in the history of the club, without the sale to Evans we would likely have gone into administration a second time. Evans failed to put a proper structure in place at the club, relying on an outdated model of football which is totally reliant on the manager and has cuts costs so much that the club only functions on the back of a small number of individuals. Sheepy up until Summer 2001 did a good job of rebuilding the club from 1995 though and that should be appreciated but also it needs to be acknowledged that he ruined it all afterwards. | |
| | Login to get fewer ads
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:23 - Oct 29 with 2419 views | hype313 |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:19 - Oct 29 by Steve_M | Without Sheepshanks misjudgements we wouldn't have been where we were when Evans bought us; had Evans made a decent job of owning the club then we wouldn't be in the third division now. Administration and screwing local businesses was a genuinely shameful moment in the history of the club, without the sale to Evans we would likely have gone into administration a second time. Evans failed to put a proper structure in place at the club, relying on an outdated model of football which is totally reliant on the manager and has cuts costs so much that the club only functions on the back of a small number of individuals. Sheepy up until Summer 2001 did a good job of rebuilding the club from 1995 though and that should be appreciated but also it needs to be acknowledged that he ruined it all afterwards. |
Totally agree Steve, it's easy to look through Rose tinted glasses when it comes to Sheepy, especially watching that video as we can see his veins run blue. But he made some huge errors of judgement and that with the perfect storm of ITV digital meant he didn't have any room to manoeuvre when things started to fall apart. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:44 - Oct 29 with 2372 views | Marshalls_Mullet | I love Sheepy. I would take him back to run the club under Evans' ownership. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:44 - Oct 29 with 2382 views | BloomBlue | Sheepy was very committed to Ipswich and we had some great times but it was his financial incompetence and Burley's overspending on average players which result in 1) relegation and 2) administration. If Sheepy had appointed a DoF who could have slapped Burley around the head and told him to stop wasting money on average players and/or preferably convinced Sheepy to sack Burley at Christmas or better still before that as Leicester did with Ranieri we would have avoided relegation. Plus Ipswich was a community club until that point and then Suffolk firms got shafted as a result of the administration So some great memories but no, no way would I have him back now. | | | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:12 - Oct 29 with 2338 views | BlueandTruesince82 | It's so much more complicated than the question. On Sheepshanks, he was a good man who always tried to right by the club and ran it well for many years. However he saddled the club with a big chunk of debt by building two ugly stands when we were PL that ulitmatley have never been full. Really what we should have done is build a new stadium a la Col U thats easy to access because getting into or out of Ipswich for a game is a mare unless you can walk. That said those stands were built with view of increasing attendance and revenue for the long term. Equally when we qualified Europe instead of enjoying the ride we thought we were back in the 70s and spent money on players who were not sustainable (notably Finidi and Sereni) and generally over extended ourselves when we should have banked the windfall. The result was administration and an inability to compete financially and both Sheepshanks and Burnley should be held accounatble for that.... But both did what they thought was right and were trying to better the club so I don't hold it against them Evans. Handled Magiltons sacking badly and that still doesn't sit well with me and as owner and steward in the years since has to take a lot of the blame for where we are but equally if you look at his decisions most are underatdnable and though we may not like to admit it many of us may have done the same IE Keane.... took Sunderland from bottom of the champ to PL in 6 months, a legend of the game with contacts and access that should have allowed us to sign some of the finest young talent in the game (Sadly Keane defined talent as Lee Martin, enough said)... why would you not apooint someone like that...? now I never liked Keane as an appointment but many on here did and understandably.... I thought the grumbling comming out of Sunderlands dressing room was a warning but equally heresay... Keane had money too for the time think of the wages on Priskin, Fullop etc... personally I don't think we ever revovered from Keane and I blame him for our plight more than anyone else.... others will disagree. Jewell... had success with a limited budget, lauded for his time at Wigan, promotions on his CV, why wouldn't you appoint someone like that... yes his record at Derby sucked but he inherited that team and they were doomed before he took over. He ticked many boxes. Mick.... was what we needed. The biggest criticism here is he was allowed to stay too long and had too much power... like Fergie at Man U just not as good. Should have sacked Mick earlier, should have twisted when we were able but the rumour was always that Mick didnt want the money or see the need (Mick subsequently deluded himself into thinking the job was to keep us up not get us up)... had Mick had the money Hurst did things may have been different but the football still awful. Hurst... 