Changes for Fulham?

[seventwo]

TM saying it's a tactic day and let's see what happens this afternoon

[champs95]

You would have thought Cahill going to Palace would mean Dann is very much available.
No for one second does that mean we can suddenly find money we simply don't have.
He would solve a massive problem we have though, and could turn things round quite quickly.
We desperately need a RB if he openly doesn't fancy Nymabe and hasn't bothered giving Rankin Costello a squad number.
We could easily get dragged into a fight to stay up if we are not careful.
That lad from City hasn't come to play RB, and that simply isn't his position. So should not even be an option.
If he can't play left side of central defence I am offically worried moving forwards.

[AucklandRover]

It's the last day of the transfer window.
TM promised defenders but we have shipped 4 out and brought just one in.
Any manager of any business will tell you that the buck stops with them.
They ARE held to account for the errors if their staff, no question.
I hope and expect TM to get his defence set up more effectively but if he doesn't it will be time to go.
He has until the end of November.

Seventwo - people keep putting words into my mouth.
Several times, I have acknowledged the manager's ultimate responsibility and agreed that he will pay for failure with his job. Your deadline sounds about right.
However, we simply do not know what has gone on in the market-process, and that includes how much say the manager has on the finance side. Looking through the final day's deals in general, it is still noticeable that a large majority of deals below PL level were loans.

[AucklandRover]

Champs - you have not replied to the points I made in Post 18.

[champs95]

Champs - you have not replied to the points I made in Post 18.

And you do raise some fair and good points. But are you saying the manager has little or no impact?

Me personally, if you recall my comments when we came up? I was extremely complimentary about TM.
The reason was, I thought his superb management was a big factor in going up.
I thought he had done a wonderful job, at stabilizing the club, while creating a good side.
That's my own opinion. And I stick by it.

If he is (imo) accountable in the good times, and able to take those accolades. Then he has to be accountable if/when things go wrong. I don't feel I am being controversial or unfair in doing so.

But I disagree that managers aren't important. They are massively. IMO they make the difference at our level. Th reason Norwich got up last season? Starts with that manager .......

[AucklandRover]

I don't dispute that a manager will be one very important factor in any given season.
I have two general reservations or additions I'd like to make, though.
1) As I've said many times, I completely reject the notion that there are "good" and "bad" managers, full-stop, except at the extremes. The evidence for this is available for all to see by glancing at every manager's record on Wiki or Transfermarkt. I have no idea why many fans are so unwilling to accept this.
2) I said, "...one very important factor", but the emphasis is on the word "one"! I want to tear my hair out when I see - on the Telegraph site - comments like: "It's the manager's fault. End of...".
So that means none of the following are significant? a) individual players' form in a particular match; b) the ups-and-downs of a player's form across a season (is Moeen Ali suddenly a "bad" cricketer?); c) confidence: to me this is hugely neglected as a factor, both for individuals and for the team as a whole; d) that unpredictable and almost indefinable criterion of whether a particular combination gels or not; e) independent decision-making by players in reaction to the way the game is going or the impact they have had thus far; f) luck and the run of the ball (it's said that these even out across a season, but there are moments where the fine margins are very costly); g) weather and pitch conditions; h) injuries and illness; i) the club's ability to purchase new players who improve the team; j) decision-making by the officials; k) the opposition (some posters seem to believe that it doesn't MATTER what the opposition do as long as our own manager "gets it right"; l) the unpredictability of the success of any signing (look at how many multi-million PL signings from the last two seasons have now been quietly "moved on"!); m) consistency (although this is another elusive factor). There are probably others I haven't thought of.
Now, I don't deny for a minute that a manager can have an impact in some of those areas too, but it's this simplistic notion that "it's all down to the manager" that makes me think that some posters are born anew every morning with no knowledge of football history and reality stored in their heads.