|
Post by butlerstbob on Feb 27, 2017 19:17:47 GMT
Excellent opening post, even if it does show some lack of appreciation of how "things" were different in the 60s. When people look back now, they see images of "swinging 60s", Beatles, flower power, women's lib, Mary Quant, the 66 World Cup, etc. etc. That was true but the world was also still very monochrome for most people, it was still dominated by grey pipe smoking politicians, the white, mediocre, middle class male dominated society, secondary schools were single sex, and whilst new fashions were coming in rapidly, the world was still largely controlled by the post-war establishment. I remember going to Stoke matches and certainly the fans quickly forgot what Waddington had achieved to get the club back into the 1st Division and many were highly critical. New signings were quickly condemned. For example I remember an Crewe fan telling me one day Nantwich how Waddington had signed John Mahoney "to save them from relegation" and some Stoke fans being highly critical of his frenetic style of dashing about the pitch when he first got into the side and being "useless". As it turns out he became an excellent player for Stoke in the 70s. There was constant criticism of "tippy-tappy" style of play, old players, and buying more old players supposedly past their best. The results were very inconsistent and thank goodness we had Banksy. We went through a number of players, many now forgotten, before the settled team of the 70s emerged. Take left back for example; there were a number of players used in that position like Bentley and Elder, before finally Pejic made it his own. Waddington was generally cautious about introducing young players, who usually had to wait some time before they got their chance, even Denis Smith had to wait to get in the side. I can only think of John Farmer getting into the side very young and staying there till Banks arrived. Fans were highly critical in the late 60s of Waddington not blooding youngsters and I remember even Frank Mountford being frustrated with his boss's lack of faith in youth. But Waddington stood by his guns and outlasted the critics, supported by the Chairman, and eventually a great team emerged with a combination of home grown talent and purchased players in key positions. Personally I was never critical of Waddington, despite his unpopularity in the late 60s and when we bought Greenhoff, having just brought back Ritchie, I knew we were in for great times. Mark Hughes has brought in a string of very talented players, but as yet, has not found the right combination to create the synergy that good teams have, and been dogged with injuries. Personally I am prepared to be patient for success, but clearly in this age of "instant results" a lot of fans are not. Criticism is harsh and often vile behind a screen of anonymity. I believe the Chairman will stick with him as long as we maintain our level in the Prem., just as Kenwright stuck by Moyes at Everton. Changing a manager who consistently produces a top half result would be nonsensical and I think most of the football neutrals in the world would think we were mad if we sacked him. Cheers for that- I'd hoped my old man would have been able to remember things in the detail that you've been able to there, but he was a bit vague. (Probably pissed up all the time during the late 60s) The importance of being patient with a good manager, even through bad spells, is the message I was trying to get across. Sadly, it seems that a lot of people have turned into the sort of knee-jerk, impatient, 'modern fans' that we used to sneer at. Good managers are hard to come by, and I believe we've got one. We shouldn't just bin him the first season that things don't go rosily...it'd be a disgraceful way to go about our business. I said the same about a month ago when the natives were banging the drums, no club gets better year on year without having a blip or two even a bad season, you can pick any side that has been in the top tier of football over a long period of time and point to a season where their form has dipped or they have a bad season. We just have to be patient, I think Hughes is a good manager and will turn it around, no need for people to jerk those knees!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 27, 2017 20:00:02 GMT
Waddo's tenure here and how the board acted at the time is no more relevant than that of any other manager at any other top flight club over the last fifty years and there will be plenty of examples of clubs wishing they had acted earlier rather than sticking with a manager until it was too late to counter your argument anyway. And it's not just one season is it? We've been poor since the Liverpool semi-final and it was quite mystifying that we still managed to finish 9th. (As I said) I think a lot of it is to do with 'variance' and at the moment we are very much on the positive side in that regard but it's important to realise that that can change very quickly and we could find ourselves in trouble very quickly if it did. Our 9th place finish last season and the fact that we sit 10th now should mean that on the whole we should look like a comfortable mid table side but on far too many occasions in the last 12 months we have looked like anything but a mid table side, I'm worried that the tipping point is actually incredibly small and we're pretending that it isn't. What is it specifically that you think Mark Hughes is getting right at the moment with regard to his tactics and transfers? The