Do l put Schumacher up there as one of Argyle's best modern day managers? Definitely. Do l want him back? Nope.
The moment is gone. That fairytale is over. I notice we do this with players that were successful here too. Wanting them back, if they failing elsewhere.
It's not the fact the way Schumacher left us. I don't feel the anger like others. He did leave us in a way that put us in a pickle but that's just football for you.
I just think he evolved us as far as he could. He had a way to make this Argyle team over the last 18 months efficiently clinical in front of goal. It wasn't like we made loads of chances & wasted them. And so this made us a good team to watch. Yet he never sorted out the defence which was an absolute mess. And these defensive issues continued in the championship. How can you watch teams continuously run through you & think you are defensively coached well?
lpswich left back Leif Davies has played 40 matches. He has 2 goals & 17 assists & yet he does not affect the balance of their team (to the point his contribution is more postive than negatives) as he ploughs forward. The reason for this is they have midfielders who can cover the spaces & protect their back four. I honestly can't remember Argyle last really good CDM.
The midfield has been neglected since Camara left. Bringing in players on loan like Matete to cover the energy & althetism we were short of. If you look at us, we try to be a passing team yet but we have no passing general in midfield who gets us moving forward.
What l miss about Schumacher was that l believed he was genuine. That he was, and still is, a nice guy. He had the ability to get the best out of a players like Whittaker & Azaz. He was flexible with his tactical approach. He change a game early enough that the subs coming on had enough time to impact the match.
Was it really good football though? I mean a pass & move style that had us opening up teams with ease. Or was it a very good counter attacking, transitional style that allowed us to exploit teams that left us space. What with the great individual goals we saw it looks a good style of football. Yet even now lm seeing issues which he has left us short in terms of attacking abilities & breakingteams down. Where is the width in this team? The wing play to create chances? Let's face it the only way we looked like scoring against Leicester was on the counter attack. Our strength under Schumacher. When we had the ball in & around their box we over hit passes or choose the wrong pass. Our execution was poor. This is why l want a new manager. For our football to evolve.
I think sometimes we been straved for such long periods of good football, that when we get a successful brand of football we are in amazement of it. Schumacher football was good. Successful. Better than we had since Holloway era. We should be using it as the next benchmark to beat.
The moment is gone. That fairytale is over. I notice we do this with players that were successful here too. Wanting them back, if they failing elsewhere.
It's not the fact the way Schumacher left us. I don't feel the anger like others. He did leave us in a way that put us in a pickle but that's just football for you.
I just think he evolved us as far as he could. He had a way to make this Argyle team over the last 18 months efficiently clinical in front of goal. It wasn't like we made loads of chances & wasted them. And so this made us a good team to watch. Yet he never sorted out the defence which was an absolute mess. And these defensive issues continued in the championship. How can you watch teams continuously run through you & think you are defensively coached well?
lpswich left back Leif Davies has played 40 matches. He has 2 goals & 17 assists & yet he does not affect the balance of their team (to the point his contribution is more postive than negatives) as he ploughs forward. The reason for this is they have midfielders who can cover the spaces & protect their back four. I honestly can't remember Argyle last really good CDM.
The midfield has been neglected since Camara left. Bringing in players on loan like Matete to cover the energy & althetism we were short of. If you look at us, we try to be a passing team yet but we have no passing general in midfield who gets us moving forward.
What l miss about Schumacher was that l believed he was genuine. That he was, and still is, a nice guy. He had the ability to get the best out of a players like Whittaker & Azaz. He was flexible with his tactical approach. He change a game early enough that the subs coming on had enough time to impact the match.
Was it really good football though? I mean a pass & move style that had us opening up teams with ease. Or was it a very good counter attacking, transitional style that allowed us to exploit teams that left us space. What with the great individual goals we saw it looks a good style of football. Yet even now lm seeing issues which he has left us short in terms of attacking abilities & breakingteams down. Where is the width in this team? The wing play to create chances? Let's face it the only way we looked like scoring against Leicester was on the counter attack. Our strength under Schumacher. When we had the ball in & around their box we over hit passes or choose the wrong pass. Our execution was poor. This is why l want a new manager. For our football to evolve.
I think sometimes we been straved for such long periods of good football, that when we get a successful brand of football we are in amazement of it. Schumacher football was good. Successful. Better than we had since Holloway era. We should be using it as the next benchmark to beat.
Last edited:
