- Joined
- Apr 8, 2025
- Messages
- 612
You being serious? Lowe had the likes of Mads, Riis, Thor etc. Hecky has had Dobbin, Devine, Offiah etc and still had a worse win rate than Lowe
Matchday Thread Sheffield Utd v PNE | 25.04.26 | KO: 3PM | Championship
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
- Messages
- 2,702
So Lowe had had a permanent striker who hit double figures regularly and wasted money on two players who ultimately proved to be unremarkable.
While Heckingbottom has made a sensible investment in the form of Offiah and has had to rely on loanees for creativity and attacking output. Because the permanent strikers we have are cheap squad fillers and a striker who draws lengthy suspensions to him like a magnet
Let's not brush over the fact Lowe also had Alan Browne and Daniel Johnson, who walked away for free because they didn't want to play under him. Riis was into his final year when Heckingbottom arrived too, so another player Lowe failed to get to sign on or accrue maximum value. Let's also not ignore that when Lowe arrived we actually had wingers (Sinclair, Barkhuizen) which he then didn't replace leaving us with this back three formation.
Let's also not gloss over the fact Lowe had Alvaro Fernandez (now at Real Madrid), Liam Millar (who wouldn't come back because of Lowe), Troy Parrott (tearing it up in Europe and the internationals), Liam Delap (now at Chelsea), Tom Cannon and Cameron Archer (both of whom the fanbase is largely desperate to have back). Yet there's a few of those loanees that Lowe failed to get anything out of who have gone on to far better things.
Lowe also had Daniel Iversen when he arrived. Heckingbottom had a mentally shot Woodman and Dai Cornell.
There are legitimate criticisms we can make of Heckingbottom and he probably should have done better this half a season, but let's not pretend Lowe somehow had a worse hand than Heckingbottom. He took a squad with flexibility and gutted it of flexibility, he had a squad with some sellable assets, he failed to make any significant income (while Heckingbottom actually got something in for Mads and Thor, the two players you highlighted). In fact I dare say Heckingbottom had the worse starting hand and a lot of that is due to Ryan Lowe.
Browne I will give you but DJ was finished as a player at this level in that final year. The fact he ended up in the Turkish 2nd Division tells you a lot. You cannot pin on Lowe Father Time catching up with DJ.
Both are poor managers.
Just 3 Home Wins since Nov 5th. That will be 6 months on Tuesday. Grasp this little horrible fact. Lucky to still be in a job, new owner or otherwise.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
- Messages
- 2,702
And yet Daniel Johnson was our second top scorer and our top assister that season. Also another leader out of the dressing room that Lowe would complain two years later lacked leaders.
For what it's worth, I don't necessarily disagree with the point you're making. I recognise DJ has gone backwards since and I'm not saying we shouldn't have been looking to improve upon him at that stage. However, it's illustrative of how much we went backwards under Lowe and how he failed to replace core parts of the squad.
As I said above, there are legitimate criticisms you can make of Heckingbottom and you have made some. I agree with you that stat isn't good enough.
If you want my perspective, I don't think we'd made enough of set pieces when we were struggling. I think Callum Lang wasn't a sensible signing (even if I could see the logic). I think there are times where he's been too cautious, like when he said we didn't have the midfield engine to play a 4-3-3, yet eventually Moran and Devine proved we probably could (although we lack the wingers IMO). I do think we need to get Small as much game time as possible (although I accept I don't know his fitness or where he is mentally).
I'm not at the point where I think he's a horrible manager. I think he's had a difficult time of it due to some circumstances and I do see him getting blamed for some things beyond his control. I think he's correctly highlighted all the areas we need to improve, which is more than Lowe did. I can appreciate if you don't think he's the right man to bring that improvement though and I can appreciate he's made mistakes.
My initial response was basically to highlight I just don't accept the premise that Heckingbottom has had a stronger squad or has had easier time of it than Lowe. I think Heckingbottom had a worse starting point and our final statistically anomalous season under Lowe has masked how much of a crap starting point Heckingbottom had (this is without even mentioning blowing our money on Jeppe Okkels).
