Manager interviews ongoing - from the official (1 Viewer)

cloughie · Sep 12, 2012

I didn't believe Davies would be interested and didn't think it realistic that he would touch us with a barge pole

This sky article is only saying he has been mentioned as a possible candidate, so I still reckon its unlikely he's interested

BUT if he is, then bring him in and quick but please please not brown

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 12, 2012

Paxman II said:
I find the talk of billy Davies 'falling out with boards' and he needs lots of money to spend a bit tedious.

Hell if we beleived everything we hear from the press then then we already know who the manager is!

It isn't about believing the press though, several times Davies criticised the Forest owners in public interviews after being given 4 million to spend

I think he would be a good choice but I think it is a no go

Nonleagueherewecome · Sep 12, 2012

Davies has always spent money, that's the point. He won't be able to do that here! I rate him a decent manager, but given how much he complains about "just needing a couple more million" every 5 minutes, he's a terrible fit for where we are at.

mark82 · Sep 12, 2012

If anyone thinks Billy Davies is in the running then get on BetVictor. 66/1 odds. To be honest I don't see why he wouldn't be interested. He's been out of work for a year now and we are a Championship sized club (albeit with all our known current baggage).

mark82 · Sep 12, 2012

Nonleagueherewecome said:
Davies has always spent money, that's the point. He won't be able to do that here! I rate him a decent manager, but given how much he complains about "just needing a couple more million" every 5 minutes, he's a terrible fit for where we are at.

Did he spend money when he got Derby promoted?

sky blue john · Sep 12, 2012

mark82 said:
If anyone thinks Billy Davies is in the running then get on BetVictor. 66/1 odds. To be honest I don't see why he wouldn't be interested. He's been out of work for a year now and we are a Championship sized club (albeit with all our known current baggage).

put your money where your mouth is Mark if you think ccfc is a realistic option for him.
Its not even known if he is in the interview process.

Sky Blues · Sep 12, 2012

Sick Boy said:
I get the impression someone has authorised for the information to be leaked.

As I said yesterday, I wouldn't rule out Brown or someone close to him leaking the information to build some momentum in the media for his candidacy.

Otis · Sep 12, 2012

Hope so.

People ask me why I am so anti-Brown, but it's not just Brown. It's a number of them of that ilk.

We need to look at the big picture here. This isn't just about bringing someone in to get us promoted, it's about stability and having a manager at the helm for the next 5 years plus.

If we brought Brown in he may well get us promoted, but then what? Would he be the man to then lead us on to greater things? You can throw the same label and Blackwell, Ince, Cotterill, Megson, whoever. I'm sure a number of managers may well be able to get us promoted, but we need a leader to take this club forwards and we don't want to be in the position in 18 months time of having to sack yet another manager. We need to get off that merry-go-round.

This next manager has to be right for the long term.

The big picture!!

It's not just about getting us back to the Championship, it's about us getting back to the Championship and then challenging consistently at that level.

So many names on that list just don't inspire me to think they have the ability to do that.

Sky Blues · Sep 12, 2012

Paxman II said:
Also interestingly all fans (at least on here) wish for Wise to get the nod.

A large portion of fans here seem to want Wise, but not ALL fans on here want Wise. I've come around to the idea that Wise MIGHT work in our situation but Derek Adams is who I want as manager, based on the limited information available to us fans.

(sorry for using caps for emphasis, I don't remember the coding to do bold or italic on mobile version of this site.)

Sky Blues · Sep 12, 2012

Otis said:
Hope so.

People ask me why I am so anti-Brown, but it's not just Brown. It's a number of them of that ilk.

We need to look at the big picture here. This isn't just about bringing someone in to get us promoted, it's about stability and having a manager at the helm for the next 5 years plus.

If we brought Brown in he may well get us promoted, but then what? Would he be the man to then lead us on to greater things? You can throw the same label and Blackwell, Ince, Cotterill, Megson, whoever. I'm sure a number of managers may well be able to get us promoted, but we need a leader to take this club forwards and we don't want to be in the position in 18 months time of having to sack yet another manager. We need to get off that merry-go-round.

This next manager has to be right for the long term.

The big picture!!

It's not just about getting us back to the Championship, it's about us getting back to the Championship and then challenging consistently at that level.

So many names on that list just don't inspire me to think they have the ability to do that.

I agree Otis.

