RicoS321

Fucking Nicola. Down the Hawthorn, then queuing outside Soul. Don't know what she was expecting.

Aye, if it were me, I'd have Campbell alongside Ferguson with mcginn in front and take it to st Johnstone full pelt. Especially as they're dicking about with a 3-4-3 at the moment. I wouldn't write Bryson off, but I also wouldn't give a fuck if he never played for us again. The conservative part, for me, is not choosing Bryson over Campbell, it's choosing three midfielders who's strengths lie in sitting deep or going box to box and shoe horning one further forward. Bryson wasn't suited to that role, but Campbell would be pish there as well and Ferguson can play there but it doesn't make the best of his abilities. If Wright hadn't turned out to be pish, it was tailor made for him. Maybe hedges? Fuck knows. We've got a plethora of players that don't quite fit.

I'm guessing that will change this weekend. I thought we'd see something from Bryson, he's a proven player. I'd be putting him in the McNamara and Naismith category of very good professional fitba'r who's just lost it after a fairly minor injury/run of injuries. I wouldn't even say he was a poor signing like a lot of the others, as he had no real injury history, keeps himself trim and is a professional. I expected him to be like Robson in terms of impact (different style of player). I'd like to see him get a couple of more appearances against some of the pisher sides just to be certain, but it doesn't look good for him. One thing I'd add, is that there is no way he should be playing high up the park like that. Needs to be along side Ferguson or just not playing.

Anyone having issues with the reply function on Android? If I quote someone and then decide I want to remove that quote, there is no option to do so. It remains on the thread for eternity too, so you can only make the mistake once and be forever unable to respond. Her nae missing much of course, just some inane shite I wanted to post.

Classic. Are you superior in heterosexuality? Or do you surpass him in your homosexuality? How does that work? I don't need you to tell me who to engage with on the internet, nor how to, but thanks for the advice I'm sure you mean well.

A cracking summation! The annoying thing about Gleeson is that I (and others, I'm not some genius) picked it up within his first pre-season game. He was a Rob Milsom type, distinctly average and always playing within themselves. In fairness, you generally have to attend a game where they're playing to notice the full extent of it, because you miss a lot on the TV. Players like Ryan Jack can seem like they're not doing a lot at times, but when you're there you seem them tucking in to replace missing fullbacks and stretching the game. Gleeson played like one of those "modern" players you see playing fives where they've learned their entire game from watching someone on the TV. Running full pelt at a centre back to "take the ball off them", so that they look like they're the main man, rather than just taking a couple of steps back and receiving the ball easily because you've made the space. Gleeson was ponderous, put his defenders under pressure by standing too close to them, didn't cover his fullbacks and had shite movement (he had one okay game at Pittodrie against someone, can't remember who). He was way out of his depth. If I had scouted him, I'd have spotted it straight away too, and almost anyone who's watched fitba regularly and played at any level (even fives) would have seen it had they been looking solely at him (which was what scouts are supposed to do!). I wouldn't blame McInnes, necessarily, for Gleeson that is where the club has to have a far better network of scouts and McInnes should be tasked with requesting a position and final sign off. That would reduce the nonsense that we keep getting where we're overloaded in parts of the pitch because Deek really liked McGeouch or whoever. McInnes is utterly to blame for Tansey, Storey, Main, Morris, May etc. who were playing in our league and blatantly didn't have the attributes to play for a McInnes team. Tansey's movement was shite for ICT, Storey was a fucking car crash of a fitba'r, and Main not much better.

Brilliant. You've definitely got humour nailed too.

I don't gradually screw it down, I usually have it hot for a minute to gie masel a dicht and then turn it straight to freezing, so it's pretty much instant cold (I don't really need the hot, I just find it better for cleaning my ba's and the like). As I say, I've never really been that bothered by the cold, so I found it quite easy. Started doing about 15 seconds of cold roughly, then within a couple of days I just stayed in, as once yer beyond the first shock you can pretty much hack it. I'd say I do no less than two minutes of cold, no more than three. Seems about right. I'm not sure it does anything good or bad, but I got really bad flu at the turn of the year when I wasn't doing it, so I started again a few weeks after. Anecdotal, of course!