96% fans thought him a good appontmet despite many now claiming otherwise (like the number of people who claim they were at live aid vs the no that actually were at live aid) he was young, had sucesss whereever he had been, took an unfancied Shrews side to the brink of promotion and showed he could work on a comparatively smaller budget... he was up and comming, one to watch and fitted the bill of what the fans wanted, why wouldn't you employ someone like that? No one could predict he'd get drunk with power and shatter the dressing room. Lambo TBC but experienced and at this level should get us up remains to be seen if he does Now that's not to excuse Evans.... the signs were there with Keane if you looked, he could have invested more at times and should have sacked Mick far sooner. But he keeps the club afloat, it doesn't make a profit. The tax dodge stuff is a nonsense. In the middle of a pandemic he is vital and I think he has been unlucky. He has made what were on paper sensible appointments that haven't worked out ( we have to confess though that the club and Evans are the common denominator)... I think he has been unlucky with some appointments and often its better to be lucky than good. So both share a portion of it for different reasons for me but ultimately I think Keane ripped the heart and soul from the club (telling KD to off etc) [Post edited 29 Oct 2020 14:32]
| |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:20 - Oct 29 with 2316 views | Swansea_Blue | 100% without question. People should have worked this out by now after 13 years of progressive decline. He’s been awful for our football team, there’s no way to sugar coat it. Yes, it may have cost him a fortune covering the annual debts, but that is also largely self inflicted through a string of disastrous and wasteful decisions. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:30 - Oct 29 with 2283 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:00 - Oct 29 by Bluefish | Without Evans we would have been in admin at least once. It is a different world compared to when Sheepy was here |
Although, had we been managed well and brought through academy players and cheaper buys to sell for significant fees we might be still at a higher level and not in administration. It is a hypothetical question but there is no doubt that Evans' reign has been very poor. Not because he wants to fail for sure. However, we could be doing a lot better if the big decisions had turned out better. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:36 - Oct 29 with 2268 views | Churchman |
How much is Evans to blame? on 13:19 - Oct 29 by Steve_M | Without Sheepshanks misjudgements we wouldn't have been where we were when Evans bought us; had Evans made a decent job of owning the club then we wouldn't be in the third division now. Administration and screwing local businesses was a genuinely shameful moment in the history of the club, without the sale to Evans we would likely have gone into administration a second time. Evans failed to put a proper structure in place at the club, relying on an outdated model of football which is totally reliant on the manager and has cuts costs so much that the club only functions on the back of a small number of individuals. Sheepy up until Summer 2001 did a good job of rebuilding the club from 1995 though and that should be appreciated but also it needs to be acknowledged that he ruined it all afterwards. |
Agree with this. Yes, Sheepshanks loved the club, but his lack of judgement/incompetence destroyed it after doing so much to build it 1995-2001. That and allowing the club to be sold to somebody like Evans. Would the club have gone out of business like Bury without our ‘saviour’ coming to our ‘rescue’? I very much doubt it and even if we had, maybe a new club would have I’m sure been formed on a sounder footing. Who knows, better that than death by a thousand cuts. Lincoln and Luton were both in the Conference a few years ago and they are both now higher in the football pyramid than us and in a far better financial position. Evans has shrunk the club year on year to the point where there’s a chance In the changing football finance climate it’ll disappear anyway. Instead of wondering if we will ever get to play in the Premier League again, we now look in justifiable trepidation at fixtures with Lincoln and Donny. I have no time for Evans and do not recognise the club I first saw so