| Cook speaks 11:06 - Jan 5 with 5242 views | Dubtractor |
Still pretending that the end of last season doesn't count then...
|  |
| |  |
| Cook speaks on 11:59 - Jan 5 with 1555 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
Cant the man count?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? |  |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:01 - Jan 5 with 1531 views | J2BLUE |
Only 20 games. Half a season... |  |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:04 - Jan 5 with 1527 views | stonojnr |
| Cook speaks on 11:33 - Jan 5 by clive_baker |
Most on here were saying the same earlier this season. Never washed with me, he inherited some good players, some key players like Downes getting back to fitness, and we were on the coattails of the playoffs with a kind run in on paper. Yet we got worse, much worse, stubbornly persevering with a system that didn't suit his personnel and throwing them under the bus at every opportunity.
The back end of last season was dismal, it was never a free hit to me and shouldn't have been viewed as such. |
that was the thing that set my alarm bells ringing, because youd think regardless of the setup you find yourself in, youd want to do your best in your job, not just give up a season like that.
and Ill never tire of pointing out Town only finished 5pts from the playoffs, there were definitely 6pts extra available in the games he managed he could have got Town into 6th spot, not likely to progress to the final though you never know, stranger things have happened.
But then this season is a totally different conversation isnt it, because its well I got a team I didnt rate in the playoffs last season, this is a team I do rate give me the time.
oh well if he is incapable of owning his mistakes, he will afford us the opportunity of watching him make the same ones again. |  | | |
| Cook speaks on 12:28 - Jan 5 with 1409 views | hype313 |
He's painting a very different picture to the one that played out, I don't blame him as he still has ambitions of managing again, but his tactical nous was non existent and he was losing most battles.
Still think he is a good guy and wanted him to do well as he is very infectious, but seemed like the wrong time, wrong place and wrong project.
I also do wonder if he works better in an environment where clubs are the underdogs and don't have much expectations, he seems to shine through in those places, the first place he ends up with everything a manager could wish for and he looked like a rabbit in headlights.
And clearly, from what the players have been saying since McKenna came in about training, it's obviously at a far higher level then under Cooks tenure. [Post edited 5 Jan 2022 12:29]
|  |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 with 1408 views | PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |  | | |
| Cook speaks on 12:39 - Jan 5 with 1351 views | hype313 |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
You do have to wonder if conversations were had post takeover between Cook and Ashton, with Ashton saying "this is how we are going to operate going forward, understand it's not what you signed up for and haven't worked under these parameters before, are you happy to work in this environment?
Presumably Cook was happy to, so to now say he struggled with Ashton installing a performance team, seems a little disingenuous from Cook for me. | |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:42 - Jan 5 with 1339 views | Ftnfwest |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
this reminds me of the lady asking the question at the forum meeting about 'who are all the men in black suits?' which seems quite pertinent now. |  | | |
| Cook speaks on 12:44 - Jan 5 with 1318 views | wkj |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
Did we really need to bring in 19 players in one transfer window without having a cohesive squad for the preseason?
I think the summer operation was far too aggressive too soon- something Cook was surely either in control or highly influential in.
Also looking at a few other decisions he made that bothered me
Bailey Celements as a regular starter following a decent cup game...
Loaning in Barry without giving him much of a chance
Letting Wilson go before having replacements
Rigidly using a 4321 when the dominant formation in L1 seemed to be variants of 532 |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Cook speaks on 12:46 - Jan 5 with 1301 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
There were no signs of it getting any better, and he didnt have a well regarded / experienced coaching staff that he had during his successful spell. | |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:46 - Jan 5 with 1296 views | PJH |
| Cook speaks on 12:39 - Jan 5 by hype313 |
You do have to wonder if conversations were had post takeover between Cook and Ashton, with Ashton saying "this is how we are going to operate going forward, understand it's not what you signed up for and haven't worked under these parameters before, are you happy to work in this environment?
Presumably Cook was happy to, so to now say he struggled with Ashton installing a performance team, seems a little disingenuous from Cook for me. |
Cook was full of praise for Ashton and the wonderful things that were happening behind the scenes, wasn't he?
In retrospect, it seems to me that it would have been better for everyone if Cook had gone when the new owners came in.
He apparently knew nothing about the takeover or whether they wanted him, they complicated things by saying that he would have been their first choice which presumably was true. |  | | |
| Cook speaks on 12:48 - Jan 5 with 1278 views | hype313 |
| Cook speaks on 12:46 - Jan 5 by PJH |
Cook was full of praise for Ashton and the wonderful things that were happening behind the scenes, wasn't he?
In retrospect, it seems to me that it would have been better for everyone if Cook had gone when the new owners came in.