I don't think he's meant to be a Shinnie though. I had fairly high hopes for him as he's quite a fitness freak apparently. Obviously that only works if yer nae injured all the time. His general attributes were that he was box to box and didn't hide, I'm not sure what happened to those at the weekend (happy to write off last season for him). I think he struggled high up the park and was chasing shadows a lot of the game, I don't think that's a good role for him. I'd have him alongside Ferguson for a few games with McGinn in front or a front two. Same as usual, the three midfielders together never really works (at a push, Ferguson higher up the park would be better). We just don't need to accomodate all three (and fucking McGeouch). We should be using the strongest two and an attacking minded player in front who drops back when needed, nae a holding midfielder going forward occasionally. Very difficult to tell like, given how far off the pace we were. Everyone was pish. I don't see what others saw in Hernandez either, he looked volatile at the back and average going forward (although a massive improvement on his debut). Playing Kent onside for his first one on one was primary school.

Or he'll finish third, nine points ahead of the others and gets to two finals and gets another chance. I think a lot will depend on the Covid situation. You want a new manager bounce when making a change and I'm not sure that will have the same affect without fans in the stands. The excitement just won't be there. I'm no optimist, but I have a feeling that Deek lifting the Scottish cup in May - our fourth trophy of the season - will complete a new era for the country; unilateral independence having been declared, following the Holyrood election two days' earlier.

Of course DNA was, and nearly everyone on here said so. It also has fuck all to do with McInnes leaving and nobody has argued that point or competed to be a superfan. That's why it is a straw man. Just like you adding the bit about Milne in. That's a totally different argument. A very valid one that virtually nobody here would disagree with. Even the argument about Calderwood is superfluous, most folk were in agreement that Calderwood was sacked correctly and had likely been suggesting it in the lead up. I think you'd struggle to find a person on this forum that didn't think that way. There's no blindness about McInnes, you're presenting it as if we're suggesting that McInnes is the answer to all our problems. Most on here are recognising his successes and highlighting his obvious flaws. I'm suggesting ways that the club could mitigate those and help the manager, whilst building a strong foundation for the next manager and you're suggesting that we just find the perfect manager. I think your way is unrealistic and I think it'll lead to us having to find another manager, and another manager in perpetuity. If anything, your way is to continue the Milne approach. Throwing all responsibility on the shoulders of one man is an idiotic way to run a club as has been shown on every occasion in the last 25 years. Even more so when the pool of managers available are no better than McInnes. I want the guy to step up, do what we're paying him to do and have the club do everything in their power to force him to get better in the areas that he's failing in - for him to take responsibility for them. Start by removing him from most of the recruitment work, the youth setup and sports science areas and instead give him targets that he must meet (50% success rate on integrating signings into the first eleven, 2 youth team players introduced in any given season with X no of minutes, 1 trophy every 2-3 years etc). There has to be no doubt, and no complaints when he goes and it has to be this season if things haven't improved. You're trying to paint it as a black and white issue, I don't believe it is. For the record, if we'd finished last season and remained in fourth (or worse), I'd have wanted McInnes to leave. The pandemic either let him off the hook, or it didn't allow him to prove folk wrong, so he gets the best part of this season instead.

Who are the bang average teams? The huns? They're not an average team and you'd have to have a fair bias to suggest so. They're a good team, with several good players. To me, that shows the lack of nuance in your argument. Your pish about superfans, not expecting success and happy with mediocrity highlights that. Nobody is actually defending McInnes on this thread, if you read it. They're just not calling for him to be sacked. There's a massive fucking difference. Every post in this thread is critical of all or part of McInnes' game and of the club's approach. Every single one. Either argue against those individual points or don't, bit don't throw up straw men about DNA or some other shite. You're arguing that we should sack the manager after one game of the season when we're playing with zero crowds and zero income. The onus is on you to explain in detail why that's a good idea and what we'd do next.