crucial factor is that we know Hughes is a good manager. His track record is indisputably a good one. Getting rid of a good manager is pretty much making the admission that he's lost the plot to the point of no return- do you think we're at that point yet? There's a big difference between ditching someone who has done the business here and elsewhere, and showing some complete duffer the door. Pulis was an example of when a good manager had reached that point of no return- and it was a seriously hard decision to get rid of him. It involved us flirting dangerously close to relegation, on top of the poor performances and lack of entetainment, before Coates finally-and rightfully- pulled the trigger. Hughes hasn't even come close to that though. To answer your question, transfer wise he's brought in Lee Grant for £1 million, BMI on a season long loan, and Sobhi is starting to look like a steal for £6m. There are other deals that look questionable (I believe Allen will prove to be agood signing for £13m but isn't a No.10) while others just look like howlers (Imbula mainly). Transfer wise, like every other manager, it's a mixed bag. Tactically I think he's getting more wrong than right at the moment. Allen at No 10 has gone on at least three weeks too long, Adam in a midfield 2 is a liability etc. However, it can't be that much of a disaster if we've been picking up results that are sufficient to see us 10th in the league. I also think that given that he's not wedded to one system in the same way that TP was, there's every chance he'll switch things round once Saido is fit and try a few different things. Things can change quickly in football, and we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering to them before the predicted collapse happens. I can't say that I'm not concerned with some of the things that have been going on, particularly defensively, but I can't bring myself to start ranting and raving about sacking a man who has the track record that MH has here...it just seems laughable.
No as I said originally we haven't reached that point yet, he must be given (at least) until the summer but what the board did in 1969 is neither here nor there in my opinion, what matters is the here and now.
We are fielding the slowest and the oldest starting XI in the league and our tactic is too simply twat it long to a 36 year old striker - that's it. Why?
Every striker that he has brought to the club has failed, Joselu, Diouf, Bony all deemed not good enough so he has had to resort to a player that should have left ages ago. Why?
Adam and Whelan clearly shot, yet our record £18 million pound signing can't get a whiff of a game. Why?
BMI has been an excellent signing but at the end of the day he isn't even our player. I think Hughes got very lucky with Grant, he was clearly brought here to replace the utterly appalling Haugaard (who signed him?), if he hadn't he would have gone straight into the team but in the end Given was so dreadful (who signed him?) Hughes had no other choice but to give Grant a go. Sobhi I'll give you.
We look a shadow of the team that finished 2015 and have done so since the Anfield semi-final and you are right we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering before the predicted collapse and it is this that worries me, I think it's a valid concern.
I think we should see how the rest of the season pans out and revisit the question in the summer.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 27, 2017 20:17:59 GMT
The crucial factor is that we know Hughes is a good manager. His track record is indisputably a good one. Getting rid of a good manager is pretty much making the admission that he's lost the plot to the point of no return- do you think we're at that point yet? There's a big difference between ditching someone who has done the business here and elsewhere, and showing some complete duffer the door. Pulis was an example of when a good manager had reached that point of no return- and it was a seriously hard decision to get rid of him. It involved us flirting dangerously close to relegation, on top of the poor performances and lack of entetainment, before Coates finally-and rightfully- pulled the trigger. Hughes hasn't even come close to that though. To answer your question, transfer wise he's brought in Lee Grant for £1 million, BMI on a season long loan, and Sobhi is starting to look like a steal for £6m. There are other deals that look questionable (I believe Allen will prove to be agood signing for £13m but isn't a No.10) while others just look like howlers (Imbula mainly). Transfer wise, like every other manager, it's a mixed bag. Tactically I think he's getting more wrong than right at the moment. Allen at No 10 has gone on at least three weeks too long, Adam in a midfield 2 is a liability etc. However, it can't be that much of a disaster if we've been picking up results that are sufficient to see us 10th in the league. I also think that given that he's not wedded to one system in the same way that TP was, there's every chance he'll switch things round once Saido is fit and try a few different things. Things can change quickly in football, and we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering to them before the predicted collapse happens. I can't say that I'm not concerned with some of the things that have been going on, particularly defensively, but I can't bring myself to start ranting and raving about sacking a man who has the track record that MH has here...it just seems laughable.
