Quite a Turnaround

[rlb999]

To be fair, it looks as though Phil has managed to turn around our fortunes when it seemed he had run out of ideas. I cashed in on him after Rochdale away - constant chopping and changing of players, half the team playing out of position, and no sign of any organisation or game plan. Given that organisation and stability has always been a feature of his teams, when he lost that I couldn't see any way back for him. But a month later, he's certainly recovered things. I'm not sure I can remember a time when another SUFC manager has lost it to the extent we had, then managed to recover the situation - or maybe no chairman previously has given them the time?

How's he done it though? Ferdinand and Ranger are key for me - even though Anton perhaps doesn't stand out as an individual there's no doubt that whole defence is better organised. Also, just having a settled team, without 5 changes each week. It's also interesting that, 18 months after promotion, and despite trying out numerous players, Atkinson, Leonard, Timlin remain central to the team when fit.

 

[AndyT]

Someone touched on this on the 'Ratings Thread' but just for this thread, here's the last 6 league matches :-

1	Sheffield Utd	6	5	1		18	6	+12	16	100%
2	Bolton	6	5		1	11	2	+9	15	17%
3	Scunthorpe	6	5		1	11	4	+7	15	50%
4	Southend Utd	6	4	2		13	3	+10	14	50%
5	Millwall	6	4		2	11	7	+4	12	67%
6	Peterborough	6	4		2	7	4	+3	12	33%
7	Wimbledon	6	3	2	1	10	5	+5	11	50%
8	Charlton	6	3	2	1	8	5	+3	11	33%
9	Coventry City	6	3	1	2	8	7	+1	10	33%
10	Walsall	6	2	3	1	9	7	+2	9	33%

 

[Sandbach Shrimper]

I think there have been a number of factors in the turnaround - playing 4-4-2, Atkinson coming back into the team, Oxley improving, a more settled defence, Ranger fit and his partnership with Cox. Like you I thought Brown should've gone after the Rochdale game, but credit where it's due he has turned things around, although I don't he's done anything that wasn't obvious. Just goes to show that sometimes keeping faith with a manager pays off. Other clubs should take note.

 

[South Bank Hank]

Great opening post.

For me as a continuing Brown fan, it's so pleasing to see the turnaround. The hyperbole around him being "clueless", losing the dressing room, players not wanting to play for him, etc has been proved wrong. You don't see any of what we're currently seeing if any of that was the truth. But... I do get why people wanted him gone because, bottom line, results weren't happening and once the rot sets in, failure becomes inevitable.

But here we are. Onwards and hopefully upwards. We look exciting. While some of the risky signings in the past (Hunt) didn't work, the ones we've brought in now seem to be making the difference. Replacing the crowd favourite Barrett has become a massive win with Ferdinand stepping in and suddenly the mix at the top of the field makes us look potent.

Goals change games and that for me is the difference here. All of a sudden, with just a couple of players coming in and back from injury, we look tighter at the back, less stressed in the middle and more potent up front. Not only does it breed confidence but it's allowing us to play on the front foot. We now look like we can dominate rather than turn up.

Whether it was financial prudence or an insight into what might be coming, huge credit to Martin for investing in and sticking with the team in charge.

 

[Shrimperforlife]

I think there have been a number of factors in the turnaround - playing 4-4-2, Atkinson coming back into the team, Oxley improving, a more settled defence, Ranger fit and his partnership with Cox. Like you I thought Brown should've gone after the Rochdale game, but credit where it's due he has turned things around, although I don't he's done anything that wasn't obvious. Just goes to show that sometimes keeping faith with a manager pays off. Other clubs should take note.

I think oxley should get a fair amount of credit , as I think the team they have more confidence in him.... he's no Bentley but working hard and getting off his line makes him more effective

 

[WESTY_SUFC]

Well done Phil. I also couldn't see him turning it around. As mentioned already there is a variation of things that have led to the change in form and now we are starting to play with real confidence. Players fitness will be key to the rest of our season.

 

[McNasty]

Things have turned round because Phil Brown took the advice of the members of the Zone. End of. :smile:

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

YES, PB has turned it around, however, if the Rochdale game was the lowest of low points it is worth remembering what had sunk us to so dismal a place AND that those that went DID see the team sheet: and before a kick was made sensed that we were in for a spanking - PB and GC cottoned on to that quickly (as shown by Mooney substitution) but 3 changes was never going to be enough with half the team selection being wrong and unbalanced.
Lessons learnt/penny dropped regards lone Mooney striker, 2 wing backs and two wingers, Adam Barrett against pace/strong tall strikers. All mistakes of big proportions.

Going 442 has been settling BUT we need to keep COX/RANGER/FORTUNE all available, and who can step in for Anton should he get injured/suspended as, great club man etc, Adam Barrett (this season) doesn't do the job further than Prosser used to; i.e. he waves his arms, shouts, loves a block tackle but gets caught square and can't see a pass like he could a few seasons back.

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

Agree with almost all of the above posts.

Rochdale was a hideous game where we (Southend United) looked completely out of our depth.

There are a number of factors but I think it all stems from the strikers keeping the ball and providing a threat. Note that is strikers (plural) rather than one individual isolated and alone. And Ranger is the big factor here of course.

That pulls the opposition midfield back and gives them a more defensive brain set and that allows our midfielders to get more forward in support. And the midfield is now more balanced and settled.

And the defence is working because it is being marshalled by Anton, Thompson is showing the potential seen from time to time and Cokes* and Demmy are showing that they are good players at this level.

And Oxley does deserve some praise .......... but I would think most goalies would lose confidence when the team in front of them is as porous as a sponge. Now there is a team (and not just a collection of individuals) for him to marshall, The Ox seems capable of being a good goalie at this level.

If I had to mention one element that has led to the improvement it would be Ranger's inclusion.


* I have not been one that has said that Cokes is playing poorly - Cokes is only 1 player in the team and if the midfield and attack are poor then he has to stay back and not get caught out of position when the ball comes straight back again after being cleared.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Things have turned round because Phil Brown took the advice of the members of the Zone. End of. :smile:

Is Barrett a zone member?

 

[gpd]

Sorry...relating to the lovely chart above from AndyT......and me being thick on a Sunday afternoon.....What is the significance of the percentages in the final column?

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Sorry...relating to the lovely chart above from AndyT......and me being thick on a Sunday afternoon.....What is the significance of the percentages in the final column?

The % that wanted the manager sacked :winking:

 

[Feathers]

Interesting that a few people have highlighted the Rochdale game. For me the key games were the 2 home games to Oxford and Peterborough after the Northampton loss. Had we lost those or played badly then I believe Phil's time would have been up.

Rochdale at the time were in great form so the result was not a huge surprise and our improving home form gave me confidence. That we have also turned around our away form is a huge bonus.

PB has made some good signings this season and added to Wordsworth and McGlaughlin being fit we now have the basis of a good team.

When things are going well PB rarely makes changes unless forced to and got it spot on yesterday playing Wordsworth and Atkinson and dropping Timlin when the easy decision would have been to keep Timlin in the team.

My only concern with PB is we are a bit boom and bust and when results do turn he perhaps over thinks things with the number of changes.

Yesterday for me was a good indication of the way PB wants us to play, but it is not until now we have had the players to move the ball quickly enough from defence to attack.

Ron Martin also deserves credit for giving Phil the chance. Many other chairman would not and it shows that change for changes sake is not the right way to go.

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

My only concern with PB is we are a bit boom and bust and when results do turn he perhaps over thinks things with the number of changes.

You are right - we have had some good runs of winning ............ and sadly some poor runs of not winning. If you (the manager) take the credit for the winning runs then you have to take the responsibility for the bad runs as well.

 

[Feathers]

You are right - we have had some good runs of winning ............ and sadly some poor runs of not winning. If you (the manager) take the credit for the winning runs then you have to take the responsibility for the bad runs as well.

I think he generally does and has he admitted last week he feared for his job.

The same also applies to supporters. There are many who are quick to criticize PB when things go wrong but dismiss the successes as being in despite of him.

 

[OldBlueLady]

As PB said, "judge me when the players are fit." It's amazing how the fitness of Ranger, Wordsworth and Ferdinand in particular has changed the whole dynamic of the side.

 

[AndyT]

Sorry...relating to the lovely chart above from AndyT......and me being thick on a Sunday afternoon.....What is the significance of the percentages in the final column?

D'you know what. I've got no idea! .. Often wondered, myself! ...

 

[AndyT]

.. Right, apparently after googling, it's the percentage of those matches that featured 2.5+ goals or not, as a total number of goals scored by both teams in each match played in that 6 match sequence.

So, we are 50% because 3 of our 6 matches featured 3 goals or more (MK Dons 3, Bury 5, Bradford City (H) 3) and the other 3 didn't (Shrewsbury 2, Chesterfield 1, Bradford City (A) 2).

Basically, watching Bolton is as boring as f**k, but Sheffield United you are guaranteed to see 3 goals a game at the moment .. like in August, eh, Blades fans! :thumbsup::cool:

That said, the stats seem pretty pointless.

 

[southendkid]

.. Right, apparently after googling, it's the percentage of those matches that featured 2.5+ goals or not, as a total number of goals scored by both teams in each match played in that 6 match sequence.

So, we are 50% because 3 of our 6 matches featured 3 goals or more (MK Dons 3, Bury 5, Bradford City (H) 3) and the other 3 didn't (Shrewsbury 2, Chesterfield 1, Bradford City (A) 2).

Basically, watching Bolton is as boring as f**k, but Sheffield United you are guaranteed to see 3 goals a game at the moment .. like in August, eh, Blades fans! :thumbsup::cool:

That said, the stats seem pretty pointless.

It's there for gamblers, there's a market for betting if there will be more or less than 2.5 goals in a match.

 

[AndyT]

MO 'Southendkid'. Makes sense, now.

... Maybe PB's turned into a gambler these days and is going for broke, hence the 4-0 reverses or the 3-0 wins!