He apparently knew nothing about the takeover or whether they wanted him, they complicated things by saying that he would have been their first choice which presumably was true. |
Indeed, I do wonder if Cook was the exact appointment needed under a ME ownership, but not the right fit under Gamechanger, and the takeover so soon after his appointment seemed to cloud everything. | |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:49 - Jan 5 with 1279 views | Dubtractor |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
I think my main gripe Phil, compounded by the additional clips that Sitters has shared, is that he doesn't seem willing to accept any responsibility for his own failings here.
In fact his response to the lack of wins over his time here is almost a "well you can prove anything with stats" kind of response.
I'm a pretty patient supporter really, but I kept seeing the same issues time and again under Cook, and I don't honestly think it was going to work out for him and us together. [Post edited 5 Jan 2022 12:50]
| |
| |
| Cook speaks on 12:52 - Jan 5 with 1253 views | JDB23 |
| Cook speaks on 12:39 - Jan 5 by hype313 |
You do have to wonder if conversations were had post takeover between Cook and Ashton, with Ashton saying "this is how we are going to operate going forward, understand it's not what you signed up for and haven't worked under these parameters before, are you happy to work in this environment?
Presumably Cook was happy to, so to now say he struggled with Ashton installing a performance team, seems a little disingenuous from Cook for me. |
Cook himself just said he should have been more forceful after the takeover and probably shouldn’t have stayed here past the summer. He probably knew himself that he couldn’t work 100% under those conditions but tried to placate Ashton as this was an amazing job for him.
Cook had enough time to see where the club was heading and if it didn’t align with his way of working he should have left. Would have been extremely hard for the owners to come in and sack Cook after a couple weeks, especially if he was making all the right noises with them.
We now have a setup where everyone is on the same page so hopefully we will see the benefits of that. | | | |
| Cook speaks on 12:58 - Jan 5 with 1223 views | Hipsterectomy |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
Cook implies it came as a surprise to him that it was success at all cost (promotion or play offs throughout the season most likely). I wonder what his objectives were from Evans. And did he really think these new owners who have almost limitless funds available at this level wouldn’t be demanding success?
I think it was harsh and I wish he had been a success here, but I can’t see how he was surprised that his job was in any danger. |  |
| Walter Smith's Barmy Army |
| |
| Cook speaks on 13:04 - Jan 5 with 1188 views | DanTheMan |
| Cook speaks on 12:49 - Jan 5 by Dubtractor |
I think my main gripe Phil, compounded by the additional clips that Sitters has shared, is that he doesn't seem willing to accept any responsibility for his own failings here.
In fact his response to the lack of wins over his time here is almost a "well you can prove anything with stats" kind of response.
I'm a pretty patient supporter really, but I kept seeing the same issues time and again under Cook, and I don't honestly think it was going to work out for him and us together. [Post edited 5 Jan 2022 12:50]
|
I did enjoy him bemoaning stats whilst backing up his point by cherry picking stats... |  |
| |
| Cook speaks on 13:04 - Jan 5 with 1186 views | xrayspecs |
Agree with other posters that the coaching team appointed by Cook may have lacked the experience/qualities he had in his previous roles.
A few other points.
Cook was very rigid with his formation and playing approach, even when he did not have the players to fit his system. Fraser and Aluko out wide, but are not pacy wingers. Celina equally wants to play through the middle not wide left. Rather than getting the best out of the available players, he has tried to force a playing style which does not necessarily suit them.
Our recruitment this summer was at times indiscriminate. Fraser, Aluko, Chaplin and Celina are all best suited through the middle, why do we need all of them?. I also question how the use of stats informed our decision making. Fraser was cited as the most number of assists in the league last season. Burgess the most headed clearances. While the latter can head the ball, he is not much use at the other aspects of the game.
Cook has also said that when he won previous promotions, his side was the best / one of the best teams in the league, and a lot better than the rest of the division. L1 this season is arguably more competitive and a bigger challenge that Cook had previously faced. | | | |
| Cook speaks on 13:05 - Jan 5 with 1183 views | Churchman |
| Cook speaks on 12:46 - Jan 5 by PJH |
Cook was full of praise for Ashton and the wonderful things that were happening behind the scenes, wasn't he?
In retrospect, it seems to me that it would have been better for everyone if Cook had gone when the new owners came in.
He apparently knew nothing about the takeover or whether they wanted him, they complicated things by saying that he would have been their first choice which presumably was true. |
At the time, it felt important to keep Cook. A high performer at this miserable level there was no reason not to. But you are right. There was in retrospect every reason for him to move on.