No as I said originally we haven't reached that point yet, he must be given (at least) until the summer but what the board did in 1969 is neither here nor there in my opinion, what matters is there here and now.
We are fielding the slowest and the oldest starting XI in the league and our tactic is too simply twat it long to a 36 year old striker - that's it. Why?
Every striker that he has brought to the club has failed, Joselu, Diouf, Bony all deemed not good enough so he has had to resort to a player that should have left ages ago. Why?
Adam and Whelan clearly shot, yet our record £18 million pound signing can't get a whiff of a game. Why?
BMI has been an excellent signing but at the end of the day he isn't even our player. I think Hughes got very lucky with Grant, he was clearly brought here to replace the utterly appalling Haugaard (who signed him?), if he hadn't he would have gone straight into the team but in the end Given was so dreadful (who signed him) Hughes had no other choice but to give Grant a go. Sobhi I'll give you.
We look a shadow of the team that finished 2015 and have done so since the Anfield semi-final and you are right we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering before the predicted collapse and it is this that worries me, I think it's a valid concern.
I think we should see how the rest of the season pans out and revisit the question in the summer.
Pretty much as I see it, how many of the permanent signings Hughes has made since the end of the 2015 season have actually turned out to be good value for money ?, Grant, Sobhi (though he has been reluctant to play him) then we have, Joselu, Wolfy, Shaq (sick note), Imbula, Allen as a No10, Haugaard, Johnson (sick note) and Berahino, that summer window and subsequent windows have been pretty much disastrous. We have the slowest squad imaginable despite spending upwards of £60 million, we are relying on the Pulis old guard to dig out points, we are now playing hoof ball to Crouch with no support our defence is lacking any quality cover, players are playing out of position on a regular basis, team spirit is lower than a dachshunds bollocks. Hughes should have gone at the end of last season.
|
|
|
Post by thepremierbanksy on Feb 27, 2017 20:40:07 GMT
From football 365:
The list of teams that Stoke have beaten in all competitions since the end of 2015: Doncaster, Norwich, Liverpool (then lost on pens), Bournemouth, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Watford, West Ham, Stevenage, Sunderland, Hull, Swansea, Burnley and Crystal Palace.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Feb 27, 2017 20:40:17 GMT
No as I said originally we haven't reached that point yet, he must be given (at least) until the summer but what the board did in 1969 is neither here nor there in my opinion, what matters is there here and now.
We are fielding the slowest and the oldest starting XI in the league and our tactic is too simply twat it long to a 36 year old striker - that's it. Why?
Every striker that he has brought to the club has failed, Joselu, Diouf, Bony all deemed not good enough so he has had to resort to a player that should have left ages ago. Why?
Adam and Whelan clearly shot, yet our record £18 million pound signing can't get a whiff of a game. Why?
BMI has been an excellent signing but at the end of the day he isn't even our player. I think Hughes got very lucky with Grant, he was clearly brought here to replace the utterly appalling Haugaard (who signed him?), if he hadn't he would have gone straight into the team but in the end Given was so dreadful (who signed him) Hughes had no other choice but to give Grant a go. Sobhi I'll give you.
We look a shadow of the team that finished 2015 and have done so since the Anfield semi-final and you are right we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering before the predicted collapse and it is this that worries me, I think it's a valid concern.
I think we should see how the rest of the season pans out and revisit the question in the summer.
Pretty much as I see it, how many of the permanent signings Hughes has made since the end of the 2015 season have actually turned out to be good value for money ?, Grant, Sobhi (though he has been reluctant to play him) then we have, Joselu, Wolfy, Shaq (sick note), Imbula, Allen as a No10, Haugaard, Johnson (sick note) and Berahino, that summer window and subsequent windows have been pretty much disastrous. We have the slowest squad imaginable despite spending upwards of £60 million, we are relying on the Pulis old guard to dig out points, we are now playing hoof ball to Crouch with no support our defence is lacking any quality cover, players are playing out of position on a regular basis, team spirit is lower than a dachshunds bollocks. Hughes should have gone at the end of last season. You forgot Arni. However, I agree the signings have been very much hit or miss - with more misses than hits. One feature of the more recent signings is they start well (e.g. Allen and Imbula) and then fade into medocrity It's very puzzling. I am wondering if he is phasing Sohbi and Berahino in more gradually so they aren't simply one hit wonders.