I've never suggested that the refs or the SFA or the SPFL are against us, but only an idiot would suggest that money isn't the overwhelming factor in no other club winning the league in 35 years, coinciding with the 1000% increase in income inequality. To answer your question though, I don't know if he's fit for purpose, but to me the evidence suggests there's a good chance that he could be, or at least as good a chance as any other manager in the league or that I can think of. I think there are areas of his management that can be improved and that it's the club's responsibility to force that. If that fails, move on. I want to see what he can do under pressure and I think he's done enough over the years to get the opportunity. There's zero flowery management spik, just actual management suggestions. You seem to think that the gap between us and the scum is so small that a good manager will drag us kicking and screaming to league victory (in the deila years, that would have been 5 additional wins and around 40 odd goals - not insignificant). I think that the entire club needs to get its shit together to give the manager the sort of opportunity Ferguson was afforded (less the massive gap in funding, obviously). I want there to be zero doubt when McInnes goes that he knows why and we know why and we've given him the exact same setup as the next guy. Otherwise, unless we get extremely lucky, then we'll just be having the same conversation again in a year with the next guy, who we've handed the keys to the club and left all our shit at his door. In the ridiculously unlikely chance we get the next Ferguson, the club needs to be ready, and it definitely isn't. Cormack has a fair amount of work to do before taking the easy option of ditching the manager.

It's true. Better if you are outside a lot of the day though and active. I have cold showers most days in the summer, maybe from March until October, but nae so much in the winter because I sit in an office all day. Seems to just improve the circulation a bit and helps my recovery from hayfever symptoms. Been a lot more regular with it during the pandemic as it's apparently good for fighting colds and the like. I could definitely hack a walk up a hill in a t shirt in November, but nae chance I could sit through 90 minutes in January in the same outfit. Have to keep moving, basically.

Aye, doesn't surprise me, he had to completely overhaul everything when he came in because we had let it get in such a state. The data folk, sports science etc were all McInnes appointments as well as youth (think the scouting preceded him). It didn't bode well for any succession planning and that's always been a huge problem. Cormack mentioned it in one of his first interviews so I'm guessing he has a handle on it, or is at least trying to get a handle on it. We need to get our shite together well before we get rid of McInnes that's for sure and get a defined strategy in place that transcends the manager. We can't be employing a new manager next month then telling them that, by the way, they have to have at least four youngsters in the starting eleven. I understand why people want rid of McInnes but the club has to be in the right place and the timing right. Give McInnes a chance to manage on our terms and set the terms of his employment so that there can be no excuses. Don't just do it on a whim like Milne did on every occasion.

Agree, but not sure why that would be McInnes' fault? I've been saying since he first came in when we got sheerin in and ditched every youth player that we needed a strategy on youth development. That has to transcend the manager, always. The board have to set the limit on purchased squad players to ensure that the youngsters get opportunity. McInnes' job is to win as many games as possible, which is easier to do with a squad of experienced players than blooding youngsters at difficult times. There's a direct conflict, so it falls to Milne, now Cormack, to set the parameters to force his hand. I'd probably argue that all three of our January signings crossed the acceptable level of senior/youth ratio for very little benefit, so I'm not convinced Cormack has it right either. Virtanen, Campbell and Ross could have substituted for Hernandez, McGeouch and Kennedy. It wouldn't have been in the comfort zone though, which is where McInnes needs to be taken from.

Failing to beat Ronnie Deila was because our squad wasn't good enough. It's been done to death. We beat the tims twice, Motherwell the only other team before the league was over. If Milne had gone for it and taken a couple of million punt in January on 3-4 players, I think we'd have won it. We got Simon Church. I don't think he'll succeed post-AFC either, but mainly because he's on a downward trajectory and I think he'll leave us on a low. If he'd left for the Hun, I think he would have been more succesful than Gerrard. As you say, the results don't lie, and his results are exceptionally good for the dons. It's his performances that have been pish (post 16/17). Saying he'll never succeed in management is too bland a statement to mean anything. He could easily go to a club like West Brom and do well, he's a good club manager. His style is unsuited to winning cups or causing shocks, but he's very good at building points and the background professional stuff within the club. He could easily have been as succesful as someone like Walter Smith for example, and in a very similar fashion. He's definitely as good a manager, but I don't think he'll ever get to be in that position. Smith looked out for number one and always left clubs on a high and joined clubs on a low. It was a case of right place, right time when he got the hun job originally and that set him on the gravy train for life. I think that ship might have sailed for McInnes, it'll be interesting to see - this season - if he knows that yet. He really, really needs this season to go well for him if he wants to continue to have a good career in football (I mean good, as in good opportunity). I'm not convinced he will, but he definitely has the ability if he wants it enough.

