Valérien Ismaël: Blackburn Rovers Head Coach

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

I totally agree that it is very much the exception to the rule in terms of his career and hes a crap manager but he had a good season.

As you say so did Coyle. And Lambert.

We tend to specialise in these sort of guys who primarily have been a failure but might have had a good season at some point because in general we refuse to pay the compensation  for a manager in employment who's on an upward trajectory. 

Preferring instead to take a punt on someone who's either out of work or on the managerial scrap heap and desperate for work.

[Rogerb]

1 hour ago, G Somerset Rover said:

 what on earth warranted a 3.5 year deal.

IMO a combination of agents and jobs for the boys.

Probably the only way they could attract him if the wage was poor.

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, TimmyJimmy said:

VI is what VI is, neither the world's best nor worst manager. In my opinion he's OK. The club and players on the other hand are not.  He will fail because there's no opportunity for him to succeed. The club is a joke and has been since the day the Venkys took over.

Two separate things can be right at the same time.

Few would disagree with the second bit but that doesn't mean VI isn't also a very poor manager. I think he's terrible.

One game and ten minutes of the next one to unravel all Eustace's good work.

Eleven defeats from Twenty competitive fixtures.

Arguably most important going forward, can anyone see what he's trying to implement on the pitch?  You could maybe cut him a little slack if you could see any signs of a defined style of play or identity taking shape. Instead we were promised exciting high intensity pressing football and are getting the polar opposite.

Needs replacing asap for me. Obviously doubtful whether he will be due to the length of contract etc but you'd have hoped a sensible Club would have inserted some sort of break clause somewhere along the way as insurance.

 

Edited 6 hours ago by RevidgeBlue

[roverandout]

29 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

As you say so did Coyle. And Lambert.

We tend to specialise in these sort of guys who primarily have been a failure but might have had a good season at some point because in general we refuse to pay the compensation  for a manager in employment who's on an upward trajectory. 

Preferring instead to take a punt on someone who's either out of work or on the managerial scrap heap and desperate for work.

Lambert was definitely not in that category.  He got Norwich two consecutive promotions to the epl then did a decent job at villa under tough circumstances.  Though I agree about coyle

[RevidgeBlue]

2 minutes ago, roverandout said:

Lambert was definitely not in that category.  He got Norwich two consecutive promotions to the epl then did a decent job at villa under tough circumstances.  Though I agree about coyle

We'll have to agree to disagree about Lambert. I think he's been poor everywhere he's been except Norwich, never had any intention of staying here more than a few months, and was only brought in by Pasha as someone who (at the time) had gravitas to flog Rhodes and create the impression he knew what he was doing.

[roverandout]

8 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

We'll have to agree to disagree about Lambert. I think he's been poor everywhere he's been except Norwich, never had any intention of staying here more than a few months, and was only brought in by Pasha as someone who (at the time) had gravitas to flog Rhodes and create the impression he knew what he was doing.

It all went down hill for him after he left rovers. He did a good job everywhere in English football.  He had a poor record in Scotland with livingstone but he got Wycombe to the semi finals of the league Cup got them to the play offs. Did a good job at Colchester where he left to go to Norwich.  Then the villa job as I said he did ok with no money.  When he left rovers he became a journey man

[MarkBRFC]

If Lambert had been left to his own devices for 5 and a half years like Mowbray, I imagine we would have ended up in similar positions.

For me Lambert can't be compared to Coyle at all.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Every time I open this thread I expect to see he’s resigned.

[rigger]

9 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Every time I open this thread I expect to see he’s resigned.

He's more likely to have re-signed.

[MarkBRFC]

10 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Every time I open this thread I expect to see he’s resigned.

No way is he giving this gig up.

[jim mk2]

Ismael has been sacked from 4 of the 11 clubs he's managed as far as I can make out. 

West Brom sacked him after winning 12 out of 31 matches.

He's won 4 out of 12 with us. Time to go

[Ghost7]

I don't see him ever going, it's no longer about results on the pitch at the top, it's about getting along with a corrupt, under-qualified, overpaid board. He appears well in there.

[TimmyJimmy]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Two separate things can be right at the same time.

Few would agree with the second bit but that doesn't mean VI isn't also a very poor manager. I think he's terrible.

One game and ten minutes of the next one to unravel all Eustace's good work.

Eleven defeats from Twenty competitive fixtures.