many years ago any more. It has no soul and it’s so sad. The people who follow ITFC have had so little to cheer in nearly 2 decades. They deserve better. | | | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:41 - Oct 29 with 2256 views | Guthrum |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:12 - Oct 29 by BlueandTruesince82 | It's so much more complicated than the question. On Sheepshanks, he was a good man who always tried to right by the club and ran it well for many years. However he saddled the club with a big chunk of debt by building two ugly stands when we were PL that ulitmatley have never been full. Really what we should have done is build a new stadium a la Col U thats easy to access because getting into or out of Ipswich for a game is a mare unless you can walk. That said those stands were built with view of increasing attendance and revenue for the long term. Equally when we qualified Europe instead of enjoying the ride we thought we were back in the 70s and spent money on players who were not sustainable (notably Finidi and Sereni) and generally over extended ourselves when we should have banked the windfall. The result was administration and an inability to compete financially and both Sheepshanks and Burnley should be held accounatble for that.... But both did what they thought was right and were trying to better the club so I don't hold it against them Evans. Handled Magiltons sacking badly and that still doesn't sit well with me and as owner and steward in the years since has to take a lot of the blame for where we are but equally if you look at his decisions most are underatdnable and though we may not like to admit it many of us may have done the same IE Keane.... took Sunderland from bottom of the champ to PL in 6 months, a legend of the game with contacts and access that should have allowed us to sign some of the finest young talent in the game (Sadly Keane defined talent as Lee Martin, enough said)... why would you not apooint someone like that...? now I never liked Keane as an appointment but many on here did and understandably.... I thought the grumbling comming out of Sunderlands dressing room was a warning but equally heresay... Keane had money too for the time think of the wages on Priskin, Fullop etc... personally I don't think we ever revovered from Keane and I blame him for our plight more than anyone else.... others will disagree. Jewell... had success with a limited budget, lauded for his time at Wigan, promotions on his CV, why wouldn't you appoint someone like that... yes his record at Derby sucked but he inherited that team and they were doomed before he took over. He ticked many boxes. Mick.... was what we needed. The biggest criticism here is he was allowed to stay too long and had too much power... like Fergie at Man U just not as good. Should have sacked Mick earlier, should have twisted when we were able but the rumour was always that Mick didnt want the money or see the need (Mick subsequently deluded himself into thinking the job was to keep us up not get us up)... had Mick had the money Hurst did things may have been different but the football still awful. Hurst... 96% fans thought him a good appontmet despite many now claiming otherwise (like the number of people who claim they were at live aid vs the no that actually were at live aid) he was young, had sucesss whereever he had been, took an unfancied Shrews side to the brink of promotion and showed he could work on a comparatively smaller budget... he was up and comming, one to watch and fitted the bill of what the fans wanted, why wouldn't you employ someone like that? No one could predict he'd get drunk with power and shatter the dressing room. Lambo TBC but experienced and at this level should get us up remains to be seen if he does Now that's not to excuse Evans.... the signs were there with Keane if you looked, he could have invested more at times and should have sacked Mick far sooner. But he keeps the club afloat, it doesn't make a profit. The tax dodge stuff is a nonsense. In the middle of a pandemic he is vital and I think he has been unlucky. He has made what were on paper sensible appointments that haven't worked out ( we have to confess though that the club and Evans are the common denominator)... I think he has been unlucky with some appointments and often its better to be lucky than good. So both share a portion of it for different reasons for me but ultimately I think Keane ripped the heart and soul from the club (telling KD to off etc) [Post edited 29 Oct 2020 14:32]
|