Go on.

Me neither. But is there any manager that the dons could dream of getting that would? Bearing in mind that rant came after winning the Cup Winners' Cup (and was followed by an apology the next day), Ferguson did have a bit of prior goodwill before that incident. I don't want some nut job coming in and slating the team off the bat, so you're looking at a manager that has already won several competitions with the dons before they can really do that and, of course, McInnes doesn't come into that category. In terms of West Brom or whatever, I don't see what your point is? McInnes has never stated his desire to join another club and has always talked of his enjoyment working for the dons, I'd say he's been very professional in that regard. His first few years with the dons were his most successful, and our most successful since the early nineties, so the evidence doesn't really back up the point that having one eye on another job affected him. In fact, turning down another job had significantly greater impact (with the fans). I just can't see a situation where a manager would expect to take their eye off the ball at one club, expecting to get a job at a wealthier one, they just wouldn't get the job. Given the level that the dons are at, could you imagine the dross you'd get if you were signing a manager who didn't aim to step up beyond that? As long as they keep that desire to themselves, I don't see it as an issue. In fact, I'm struggling to see what the actual issue is. McInnes being not good enough isn't likely related to his desire to work elsewhere, it's more likely that a desire to remain would see him go stale and run out of ideas.

Jesus

Cormack needs to put the pressure on, let him know what is acceptable and what isn't and start giving him support by identifying exactly the strategy and goals so that McInnes can't claim to be hard done by. There should be no surprise for McInnes if he does get fired. I very much disliked Calderwood as a manager and was pleased when the club decided to let him go. But the fact he was so surprised by it shows how out of touch with the manager the chairman was. If Cormack can lay out exactly what he expects of McInnes then failure to meet those expectations should see him punted. It's not McInnes' fault he has had zero accountability and free reign to date and it would be exceptionally unfair to punt him in the early part of this season (before January). It's a new Chairman with new expectations (hopefully). McInnes proved in 16/17 that he has the ability to put an excellent team on the park (74 goals, 76 points, +39GD is phenomenal), he needs start taking the risks and making the decisions to get back near to that level again. After he lost a few players from that side, he hid behind grinding points out, now is the time for him to face up to the difficult choices on the pitch. Get playing again or leave. I think he has the ability, I just think years of not being challenged has left him complacent. With no games in front of a crowd until January, I'd give him every opportunity until then.

Aye. Step by step it's called. Interesting like. A good holiday read, if yer heading to Spain or inverurie or wherever folk ging these days.

His book is quite good too. Quite a likeable guy, who on first listen I thought I was going to hate, because of some deep seated prejudice of mine, probably.

Agree with Elgin and yersel like. I've said for ages that McInnes seems to have zero accountability, through no fault of his own. He has completely transformed the club in the way you would expect of a football director, that allows for no real succession planning. Whilst the strategy produced by the club was a little light on detail, it did suggest that McInnes would be required to deliver rather than be left to it like under Milne. I think a set of goals around youth integration and entertainment would go a long way toward improving the team if he was to accept the challenge. He needs to be challenged, that's the issue. The team from a few seasons back banged in seven goals in more than one spfl game and several four goals, a five and a six from memory. They were the best I've seen since Willie Miller's first season. That's the freedom we need to be seeing regularly.

We produced Jack as a full back, Robertson has had a reasonable career too, Harvie looks half decent. Considine filled our left back spot for a decade. Virtanen supposed to be good but seems to be a midfielder now. Low was a hard working midfielder, Cammy Smith etc. The problem is that we're better than we used to be. Where we seem to fall down under McInnes is the squad numbers. We shouldn't expect our young players to play every week, but we don't really need to be bringing on Wilson, McGeouch, Ball, hedges etc. The ratio seems to be wrong. Campbell and the like should be first reserve.