Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
piffer

Alex Dyer Megathread™

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, charlie1 said:

I know from personal experiance that being a nice guy , good guy one of the boys   etc , eventually does not cut it a managrial level in any field

better to be firm , fair and keep detached a bit like SC appeared to be.

 

This 100%.  None of the great managers were "great guys" or one of the boys.  They drew a line and anyone who crossed it were in trouble.  They demanded respect and disnt hesitate to change personnel when it was needed.  They were ruthless when needed, and supportive when needed.

I just dont get the feeling AD can be the former and is way too much of the latter.  Stroking the egos of players at the level weve got will get you relegated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of great guy managers Klopp for one.Some managers are just better than others through there tactics,signings ,motivation and luck.Some players play better for certain managers .Clarke got the best out numerous players at Killie .He even managed to get an overweight past it center to become the top scorer in the league .Good guy or bad guy doesn't matter the ability to get the best out the players,tactically aware and identify weaknesses/ strengths in the squad are 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Killiepies said:

Plenty of great guy managers Klopp for one.Some managers are just better than others through there tactics,signings ,motivation and luck.Some players play better for certain managers .Clarke got the best out numerous players at Killie .He even managed to get an overweight past it center to become the top scorer in the league .Good guy or bad guy doesn't matter the ability to get the best out the players,tactically aware and identify weaknesses/ strengths in the squad are 

More so than ever having the right team around you as a manager is important. Clarke took the time to think of Dyer as his assistant. AA’s staff was a bit hash bash. Dyer forced on him. Was Donati in as a coach or translator? Was he AA’s choice? Then when Dyer took over he went with what was there and brought Billy Thompson back into the fold

I don’t know what Dyer specialises in. Tactics, fitness, motivation etc. Does he have the right people about him to cover the other aspects of the game. Maybe if we do go with him permanently it’s bout structuring the back room staff for the clubs best interests rather than loyalty to those on the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, skygod said:

It's not the fans who appoint and dismiss the managers.

Alessio - Who the **** knows why?
Clarke - Left for new position (Scotland)
McCulloch - Mutual consent when bottom of the table
Clark - Left for new position (Bury)
Locke - Resigned when second bottom
Johnston - Dismissed when 8th in table
Shiels - Dismissed after finishing 9th
Paateleinen - Left for new position (Finland)

But it's the fans' fault that our turnover in managers is ridiculous!

 

Board in the main sack managers when fans turn on on them. After the sacking of Shiels fans called for the head of Johnston, Locke, Clark and McCulloch at various times - there was also a campaign to get shot of Alessio from the outset and now Dyer as well is getting the "not good enough for us" treatment. That's six of the last eight. You can't tell me that the fans were not instrumental in them all (apart from Dyer) getting the Spanish archer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Secret Squirrel said:

First on Alex Ferguson by the time he was appointed at Man Utd he had won 12 trophies including a European cup so I don't think the two Alex's are comparable. If you don't think 15 games is enough to judge him on then feel free to let me know what you believe the average manager should get.

I don't think you can call Kilmarnock fans entitled, for most of the past 12 years we have been more often than not a relegation threatened side with the occasional uptick in form that generally last no more than two seasons in a row. For the most part we have seen that the assistant stepping up to the big job often ends up poorly, the only one that has been favourable for us in my time has been Shiels. Many managers we have appointed were sacked because they were hopeless and more often than not would have taken us down to the championship if they had been given any more time, again Shiels is about the only one who can feel aggrieved at his sacking, its also worth pointing out that out of our last 10 managers 3 have left us for other jobs rather than being sacked.

Not accepting declining standards in everything apart from goals scored under Dyer is hardly what I would call living in cloud cuckoo land, rather it is a desire from the fan base to have some ambition to not just be in the top league to make up the numbers but to actually challenge for Europe, top six and cups. Time will tell us if its the right call, if he gets the job he will receive my full backing as every other manager has but I've set out my stall as I did with Lee McCulloch that I don't think Dyer is the one to take us forward.    

I can and I did.

You know fine well my point about SAF was about giving someone time to find their feet and patience being a virtue, I was not drawing comparisons between the two's careers. You can also try and rationalise your opinion that 15 games is enough to judge a manager on all you want. You are just plain wrong, and I defy to to find anyone in the football world of any nous whatsoever to agree with you. Every football fan has ambition, every football fan wants the best for his club, no one wants to settle for second best, but ambition has to be tempered with reality, and in this current reality there is a lot more to factor in than usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rb_506 said:

Board in the main sack managers when fans turn on on them. After the sacking of Shiels fans called for the head of Johnston, Locke, Clark and McCulloch at various times - there was also a campaign to get shot of Alessio from the outset and now Dyer as well is getting the "not good enough for us" treatment. That's six of the last eight. You can't tell me that the fans were not instrumental in them all (apart from Dyer) getting the Spanish archer.