Pretty spot on. Also agree that Keane is the man who did the initial damage and we have been firefighting ever since. Took us from 9th to flirting with relegation, blew Evans' promotion budget and caused a lot of disruption off the pitch. He just didn't know how to run ITFC. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:42 - Oct 29 with 2252 views | hype313 |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:12 - Oct 29 by BlueandTruesince82 | It's so much more complicated than the question. On Sheepshanks, he was a good man who always tried to right by the club and ran it well for many years. However he saddled the club with a big chunk of debt by building two ugly stands when we were PL that ulitmatley have never been full. Really what we should have done is build a new stadium a la Col U thats easy to access because getting into or out of Ipswich for a game is a mare unless you can walk. That said those stands were built with view of increasing attendance and revenue for the long term. Equally when we qualified Europe instead of enjoying the ride we thought we were back in the 70s and spent money on players who were not sustainable (notably Finidi and Sereni) and generally over extended ourselves when we should have banked the windfall. The result was administration and an inability to compete financially and both Sheepshanks and Burnley should be held accounatble for that.... But both did what they thought was right and were trying to better the club so I don't hold it against them Evans. Handled Magiltons sacking badly and that still doesn't sit well with me and as owner and steward in the years since has to take a lot of the blame for where we are but equally if you look at his decisions most are underatdnable and though we may not like to admit it many of us may have done the same IE Keane.... took Sunderland from bottom of the champ to PL in 6 months, a legend of the game with contacts and access that should have allowed us to sign some of the finest young talent in the game (Sadly Keane defined talent as Lee Martin, enough said)... why would you not apooint someone like that...? now I never liked Keane as an appointment but many on here did and understandably.... I thought the grumbling comming out of Sunderlands dressing room was a warning but equally heresay... Keane had money too for the time think of the wages on Priskin, Fullop etc... personally I don't think we ever revovered from Keane and I blame him for our plight more than anyone else.... others will disagree. Jewell... had success with a limited budget, lauded for his time at Wigan, promotions on his CV, why wouldn't you appoint someone like that... yes his record at Derby sucked but he inherited that team and they were doomed before he took over. He ticked many boxes. Mick.... was what we needed. The biggest criticism here is he was allowed to stay too long and had too much power... like Fergie at Man U just not as good. Should have sacked Mick earlier, should have twisted when we were able but the rumour was always that Mick didnt want the money or see the need (Mick subsequently deluded himself into thinking the job was to keep us up not get us up)... had Mick had the money Hurst did things may have been different but the football still awful. Hurst... 96% fans thought him a good appontmet despite many now claiming otherwise (like the number of people who claim they were at live aid vs the no that actually were at live aid) he was young, had sucesss whereever he had been, took an unfancied Shrews side to the brink of promotion and showed he could work on a comparatively smaller budget... he was up and comming, one to watch and fitted the bill of what the fans wanted, why wouldn't you employ someone like that? No one could predict he'd get drunk with power and shatter the dressing room. Lambo TBC but experienced and at this level should get us up remains to be seen if he does Now that's not to excuse Evans.... the signs were there with Keane if you looked, he could have invested more at times and should have sacked Mick far sooner. But he keeps the club afloat, it doesn't make a profit. The tax dodge stuff is a nonsense. In the middle of a pandemic he is vital and I think he has been unlucky. He has made what were on paper sensible appointments that haven't worked out ( we have to confess though that the club and Evans are the common denominator)... I think he has been unlucky with some appointments and often its better to be lucky than good. So both share a portion of it for different reasons for me but ultimately I think Keane ripped the heart and soul from the club (telling KD to off etc) [Post edited 29 Oct 2020 14:32]
|
Good take there, I agree on the whole, I actually think our biggest downfall wasn't Finidi or Sereni per se, but the building of those two stands, they are our biggest sliding doors moment. If he had waited another year or two rather than getting giddy after the European adventure then things could have been so much different. On those two players, none of us could really question Burleys signings as generally on the whole they were mostly positive, however I firmly believe that George's strengths were around building promotion chasing teams as opposed to trying to buy players to compete with the top 10 in the PL. To be fair it was such a dramatic change of dynamics building those two teams that he couldn't really be blamed for getting it wrong, maybe in hindsight we should have been ruthless and brought someone in who had the experience higher up in the league, but Sheepy was never going to be that ruthless and you can't blame him for not being so either. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:02 - Oct 29 with 2209 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:42 - Oct 29 by hype313 | Good take there, I agree on the whole, I actually think our biggest downfall wasn't Finidi or Sereni per se, but the building of those two stands, they are our biggest sliding doors moment. If he had waited another year or two rather than getting giddy after the European adventure then things could have been so much different. On those two players, none of us could really question Burleys signings as generally on the whole they were mostly positive, however I firmly believe that George's strengths were around building promotion chasing teams as opposed to trying to buy players to compete with the top 10 in the PL. To be fair it was such a dramatic change of dynamics building those two teams that he couldn't really be blamed for getting it wrong, maybe in hindsight we should have been ruthless and brought someone in who had the experience higher up in the league, but Sheepy was never going to be that ruthless and you can't blame him for not being so either. |
Totally agree with the stand and the point RE players. My take is that we should never have looked to sign such players, yes we needed to strengthen but that should have been to solidify our top flight place rather than thinking about Europe where we should have enjoyed the ride. Having said that, Inter was a great moment to savour but would trade it in a heartbeat for even Champ status RN. The stands became and albatross round the club's neck that hamstrung us as soon as we went down.... Europe a fun distraction that ultimately didn't help | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:26 - Oct 29 with 2167 views | Swansea_Blue |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:12 - Oct 29 by BlueandTruesince82 | It's so much more complicated than the question. On Sheepshanks, he was a good man who always tried to right by the club and ran it well for many years. However he saddled the club with a big chunk of debt by building two ugly stands when we were PL that ulitmatley have never been full. Really what we should have done is build a new stadium a la Col U thats easy to access because getting into or out of Ipswich for a game is a mare unless you can walk. That said those stands were built with view of increasing attendance and revenue for the long term. Equally when we qualified Europe instead of enjoying the ride we thought we were back in the 70s and spent money on players who were not sustainable (notably Finidi and Sereni) and generally over extended ourselves when we should have banked the windfall. The result was administration and an inability to compete financially and both Sheepshanks and Burnley should be held accounatble for that.... But both did what they thought was right and were trying to better the club so I don't hold it against them Evans. Handled Magiltons sacking badly and that still doesn't sit well with me and as owner and steward in the years since has to take a lot of the blame for where we are but equally if you look at his decisions most are underatdnable and though we may not like to admit it many of us may have done the same IE Keane.... took Sunderland from bottom of the champ to PL in 6 months, a legend of the game with contacts and access that should have allowed us to sign some of the finest young talent in the game (Sadly Keane defined talent as Lee Martin, enough said)... why would you not apooint someone like that...? now I never liked Keane as an appointment but many on here did and understandably.... I thought the grumbling comming out of Sunderlands dressing room was a warning but equally heresay... Keane had money too for the time think of the wages on Priskin, Fullop etc... personally I don't think we ever revovered from Keane and I blame him for our plight more than anyone else.... others will disagree. Jewell... had success with a limited budget, lauded for his time at Wigan, promotions on his CV, why wouldn't you appoint someone like that... yes his record at Derby sucked but he inherited that team and they were doomed before he took over. He ticked many boxes. Mick.... was what we needed. The biggest criticism here is he was allowed to stay too long and had too much power... like Fergie at Man U just not as good. Should have sacked Mick earlier, should have twisted when we were able but the rumour was always that Mick didnt want the money or see the need (Mick subsequently deluded himself into thinking the job was to keep us up not get us up)... had Mick had the money Hurst did things may have been different but the football still awful. Hurst... 