Yes, he was full of support for what Ashton was doing and he noticeably is not taking much responsibility for what is in all probability another season lost and indeed the loss of his own job. I can’t say I blame him. He wants to be as ‘clean’ as possible for his next job so everything has to be somebody else’s fault.
I hope he shuts up about it now and moves on. I wish him well. |  | | |
| Cook speaks on 13:07 - Jan 5 with 1169 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| Cook speaks on 13:04 - Jan 5 by DanTheMan |
I did enjoy him bemoaning stats whilst backing up his point by cherry picking stats... |
Ha ha, 100% agree with this. | |
| |
| Cook speaks on 13:07 - Jan 5 with 1173 views | Illinoisblue |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
Do we know in more detail what Cook’s issues with the sports performance dept. were? I’m assuming it was the sports science folks saying player X is not fit to play and Cook, bring more old school, disagreeing with that. Maybe that’s too simplistic but would love to know more |  |
| |
| Cook speaks on 13:11 - Jan 5 with 1172 views | PhilTWTD |
| Cook speaks on 12:58 - Jan 5 by Hipsterectomy |
Cook implies it came as a surprise to him that it was success at all cost (promotion or play offs throughout the season most likely). I wonder what his objectives were from Evans. And did he really think these new owners who have almost limitless funds available at this level wouldn’t be demanding success?
I think it was harsh and I wish he had been a success here, but I can’t see how he was surprised that his job was in any danger. |
I think he probably thought, from comments which were made during the close season, that there would be more leeway after the summer business and the lack of a pre-season for a number of those that came in.
I don't think he thought his job wasn't in any danger but I think he expected to be given longer to get things on track, that was presumably the way the position had been sold to him. As I say, I think it was a little harsh to sack him at the point they did. I expect him to come into a decent job soon enough at our level or the division above and do well there. | | | |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:16 - Jan 5 with 1139 views | unstableblue |
| Cook speaks on 12:33 - Jan 5 by PhilTWTD |
I'm not sure that's fair. I think it's more he's saying the changes made over the summer were judged too quickly, which personally I'd agree with, and there was little clamour for his sacking when it came. I'd still have backed him to get things right, given his history elsewhere, but evidently that wasn't going to happen quickly enough for the ownership/MA.
However, given his comments about the performance department, you have to question whether there was an inevitability that the stucture put in was one within which PC could have worked long term (although I suspect everything might have felt a bit easier to all concerned if there had been a longer-term upturn in results). One of the attractions of the job he took under ME was that he would be able to manage in what he saw as a unfettered manner, something which wasn't how he saw it post-takeover. |
.... that our destiny is very much in Ashton's hands and the structure he has in mind for the club. And we must all hope and pray that the structure and the Ashton relationship is something McKenna can work within, and have the control he needs. But Ashton has always been the risk with the gamechanger project, period.
I posted a few similar views earlier - Don’t agree with a lot of what Cook is saying, but the performance team commen by unstableblue 5 Jan 2022 11:53… is very interesting
First off Cook states that if he’d known that the project was only 20 games to achieve success he’d have not taken it on. I don’t agree - the reason he was sacked was a lack of visible progression in the playing system and the effectiveness.
I still think Cook should have had longer, and the poor cup form clouded judgment in the board and fans. Wycombe away remains our most cohesive performance and Sunderland away was strong. Crewe had some merits.
But McKenna has already showed tweaks in system and set up that cook failed to deliver. Cook was slavish to 4-2-3-1, and it relied on good wing backs and high performance across the team which he was just not getting. I still think we’d have got better results against Charlton, Wigan and Sunderland at home than with McGreal. But cook has to be honest that the cup performances and many league just weren’t good enough.
Most telling from the interview is the comments about Ashton installing his own performance department and the friction and disconnect to cooks team and way of thinking. That is not good. And it is critical that McKenna feels he is going to get value from that team. Rolls does not have a good reputation.
The difference is that McKenna perhaps expects such a department and knew it was part of him joining.
Gills game needs to show continued improvement.
I would have given Cook till Lincoln, 2022. He was sacked because of the Rotherham result, and what was deemed a weak response against Crewe, exasperated by poor showings in two meaningless cup ties - was that fair? I'm still not sure... think Sunderland away was strong, and we looked more cohesive than we did at home recently, but we lost, and Rotherham was really really bad.
Hoping that our luck has turned with McKenna, and he is the right man for Ashton's plan. |  |
| |
| Cook speaks on 13:16 - Jan 5 with 1133 views | RobTheMonk |
He got sacked because we're midtable in League 1 aspiring to be like Rotherham. |  | | |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:20 - Jan 5 with 1107 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:16 - Jan 5 by unstableblue |
.... that our destiny is very much in Ashton's hands and the structure he has in mind for the club. And we must all hope and pray that the structure and the Ashton relationship is something McKenna can work within, and have the control he needs. But Ashton has always been the risk with the gamechanger project, period.
