Ok mate. I've read your original post. I decided not to respond as
@Marius57 feels pretty much the same as I do and summed it up nicely in the above post.
I will add a couple more points to that if I may.
Firstly, as I mentioned in my previous post, after his initial run of games Allardyce had us in 9th position, double digit points clear of relegation and 3 points behind 7th. We were not in a relegation battle at that time but for some reason he continued to fight one that didn't exist. In my opinion, his over negative attitude cost or more points than they won us. Why do you think Allardyce decided to do this?. You say you want to give him a chance to play more adventurous football next season. I would argue that he had the perfect opportunity to do so this season but passed it up. At that time he had practically the whole fan base behind him. Now it's the complete opposite. Why do you think he should be given a second chance.?
The second point relates to his press conferences and post/pre match interviews. I know you've since acknowledged that you don't agree with all he says. But my biggest issue with them is his self righteousness. He picks the team and tactics for every game. Apart from International weeks, he has all week to set them up to play the way he wants them to play. If we win, he invariably takes the credit. If we don't, he will always, and I do mean always, blame somebody else. Yes the players should take their fair share of the blame, and if you go onto their individual threads, you will see that nobody gets away with anything in this forum. But Allardyce has never, not once, held his hands up and said "that was my fault. sorry guys". He is the manager, the guy the book stops with. But notwithstanding this, a big reason why we've failed in so many of the games this season is because of the way he sets up. You mentioned Spurs away as a game where he set up to attack. The other game when he set up to attack was Manchester City at home, where he went with 2 strikers, 2 wingers and Rooney in a midfield 2. After each of those games he came out with some comment about being too attack minded and having to tone it down a bit. One could very easily argue that he purposely threw those games to justify the defensive tactics he normally employs. In fact, the vast majority of the fan base would probably have agreed with him had he gone into those 2 games with his usual defensive formation. How can you be happy with a manager, who cannot accept any blame for his bad decisions
AND is quite happy to blame his own players, whether that be collectively or individually as he's done on occasion.
?