You're not seriously suggesting that Johnston, Locke and McCulloch were harshly treated, are you?

Competent boards should be able to resist the clamour of fans if they have the courage of their convictions but I don't think ours had much choice in the above cases. So the board and fans were in accord.

That only leaves Shiels and Alessio, who split the support but there were no campaigns to remove them and the boards' decisions were a surprise to most. 

I think blaming "fan power" for our rapid turnover of managers is a fallacy.

A more interesting exercise would be to look at the nature of the appointments and whether the fans were behind them.

The most contentious ones were probably the promotees. I think Shiels was popular enough, having been part of a successful partnership.

Both Locke and McCulloch had a lot of support from fans, although not me. Both of them smacked of taking the easy option and promoting a caretaker who hadn't been convincing.

Johnston spilt the fans - I saw it as an imaginative appointment of an up and coming young manager, others thought he had been successful at QoS because of a competitive advantage. I got that one wrong.

The others seemed imaginative appointments at the time - Mixu, Clark, Clarke and Alessio. Two were successful and went on to manage their national teams, Clark was a maverick who got mixed results while Alessio had inherent problems which should have been apparent sooner. 

Successive boards have generally had more success when appointing from outside the club, but the track record is mixed. My point being that, if the board botches the appointment in the first place, the fans can't be blamed entirely if they want the manager removed, after a decent interval.

Dyer looks to me more like a Locke or McCulloch than a Shiels. Fortunately, I don't have to make the decision. 

 

 

Edited by skygod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rb_506 said:

I can and I did.

You know fine well my point about SAF was about giving someone time to find their feet and patience being a virtue, I was not drawing comparisons between the two's careers. You can also try and rationalise your opinion that 15 games is enough to judge a manager on all you want. You are just plain wrong, and I defy to to find anyone in the football world of any nous whatsoever to agree with you. Every football fan has ambition, every football fan wants the best for his club, no one wants to settle for second best, but ambition has to be tempered with reality, and in this current reality there is a lot more to factor in than usual.

I got your point about SAF pretty well, just you are ignoring the key point that I put in my post, one had a pedigree of winning titles and so earned the right to take his time while another is completely untested, do you think Klopp would have been given three years at Liverpool without winning anything if it had not been for the fact that people knew from his time at Dortmund that he could win trophies?

You say my opinion is "just plain wrong" what utter nonsense. I have actually provided evidence based on data and metrics gathered from Dyers time as our manager, you have provided nothing but subjective opinions backed up with no evidence to speak of. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was Johnston actually sacked? He decided he was leaving in the summer and after meeting with Bowie that was brought forward. Similarly did McCulloch not go to the board to be mutually consented rather than them going to him.

For all these managers had people calling for their heads there were as many wanting them to get a bit more time. Just like Dyer just now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, skygod said:

Dyer looks to me more like a Locke or McCulloch than a Shiels.

Kenny didn't exactly set the heather on fire when he took over either (with a team in a way better place than the one Dyer picked up) - 4 points in 8 games but he got more time to prove himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very surprised to see people comparing Dyer to Locke or McCulloch, talk about harsh.

Those two were genuinely clueless. Literally fielding sides with no direction, no plan, players playing out of position. Sides that genuinely either couldn't string two passes together or bypassed the midfield and didn't even try to play football.

Dyer maybe hasn't completely set the heather alight run but to compare him to that is embarrassing. Go back and watch what we were like then, ridiculous comparisons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, piffer said:

Was Johnston actually sacked? He decided he was leaving in the summer and after meeting with Bowie that was brought forward. Similarly did McCulloch not go to the board to be mutually consented rather than them going to him.

I checked these yesterday. Johnston did indeed announce that he would be leaving at the end of the season but he was then asked to leave immediately.

As I said yesterday, McCulloch was officially by mutual consent.

 

Edited by skygod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Secret Squirrel said:

I got your point about SAF pretty well, just you are ignoring the key point that I put in my post, one had a pedigree of winning titles and so earned the right to take his time while another is completely untested, do you think Klopp would have been given three years at Liverpool without winning anything if it had not been for the fact that people knew from his time at Dortmund that he could win trophies?

At what point are you going to realise he wasn't actually comparing Alex Dyer v Alex Ferguson but was simply making a perfectly decent point that 15 games isn't enough to draw a fair judgement over a manager?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fletch said:

Very surprised to see people comparing Dyer to Locke or McCulloch, talk about harsh.

Those two were genuinely clueless. Literally fielding sides with no direction, no plan, players playing out of position. Sides that genuinely either couldn't string two passes together or bypassed the midfield and didn't even try to play football.

Dyer maybe hasn't completely set the heather alight run but to compare him to that is embarrassing. Go back and watch what we were like then, ridiculous comparisons.

Maybe the standard of football was worse under Locke and  McCulloch but it's a results business and their points per game record wasn't that much worse than AD's.   

But, rather than reflecting on their records to date, I was looking towards the future and speculating that Dyer would be more like a Locke or McCulloch than a Shiels, of managers promoted from within. 

After all, that is what the board has to try to do - look into the future. And they wouldn't be sacking him after 15 matches, just not renewing his contract.

 

 

Edited by skygod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Fletch said:

At what point are you going to realise he wasn't actually comparing Alex Dyer v Alex Ferguson but was simply making a perfectly decent point that 15 games isn't enough to draw a fair judgement over a manager?

At what point are you going to read what I said above, if you can't see my point is managers earn the right to have time by being successful whether that's immediately or being successful at other clubs then I don't know how to phrase it any other way. Did you think I was drawing comparisons to Klopp and Dyer in my above post then?

If you say 15 games isn't enough then you need to provide some sort of counter to it, when is it enough? Otherwise your argument carries no weight.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Secret Squirrel said:

I got your point about SAF pretty well, just you are ignoring the key point that I put in my post, one had a pedigree of winning titles and so earned the right to take his time while another is completely untested, do you think Klopp would have been given three years at Liverpool without winning anything if it had not been for the fact that people knew from his time at Dortmund that he could win trophies?

You say my opinion is "just plain wrong" what utter nonsense. I have actually provided evidence based on data and metrics gathered from Dyers time as our manager, you have provided nothing but subjective opinions backed up with no evidence to speak of. 

You talk about my comparison and then you throw Klopp in the mix! Managing Liverpool is a bit different from managing Kilmarnock - that's pretty much at the heart of my point. We are expecting too much. I also maintain that 15 games is no time to gauge a manager, completely contrary to your point, those without a track record should potentially be given longer because they have nothing to live up to. I say again, name me one person with nous in the professional game that thinks 15 games is enough to judge anyone? Calling bulls**t on the "data and metrics" as well. No one in their right mid would take 15 games as a sample and have the cheek to claim it is representative. As for my opinions, they were exactly that, opinions, I'm not claiming they are anything else unlike yourself; how can I provide any evidence at all when my point is there is not enough evidence for anyone to judge?

Edited by rb_506
add

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skygod said:

You're not seriously suggesting that Johnston, Locke and McCulloch were harshly treated, are you

No, I'm saying that the fans wanted them out and the board acted on it. I agree they were dubious appointments in the first place, but the fact remains that fan power ultimately got them sacked, rightly (for the most part) or wrongly. Consistency is key and our lack of it has been seriously detrimental to our form. Changing the manager all the time is bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rb_506 said:

You talk about my comparison and then you throw Klopp in the mix! Managing Liverpool is a bit different from managing Kilmarnock - that's pretty much at the heart of my point. We are expecting too much. I also maintain that 15 games is no time to gauge a manager, completely contrary to your point, those without a track record should potentially be given longer because they have nothing to live up to. I say again, tell me one person with nous in the professional game that thinks 15 games is enough to judge anyone.

how does the standard of manager or level of club relate to the simple point that some managers have earned time and some haven't? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, rb_506 said:

No, I'm saying that the fans wanted them out and the board acted on it.

So, if the fans hadn't wanted them out, the board would have happily persevered with them? Is that what you're saying?

Thank God for fan power in that case! 

It sounds like our fans are no different from most other clubs': we want to keep successful managers, and usually can't, and bin those who aren't up to the job. We've had a mixture of good, bad and indifferent in recent times, hence the high turnover, which is far from ideal.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skyhigh said:

how does the standard of manager or level of club relate to the simple point that some managers have earned time and some haven't? 

How do you know if an untested manager will be any good if you don't give him time? Its an absolute fallacy that past records earn managers time, it earns them kudos, if they have a string of crap results then the fans want them gone no matter their reputation. I give you Mourinho, fantastic record, Man Utd fans wanted him gone, Spurs fans want him gone. Squirrel guy made that point for me, SAF had an amazing record and a mediocre run of results had the Man Utd fans on his back, it was patience by their board that gave him the time to settle and prosper.

My opinion is not changing, expecting to judge a manager in 15 games, especially given exceptional circumstances, is an absolute joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No surprise but glad at least confirmed it , lot of doubts about capabilities of AD as Manager....but I’m sure fans will all be hoping it is proved to be the right decision for our club 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

The Killie Trust

KFC Supporters Association

Young Kilmarnock

FC Kilmarnock

Kilmarnock FC (Official)

×