Who's the next coach abeg?

[ANC]

Lars Lagerbäck and the late Keshi were probably the last decent hire by NFF.
Something is wrong, it is high time NFF looks at herself and the system.

[packerland]

I am book marking all of this threads for future remimnder. Because I know in 2 years another Wowo movement will want another heeyou journey man coach to coach Nigeria. It doesn't matter if he was fired from Kuwait or even Bel muda triangle. All that matters to them is he is a foreigner and he is a white man. His coaching philosophy or his ability doesn't matter.

Ohenhen1

But that isn't new. It keeps re-occurring i.e. from indigenuous to foreign and back and so forth. What else is new?

Ohenhen1 is part of the problem. It’s not about hiring foreign or local coaches it’s about how you run things. Keshi was constantly complaining about one thing or the other. They even wanted to fire him at AFCON had he not won that third game against Ethiopia.

[packerland]

As much stick as Pinnick used to get on these pages, this is one area that he excelled in. Finding sponsors and fundraising. We are back to civil servants sitting their butts in executive chairs waiting on govt funding to pay coaches. This is one reason why I will never classify Pinnick as a failure. I met him personally at Lagos Airport and thanked him for making the NFF self sufficient when everyone else was spitting at him.

Pinnick was begging at the end which is why he agreed to fire Rohr. What I liked about him was the he was visible. This Gusau dude is hiding to speak to the public . It seems like subordinates talk far more than him. Tufiakwa!

[packerland]

We are truly a poor nation. We can’t pay this dude 600k a year but the US pays their current female & male coaches $1.3M plus bonuses. Soccer is even the 4th popular sports in the US. I don’t want to here about sponsors because sacking Peseiro should be a national matter.

[ANC]

We are truly a poor nation. We can’t pay this dude 600k a year but the US pays their current female & male coaches $1.3M plus bonuses. Soccer is even the 4th popular sports in the US. I don’t want to here about sponsors because sacking Peseiro should be a national matter.

poorly managed nation.

[nzeogwu]

We are not a poor country but poorly managed by incompetent and unimaginative people

[ohenhen1]

I am book marking all of this threads for future remimnder. Because I know in 2 years another Wowo movement will want another heeyou journey man coach to coach Nigeria. It doesn't matter if he was fired from Kuwait or even Bel muda triangle. All that matters to them is he is a foreigner and he is a white man. His coaching philosophy or his ability doesn't matter.

Ohenhen1

But that isn't new. It keeps re-occurring i.e. from indigenuous to foreign and back and so forth. What else is new?

Ohenhen1 is part of the problem. It’s not about hiring foreign or local coaches it’s about how you run things. Keshi was constantly complaining about one thing or the other. They even wanted to fire him at AFCON had he not won that third game against Ethiopia.

Wben the head is rotten, every other part of the body is also rotten. The NFF is the bigtgest problem, The coaching hire is also a big problem. But we have had coaches in the past that have succeded inspite of the NFF. I don't care if the coach is foreign based or home based. All I want is for the coach not to be a journey man coach that failed at his last appointment. And will scout the local league. Rohr was fired by Niger republic. Pesiero was fired by Venezuela with a bad record. I prefer a young and innovative coach that will have a balanced team.

[ohenhen1]

We are not a poor nation. They prefer to loot the money and store it in domicile accounts.

[packerland]

I am book marking all of this threads for future remimnder. Because I know in 2 years another Wowo movement will want another heeyou journey man coach to coach Nigeria. It doesn't matter if he was fired from Kuwait or even Bel muda triangle. All that matters to them is he is a foreigner and he is a white man. His coaching philosophy or his ability doesn't matter.

Ohenhen1

But that isn't new. It keeps re-occurring i.e. from indigenuous to foreign and back and so forth. What else is new?

Ohenhen1 is part of the problem. It’s not about hiring foreign or local coaches it’s about how you run things. Keshi was constantly complaining about one thing or the other. They even wanted to fire him at AFCON had he not won that third game against Ethiopia.

Wben the head is rotten, every other part of the body is also rotten. The NFF is the bigtgest problem, The coaching hire is also a big problem. But we have had coaches in the past that have succeded inspite of the NFF. I don't care if the coach is foreign based or home based. All I want is for the coach not to be a journey man coach that failed at his last appointment. And will scout the local league. Rohr was fired by Niger republic. Pesiero was fired by Venezuela with a bad record.