Colonel Mustard · Sep 12, 2012

Otis said:
We need to look at the big picture here. This isn't just about bringing someone in to get us promoted, it's about stability and having a manager at the helm for the next 5 years plus. If we brought Brown in he may well get us promoted, but then what? Would he be the man to then lead us on to greater things? You can throw the same label and Blackwell, Ince, Cotterill, Megson, whoever. I'm sure a number of managers may well be able to get us promoted, but we need a leader to take this club forwards and we don't want to be in the position in 18 months time of having to sack yet another manager. We need to get off that merry-go-round.

Disagree, Otis.

Look at the average US sport. Teams draft players based on their league position. Drafted players tend to be under contract for five years or so. There are squad limits meaning creative trading of players (e.g. superstar in return for two or three top prospects). There is no relegation or promotion meaning a general manager can build a competitive team over years.

Compare that to football - everything is upside down. It's such a dynamic business - lots of players go in and out each year, the academy is culled every 12 months, there is always the threat of relegation or the necessity of promotion, stronger teams come down or move up to compete with you, etc.

The bottom line has to be that a manager stays in the job if they're doing the business, but sacked if they aren't. 'Long-term stability' is a romantic ideal for management, but there is little evidence or reason that it would work.

Brighton Sky Blue · Sep 12, 2012

Truth be told Waggott and Fisher can only pick from who's applied-since presumably resources are too tight to go out and approach other clubs. That Phil Brown has been shortlisted gives you an idea of the calibre of the other applicants which really can't be inspiring.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 12, 2012

Colonel Mustard said:
Disagree, Otis.

Look at the average US sport. Teams draft players based on their league position. Drafted players tend to be under contract for five years or so. There are squad limits meaning creative trading of players (e.g. superstar in return for two or three top prospects). There is no relegation or promotion meaning a general manager can build a competitive team over years.

Compare that to football - everything is upside down. It's such a dynamic business - lots of players go in and out each year, the academy is culled every 12 months, there is always the threat of relegation or the necessity of promotion, stronger teams come down or move up to compete with you, etc.

The bottom line has to be that a manager stays in the job if they're doing the business, but sacked if they aren't. 'Long-term stability' is a romantic ideal for management, but there is little evidence or reason that it would work.

Everton, Stoke, Charlton under Curbishley for 10+ years, Man Utd, Wigan

It is good if you bring in a manager to build on the previous managers work how Swansea have with Martinez, Rodgers, Laudrup. However it is useless if every 12 to 18 months you effectively tear up everything the previous manager has done and start again because it hasn't worked

Where is the evidence hiring and firing managers works either? Liverpool, Tottenham, Chelsea, Leicester, Forest?

I agree you shouldn't keep an under performing manager just for the sake of stability but if you are sacking a manager after 12 months then obviously a mistake was made by appointing the manager. That is why many have stressed the importance of getting the right man this time.

stupot07 · Sep 12, 2012

mark82 said:
Did he spend money when he got Derby promoted?

With new ownership, Derby had been able to compete in the transfer market for the first time in a number of years, with Luton Town's Steve Howard becoming the club's first £1 million singing since François Grenet six years previously and, alongside captures from Premiership clubs such as West Ham United's Stephen Bywater and Fulham's Dean Leacock, manager Billy Davies began shaping a side capable of competing at the right end of the table. This wasn't apparent from the off, however, and a return of just five points from the club's opening six fixtures did not hint at instant success for Davies, leaving influential and creative players such as Tommy Smith and Iñigo Idiakez to depart the club prior to the closing of the August transfer window. However, a 1–0 win at Wolverhampton Wanderers on 12 September proved a catalyst as the club lost only four of its next 27 fixtures (a run which included winning all six league fixtures in November and an eight-match winning streak of six league and two FA Cup games from 30 December to 10 February). After a 2–2 draw at home to Hull City on 10 February, Derby were six points clear at the top of the table[3] and had strengthened for the promotion run-in with the signing of Tyrone Mears, Jay McEveley, Gary Teale, David Jones, Craig Fagan, Stephen Pearson and Jon Macken for a combined £5 million.