Last edited:
@Jürgen Krapp
This weekend is Heckingbottoms 100th game in charge of PNE, 88 League, 12 Cups.
Fair to say that 100 games is more than a fair benchmark from which to judge, especially in this modern "Fire / Hire" footballing world that we live in.
This weekend is Heckingbottoms 100th game in charge of PNE, 88 League, 12 Cups.
Fair to say that 100 games is more than a fair benchmark from which to judge, especially in this modern "Fire / Hire" footballing world that we live in.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 6,000
I've noticed elsewhere the narrative has changed to the lack of home wins recently.
Never really understood why home/away results get brought up as a reason to sack someone. Yes it's disappointing as a fan if you've got a season ticket and they're better away, or you go to a lot of away games but the away form is poor, but it's about the results in general.
Same with win percentage being used when draws exist in football. A lot. You're not going to get too far with a poor win percentage, but also doesn't mean you're going to be relegated either.
Performed way above expectation in the first half of the season, and below expectation in the second half of the season. Yes, some other clubs probably would've sacked him during that run, but mid table is where we're at, and that's where this squad belongs. Certainly is what my expectations were after the summer window shut anyway. Start of the season I thought would be more bottom six, but then after couple more additions prior to the window closing, mid table seemed right.
And that's not taking into account losing your no1 GK for so long. Again.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 4,488
Aye he took us from being a relegation candidate (which we were heading to under Lowe) to being a solid midtable side again
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 4,488
Lowe signed the likes of Mads, Thor, etc. Riis was a Neil signing but still a better striker than the ones we've currently got I'd argue. Hecky signed Dobbin, Devine, Offiah, etc. With our current squad, are you saying we should be in the playoffs or has Hecky got us where you'd expect us to be considering the strength of our squad?
Also, as has been said elsewhere, win percentage is daft stat to focus on generally because draws earn you valuable points. Plus stats without any context don't mean anything. It's like saying a goalkeeper is terrible because he keeps conceding goals even though they could be pulling off quality save after save. A shit squad leads to shit results. That's what happened last season. This season, our win percentage is fairly normal for us because Heckingbottom improved the squad.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
- Messages
- 2,702
I have a judgment on him as a manager, unfortunately, it's not a straightforward 'good' or 'bad'. I don't necessarily have a firm judgement on whether he should stay or go because I don't think Heckingbottom is the main definitive factor in if we're going to be successful in the future.
I think too as a culture we're quick to point to managers and win percentages without considering the bigger picture. I don't know what that bigger picture looks like under Zedan. I also think we sometimes look at sacking as a solution when sometimes we ought to wonder what we can do to improve the current situation. Plymouth didn't sack Cleverly, they brought Derek Adams in and look at them now. I sometimes wonder if what Alan Irvine needed was a Director of Football because he was a great coach who was awful in the transfer market.
So here's my assessment of Heckingbottom as a manager. He's a pragmatist with a sense of the bigger picture. Is that what the club needed when he was brought in? Yes. Is it what it needs now? I don't know. Strangely, I don't think he'd be a bad Sporting Director.
What I like:
- He has an actual transfer strategy (focusing on players to develop) and he's proactive in bringing money in. He's stepped up to do the job Ridsdale should be doing.
- He doesn't bullshit us about our ability to develop players via our academy. I think the honesty is important in setting expectations.
- He's actually more tactically flexible than people give him credit for. He has an aspiration to play differently, he just feels he can't and not necessarily unfairly
- He recognises what gaps are missing in the squad and tries to rectify them. I accept the recruitment isn't always successful, however he's not doing silly things like signing Thordarsson to replace Alan Browne or getting rid of our fastest CB and bringing in Jack Whatmough. e.g. We needed a target man, he got Smith. He identified the correct issue but we got the wrong player. See Josh Bowler too. Now is that him or budget? I'm inclined to think budget.
- While people will moan about Dobbin being subbed off etc, he's managed the fitness of some key players quite well.
- His staff appointments have been on ability/reputation rather than nepotistic
What I don't like:
- His approach to officials is incredibly unprofessional and achieves very little
- I think he could have more faith in some players
- I think he can be a little conservative at times
- We could do with a little more creativity in how we create chances (e.g. set pieces)
I'm not against him going because I think it's important that under the new owner everyone pulls together in a coherent strategy. There's a lot of work to do and it needs to begin quickly.
I'm not against him staying because I don't think he's a stubborn idealist who will work against the owners objectives. He brought youth players through at Sheffield United, but they have a better academy than us (although I doubt he'll be around long enough to do it here even if the Dome is built next year). His transfer activity has broadly been good and with a bit of backing who knows what will happen.
You want your manager to fit your club culture. If you want to bring kids through, you don't want a wheeler-dealer like Harry Redknapp. If you want a manager to bring in instant results on a low budget you don't want an idealist like Vincent Kompany. I don't have a strong opinion on if Heckingbottom should be here because I don't know what our club culture will be.
When he was hired, my desire was for a new Craig Brown. Someone who can evolve the club for someone else to pick up. If he does that but can't get us over the line that would be a success in my eyes.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 4,488
That's the thing, being midtable means there's always something to find fault with. Some seasons it'll be home wins, some seasons it'll be away wins.
Even with our bad run of form, I'll contend it was bad but there's massive caveats around it when we factor in the loss of Armstrong and Iversen. However good Cornell was, there's a clear lack of quality among our backup keepers. And without Armstrong, we lacked a ball carrier in midfield. Even after making 16 signings, there's still clear issues within the squad which just highlights how many issues were created in the squad building of our previous managers.
I think people have focused too much on the micro issues of individual results rather than looking at the bigger picture of where we are in the table and of how long it takes to address key issues created by our situation. Without any real budget, whatever changes that need to be enacted to make us a more successful team will take more than a season to achieve. And even with a significant improvement to the budget, we aren't necessarily going to be massively outperforming the likes of Hull or Derby. This season was always about stabilising for me and we've actually performed better than my expectations in a number of ways. I'm still amazed with how dramatically the quality of the squad has improved considering how little money there was within the budget.
I'm willing to bat for Heckingbottom simply because I do not understand the expectations other people have when they're levelling criticism at him. Our position in the table is fine, our transfer strategy is good, we now have players we can develop and potentially sell-on in the future. There's a clear long term strategy in place that we're making positive steps with and it will take more than one season no matter what. This is far more important to me than making the football more entertaining. Even with the frustrations around entertainment (and formation), I get a lot of Heckingbottom's arguments about the types of players we need. Even with the question marks over bad form, it shouldn't go understated that our form in the first half of the season was among our very best we've delivered since returning to this division. I can take the rough with the smooth because I think we're moving in the right direction.
To be fair, Heckingbottom has been better backed. Spending £6.2m in three windows, signing 15 players.
We spent about £5m in six windows while Lowe was here, but about £1.8m of that was on Okkels & Thordarson, who he didn't manage. We didn't pay a single fee in his first 18 months here.
Lowe was and is shit, but he had poorer squads than the one we have this season. I doubt he wanted the likes of Diaby, Onomah, and Wickham.
We spent about £5m in six windows while Lowe was here, but about £1.8m of that was on Okkels & Thordarson, who he didn't manage. We didn't pay a single fee in his first 18 months here.
Lowe was and is shit, but he had poorer squads than the one we have this season. I doubt he wanted the likes of Diaby, Onomah, and Wickham.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 4,488
I think Heckingbottom has spent more because he sold more. Hasn't he made the point before that the money spent on players last summer came from players we sold? To spend more, we need to sell well ultimately and he did well to get the fees he got for some of the players.
With Lowe, Wickham and Diaby were already in the building when he joined. Wickham was signed by McAvoy. Onomah joined very much in the middle of Lowe's tenure and Ridsdale always makes the point that the managers approve every transfer. Plus in terms of backing, wasn't Osmajic our record transfer fee at one point? The squads Lowe had were shit but he made them shit largely. I still believe the squad he left us with was our worst squad we've had since rejoining the Championship though.