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Feb 27, 2017 21:08:29 GMT
The crucial factor is that we know Hughes is a good manager. His track record is indisputably a good one. Getting rid of a good manager is pretty much making the admission that he's lost the plot to the point of no return- do you think we're at that point yet? There's a big difference between ditching someone who has done the business here and elsewhere, and showing some complete duffer the door. Pulis was an example of when a good manager had reached that point of no return- and it was a seriously hard decision to get rid of him. It involved us flirting dangerously close to relegation, on top of the poor performances and lack of entetainment, before Coates finally-and rightfully- pulled the trigger. Hughes hasn't even come close to that though. To answer your question, transfer wise he's brought in Lee Grant for £1 million, BMI on a season long loan, and Sobhi is starting to look like a steal for £6m. There are other deals that look questionable (I believe Allen will prove to be agood signing for £13m but isn't a No.10) while others just look like howlers (Imbula mainly). Transfer wise, like every other manager, it's a mixed bag. Tactically I think he's getting more wrong than right at the moment. Allen at No 10 has gone on at least three weeks too long, Adam in a midfield 2 is a liability etc. However, it can't be that much of a disaster if we've been picking up results that are sufficient to see us 10th in the league. I also think that given that he's not wedded to one system in the same way that TP was, there's every chance he'll switch things round once Saido is fit and try a few different things. Things can change quickly in football, and we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering to them before the predicted collapse happens. I can't say that I'm not concerned with some of the things that have been going on, particularly defensively, but I can't bring myself to start ranting and raving about sacking a man who has the track record that MH has here...it just seems laughable.
No as I said originally we haven't reached that point yet, he must be given (at least) until the summer but what the board did in 1969 is neither here nor there in my opinion, what matters is the here and now.
We are fielding the slowest and the oldest starting XI in the league and our tactic is too simply twat it long to a 36 year old striker - that's it. Why?
Every striker that he has brought to the club has failed, Joselu, Diouf, Bony all deemed not good enough so he has had to resort to a player that should have left ages ago. Why?
Adam and Whelan clearly shot, yet our record £18 million pound signing can't get a whiff of a game. Why?
BMI has been an excellent signing but at the end of the day he isn't even our player. I think Hughes got very lucky with Grant, he was clearly brought here to replace the utterly appalling Haugaard (who signed him?), if he hadn't he would have gone straight into the team but in the end Given was so dreadful (who signed him?) Hughes had no other choice but to give Grant a go. Sobhi I'll give you.
We look a shadow of the team that finished 2015 and have done so since the Anfield semi-final and you are right we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering before the predicted collapse and it is this that worries me, I think it's a valid concern.
I think we should see how the rest of the season pans out and revisit the question in the summer.
I think people are right to be concerned too. I'm concerned. Concerned is fine- hysterically screaming for the manager's head when we're 10th in the table isn't fine. That's what's boiling my piss right now. Picking apart the build up to transfers to label the good ones as 'lucky' is loading the deck somewhat in my opinion. We should only judge the success of transfers as to how successful they are on the pitch, not start going through who recommended X, who got injured to make signing Y possible etc. By the same token we could start claiming that some transfers have been 'unlucky' to suit whichever side of the fence we're sitting. The fact is that Grant has been a brilliant signing for £1 million, and we can't simply write that off as being down to luck while slamming Hughes for signing, say, Bony- who has been an absolute disaster. Anyway, I don't want to get too bogged down in arguing the ins and outs of individual transfers or tactical decisions, because I agree that reviewing the situation in the summer is the sensible option; it's always the sensible option. A lot could happen between now and then, and if we go on some dreadful spiral of form that sees us sucked into trouble, I might not be giving Hughes so much leeway. On the other hand, he could land on a new system next week that clicks and we go on a brilliant run. No-one really knows.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 27, 2017 21:26:23 GMT
Pretty much as I see it, how many of the permanent signings Hughes has made since the end of the 2015 season have actually turned out to be good value for money ?, Grant, Sobhi (though he has been reluctant to play him) then we have, Joselu, Wolfy, Shaq (sick note), Imbula, Allen as a No10, Haugaard, Johnson (sick note) and Berahino, that summer window and subsequent windows have been pretty much disastrous. We have the slowest squad imaginable despite spending upwards of £60 million, we are relying on the Pulis old guard to dig out points, we are now playing hoof ball to Crouch with no support our defence is lacking any quality cover, players are playing out of position on a regular basis, team spirit is lower than a dachshunds bollocks. Hughes should have gone at the end of last season. You forgot Arni. However, I agree the signings have been very much hit or miss - with more misses than hits. One feature of the more recent signings is they start well (e.g. Allen and Imbula) and then fade into medocrity It's very puzzling. I am wondering if he is phasing Sohbi and Berahino in more gradually so they aren't simply one hit wonders. I didn't forget Arni probably Hughes's best signing for me, he was signed before with Bardsley Bojan, Muniesa, Given etc. the signing of Wolfy and departure of Huth that season were a massive down turn along with his abject failure to replace Zonz.