stevo_ccfc · Sep 12, 2012

stupot07 said:
With new ownership, Derby had been able to compete in the transfer market for the first time in a number of years, with Luton Town's Steve Howard becoming the club's first £1 million singing since François Grenet six years previously and, alongside captures from Premiership clubs such as West Ham United's Stephen Bywater and Fulham's Dean Leacock, manager Billy Davies began shaping a side capable of competing at the right end of the table. This wasn't apparent from the off, however, and a return of just five points from the club's opening six fixtures did not hint at instant success for Davies, leaving influential and creative players such as Tommy Smith and Iñigo Idiakez to depart the club prior to the closing of the August transfer window. However, a 1–0 win at Wolverhampton Wanderers on 12 September proved a catalyst as the club lost only four of its next 27 fixtures (a run which included winning all six league fixtures in November and an eight-match winning streak of six league and two FA Cup games from 30 December to 10 February). After a 2–2 draw at home to Hull City on 10 February, Derby were six points clear at the top of the table[3] and had strengthened for the promotion run-in with the signing of Tyrone Mears, Jay McEveley, Gary Teale, David Jones, Craig Fagan, Stephen Pearson and Jon Macken for a combined £5 million.

So only a few quid...

Otis · Sep 12, 2012

CCFC said:
Everton, Stoke, Charlton under Curbishley for 10+ years, Man Utd, Wigan

It is good if you bring in a manager to build on the previous managers work how Swansea have with Martinez, Rodgers, Laudrup. However it is useless if every 12 to 18 months you effectively tear up everything the previous manager has done and start again because it hasn't worked

Where is the evidence hiring and firing managers works either? Liverpool, Tottenham, Chelsea, Leicester, Forest?

I agree you shouldn't keep an under performing manager just for the sake of stability but if you are sacking a manager after 12 months then obviously a mistake was made by appointing the manager. That is why many have stressed the importance of getting the right man this time.

Summed up perfectly. :claping hands:

@richh87 · Sep 12, 2012

You lot make me laugh. So it's accepted that everywhere Davies has gone he's spent big, and his chief accomplishment is getting Derby to the Premier League (and then having an ABSOLUTE SHOCKER - a record low points haul I seem to recall. Yet this serial moaner is somehow better than Phil Brown who got Hull up on a shoestring and KEPT THEM THERE!

Never knew people hated tans so much. Think it through people.

Otis · Sep 12, 2012

He kept them up yes. No-one is arguing that he had a successful spell at Hull. After that successful spell though it's been downhill and that is what people are reticent about.

No-one is denying he had one good spell. Does that make him a good manager? If so then does the totally unsuccessful spell at Preston make him a shit manager?

He's had success, since then he's had failure. No grounds to assume he will suddenly start having success again.

I will be gutted if he comes here and he will not put bums on seats at all. A totally uninspiring choice when we need inspiration.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 12, 2012

@richh87 said:
You lot make me laugh. So it's accepted that everywhere Davies has gone he's spent big, and his chief accomplishment is getting Derby to the Premier League (and then having an ABSOLUTE SHOCKER - a record low points haul I seem to recall. Yet this serial moaner is somehow better than Phil Brown who got Hull up on a shoestring and KEPT THEM THERE!

Never knew people hated tans so much. Think it through people.

He also qualified for the play offs two seasons in a row with Preston, unsure of the money spent there tbh but thought I would bring it up as it hasn't been mentioned

Colonel Mustard · Sep 12, 2012

CCFC said:
Everton, Stoke, Charlton under Curbishley for 10+ years, Man Utd, Wigan

All those managers had initial success. The long-term tenures were created by success, not the other way around. If CCFC hire a manager who achieves success like, say, Moyes, then few fans would have an issue with him being here 10 years later.

However it is useless if every 12 to 18 months you effectively tear up everything the previous manager has done and start again because it hasn't worked...

Not necessarily. Some managers are just more capable of getting more from the resources than the previous incumbent. The McAllister-to-Black transition should emphasise that to any CCFC fan.

Where is the evidence hiring and firing managers works either? Liverpool, Tottenham, Chelsea, Leicester, Forest?

Nobody is saying that firing a manager will definitely bring about better results. This is the whole AT thing that was discussed last season; a portion of fans felt that he was tapped out, that the results and performances were consistent enough to guarantee relegation, and that there was nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying somebody else. Hell, maybe we'd have been relegated if we didn't replace Boothroyd with Thorn. The point is to be proactive when needs be.

I agree you shouldn't keep an under performing manager just for the sake of stability but if you are sacking a manager after 12 months then obviously a mistake was made by appointing the manager. That is why many have stressed the importance of getting the right man this time.

What you appear to be saying is that it would be good to have a manager for a long period of time, that the recruitment process should be rigorous, and that an underperforming manager should be sacked even if it's merely 12 months since his appointment.