96% fans thought him a good appontmet despite many now claiming otherwise (like the number of people who claim they were at live aid vs the no that actually were at live aid) he was young, had sucesss whereever he had been, took an unfancied Shrews side to the brink of promotion and showed he could work on a comparatively smaller budget... he was up and comming, one to watch and fitted the bill of what the fans wanted, why wouldn't you employ someone like that? No one could predict he'd get drunk with power and shatter the dressing room. Lambo TBC but experienced and at this level should get us up remains to be seen if he does Now that's not to excuse Evans.... the signs were there with Keane if you looked, he could have invested more at times and should have sacked Mick far sooner. But he keeps the club afloat, it doesn't make a profit. The tax dodge stuff is a nonsense. In the middle of a pandemic he is vital and I think he has been unlucky. He has made what were on paper sensible appointments that haven't worked out ( we have to confess though that the club and Evans are the common denominator)... I think he has been unlucky with some appointments and often its better to be lucky than good. So both share a portion of it for different reasons for me but ultimately I think Keane ripped the heart and soul from the club (telling KD to off etc) [Post edited 29 Oct 2020 14:32]
|
Thensigns were definitely there with Keane, not least his seeming breakdown during his later time at Sunderland, and all the baggage that came with him. He was an obvious bad fit. I don't know whether Evans was star struck but that was not a wise move, and he compounded it by also bringing in a new Chief Exec with zero football experience at exactly the same time. TWTD! | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:31 - Oct 29 with 2148 views | tractorboy1978 |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:12 - Oct 29 by BlueandTruesince82 | It's so much more complicated than the question. On Sheepshanks, he was a good man who always tried to right by the club and ran it well for many years. However he saddled the club with a big chunk of debt by building two ugly stands when we were PL that ulitmatley have never been full. Really what we should have done is build a new stadium a la Col U thats easy to access because getting into or out of Ipswich for a game is a mare unless you can walk. That said those stands were built with view of increasing attendance and revenue for the long term. Equally when we qualified Europe instead of enjoying the ride we thought we were back in the 70s and spent money on players who were not sustainable (notably Finidi and Sereni) and generally over extended ourselves when we should have banked the windfall. The result was administration and an inability to compete financially and both Sheepshanks and Burnley should be held accounatble for that.... But both did what they thought was right and were trying to better the club so I don't hold it against them Evans. Handled Magiltons sacking badly and that still doesn't sit well with me and as owner and steward in the years since has to take a lot of the blame for where we are but equally if you look at his decisions most are underatdnable and though we may not like to admit it many of us may have done the same IE Keane.... took Sunderland from bottom of the champ to PL in 6 months, a legend of the game with contacts and access that should have allowed us to sign some of the finest young talent in the game (Sadly Keane defined talent as Lee Martin, enough said)... why would you not apooint someone like that...? now I never liked Keane as an appointment but many on here did and understandably.... I thought the grumbling comming out of Sunderlands dressing room was a warning but equally heresay... Keane had money too for the time think of the wages on Priskin, Fullop etc... personally I don't think we ever revovered from Keane and I blame him for our plight more than anyone else.... others will disagree. Jewell... had success with a limited budget, lauded for his time at Wigan, promotions on his CV, why wouldn't you appoint someone like that... yes his record at Derby sucked but he inherited that team and they were doomed before he took over. He ticked many boxes. Mick.... was what we needed. The biggest criticism here is he was allowed to stay too long and had too much power... like Fergie at Man U just not as good. Should have sacked Mick earlier, should have twisted when we were able but the rumour was always that Mick didnt want the money or see the need (Mick subsequently deluded himself into thinking the job was to keep us up not get us up)... had Mick had the money Hurst did things may have been different but the football still awful. Hurst... 96% fans thought him a good appontmet despite many now claiming otherwise (like the number of people who claim they were at live aid vs the no that actually were at live aid) he was young, had sucesss whereever he had been, took an unfancied Shrews side to the brink of promotion and showed he could work on a comparatively smaller budget... he was up and comming, one to watch and fitted the bill of what the fans wanted, why wouldn't you employ someone like that? No one could predict he'd get drunk with power and shatter the dressing room. Lambo TBC but experienced and at this level should get us up remains to be seen if he does Now that's not to excuse Evans.... the signs were there with Keane if you looked, he could have invested more at times and should have sacked Mick far sooner. But he keeps the club afloat, it doesn't make a profit. The tax dodge stuff is a nonsense. In the middle of a pandemic he is vital and I think he has been unlucky. He has made what were on paper sensible appointments that haven't worked out ( we have to confess though that the club and Evans are the common denominator)... I think he has been unlucky with some appointments and often its better to be lucky than good. So both share a portion of it for different reasons for me but ultimately I think Keane ripped the heart and soul from the club (telling KD to off etc) [Post edited 29 Oct 2020 14:32]