I posted a few similar views earlier - Don’t agree with a lot of what Cook is saying, but the performance team commen by unstableblue 5 Jan 2022 11:53… is very interesting
First off Cook states that if he’d known that the project was only 20 games to achieve success he’d have not taken it on. I don’t agree - the reason he was sacked was a lack of visible progression in the playing system and the effectiveness.
I still think Cook should have had longer, and the poor cup form clouded judgment in the board and fans. Wycombe away remains our most cohesive performance and Sunderland away was strong. Crewe had some merits.
But McKenna has already showed tweaks in system and set up that cook failed to deliver. Cook was slavish to 4-2-3-1, and it relied on good wing backs and high performance across the team which he was just not getting. I still think we’d have got better results against Charlton, Wigan and Sunderland at home than with McGreal. But cook has to be honest that the cup performances and many league just weren’t good enough.
Most telling from the interview is the comments about Ashton installing his own performance department and the friction and disconnect to cooks team and way of thinking. That is not good. And it is critical that McKenna feels he is going to get value from that team. Rolls does not have a good reputation.
The difference is that McKenna perhaps expects such a department and knew it was part of him joining.
Gills game needs to show continued improvement.
I would have given Cook till Lincoln, 2022. He was sacked because of the Rotherham result, and what was deemed a weak response against Crewe, exasperated by poor showings in two meaningless cup ties - was that fair? I'm still not sure... think Sunderland away was strong, and we looked more cohesive than we did at home recently, but we lost, and Rotherham was really really bad.
Hoping that our luck has turned with McKenna, and he is the right man for Ashton's plan. |
It's not just Ashton's structure, it is the structure of many (and increasingly more) clubs. People seem to suggest we are doing something novel but we really aren't. Many successful clubs have been run like this for years. | | | |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:29 - Jan 5 with 1082 views | Vic |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:16 - Jan 5 by unstableblue |
.... that our destiny is very much in Ashton's hands and the structure he has in mind for the club. And we must all hope and pray that the structure and the Ashton relationship is something McKenna can work within, and have the control he needs. But Ashton has always been the risk with the gamechanger project, period.
I posted a few similar views earlier - Don’t agree with a lot of what Cook is saying, but the performance team commen by unstableblue 5 Jan 2022 11:53… is very interesting
First off Cook states that if he’d known that the project was only 20 games to achieve success he’d have not taken it on. I don’t agree - the reason he was sacked was a lack of visible progression in the playing system and the effectiveness.
I still think Cook should have had longer, and the poor cup form clouded judgment in the board and fans. Wycombe away remains our most cohesive performance and Sunderland away was strong. Crewe had some merits.
But McKenna has already showed tweaks in system and set up that cook failed to deliver. Cook was slavish to 4-2-3-1, and it relied on good wing backs and high performance across the team which he was just not getting. I still think we’d have got better results against Charlton, Wigan and Sunderland at home than with McGreal. But cook has to be honest that the cup performances and many league just weren’t good enough.
Most telling from the interview is the comments about Ashton installing his own performance department and the friction and disconnect to cooks team and way of thinking. That is not good. And it is critical that McKenna feels he is going to get value from that team. Rolls does not have a good reputation.
The difference is that McKenna perhaps expects such a department and knew it was part of him joining.
Gills game needs to show continued improvement.
I would have given Cook till Lincoln, 2022. He was sacked because of the Rotherham result, and what was deemed a weak response against Crewe, exasperated by poor showings in two meaningless cup ties - was that fair? I'm still not sure... think Sunderland away was strong, and we looked more cohesive than we did at home recently, but we lost, and Rotherham was really really bad.
Hoping that our luck has turned with McKenna, and he is the right man for Ashton's plan. |
The difference between KM and PC is that the order has come in knowing the structure he has to work in, whereas PC had no idea. |  |
| |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:31 - Jan 5 with 1071 views | unstableblue |
| Bang on Phil... and highlights the key point.... on 13:20 - Jan 5 by tractorboy1978 |
It's not just Ashton's structure, it is the structure of many (and increasingly more) clubs. People seem to suggest we are doing something novel but we really aren't. Many successful clubs have been run like this for years. |
Totally agree.
I should have said the structure and personnel that Ashton has created.
And to be fair to Ashton, he's chosen McKenna to be a person within that structure, and so far so good.
Albeit I would hope McKenna has a lot of say in his immediate reports... I thought in one comment our new manager stated he wasn't involved in one... but could be making that up | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