Arguably most important going forward, can anyone see what he's trying to implement on the pitch?  You could maybe cut him a little slack if you could see any signs of a defined style of play or identity taking shape. Instead we were promised exciting high intensity pressing football and are getting the polar opposite.

Needs replacing asap for me. Obviously doubtful whether he will be due to the length of contract etc but you'd have hoped a sensible Club would have inserted some sort of break clause somewhere along the way as insurance.

 

I don't agree but understand your point and respect your opinion, it's just not mine.

You can't make a silk purse from a sows ear, to quote a golden oldie. With this ownership, these players and this board even King Kenny would struggle

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right ...

We can change the name on the managers door (and have umpteen times in recent years) repeatedly but it has and will make no difference.  I'm sure there are better managers out there today than VI but so what they too would fail under this joke of a club ownership.

I'm cutting VI some slack. He says the right things, he's honest (IMO) and sounds like he genuinely wants success for the club so all power to his elbow.

He's not going to succeed though, no one could.

 

[lraC]

1 minute ago, TimmyJimmy said:

I don't agree but understand your point and respect your opinion, it's just not mine.

You can't make a silk purse from a sows ear, to quote a golden oldie. With this ownership, these players and this board even King Kenny would struggle

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right ...

We can change the name on the managers door (and have umpteen times in recent years) repeatedly but it has and will make no difference.  I'm sure there are better managers out there today than VI but so what they too would fail under this joke of a club ownership.

I'm cutting VI some slack. He says the right things, he's honest (IMO) and sounds like he genuinely wants success for the club so all power to his elbow.

He's not going to succeed though, no one could.

 

I suppose you can give him some credit for being honest and hope it remains that way, after what we have suffered in the past, especially the very first appointment, these owners made.

[RevidgeBlue]

15 minutes ago, TimmyJimmy said:

He's not going to succeed though, no one could.

Depends on your definition of success. A lot of managers probably wouldnt have done as well as JDT (for a period) or Eustace under the same conditions.

Equally, as testing as VI'S conditions are, Im sure there are a lot of managers out there who could do a far better job.

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, Ghost7 said:

I don't see him ever going, it's no longer about results on the pitch at the top, it's about getting along with a corrupt, under-qualified, overpaid board. He appears well in there.

It's never been about results on the pitch.

Results have not been the priority at this club for over 15 years.

If it was Allardyce wouldn't have got sacked, Kean wouldn't have been appointed, Kean would have been gone within a few weeks or at the end of that first season, both Bowyer and Mowbray would have lost their jobs earlier than they did.

It is about cost and compliance. If you are willing to operate in the structure these people want and not complain, and are relatively speaking cheap, then you're set. Allardyce wasn't ever going to play their game so he had to go, Bowyer and Mowbray put up with it both because they got answers directly from India and because neither would have got similar jobs elsewhere. Coyle wouldn't have got the job and definitely wouldn't have been parachuted in ahead of Warnock and would have been sacked in October or November rather than February. Lambert wouldn't put up with it, nor JDT or Eustace because they all knew they were able to get employment elsewhere

Edited 6 hours ago by JHRover

[Mattyblue]

All true, JH, yet no clearer to an answer to ‘why’ they want a manager to keep costs down and for the club to just tick over.

Obviously a burden (even if a small one in the grand scheme of their empire with their point man given carte blanche), obviously no sporting interest in the club achieving anything, so the next step is obvious, so WHY aren’t they doing it?’

Edited 5 hours ago by Mattyblue

[lraC]

14 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

All true, JH, yet no clearer to an answer to ‘why’ they want a manager to keep costs down and for the club to just tick over.

Obviously a burden (even if a small one in the grand scheme of their empire with their point man given carte blanche), obviously no sporting interest in the club achieving anything, so the next step is obvious, so WHY aren’t they doing it?’

It always leads back to one thing only and that is they are hiding something and scared of it coming out.

liken it to the house on Nuttall Street that had the body in the drains. That would have never come to light, without the house being sold and demolished. 

[lraC]

Dramatic irony really.

Killer thought the body was buried for good | Lancashire Telegraph

[Tomphil2]

2 hours ago, Ghost7 said:

I don't see him ever going, it's no longer about results on the pitch at the top, it's about getting along with a corrupt, under-qualified, overpaid board. He appears well in there.

Yes they are all aligned apparently but what to we don't now.

He isn't actively trying to lose games and neither are the other two but he obviously is another one who hasn't got a clue how to turn games round or get his team on the front foot more than once every 5 games.

However some of that imo is down to priorities and the main one here is getting players games and increasing value through Championship mins and presumably flexibility to systems and positions.

Not once has anyone, apart from Eustace i'd argue, tried to build a well oiled square pegs in square holes functional unit to try and wins points however they come as number 1 priority.

Nobody, including Mowbray.

It's always about swapping, changing, rotating, out of position, pass from the back, develop youth etc etc.

Yes modern demands call for some of that at a lot of clubs but here it's a joke it takes priority over everything.

[sharpysharps86]

I think as one or two others have said, it appears as though Ismael isn't gonna get the boot anytime soon. The 3.5 year deal just beggars belief really.

Having said that, Ismael will get rolled under the bus eventually by Rudy and Suhail. If Rovers continue to lose home games then the crowd will turn, and not just on the head coach but I think it might finally turn some of the happy clappers onto the ownership. It was different last season because Eustace had us up in the top 6 for much of the time, but if they're down in and around the bottom 3 this season then it will turn.

On Ismael himself - he's just not a very good head coach. I have some sympathy with him due to the turnover of players and the distinct lack of championship experience, but he's still bang average.

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, Tomphil2 said:

Yes they are all aligned apparently but what to we don't now.

He isn't actively trying to lose games and neither are the other two but he obviously is another one who hasn't got a clue how to turn games round or get his team on the front foot more than once every 5 games.

However some of that imo is down to priorities and the main one here is getting players games and increasing value through Championship mins and presumably flexibility to systems and positions.

Not once has anyone, apart from Eustace i'd argue, tried to build a well oiled square pegs in square holes functional unit to try and wins points however they come as number 1 priority.

Nobody, including Mowbray.

It's always about swapping, changing, rotating, out of position, pass from the back, develop youth etc etc.

Yes modern demands call for some of that at a lot of clubs but here it's a joke it takes priority over everything.

I'd suggest maybe Lambert a bit like Eustace albeit less effective in that he wanted results first and wasn't brought in and didn't have any intentions of all the above stuff. 

But yeah other than that whether it be Kean, Bowyer, Coyle, Mowbray, JDT and now Ismael there has always been a 'project' running alongside the bread and butter of results which takes over from it.

The sad thing is that in both JDT and Eustace - for totally differing reasons but both very effective - they had people here that could deliver for them. Eustace showed he could do it on a shoestring budget without the need for some elaborate network and scouting, and JDT showed he could do it whilst handing debuts and game time to a raft of academy players, most of whom proved themselves to not be good enough yet were given plenty of opportunity at Championship level whilst we remained competitive. 

In avoiding both of the above we now seem to have gone down a third route - totally ditched the academy model, totally ditched the 'tried and tested' experience model, and ended up with a massively inferior manager working with a raft of players not good enough.

Idiots gambling with the club's future and Championship status, for no good reason other than to perhaps benefit third parties outside of BRFC.

[Herbie6590]

The 3.5 year contract was for the optics…”look at us, we’re backing this guy…he ain’t going anywhere so get used to him…”. It was a message to the players & the fans. 

I’d be amazed if that contract didn’t have fixed compensation clauses in it as opposed to “paying up the unexpired term”. But that said, if he is wiling to play the game, as was Kean, then realistically they won’t pot him as they’d then have to find another patsy. 

I’ve said it multiple times on here, as indeed have many others - this club isn’t about chasing on-field success. It’s about reducing costs. 

[simongarnerisgod]

5 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Depends on your definition of success. A lot of managers probably wouldnt have done as well as JDT (for a period) or Eustace under the same conditions.

Equally, as testing as VI'S conditions are, Im sure there are a lot of managers out there who could do a far better job.

it matters not who the manager is here,whoever it is ,they won`t be allowed to be succesful,wether val goes into mowbray mode and accepts it,we can only wait

[BRFC.]

The main issue at the club are these owners (who have to go) and pasha and Rudy who won’t get another job in football after this but Ismael looks out of his depth, doesn’t look inspiring one bit and the players look like they aren’t playing for him these last 2 games.. 3 and a half year deal was clearly given to VI because Eustace was worried about the long term vision  

Edited 1 hour ago by BRFC.