|
I'd say building a soulless stadium on the outskirts of Ipswich is the last thing we need. The club has always been at the heart of the Town. | | | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:35 - Oct 29 with 2137 views | hype313 |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:31 - Oct 29 by tractorboy1978 | I'd say building a soulless stadium on the outskirts of Ipswich is the last thing we need. The club has always been at the heart of the Town. |
To be fair from a rail perspective it's ideal, and parking isn't too bad if you know where to go to get a quick escape. i'd hate to have us in a situation where we were somewhere like Ransomes (which was mooted) only to have the Harvester and a Toby carvery for pre match beers. Being in town, considering all the other out of town soulless bowls around, is one of our redeeming features. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:38 - Oct 29 with 2138 views | PrideOfTheEast | In terms of personality I would much rather a Sheepshanks type than Evans running the club. Sheepy is a fan, very well connected and respected within the game and clearly placed a lot of importance on a "one-team" approach. It was clearly unfortunate timing to get relegated at the same time as the ITV Digital collapse and the knock on to the transfer market. Financially, the game has moved on so much so it's difficult to compare to the Evans era in many respects. Obviously the new stands contributed to our downfall. Evans - put in an absolute fortune but with the financial commitment to be competitive having multiplied significantly since 2007 now finds himself unable (or unwilling) to compete with the top 10 at Championship level . Not helped by a series of unfortunate managerial choices. Need to go up this year. | | | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:42 - Oct 29 with 2128 views | patrickswell | I've posted this without reading earlier replies, so apologies if I'm repeating what others have said or missing the blindingly obvious. I don't put much blame on him for the Magilton/Keane/Jewell period. Yes, he could have hired a more experienced footballing figure than Simon Clegg to work alongside them, but he backed those managers financially and to wildly varying degrees, they failed him. It's a sick joke that he gave McCarthy relative buttons to work with and it was the January transfer window of 2016 that told me Evans wasn't backing his best manager to date. The culture of mediocrity that engulfed the latter stages of McCarthy's time here were fostered by Evans and it came back to bite him once Hurst jumped feet first into the job, demolished the patch up job McCarthy had done and decimated the morale of everyone here. I can almost believe that we've reached a point where they want to implement long-term thinking because too many short-terms have been undertaken. It's just a shame it's happening under a manager who's, through his own failings, already lost a substantial amount of support and in a footballing landscape which could see 21st in the Championship as the summit of our ambitions due to something Evans couldn't control (COVID) compounding the failure of all the things he could have controlled here. | | | |
How much is Evans to blame? on 16:34 - Oct 29 with 2048 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
How much is Evans to blame? on 14:41 - Oct 29 by Guthrum | Pretty spot on. Also agree that Keane is the man who did the initial damage and we have been firefighting ever since. Took us from 9th to flirting with relegation, blew Evans' promotion budget and caused a lot of disruption off the pitch. He just didn't know how to run ITFC. |
The damage done by Keane was pretty devastating. However, MM had pretty much repaired all of it only for the next appointment to pretty much repeat the same damage. We need a repair job of the same proportions that MM did and we need to then build from it. | |
| |
How much is Evans to blame? on 16:35 - Oct 29 with 2044 views | Swansea_Blue |
How much is Evans to blame? on 15:31 - Oct 29 by tractorboy1978 | I'd say building a soulless stadium on the outskirts of Ipswich is the last thing we need. The club has always been at the heart of the Town. |
Agreed. It's a pretty tidy ground now - plenty good enough. Needs a bit of a clean and I'd cheer up the bare concrete in the concourses with a lick of paint or some panelling though. | |
| |
| |