|
|
|
Post by scfcwebby on Feb 27, 2017 21:28:10 GMT
From football 365: The list of teams that Stoke have beaten in all competitions since the end of 2015: Doncaster, Norwich, Liverpool (then lost on pens), Bournemouth, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Watford, West Ham, Stevenage, Sunderland, Hull, Swansea, Burnley and Crystal Palace. That is fooking frightening!
|
|
|
Post by reddipotter on Feb 27, 2017 23:04:54 GMT
This thread is about learning from history, and several posters have told us that Hughes is a proven successful manager. However, his history shows that he has a very quick impact at clubs, but he's never been anywhere as long as he's been at Stoke, so there's no history of continual building nor of reversing a decline.
|
|
|
Post by StatesideStokie on Feb 28, 2017 0:09:27 GMT
Predictably, the Hughes Out calls have started again after an admittedly shite performance today. The following post is taken from my article in the fanzine a few issues back. I expect that barring some some sort of catastrophic collapse, this will be my view on the manager's position for some time yet.It’s fair to say that we’re looking at a likely finish somewhere between 10th and 15th this season and a points total below the 50 point mark. Not as good as previous campaigns in terms of position, points or entertainment. However, this is the first season under Hughes that hasn’t been, overall, a positive one. Is the mind-frame of the modern supporter really as impatient as demanding that a successful manager’s first indifferent season should result in him being sacked? Well, for those who answer ‘yes’, I’d like to draw your attention to Stoke’s final league positions in The Waddington era, particularly those years in the late sixties after we’d been promoted in 1962-63 and before the halcyon days of the mid-Seventies: Year Points Total Finishing Position 1963/64 38 17th 1964/65 42 11th 1965/66 42 10th 1966/67 41 12th 1967/68 35 18th 1968/69 33 19th 1969/70 45 9th 1970/71 37 13th 1971/72 35 17th 1972/73 38 15th 1973/74 46 5th 1974/75 49 5th 1975/76 41 12th 1976/77 34 21st (RELEGATED) As you can see, The Waddington-era wasn’t one long party of beer, skittles and year-on-year progress. The first three seasons were each more successful than the last, but they were followed by three years of continual regression, where points totals and league positions got progressively worse every year. However, the pattern was stopped with a 9th place finish in 69/70 before, once again, the team slid down the table for a few years. Between 1973 and 1975 though, double 5th place finishes were achieved by what most people around at the time consider to be our best ever side. Only being born in 1978, obviously I wasn’t around to witness this first hand, but I asked my father (a regular attendee in those days, as he still is) what the mood was like in the stands during the late sixties when the team, after an initial burst of progress, seemed to be on the slide. He said that he couldn’t remember any talk of Waddington being sacked, just the usual week-to-week grumbling that football supporters tend to emit however their team’s performing. However, whether fans were whinging or not about Waddington’s team in that spell, the fact is that anyone who wanted him sacked would have been left with egg on their face by the period of success that followed. Waddington is rightly held in high esteem by all Stoke fans; even for people too young to have been there at the time it’s obvious from his record that the man was a very good football manager. However, scattered throughout all the good years were some average ones and a couple of outright bad ones. The board and the fans stuck with him though, obviously realising that a good manager is a good manager and should be rewarded with time and patience to get things right again. Would that happen nowadays? Probably not, as it seems that as soon as any team goes through any sort of prolonged sticky patch, fans start whipping themselves up into a frenzy and demanding that the boss pays for it with his job. It’s fortunate that people didn’t do that in 1968 or 1969 though, otherwise we wouldn’t have won a League Cup, wouldn’t have finished 5th, wouldn’t have signed Alan Hudson and wouldn’t have faced the likes of Ajax in European competition. When you have a rank bad manager in charge of your side, it’s a good idea to get rid of them at the earliest opportunity as they’ll only take you one way. Could anybody, taking his track record at every club he’s been at (barring the basket case that was QPR), claim that Mark Hughes is a bad manager? I’m not saying that he’s in Tony Waddington’s class, but bad managers do not guide relatively small clubs to top-half finishes in The Premier League three seasons in a row- it just doesn’t happen. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that everything in the garden is rosy and we should all sit there happy-clapping every dismal bit of football that we see under Mark Hughes, and we should certainly question some of his recent transfer dealings, but for God’s sake people, please try to get a grip. A club like Stoke cannot keep churning out continual progress- otherwise we’d win the league in about seven or eight years- and we all know that’s not going to happen. We’re bound to have some seasons where the squad needs to be rebuilt and a period of consolidation is needed, or maybe even a lower finish in order that we bed in new players and new ideas so that we can move forwards again in the future. The culture of hysterical tantrums and unrealistic demands seems very much a modern phenomenon- the 21st Century an age of instant gratification, where nobody is prepared to wait for anything or accept that things in life cannot always be perfect. Everything is always somebody’s fault, someone has to be blamed and hounded, and mistakes just aren’t allowed to happen. Well, here’s what could happen if we don’t give a proven manager the time and space to sort things out: we sack him and appoint one of the absolute duffers who go round the managerial merry-go-round year upon year, ballsing up at one club after another, and if we do get sucked through that relegation trapdoor as a result, then it could take another twenty-three year absence (or even longer) before we come back again. Don’t think it can happen? Ask Leeds, ask Wolves, ask Portsmouth, ask Charlton, ask Coventry City, ask Derby County. I could go on. Whatever your views are on Mark Hughes’s team selections, his transfers or his tactics, all I ask is that we as fans- the only people with the success of the football club truly in our hearts- exercise a little more patience and tinge our expectations with a dose of realism. Hound out a good manager during his first bad spell and we could pay the consequences for generations to come. Give him time and support, a bit of leeway, and he’s already shown that he has the ability to get us moving in the right direction again. One day, the time may come when Mark Hughes’s time really is up and the man his simply run out of ideas or motivation to keep Stoke City performing at a successful level. When that happens, then like all managers, it’ll be time for both parties to move on- even Tony Waddington reached that point, although the circumstances surrounding his departure were also laced with the terrible luck of The Butler Street Stand roof blowing off and the subsequent sale of half his team. At this stage, one below average season is really not grounds for the axe to fall. Great post and some sensible perspective - bang on the money, Trousers. The expectations of some of our fans are beyond unrealistic. You just don't get to demand unrelenting progress and improvement. We've been luck enough to have something close to that over the last ten years, but you have to accept that there are going to be periods of consolidation, and even some regression. It's the nature of the beast, but I've not seen anything that would suggest that we're headed for disaster, and I think Hughes still has plenty of credit in the bank so long as we don't get dragged into relegation-scrap territory. Having said that, he has some major work ahead of him in the summer. A good number of key players are reaching the stage where we have to find some long term replacements, and you have to admit he's made some questionable purchases that haven't worked out - or at least not yet. I'm confident he can steer us back in the right direction and don't see any reason why we need to be hitting any panic buttons.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Feb 28, 2017 12:28:27 GMT
Im with you on this Trousers. As long as Hughes hasnt lost the dressing room then he should be given the chance to reflect and improve us next season.
The only thing I would enforce in the background if I was Coates is a new defensive and fitness coach to work with the players and get them up to speed.