You do care if the coach is black or white (tell the truth bro ). They can’t afford a successful coach with experience. I want them to hire an average coach that is willing to put in the work or a young up and coming coach. They seem to be hiring journeymen coaches that are well below average with poor records. Please tell me the local coach you said was successful without support?

[ohenhen1]

I am book marking all of this threads for future remimnder. Because I know in 2 years another Wowo movement will want another heeyou journey man coach to coach Nigeria. It doesn't matter if he was fired from Kuwait or even Bel muda triangle. All that matters to them is he is a foreigner and he is a white man. His coaching philosophy or his ability doesn't matter.

Ohenhen1

But that isn't new. It keeps re-occurring i.e. from indigenuous to foreign and back and so forth. What else is new?

Ohenhen1 is part of the problem. It’s not about hiring foreign or local coa
Mches it’s about how you run things. Keshi was constantly complaining about one thing or the other. They even wanted to fire him at AFCON had he not won that third game against Ethiopia.

Wben the head is rotten, every other part of the body is also rotten. The NFF is the bigtgest problem, The coaching hire is also a big problem. But we have had coaches in the past that have succeded inspite of the NFF. I don't care if the coach is foreign based or home based. All I want is for the coach not to be a journey man coach that failed at his last appointment. And will scout the local league. Rohr was fired by Niger republic. Pesiero was fired by Venezuela with a bad record.

You do care if the coach is black or white (tell the truth bro ). They can’t afford a successful coach with experience. I want them to hire an average coach that is willing to put in the work or a young up and coming coach. They seem to be hiring journeymen coaches that are well below average with poor records. Please tell me the local coach you said was successful without support?

My preference is a local coach because they tend to live in Nigeria and scout the local league more than foreign coaches. Also helps encourage indigenous coach. Nigerian coaches don't get jobs in Europe or in the US. But I am pragmatic. If the foreign coach is good and will win us games, I will not object to a foreign coach. The problem is the foreign coaches they are hiring are not good enough and they are making excuses for them.

[Damunk]

Thank you icee.
This is the most objective and enlightening post on this whole matter.
All the rest na feelings.

I don't think Pisero or Pisoro is great. I do think he has a playing style. In most of his games, he favours fast transitions via the wings, playing from the back. Here's a link - We had crosses into the box in double digits -

We had 5 corner kicks to 0 in addition to the open field wing attacks. The corner ratio was similar in the Mozambique game we had 10 vs 1 for Mozambique

Back to open play attacks from the wings: Just as you can see in video link vs Zim, passes were mistimed with folks not on the same page. The idea is the right one - I have seen this wing transition consistently but execution has deteriorated - in prior games we had several clear cut chances and shots on goals.

1. Against Lesotho, we had a total of 14 shots, 8 shots on goal vs Lesotho's 2 shots, we drew 1:1
2. Against Mozambique we had 9 shots on vs 3 MZM. Of the 9, 6 of them where on goal - all of 3 of Mozambique's shots were on goal and they scored 2 of the 3. (sources - https://www.soccerpunter.com/match/1901 ... vs-Nigeria)
3. Against Saudi, we had 15 shots against Saudi's 4. of the 4 of Saudi's shots, 3 of them were on Goal and they scored 2, game ended 2-2.

You see a clear pattern - we concede > 50% of shots against us but more key is..it doesn't have to be more than 4 shots. The latter is the most telling. In many cases we are conceding more than 60% of our shots on goal against us and WE are not converting as many of the shots from the chances we create.

The above is why I am not jumping on the new coach bandwagon. The data tells me we create loads of chances EXCEPT yesterday, the crosses didn't result in attempts on goal - I see a chemistry issue here. Is it then due to selection or players that dropped out, logistics or the coaching actually is that bad?

We are not Lethal off the chances we create

And the big one - you only need one shot or two to score against us no matter the distance. I will do a summary on distance soon going back to the Ghana game. I think Uzo may have some sort of an eye /coordination problem - I'm serious about this. If that's the case, start someone else

I look forward to your further analysis as promised.
I much prefer this kind of breakdown rather than joining noisy choruses to sack the coach with no idea of a succession plan.

[Damunk]

We are truly a poor nation. We can’t pay this dude 600k a year but the US pays their current female & male coaches $1.3M plus bonuses. Soccer is even the 4th popular sports in the US. I don’t want to here about sponsors because sacking Peseiro should be a national matter.

No way should we be comparing ourselves to the USA, but at least we can compare to what middle level European nations are paying.
My issue is that if and when we hire a local coach, we have to pay him properly.
We can’t be advocating for a local coach and then pay him peanuts because he is one of our own.
Keshi fought for equality and respect for African coaches.
He will be turning in his grave if we hire a Nigerian and pay him a fraction of what Keshi was able to successfully negotiate for himself.

But I have a feeling that this will become a tricky “leave that wan first” matter.

[Dammy]

From Le Guen to Rohr to Peseiro, we seem to have an interest in coaches with their best days behind them.
If we cannot get an up and coming coach, we may as well invest in our local coaches and give them all the necessary support

[Damunk]

From Le Guen to Rohr to Peseiro, we seem to have an interest in coaches with their best days behind them.
If we cannot get an up and coming coach, we may as well invest in our local coaches and give them all the necessary support

It’s a catch-22 and I don’t think anyone has a solution that ticks all or even most of the right boxes.

1. We can’t afford a coach of proven international quality.
2. An “up and coming coach” is a bit too ambiguous. What’s the definition of such a coach? All it suggests is that he is young with at best a ‘promising’ record, but no real achievements.
If he is truly ‘up and coming’ will he want to come to this our Nigeria with all our ish? Why wouldn’t he just stay in one of the European league systems to develop his pedigree even further in a stable environment? Will an ‘up and coming’ coach even survive Nigerian fans, even with the backing of the NFF?
3. Which leaves us with our local coaches, and that debate is familiar to everyone: Finidi. Amuneke. Eguavon. Salisu. Also a number of ‘up and coming’ NPFL coaches that will probably be hired strictly on faith and plenti prayers.

Never underestimate the formidable role of Nigerian fans.
We no get time like that o. One misstep and the knives are out.
Oyibo coaches even have it good.
We eat our own.

It’s not beans, this coach thing.

[Lolly]

Lars Lagerbäck and the late Keshi were probably the last decent hire by NFF.
Something is wrong, it is high time NFF looks at herself and the system.

Show some appreciation for Rohr. The guy has a decent record, better than Keshi and Lagerback. Unfortunately, he couldn’t deliver a tournament title which is where Keshi did better than him.

[Lolly]

We are truly a poor nation. We can’t pay this dude 600k a year but the US pays their current female & male coaches $1.3M plus bonuses. Soccer is even the 4th popular sports in the US. I don’t want to here about sponsors because sacking Peseiro should be a national matter.

poorly managed nation.

NFF is independent of government. So those managing the nation shouldn’t be blamed for their incompetence or corrupt ways.

[packerland]

We are truly a poor nation. We can’t pay this dude 600k a year but the US pays their current female & male coaches $1.3M plus bonuses. Soccer is even the 4th popular sports in the US. I don’t want to here about sponsors because sacking Peseiro should be a national matter.

poorly managed nation.

NFF is independent of government. So those managing the nation shouldn’t be blamed for their incompetence or corrupt ways.

I thinks he’s saying that the people that manage/govern our country are not different from the people that run NFF.

[Cellular]

I don't think Pisero or Pisoro is great. I do think he has a playing style. In most of his games, he favours fast transitions via the wings, playing from the back. Here's a link - We had crosses into the box in double digits -

We had 5 corner kicks to 0 in addition to the open field wing attacks. The corner ratio was similar in the Mozambique game we had 10 vs 1 for Mozambique

Back to open play attacks from the wings: Just as you can see in video link vs Zim, passes were mistimed with folks not on the same page. The idea is the right one - I have seen this wing transition consistently but execution has deteriorated - in prior games we had several clear cut chances and shots on goals.

1. Against Lesotho, we had a total of 14 shots, 8 shots on goal vs Lesotho's 2 shots, we drew 1:1
2. Against Mozambique we had 9 shots on vs 3 MZM. Of the 9, 6 of them where on goal - all of 3 of Mozambique's shots were on goal and they scored 2 of the 3. (sources - https://www.soccerpunter.com/match/1901 ... vs-Nigeria)
3. Against Saudi, we had 15 shots against Saudi's 4. of the 4 of Saudi's shots, 3 of them were on Goal and they scored 2, game ended 2-2.

You see a clear pattern - we concede > 50% of shots against us but more key is..it doesn't have to be more than 4 shots. The latter is the most telling. In many cases we are conceding more than 60% of our shots on goal against us and WE are not converting as many of the shots from the chances we create.

The above is why I am not jumping on the new coach bandwagon. The data tells me we create loads of chances EXCEPT yesterday, the crosses didn't result in attempts on goal - I see a chemistry issue here. Is it then due to selection or players that dropped out, logistics or the coaching actually is that bad?

We are not Lethal off the chances we create

And the big one - you only need one shot or two to score against us no matter the distance. I will do a summary on distance soon going back to the Ghana game. I think Uzo may have some sort of an eye /coordination problem - I'm serious about this. If that's the case, start someone else

Great post!

I have asked repeatedly why no one is talking about how poor our striking efficiency is.
We know about how poor the goalie is.
But the strikers have been poor as well.

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

I don't think Pisero or Pisoro is great. I do think he has a playing style. In most of his games, he favours fast transitions via the wings, playing from the back. Here's a link - We had crosses into the box in double digits -

We had 5 corner kicks to 0 in addition to the open field wing attacks. The corner ratio was similar in the Mozambique game we had 10 vs 1 for Mozambique

Back to open play attacks from the wings: Just as you can see in video link vs Zim, passes were mistimed with folks not on the same page. The idea is the right one - I have seen this wing transition consistently but execution has deteriorated - in prior games we had several clear cut chances and shots on goals.

1. Against Lesotho, we had a total of 14 shots, 8 shots on goal vs Lesotho's 2 shots, we drew 1:1
2. Against Mozambique we had 9 shots on vs 3 MZM. Of the 9, 6 of them where on goal - all of 3 of Mozambique's shots were on goal and they scored 2 of the 3. (sources - https://www.soccerpunter.com/match/1901 ... vs-Nigeria)
3. Against Saudi, we had 15 shots against Saudi's 4. of the 4 of Saudi's shots, 3 of them were on Goal and they scored 2, game ended 2-2.

You see a clear pattern - we concede > 50% of shots against us but more key is..it doesn't have to be more than 4 shots. The latter is the most telling. In many cases we are conceding more than 60% of our shots on goal against us and WE are not converting as many of the shots from the chances we create.

The above is why I am not jumping on the new coach bandwagon. The data tells me we create loads of chances EXCEPT yesterday, the crosses didn't result in attempts on goal - I see a chemistry issue here. Is it then due to selection or players that dropped out, logistics or the coaching actually is that bad?

We are not Lethal off the chances we create

And the big one - you only need one shot or two to score against us no matter the distance. I will do a summary on distance soon going back to the Ghana game. I think Uzo may have some sort of an eye /coordination problem - I'm serious about this. If that's the case, start someone else

Great post!

I have asked repeatedly why no one is talking about how poor our striking efficiency is.
We know about how poor the goalie is.
But the strikers have been poor as well.

In terms of output, the strikers have been poor but poor performances by historically good strikers is usually a strong indication of a sub standard midfield. Not too long, after the Lesotho match, I pointed out that out of 8 total shots, we had 6 on goal. None of those were by the strikers. If the strikers aren’t taking our shots, who the heck is? The evidence is clear; the midfield is not doing it’s primary job, which is acting as a conduit to the strikers


Cheers.

[Cellular]

I don't think Pisero or Pisoro is great. I do think he has a playing style. In most of his games, he favours fast transitions via the wings, playing from the back. Here's a link - We had crosses into the box in double digits -

We had 5 corner kicks to 0 in addition to the open field wing attacks. The corner ratio was similar in the Mozambique game we had 10 vs 1 for Mozambique

Back to open play attacks from the wings: Just as you can see in video link vs Zim, passes were mistimed with folks not on the same page. The idea is the right one - I have seen this wing transition consistently but execution has deteriorated - in prior games we had several clear cut chances and shots on goals.

1. Against Lesotho, we had a total of 14 shots, 8 shots on goal vs Lesotho's 2 shots, we drew 1:1
2. Against Mozambique we had 9 shots on vs 3 MZM. Of the 9, 6 of them where on goal - all of 3 of Mozambique's shots were on goal and they scored 2 of the 3. (sources - https://www.soccerpunter.com/match/1901 ... vs-Nigeria)
3. Against Saudi, we had 15 shots against Saudi's 4. of the 4 of Saudi's shots, 3 of them were on Goal and they scored 2, game ended 2-2.

You see a clear pattern - we concede > 50% of shots against us but more key is..it doesn't have to be more than 4 shots. The latter is the most telling. In many cases we are conceding more than 60% of our shots on goal against us and WE are not converting as many of the shots from the chances we create.

The above is why I am not jumping on the new coach bandwagon. The data tells me we create loads of chances EXCEPT yesterday, the crosses didn't result in attempts on goal - I see a chemistry issue here. Is it then due to selection or players that dropped out, logistics or the coaching actually is that bad?

We are not Lethal off the chances we create

And the big one - you only need one shot or two to score against us no matter the distance. I will do a summary on distance soon going back to the Ghana game. I think Uzo may have some sort of an eye /coordination problem - I'm serious about this. If that's the case, start someone else

Great post!

I have asked repeatedly why no one is talking about how poor our striking efficiency is.
We know about how poor the goalie is.
But the strikers have been poor as well.

In terms of output, the strikers have been poor but poor performances by historically good strikers is usually a strong indication of a sub standard midfield. Not too long, after the Lesotho match, I pointed out that out of 8 total shots, we had 6 on goal. None of those were by the strikers. If the strikers aren’t taking our shots, who the heck is? The evidence is clear; the midfield is not doing it’s primary job, which is acting as a conduit to the strikers


Cheers.

Nothing more to add...

[txj]

I don't think Pisero or Pisoro is great. I do think he has a playing style. In most of his games, he favours fast transitions via the wings, playing from the back. Here's a link - We had crosses into the box in double digits -

We had 5 corner kicks to 0 in addition to the open field wing attacks. The corner ratio was similar in the Mozambique game we had 10 vs 1 for Mozambique

Back to open play attacks from the wings: Just as you can see in video link vs Zim, passes were mistimed with folks not on the same page. The idea is the right one - I have seen this wing transition consistently but execution has deteriorated - in prior games we had several clear cut chances and shots on goals.

1. Against Lesotho, we had a total of 14 shots, 8 shots on goal vs Lesotho's 2 shots, we drew 1:1
2. Against Mozambique we had 9 shots on vs 3 MZM. Of the 9, 6 of them where on goal - all of 3 of Mozambique's shots were on goal and they scored 2 of the 3. (sources - https://www.soccerpunter.com/match/1901 ... vs-Nigeria)
3. Against Saudi, we had 15 shots against Saudi's 4. of the 4 of Saudi's shots, 3 of them were on Goal and they scored 2, game ended 2-2.

You see a clear pattern - we concede > 50% of shots against us but more key is..it doesn't have to be more than 4 shots. The latter is the most telling. In many cases we are conceding more than 60% of our shots on goal against us and WE are not converting as many of the shots from the chances we create.

The above is why I am not jumping on the new coach bandwagon. The data tells me we create loads of chances EXCEPT yesterday, the crosses didn't result in attempts on goal - I see a chemistry issue here. Is it then due to selection or players that dropped out, logistics or the coaching actually is that bad?

We are not Lethal off the chances we create

And the big one - you only need one shot or two to score against us no matter the distance. I will do a summary on distance soon going back to the Ghana game. I think Uzo may have some sort of an eye /coordination problem - I'm serious about this. If that's the case, start someone else

Great post!

I have asked repeatedly why no one is talking about how poor our striking efficiency is.
We know about how poor the goalie is.
But the strikers have been poor as well.

In terms of output, the strikers have been poor but poor performances by historically good strikers is usually a strong indication of a sub standard midfield. Not too long, after the Lesotho match, I pointed out that out of 8 total shots, we had 6 on goal. None of those were by the strikers. If the strikers aren’t taking our shots, who the heck is? The evidence is clear; the midfield is not doing it’s primary job, which is acting as a conduit to the strikers


Cheers.

Nothing more to add...

But he doesn't know what he's talking about. If we are creating loads of chances, then its a matter of efficiency of the strikers. Efficiency as in conversion ratio, which would be about the xG of the strikers, NOT about the MF.

But if you look more closely, you will find that also significant is the "layout" of the attack- as in
- the movement/positioning of players in the various phases of attack;
- the relationships between players- as in choice of who fits best with whom, and
- the best positions for them to be in; where and how the ball is delivered, etc

[TonyTheTigerKiller]

I don't think Pisero or Pisoro is great. I do think he has a playing style. In most of his games, he favours fast transitions via the wings, playing from the back. Here's a link - We had crosses into the box in double digits -

We had 5 corner kicks to 0 in addition to the open field wing attacks. The corner ratio was similar in the Mozambique game we had 10 vs 1 for Mozambique

Back to open play attacks from the wings: Just as you can see in video link vs Zim, passes were mistimed with folks not on the same page. The idea is the right one - I have seen this wing transition consistently but execution has deteriorated - in prior games we had several clear cut chances and shots on goals.

1. Against Lesotho, we had a total of 14 shots, 8 shots on goal vs Lesotho's 2 shots, we drew 1:1
2. Against Mozambique we had 9 shots on vs 3 MZM. Of the 9, 6 of them where on goal - all of 3 of Mozambique's shots were on goal and they scored 2 of the 3. (sources - https://www.soccerpunter.com/match/1901 ... vs-Nigeria)
3. Against Saudi, we had 15 shots against Saudi's 4. of the 4 of Saudi's shots, 3 of them were on Goal and they scored 2, game ended 2-2.

You see a clear pattern - we concede > 50% of shots against us but more key is..it doesn't have to be more than 4 shots. The latter is the most telling. In many cases we are conceding more than 60% of our shots on goal against us and WE are not converting as many of the shots from the chances we create.

The above is why I am not jumping on the new coach bandwagon. The data tells me we create loads of chances EXCEPT yesterday, the crosses didn't result in attempts on goal - I see a chemistry issue here. Is it then due to selection or players that dropped out, logistics or the coaching actually is that bad?

We are not Lethal off the chances we create

And the big one - you only need one shot or two to score against us no matter the distance. I will do a summary on distance soon going back to the Ghana game. I think Uzo may have some sort of an eye /coordination problem - I'm serious about this. If that's the case, start someone else

Great post!

I have asked repeatedly why no one is talking about how poor our striking efficiency is.
We know about how poor the goalie is.
But the strikers have been poor as well.

In terms of output, the strikers have been poor but poor performances by historically good strikers is usually a strong indication of a sub standard midfield. Not too long, after the Lesotho match, I pointed out that out of 8 total shots, we had 6 on goal. None of those were by the strikers. If the strikers aren’t taking our shots, who the heck is? The evidence is clear; the midfield is not doing it’s primary job, which is acting as a conduit to the strikers


Cheers.

Nothing more to add...

But he doesn't know what he's talking about. If we are creating loads of chances, then its a matter of efficiency of the strikers. Efficiency as in conversion ratio, which would be about the xG of the strikers, NOT about the MF.

But if you look more closely, you will find that also significant is the "layout" of the attack- as in
- the movement/positioning of players in the various phases of attack;
- the relationships between players- as in choice of who fits best with whom, and
- the best positions for them to be in; where and how the ball is delivered, etc

You really do have a talent for talking nonsense. If we had eight shots on goal and none of the strikers, not Awoniyi nor Boniface nor Iheanacho had a single one of those then what does striking efficiency have to do with that? You can’t talk about the efficiency of strikers when the strikers are clearly not getting the ball. That is decidedly a midfield issue so, try again


Cheers.

[delisyomie don]

the players need to come together and start paying for the better coach if they really want to go to the World Cup or for their cv. our government is not interested in football and we can not be financially supportive because we don't have big pockets if we have definitely we be supportive. Is not about what the government can do for us but what we can do if we are in a position to help. we should stop giving ourselves stress about nigeria football people in charge we move on one day [everything is timing]