I don't disagree with any of that. All I am saying is that managerial performance is a mercurial, unpredictable thing, and we shouldn't set up expectations that could harm the club (such as sticking with an underperforming manager for the sake of 'stability').

stupot07 · Sep 12, 2012

Didnt spend really big that season? Including huge wages on Bullard?

stupot07 · Sep 12, 2012

Colonel Mustard said:
All those managers had initial success. The long-term tenures were created by success, not the other way around. If CCFC hire a manager who achieves success like, say, Moyes, then few fans would have an issue with him being here 10 years later.

Not necessarily. Some managers are just more capable of getting more from the resources than the previous incumbent. The McAllister-to-Black transition should emphasise that to any CCFC fan.

Nobody is saying that firing a manager will definitely bring about better results. This is the whole AT thing that was discussed last season; a portion of fans felt that he was tapped out, that the results and performances were consistent enough to guarantee relegation, and that there was nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying somebody else. Hell, maybe we'd have been relegated if we didn't replace Boothroyd with Thorn. The point is to be proactive when needs be.

What you appear to be saying is that it would be good to have a manager for a long period of time, that the recruitment process should be rigorous, and that an underperforming manager should be sacked even if it's merely 12 months since his appointment.

I don't disagree with any of that. All I am saying is that managerial performance is a mercurial, unpredictable thing, and we shouldn't set up expectations that could harm the club (such as sticking with an underperforming manager for the sake of 'stability').

I think what Otis was trying to get at was that some on the suggesterd shortlist/people's wishlists that you know won't hang around too long whether they are successful or not, especially manager that have never had a long term managerial post, say unlike Wilder or Tisdale.

Wise jumped ship from from a couple of his jobs for a 'better offer' if you can call being a glorified scout at Newcastle a better offer.

Colonel Mustard · Sep 12, 2012

stupot07 said:
Wise jumped ship from from a couple of his jobs for a 'better offer' if you can call being a glorified scout at Newcastle a better offer.

Some people just love playing the banker in Monopoly...

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 12, 2012

Colonel Mustard said:
All those managers had initial success. The long-term tenures were created by success, not the other way around. If CCFC hire a manager who achieves success like, say, Moyes, then few fans would have an issue with him being here 10 years later.

Yes but all have been through sticky patches in their careers but have came through stronger for it when there board stood by there side

Look at Ferguson no premier leagues between 02/03 to 06/07, no title for 4 years. If he had been Chelsea manager he would have been sacked

Look at Fergusons first season as Man Utd manager, 1 away win for the whole season. Something that would be branded unacceptable by most clubs and a reason for sacking the manager. But they had faith in him

I choose Ferguson because he has been the most successful an I can't be bothered to look through everyones records

Not necessarily. Some managers are just more capable of getting more from the resources than the previous incumbent. The McAllister-to-Black transition should emphasise that to any CCFC fan.

We will never move forward hiring an firing every season, ripping apart one managers team to build another only to do the same again. Equally we won't move forward by allowing someone who isn't up to the job to continue longer than they should
Get the right man in and allow him to build

I think it is easy to confuse someone going though a bad spell and someone who is clearly not up to the job

Nobody is saying that firing a manager will definitely bring about better results. This is the whole AT thing that was discussed last season; a portion of fans felt that he was tapped out, that the results and performances were consistent enough to guarantee relegation, and that there was nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying somebody else. Hell, maybe we'd have been relegated if we didn't replace Boothroyd with Thorn. The point is to be proactive when needs be.

I agree if you have the wrong man in charge you should replace him, when you believe you have the right man in charge you should back him an stick with him through the hard times as well

What you appear to be saying is that it would be good to have a manager for a long period of time, that the recruitment process should be rigorous, and that an underperforming manager should be sacked even if it's merely 12 months since his appointment.

I don't disagree with any of that. All I am saying is that managerial performance is a mercurial, unpredictable thing, and we shouldn't set up expectations that could harm the club (such as sticking with an underperforming manager for the sake of 'stability').

Yes I agree with that, it is about getting the right manager in and sticking with him

I think you should pick a manager, if you have faith in his ability and qualities you should stick with him to come through tough times as a better manager.

Otis · Sep 12, 2012

stupot07 said:
I think what Otis was trying to get at was that some on the suggesterd shortlist/people's wishlists that you know won't hang around too long whether they are successful or not, especially manager that have never had a long term managerial post, say unlike Wilder or Tisdale.

