| Why FIVE years? 09:37 - Feb 27 with 2125 views | SamWhiteUK |
I get that Evans wanted to show that he had faith in Lambert and the long-term plan, but where in the hell did the number five come from? That must be one of the longest contracts ever signed at this level of football. Why not a 2 or 3 year deal, with extensions?
If Evans has to cut it short, which he really should do, he would look a lot less of a pillock, and lose less money, if it were only 2 years early as opposed to 4.
Maybe a five year deal is linked to the five year plan, which I'm not convinced we've ever left year one of. |  | | |  |
| Why FIVE years? on 09:40 - Feb 27 with 2102 views | hatch |
I get topic deja vu on here.
I feel like we have spent most of this year reading threads on broadly the same 3 or 4 topics. |  | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 09:40 - Feb 27 with 2102 views | Guthrum |
Much like the Soviets, he likes a Five Year Plan. |  |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 09:53 - Feb 27 with 2059 views | homer_123 |
| Why FIVE years? on 09:40 - Feb 27 by Guthrum |
Much like the Soviets, he likes a Five Year Plan. |
[OUCH!] |  |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 12:55 - Feb 27 with 1985 views | LB27 |
It really is one of the worlds greatest mysteries... |  | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:16 - Feb 27 with 1957 views | BLUEBEAT |
As proved by Evans already, 5 year plans are easily forgotten, changed and cancelled.
Announcing such a plan can give an immediate response (without having to actually do anything there and then), calm down situations and deflect attention from other more pressing matters.
Generally, 5YPs are based on plotting economic growth over limited time periods, generally through the use of quotas. They are a Communist invention. The Soviet Union’s first 5YP (1928—32) was implemented by Stalin and concentrated on developing heavy industry and collectivising agriculture at the cost of a drastic fall in consumer goods. In ITFC terms, this is basing the future purely on the youth system and so needs time to develop whilst all other revenues continue to fall. |  |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:21 - Feb 27 with 1946 views | BigManBlue |
| Why FIVE years? on 09:40 - Feb 27 by Guthrum |
Much like the Soviets, he likes a Five Year Plan. |
And much like the USSR we'll accomplish it 18 months early, then realise that everything we've produced was terrible quality... |  |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:23 - Feb 27 with 1938 views | braveblue |
Incompetence. Like the rest of his tenure. |  | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:35 - Feb 27 with 1917 views | No9 |
maybe the 5 year plan is a standard introduce by Sheepshanks? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Why FIVE years? on 13:37 - Feb 27 with 1916 views | Herbivore |
We don't have a 5 year plan do we? I think we did under Roy or Jewell or maybe Mick, but pretty sure it's now just a 5 point plan. |  |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:39 - Feb 27 with 1909 views | PhilTWTD |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:37 - Feb 27 by Herbivore |
We don't have a 5 year plan do we? I think we did under Roy or Jewell or maybe Mick, but pretty sure it's now just a 5 point plan. |
Five-year plan was under Burley. As you say, was a five-point plan which was announced a couple of years back. |  | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:39 - Feb 27 with 1905 views | footers |
| Why FIVE years? on 09:40 - Feb 27 by Guthrum |
Much like the Soviets, he likes a Five Year Plan. |
Is that why we signed Tito Nsiala? |  |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:40 - Feb 27 with 1897 views | evansblue |
I told my mates off back in the day for running on the pitch and joining in the Duncan out demo.
I stuck up for Mick until I was blue in the face. I know it was dull football but his hands were tied. I also appreciate after Norwich away there was no going back. I thought Hurst could have had a bit longer. After five years of MM it was always going to take time.
BUT, Lambert is the most clueless and useless manager in my time supporting Ipswich. We were 3 points off 4th bottom when he joined, he has had three transfer windows, he works with them every day on the training ground and we are a shambles. I have never wanted a manager out but I want him gone ASAP. He has got away lightly and the minute anyone questions him he gets all aggressive. The bloke got a £3m pay off from Villa so he doesn't need the cash. Get someone new in, anyone. Someone for whom this job means something. someone with a plan and someone who cares. |  | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:45 - Feb 27 with 1873 views | No9 |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:40 - Feb 27 by evansblue |
I told my mates off back in the day for running on the pitch and joining in the Duncan out demo.
I stuck up for Mick until I was blue in the face. I know it was dull football but his hands were tied. I also appreciate after Norwich away there was no going back. I thought Hurst could have had a bit longer. After five years of MM it was always going to take time.
BUT, Lambert is the most clueless and useless manager in my time supporting Ipswich. We were 3 points off 4th bottom when he joined, he has had three transfer windows, he works with them every day on the training ground and we are a shambles. I have never wanted a manager out but I want him gone ASAP. He has got away lightly and the minute anyone questions him he gets all aggressive. The bloke got a £3m pay off from Villa so he doesn't need the cash. Get someone new in, anyone. Someone for whom this job means something. someone with a plan and someone who cares. |
So to put into perspective; At ITFC-
John Duncan win record = 45.3%
Mick McCarthy win record = 37.6% | | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:48 - Feb 27 with 1858 views | Herbivore |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:45 - Feb 27 by No9 |
So to put into perspective; At ITFC-
John Duncan win record = 45.3%
Mick McCarthy win record = 37.6% |
You need help. | |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:48 - Feb 27 with 1856 views | BigManBlue |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:45 - Feb 27 by No9 |
So to put into perspective; At ITFC-
John Duncan win record = 45.3%
Mick McCarthy win record = 37.6% |
And according to trusty wikipedia Lambert is on 28%, which is the real issue I assume? | |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:49 - Feb 27 with 1856 views | evansblue |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:45 - Feb 27 by No9 |
So to put into perspective; At ITFC-
John Duncan win record = 45.3%
Mick McCarthy win record = 37.6% |
What's Lamberts I haven't seen it ? | | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:56 - Feb 27 with 1838 views | evansblue |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:48 - Feb 27 by BigManBlue |
And according to trusty wikipedia Lambert is on 28%, which is the real issue I assume? |
Ok 28. Cheers.
I don't believe a word he says, the rotation was arrogant and confusing for all and bringing on Sears in the 90th minute v Oxford summed him up.
Anyway he won't be here too much longer. The fans rule and have found him out. | | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 14:40 - Feb 27 with 1782 views | SamWhiteUK |
| Why FIVE years? on 13:37 - Feb 27 by Herbivore |
We don't have a 5 year plan do we? I think we did under Roy or Jewell or maybe Mick, but pretty sure it's now just a 5 point plan. |
Whoops, yeah, you're right. What point are we on now? | | | |
| Why FIVE years? on 14:41 - Feb 27 with 1779 views | footers |
| Why FIVE years? on 14:40 - Feb 27 by SamWhiteUK |
Whoops, yeah, you're right. What point are we on now? |
We're on 'What's the point?' | |
| |
| Why FIVE years? on 14:51 - Feb 27 with 1760 views | Doctor_Earman |
There's pretty much zero chance that Lambert will see out that contract. Evans will have to act in order to stop ticket sales from plummeting. It will be a massive U-turn and about face from Evans and will be yet another example of his utter incompetence. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