Hughes would never agree to it, but he needs to realise he is missing a major part of preparing a team.
|
|
|
Post by coachragnar on Feb 28, 2017 14:01:27 GMT
This reminds me a bit of the shares market. Companies are so dependent on the quarterly reports and profits they don't take the long view and build for a solid future. There is tremendous financial pressure on teams with super-funded teams able to skim the cream of the top. Stoke are better funded now than in the past with the success of "Bet365," but they don't have endless resources to go after top players. So, where do you find the pieces of the puzzle needed to move up? This is not just a Manager's job, but the entire organization. I was against sacking the last manager (who seems to be doing fine at WBA) but I give Mark Hughes my fullest support. Stoke supporters are becoming known for being as hard on their own manager as they are on opponents. It must be distracting to have your own dogs nipping at your heels while you're trying to manage the club. Back off, let the man do his job. Our job is to support the side.
|
|
shooters
Youth Player
POTTER POWER
Posts: 475
|
Post by shooters on Feb 28, 2017 14:16:32 GMT
Is it possible that he is building the team he wants like fergie? So in yr 5 we win a cup with a few youngsters in an ageing team, then the 5 or 6 players that progressed from the academy set up after having won the youth cup in 2017 form the nucleus of a top 6 team and glory days. That's proper management and planning.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Feb 28, 2017 15:21:04 GMT
The only thing I would enforce in the background if I was Coates is a new defensive and fitness coach to work with the players and get them up to speed. I think if this season peters out as it looks likely to do (finally debunking the myth about his teams in the second half of the season) and we have our annual horrendous start to proceedings next year, then you’d think he’d be on the thinnest of ice. It might be unfair when couched against our history but football has never been fair. Raised expectations meet stagnation, sprinkle on a regular supply of absolutely shambolic shellacking’s and a dash of double digit million footballers completely out of the picture and it starts to look fairly grim for Hughes.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Feb 28, 2017 17:50:00 GMT
Is it possible that he is building the team he wants like fergie? So in yr 5 we win a cup with a few youngsters in an ageing team, then the 5 or 6 players that progressed from the academy set up after having won the youth cup in 2017 form the nucleus of a top 6 team and glory days. That's proper management and planning. Possible but highly unlikely given his historical reluctance to field young players.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Feb 28, 2017 19:20:42 GMT
Is it possible that he is building the team he wants like fergie? So in yr 5 we win a cup with a few youngsters in an ageing team, then the 5 or 6 players that progressed from the academy set up after having won the youth cup in 2017 form the nucleus of a top 6 team and glory days. That's proper management and planning. Of course how can we have missed what he is doing, you are a genius now I see why he keeps playing over the hill slow players.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Feb 28, 2017 19:26:41 GMT
The crucial factor is that we know Hughes is a good manager. His track record is indisputably a good one. Getting rid of a good manager is pretty much making the admission that he's lost the plot to the point of no return- do you think we're at that point yet? There's a big difference between ditching someone who has done the business here and elsewhere, and showing some complete duffer the door. Pulis was an example of when a good manager had reached that point of no return- and it was a seriously hard decision to get rid of him. It involved us flirting dangerously close to relegation, on top of the poor performances and lack of entetainment, before Coates finally-and rightfully- pulled the trigger. Hughes hasn't even come close to that though. To answer your question, transfer wise he's brought in Lee Grant for £1 million, BMI on a season long loan, and Sobhi is starting to look like a steal for £6m. There are other deals that look questionable (I believe Allen will prove to be agood signing for £13m but isn't a No.10) while others just look like howlers (Imbula mainly). Transfer wise, like every other manager, it's a mixed bag. Tactically I think he's getting more wrong than right at the moment. Allen at No 10 has gone on at least three weeks too long, Adam in a midfield 2 is a liability etc. However, it can't be that much of a disaster if we've been picking up results that are sufficient to see us 10th in the league. I also think that given that he's not wedded to one system in the same way that TP was, there's every chance he'll switch things round once Saido is fit and try a few different things. Things can change quickly in football, and we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering to them before the predicted collapse happens. I can't say that I'm not concerned with some of the things that have been going on, particularly defensively, but I can't bring myself to start ranting and raving about sacking a man who has the track record that MH has here...it just seems laughable.
No as I said originally we haven't reached that point yet, he must be given (at least) until the summer but what the board did in 1969 is neither here nor there in my opinion, what matters is the here and now.
We are fielding the slowest and the oldest starting XI in the league and our tactic is too simply twat it long to a 36 year old striker - that's it. Why?