Wise jumped ship from from a couple of his jobs for a 'better offer' if you can call being a glorified scout at Newcastle a better offer.

Yup. In a nutshell.

Colonel Mustard · Sep 12, 2012

CCFC said:
Yes but all have been through sticky patches in their careers but have came through stronger for it when there board stood by there side

Sticky patches are generally acceptable for the manager who has earned success capital. Ferguson is often trumpeted as an example of the man who was nearly fired, but he had two seasons of success behind him. Just yesterday I was arguing that the lean final days of Black's regime were acceptable not only because of previous success, but what that success had meant (lots of points to act as a buffer against a sticky patch).

There's a huge difference between that and mindlessly sticking with a guy who has achieved nothing and continues to underperform/continue along the plateau.

Look at Ferguson no premier leagues between 02/03 to 06/07, no title for 4 years. If he had been Chelsea manager he would have been sacked

Yeah, but I'm not saying Abramovich is a paragon of ownership. He is too trigger-happy, just as McGinnity was with Nilsson and Black.

Look at Fergusons first season as Man Utd manager, 1 away win for the whole season. Something that would be branded unacceptable by most clubs and a reason for sacking the manager. But they had faith in him

Not at all. He only took over in November and considerably improved results and league position. That is success by any measure.

We will never move forward hiring an firing every season, ripping apart one managers team to build another only to do the same again. Equally we won't move forward by allowing someone who isn't up to the job to continue longer than they should
Get the right man in and allow him to build

I don't disagree with that. The argument I've made in the past is that we, as a club, would not have this insecurity over the longevity of managers if we had done the right thing and played out Nilsson and Black instead of merely adding them to the statistic. There's nothing wrong with sacking an underperforming manager after a year, but it's absolutely criminal to sack one who is doing the business.

I think you should pick a manager, if you have faith in his ability and qualities you should stick with him to come through tough times as a better manager.

Ranson did that with Coleman. Not good.

sky blue john · Sep 12, 2012

Otis said:
Hope so.

People ask me why I am so anti-Brown, but it's not just Brown. It's a number of them of that ilk.

We need to look at the big picture here. This isn't just about bringing someone in to get us promoted, it's about stability and having a manager at the helm for the next 5 years plus.

If we brought Brown in he may well get us promoted, but then what? Would he be the man to then lead us on to greater things? You can throw the same label and Blackwell, Ince, Cotterill, Megson, whoever. I'm sure a number of managers may well be able to get us promoted, but we need a leader to take this club forwards and we don't want to be in the position in 18 months time of having to sack yet another manager. We need to get off that merry-go-round.

This next manager has to be right for the long term.

The big picture!!

It's not just about getting us back to the Championship, it's about us getting back to the Championship and then challenging consistently at that level.

So many names on that list just don't inspire me to think they have the ability to do that.

Your living in cloud cuckoo land I'd take any manager that gets us back up to the championship !!!
Also i don't give a fu-ck if the manager doesn't inspire me as long as he inspires the players !!!
Why you getting all heated about someone who may or may not have been interviewed !!! :facepalm:

ccfclinney · Sep 12, 2012

Wise - Did well at the start, but soon as poyet left things seem to go from bad to worse, - who was pulling the strings ?
Davies- Talks himself in to the sack by suggesting the board dont support him and is very demanding - who really thinks sisu would work with him ?

People saying brown going to get it just because hes odds on favourite, are we forgetting that wielder was 1/10 on last week ? Sky sports only saying he has been interviewed not forgetting that 8 other people have been interviewed

In my opinion the job is still wide open and an approach could be still made for wielder tomorrow,

I wouldnt mind brown though i just hope he has learnt from serious mistakes he has made in the past ( player humiliation)

PUSB

@richh87 · Sep 12, 2012

ccfclinney said:
Wise - Did well at the start, but soon as poyet left things seem to go from bad to worse, - who was pulling the strings ?
Davies- Talks himself in to the sack by suggesting the board dont support him and is very demanding - who really thinks sisu would work with him ?

People saying brown going to get it just because hes odds on favourite, are we forgetting that wielder was 1/10 on last week ? Sky sports only saying he has been interviewed not forgetting that 8 other people have been interviewed

In my opinion the job is still wide open and an approach could be still made for wielder tomorrow,

I wouldnt mind brown though i just hope he has learnt from serious mistakes he has made in the past ( player humiliation)

PUSB

Wise didn't have Poyet at Millwall - where he managed them to an FA Cup final v Man Utd. He doesn't need Poyet - it's just a popular thing to say right now as Poyet appears to be decent and Wise isn't managing.

