Assessing the Megson era
21/02/06 | by Andrew Brookes

It’s that time of year again. The time of year when the nights get just that bit lighter, when memories of Christmas drift away, when rubbish awards shows fill the telly schedules, and when Nottingham Forest begin their yearly hunt for a new manager…

Gary Megson was brought to the club thirteen months ago to try and halt the slide created by the previous management. Unfortunately for him, he was never able to do so and his reign saw the club to continue to slide to new lows, the last being a slip towards the relegation dogfight in League One. It was thus, amidst a great deal of unrest and supporter apathy, that his tenure at the club came to an end. But was there nothing good to come out of the ‘Megson Era’?

When Megson was first appointed many Forest fans, myself included, were very optimistic. He seemed to me to be just what the club needed. Under Kinnear, the team had lost its discipline and organisation, and Megson’s credentials suggested that this was something he would be able to sort. He had also taken West Brom from the same position that we occupied at the time and left them in the Premiership. The ‘style’ with which he had achieved his success was of some concern to many fans, but, realistically, everyone knew that results were of prime importance in the grave situation we were in.

It was not long after his appointment that we played Tottenham away in the FA Cup, a game after which I sung Megson’s praises on this very website. It seemed to me that this game was a blueprint through which Megson would right the wrongs of our away form. We were disciplined, spirited, organised, and played some good football on the break, possibly deserving to win. It proved a false dawn, and perhaps the highest point we were to reach under Megson. Rather than the basis with which to form a rescue attempt, the performance at White Hart Lane was a flash in the pan. Dismal performances were to follow, and back-to-back results and performances at Coventry and Plymouth within a week were unspeakably bad. In the end we went down with a whimper.

Most were impressed by the re-building job that he went about in the summer, however, shipping out large numbers from a squad overflowing with mediocrity. It seemed as though Megson had the nous required to get results in the transfer market, and, to be fair to him, this continued in January with further impressive acquisitions. Megson had assembled a squad that, on paper, looked to be worthy of challenging for the play-offs at the very least. On grass, however, this promotion push never materialised, and a string of pathetic away-day capitulations followed to negate the impressive home form.

However, having ‘done the honourable thing’ and resigned, Megson leaves a legacy that is not altogether negative. As mentioned previously, his work in the transfer market was excellent. The likes of Nathan Tyson, Danny Cullip, Sammy Clingan, John Curtis, Grant Holt and Julian Bennett should provide the backbone of a decent side for a few seasons to come. Although signings such as Gary Holt, David Friio, Gino Padula and Nicky Eaden have not impressed quite so much, they all appeared to be decent acquisitions based on their track records, and who’s to say the next boss won’t be able to get more out of them?

Megson has also made great inroads into clearing out the ‘deadwood’ in the squad. His comments have suggested that he was still intending on moving on a few more players, but he also believed that he had removed most of the elements that had caused unrest in the dressing room. It seems as though he never fully got on top of the ‘unseen’ problems at the club, but may have also become part of the problem himself towards the end, as he has admitted. Whatever his merits in achieving it, Megson at least highlighted the need for big change within the club and got the wheels in motion for this to occur.

It is fair to say that the negatives from Megson’s tenure far outweigh the positives for the time being. His side produced shocking, ineffective football that was not entertaining to watch. The capitulations away from home could not be allowed to continue and it seemed as though Megson had run out of ideas to solve this particular conundrum (ironically it seems his resignation was the best way to get a result!). Tactics in general seemed a specific problem, with formations constantly changing and far too many players playing out of position. This said, it is worth noting that there may turn out to be long-term positives to come from the Megson Era. Some promising-looking signings, the makings of a good squad and the realisation for change within the club may all turn out to leave the club stronger than when he found it. Let’s hope so!