With our squad this season, we've definitely had worse squads but there's still key limitations present that have held us back this season. The overall quality of the players is fine on the whole but we're missing certain types of players but we also lack quality in specific areas. The way I view it is that the overall average is good but there's more extremes in the quality range than we've had with previous squads.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Messages
- 6,000
Lowe would've been around the £6m mark, although as you say, portion of that is Okkels and Thor, but he didn't really make any money from players, so his net spend in that time would been more than Heckingbottom's.
I do think he slightly overachieved overall with his finishes though compared to some of the squads during that time. The writing was on the wall on that last season though despite the 10th place as the data was a big drop off from previous, then the squad got poorer again. Whilst his finishes were respectable, he was part of overseeing the decline in the quality of the squad, which Heckingbottom has helped to try and shift it back to ok.
I think with the likes of Onomah though, it was either him, or no one. The money recouped by Heckingbottom probably accounts for a quarter of his spend, and they were all signed under Lowe to be fair.
I'm not aware of any bids for key players while Lowe was here, and the squad players weren't worth a penny. We released some serious shite while he was here. So not sure that lack of sales is on him.
All in all, I think Lowe managed a higher league position with a weaker team and squad.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
- Messages
- 2,702
A bit of added context: I think I'm right in saying Josh Onomah was identified by MRKT Insights (I think I recall @Bobbage flagging up tweets from Andy McGreggor), and we offered him a contract extension at the end of the season.
From what I can see, as a collection of permanent players Lowe had an alright starting point and then weakened the permanent players. Heckingbottom had a weak collection of permanent players and has broadly strengthened. In terms of loans I honestly don't think you can claim Lowe had a weak hand except for the final season when Ramsay was brought in.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
- Messages
- 2,702
I mean realistically, it's on Peter Ridsdale.
But if it's on the manager, to say Heckingbottom's spend is about a quarter is lowballing it. Frokjaer is supposed to be £1.5m, we supposedly made our money back on Okkels (£1.7m), Thor is another we've supposed to have made our money back on. In three players you've got to about £4m. Then Theo Mawene was a 'significant undisclosed fee', Whatmough was about half a million (if I recall correctly) and Stewart was probably a couple of hundred grand. We won't have made profit, but it's a lot more than a quarter.
Equally, let's actually look at the quality of those players sold. Under Lowe Ridsdale would often handwave and say "You need somone to be interested", I don't think any of the players we've sold under Heckingbottom you could realistically say were key players. Some like Okkels and Stewart probably fit into the 'shite' category. Yet under Heckingbottom we've managed to sell them.
Again the main culprit is Ridsdale, but I don't think it's worth pretending the transfer activity had nothing to do with Lowe. We didn't receive bids but we didn't go out and encourage teams to bid either, while now we do.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 4,488
But ultimately the league positions don't really matter much since we ended up midtable. The problem was that Lowe was overseeing a decline in the quality of the squad. If you pardon me for being a bit flippant, however "successful" he was in achieving his Championship participation medals, they don't really matter when the end result is that he makes it harder for the next guy to do anything.
Ultimately there weren't any bids for key players during Lowe's time because he hadn't signed anyone other clubs thought were worth buying. Plus he didn't seem to know how to shift the dross we still had around. Contract extensions were handed out far too easily too.
In terms of backing, Lowe was incredibly well backed. Considering the £5m spent that you're talking about is from basically no players sold. Plus he was allowed to make wholesale changes to the backroom staff including signing his mates up as part of the scouting setup. A number of players were paid to leave during his time too. The club even backed Lowe over Browne despite the level of negativity coming from the fans and Lowe's failure to achieve anything of note during 3 seasons here. The club stood by him as best as they could and even failed to sack him in the end.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2021
- Messages
- 4,488
The managers often have quite an active role in transfers under the current setup. Every transfer and contract extension is supposedly signed off by them and the overall strategy is probably defined by them. I think Ridsdale is right that his involvement is largely on the financial side and contractual details. Who we end up signing is still the responsibility of the manager in my mind so Lowe is responsible for the players we signed, for me.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 16,713
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again but I honestly believe that had Lowe remained our manager last season we would have been relegated and playing League One football this season.