Brighton Sky Blue · Sep 12, 2012

Wise hasn't managed in a long time now. The reality is our appointment will be more a 'lesser of 2 evils' than it will be being spoiled for choice.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 12, 2012

Colonel Mustard said:
Sticky patches are generally acceptable for the manager who has earned success capital. Ferguson is often trumpeted as an example of the man who was nearly fired, but he had two seasons of success behind him. Just yesterday I was arguing that the lean final days of Black's regime were acceptable not only because of previous success, but what that success had meant (lots of points to act as a buffer against a sticky patch).

There's a huge difference between that and mindlessly sticking with a guy who has achieved nothing and continues to underperform/continue along the plateau.

Yeah, but I'm not saying Abramovich is a paragon of ownership. He is too trigger-happy, just as McGinnity was with Nilsson and Black.

Not at all. He only took over in November and considerably improved results and league position. That is success by any measure.

I don't disagree with that. The argument I've made in the past is that we, as a club, would not have this insecurity over the longevity of managers if we had done the right thing and played out Nilsson and Black instead of merely adding them to the statistic. There's nothing wrong with sacking an underperforming manager after a year, but it's absolutely criminal to sack one who is doing the business.

Ranson did that with Coleman. Not good.

I think we arguing the same point, just coming at it from slightly different angles

The problem with Coleman was it was blind faith, I think he had 3 full seasons with us, when in the second season it was clear there would be no improvement on his first season. That was the time to replace him imo

but it's absolutely criminal to sack one who is doing the business.

I think this is part of the problem that some clubs have too high expectations as to what is expected. Not specifically us, just stating as a generalisation for most of football

Clubs who have been performing to expectation or above have often sacked managers as they want to move the club to the 'next level' only to see them go on a downward spiral from there.

Otis · Sep 12, 2012

sky blue john said:
Your living in cloud cuckoo land I'd take any manager that gets us back up to the championship !!!
Also i don't give a fu-ck if the manager doesn't inspire me as long as he inspires the players !!!
Why you getting all heated about someone who may or may not have been interviewed !!! :facepalm:

I wasn't getting heated. Why do you think i was getting heated? :thinking about::thinking about: Was being totally calm.

Just saying that we need to look at the big picture. If we just look for someone to get us back into the Championship but not take us further we will be back to way we have been for the past 10 years and that is struggling to stay in the Championship.

Is that what you really want? We have had 12 managers in 11 years. We need stability that's all I am saying.

No point getting a manager to get us out of League One to then have to sack him next season.

Not getting heated at all. Just looking at the whole picture and looking to see some perspective of what is truly needed.

@richh87 · Sep 12, 2012

Otis said:
I wasn't getting heated. Why do you think i was getting heated? :thinking about::thinking about: Was being totally calm.

Just saying that we need to look at the big picture. If we just look for someone to get us back into the Championship but not take us further we will be back to way we have been for the past 10 years and that is struggling to stay in the Championship.

Is that what you really want? We have had 12 managers in 11 years. We need stability that's all I am saying.

No point getting a manager to get us out of League One to then have to sack him next season.

Not getting heated at all. Just looking at the whole picture and looking to see some perspective of what is truly needed.

I just don't get the logic that Phil Brown would require sacking next season - whereas one of your lower league choices wouldn't.

Otis · Sep 12, 2012

@richh87 said:
I just don't get the logic that Phil Brown would require sacking next season - whereas one of your lower league choices wouldn't.

Where did I say that? :thinking about:

All I am saying that this appointment needs to be the right one for the future not just for a short term fix.

Have explained why I am totally uninspired by Brown. For me his star is on the wane. One great spell, downhill since.

It's not just Brown. Feel exactly the same way about Ince too amongst others.

Grendel · Sep 12, 2012

Otis said:
Where did I say that? :thinking about:

All I am saying that this appointment needs to be the right one for the future not just for a short term fix.

Have explained why I am totally uninspired by Brown. For me his star is on the wane. One great spell, downhill since.

It's not just Brown. Feel exactly the same way about Ince too amongst others.

The danger is that Brown is another Dowie or Coleman. Someone who demonstrated brief success at one club which was not again repeated. I know a few Hull fans and they say he became a laughing stock by the end of his tenure then. I would really be concerned at his ability to resolve the many issues at the club.

Manager interviews ongoing - from the official (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency