Who was the better manager

[Tandy]

I don't expect much honesty

[jeepster]

I don't expect much honesty

Where was they were both as boring as fcuk.

[Arfur Europe]

Where was they were both as boring as fcuk.

This. Need a both 'not all that good' option

[bobh]

Scoular or May?

[Eric the Half a Bee]

I believe Slade was the better manager, simply because he was a better manager of people. Trollope is superior to him as a coach, a tactician and has a much better football brain. Slade was able to motivate his players, unsurprising as a former teacher. It would appear that his experience in the role suited him better as a manager for the crap that goes with the job. Trollope appears to be someone who works best with the players and getting involved on the training ground. Management probably doesn't really suit him. Dave Jones, as an example, apparently spent little time on the training ground with the players.

Trollope's footballing brain and Slade's managerial style would be ok at this level. Suggesting that Slade is a better manager because he knows more about football is a load of bollocks.

[TH63]

Based on results, clearly Slade.

But in all honesty, it's like saying I'd prefer a punch in the face to a kick in the bollocks.

[thehumblegringo]

My problem is solely with Slade at the moment, the man is a complete knob. I hate the Belgians ( well not literally all, just two) but I think protests should only take place outside the main stand before and after games. BUT my god, Slade and his poxy team selections and tactics are making that very hard to do at present and for me he is one of the worst managers we have had in a long while.
Even if we had another couple of decent midfielders I do not think we would be doing any better as he makes Chrissy Powell look like a tactical genius plus at least Powell had likeability as a character.

He talks a load of bollocks too.

Read more: http://intothevalley.proboards.com/t...#ixzz4MHk7Erbk

From Charlton forum

[thehumblegringo]

said:
The way to change the atmosphere at the Valley is to win matches and play a more adventurous brand of Football. If we carry on drawing and losing matches the pressure will build. It is over to you Russell.

Read more: http://intothevalley.proboards.com/t...#ixzz4MHkgJl1V

[thehumblegringo]

There isn't a right manager for where we are now. I think Slade's useless, but every jeer that's directed at him would be better off aimed at the incompetent liar hiding in the Director's box.

[thehumblegringo]

Slade has always been in charge of "underdogs" so sets his teams up negatively, to try & "steal" something.

"Where do we go from here ? "

Well if Slade gets the bullet, I don't care, because it's already apparent the players aren't playing for him, as we're outbattled far too often. But if he goes, who will replace him ? Kenny Jackett would be a good candidate.

If he stays he needs to drop the players that are virtually every single game our worst players.

[thehumblegringo]

Slade acronyms from Charlton fans


Stifles
Lively
Attack
Defensive
Emphasis


Slug-like arsehole disappoints everyone

Slow learner and depressing eyesore

Sad loser and dire entertainer



There's 8 pages of those

[Blue Beetle]

I believe Slade was the better manager, simply because he was a better manager of people. Trollope is superior to him as a coach, a tactician and has a much better football brain. Slade was able to motivate his players, unsurprising as a former teacher. It would appear that his experience in the role suited him better as a manager for the crap that goes with the job. Trollope appears to be someone who works best with the players and getting involved on the training ground. Management probably doesn't really suit him. Dave Jones, as an example, apparently spent little time on the training ground with the players.

Trollope's footballing brain and Slade's managerial style would be ok at this level. Suggesting that Slade is a better manager because he knows more about football is a load of bollocks.

What exactly did you see in Trollope that made you think he was a 'superior tactician' or had a 'footballing brain'? I must have missed that. Was it when he brought on Kadeem Harris twice and played him at right-back? Or maybe when he brought on Manga to play as a centre-forward?

[Eric the Half a Bee]

What exactly did you see in Trollope that made you think he was a 'superior tactician' or had a 'footballing brain'? I must have missed that. Was it when he brought on Kadeem Harris twice and played him at right-back? Or maybe when he brought on Manga to play as a centre-forward?

Manga was a last throw of the dice out of desperation as we didn't have any other strikers. I think he felt Harris would make a decent wing back due to his pace, so I can just about understand that. Slade was generally a like-for-like substitution man, rarely would he give something different a go even when things weren't working.

As for Slade's footballing brain, stick to 4-4-2, regardless of whether it works or not. Trollope arguably overthought things, a bit like Solskjaer.

[the other bob wilson]

Manga was a last throw of the dice out of desperation as we didn't have any other strikers. I think he felt Harris would make a decent wing back due to his pace, so I can just about understand that. Slade was generally a like-for-like substitution man, rarely would he give something different a go even when things weren't working.

As for Slade's footballing brain, stick to 4-4-2, regardless of whether it works or not. Trollope arguably overthought things, a bit like Solskjaer.

Trouble is, Harris as a wing back only made sense if they were going to play like Burton's did against us on Saturday (i.e. more like wingers than full backs), but instead we played 5-3-2 with full backs and we had far better options than Harris to play in such a system. Maybe in the weeks and months to come, it will emerge whether there was some sort of fall out between team and management which caused our feeble and cautious approach when it came to the three centreback system, but , for a supposed tactician (and I agree with you that Trollope had more to offer in that department than Slade), some of Trollope's decisions look pretty baffling when you see how they turned out in reality - it was as if he was obsessed by the theory without paying any attention to what was happening in practice.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Trouble is, Harris as a wing back only made sense if they were going to play like Burton's did against us on Saturday (i.e. more like wingers than full backs), but instead we played 5-3-2 with full backs and we had far better options than Harris to play in such a system. Maybe in the weeks and months to come, it will emerge whether there was some sort of fall out between team and management which caused our feeble and cautious approach when it came to the three centreback system, but , for a supposed tactician (and I agree with you that Trollope had more to offer in that department than Slade), some of Trollope's decisions look pretty baffling when you see how they turned out in reality - it was as if he was obsessed by the theory without paying any attention to what was happening in practice.

Trollope was hopeless as a manger, his decisions are baffling and they made no sense whatsoever. Every single player went backwards under him, I don't think there's anyone that can say x player played better under Trollope than Slade. There is no question Slade is a better manager of a football club, and Trollope may be a better coach but that's only from what we hear. The evidence points to Trollope shoehorning players into his 5-3-2 and then throwing on centre halves as strikers (which he did on more than one occasion if you count Morrison trotting up with 5 minutes to go). It was like schoolboy football.

I'll never forget the Reading game, where Harris was playing a winger and Richards was playing as a genuine left back. It was like some lop-sided 4-4-2, except he didn't change it to that. He just kept going with with this hopeless system and we lost. Every week we'd go backwards, and every week the same old rhetoric would come out.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't want either back at the club but at least Slade got the team 8th, Trollope was taking us down and quickly. Trollope seems to have an unusual amount of kudos for a manager that almost everyone wanted to get sacked.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Manga was a last throw of the dice out of desperation as we didn't have any other strikers. I think he felt Harris would make a decent wing back due to his pace, so I can just about understand that. Slade was generally a like-for-like substitution man, rarely would he give something different a go even when things weren't working.

As for Slade's footballing brain, stick to 4-4-2, regardless of whether it works or not. Trollope arguably overthought things, a bit like Solskjaer.

Trollope sticked to his 5-3-2 in many games where it clearly wasn't working. He had to change to a 4-5-1 as we were losing every week. Slade realised the side had no pace and no goals, so he found a way to win in a way that the team were comfortable with. Trollope took us backwards. Sorry, this Trollope love in is ridiculous in my opinion.

[CCFC CASUAL]

Trollope sticked to his 5-3-2 in many games where it clearly wasn't working. He had to change to a 4-5-1 as we were losing every week. Slade realised the side had no pace and no goals, so he found a way to win in a way that the team were comfortable with. Trollope took us backwards. Sorry, this Trollope love in is ridiculous in my opinion.

And I'm sorry but this notion that Slade only played the way he did because he realised the squad limitations is utter bollocks.
That's just the way he played. Keep it tight, try and get a set piece. Worked last year to a certain degree but it's not a sustainable long term plan as he's finding out this season.
He's been allowed to bring in several strikers at Charlton, one of whom Nicky Ajose got 24 league goals in a struggling Swindon side last year, and he's having the same complaints from Charlton fans about being a negative twat.

[Bluebird since 1948]

Voted for Slade but as always Tandy is implying that all the posters that wanted Slade out wanted Trollope in. Slade suits teams struggling at the bottom of the third and fourth tiers but is utter shit at managing one of the division heavyweights as he's proving with his pathetic stint at Charlton.

[Blue in the Face]

The irony of this argument is that Trollope's arrival made Slade look less appaling than he actually was. I think Tandy conveniently forgets that we were plummeting towards the relegation zone before PT arrived.

Trollope's failing doesn't all of a sudden make Slade some kind of genius. At a time we could ill afford to go wrong in the transfer market Slade squandered more precious funds on many players who he either never played, or were never going to be good enough to play at levels for which Russell does not have the competency to manage at.

Slade also turned many fans away from the club and the gates declined dramatically during his tenure. You could say it was an awful choice to appoint him as manager given that under the right man, we could've achieved the playoffs. But then who else would take the role of what was effectively a fall guy while the suits got shot of the wage drainers? It's just a shame they let Slade add his own lower profile wage drainers to the problem.

The question should be - who was the worse manager? Given that a manager's role expands beyond just match day responsibilities, I'd say that Slade did far more long term damage than Trollope.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Trollope sticked to his 5-3-2 in many games where it clearly wasn't working.

Trollope wanted to try a different philosophy, nothing wrong with that, and initially things didn't seem quite so bad. I can't recall too many being sorry to see the back of 4-4-2. It didn't work and things got worse under it, so he reverted back to a back 4.

[life on mars]

Landslide victory for the golden age of Slade

[life on mars]

What exactly did you see in Trollope that made you think he was a 'superior tactician' or had a 'footballing brain'? I must have missed that. Was it when he brought on Kadeem Harris twice and played him at right-back? Or maybe when he brought on Manga to play as a centre-forward?

yep agree on that