Every striker that he has brought to the club has failed, Joselu, Diouf, Bony all deemed not good enough so he has had to resort to a player that should have left ages ago. Why?
Adam and Whelan clearly shot, yet our record £18 million pound signing can't get a whiff of a game. Why?
BMI has been an excellent signing but at the end of the day he isn't even our player. I think Hughes got very lucky with Grant, he was clearly brought here to replace the utterly appalling Haugaard (who signed him?), if he hadn't he would have gone straight into the team but in the end Given was so dreadful (who signed him?) Hughes had no other choice but to give Grant a go. Sobhi I'll give you.
We look a shadow of the team that finished 2015 and have done so since the Anfield semi-final and you are right we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering before the predicted collapse and it is this that worries me, I think it's a valid concern.
I think we should see how the rest of the season pans out and revisit the question in the summer.
Cracking post.
|
|
|
Post by SneydGreenStokie on Feb 28, 2017 22:59:55 GMT
Predictably, the Hughes Out calls have started again after an admittedly shite performance today. The following post is taken from my article in the fanzine a few issues back. I expect that barring some some sort of catastrophic collapse, this will be my view on the manager's position for some time yet.It’s fair to say that we’re looking at a likely finish somewhere between 10th and 15th this season and a points total below the 50 point mark. Not as good as previous campaigns in terms of position, points or entertainment. However, this is the first season under Hughes that hasn’t been, overall, a positive one. Is the mind-frame of the modern supporter really as impatient as demanding that a successful manager’s first indifferent season should result in him being sacked? Well, for those who answer ‘yes’, I’d like to draw your attention to Stoke’s final league positions in The Waddington era, particularly those years in the late sixties after we’d been promoted in 1962-63 and before the halcyon days of the mid-Seventies: Year Points Total Finishing Position 1963/64 38 17th 1964/65 42 11th 1965/66 42 10th 1966/67 41 12th 1967/68 35 18th 1968/69 33 19th 1969/70 45 9th 1970/71 37 13th 1971/72 35 17th 1972/73 38 15th 1973/74 46 5th 1974/75 49 5th 1975/76 41 12th 1976/77 34 21st (RELEGATED) As you can see, The Waddington-era wasn’t one long party of beer, skittles and year-on-year progress. The first three seasons were each more successful than the last, but they were followed by three years of continual regression, where points totals and league positions got progressively worse every year. However, the pattern was stopped with a 9th place finish in 69/70 before, once again, the team slid down the table for a few years. Between 1973 and 1975 though, double 5th place finishes were achieved by what most people around at the time consider to be our best ever side. Only being born in 1978, obviously I wasn’t around to witness this first hand, but I asked my father (a regular attendee in those days, as he still is) what the mood was like in the stands during the late sixties when the team, after an initial burst of progress, seemed to be on the slide. He said that he couldn’t remember any talk of Waddington being sacked, just the usual week-to-week grumbling that football supporters tend to emit however their team’s performing. However, whether fans were whinging or not about Waddington’s team in that spell, the fact is that anyone who wanted him sacked would have been left with egg on their face by the period of success that followed. Waddington is rightly held in high esteem by all Stoke fans; even for people too young to have been there at the time it’s obvious from his record that the man was a very good football manager. However, scattered throughout all the good years were some average ones and a couple of outright bad ones. The board and the fans stuck with him though, obviously realising that a good manager is a good manager and should be rewarded with time and patience to get things right again. Would that happen nowadays? Probably not, as it seems that as soon as any team goes through any sort of prolonged sticky patch, fans start whipping themselves up into a frenzy and demanding that the boss pays for it with his job. It’s fortunate that people didn’t do that in 1968 or 1969 though, otherwise we wouldn’t have won a League Cup, wouldn’t have finished 5th, wouldn’t have signed Alan Hudson and wouldn’t have faced the likes of Ajax in European competition. When you have a rank bad manager in charge of your side, it’s a good idea to get rid of them at the earliest opportunity as they’ll only take you one way. Could anybody, taking his track record at every club he’s been at (barring the basket case that was QPR), claim that Mark Hughes is a bad manager? I’m not saying that he’s in Tony Waddington’s class, but bad managers do not guide relatively small clubs to top-half finishes in The Premier League three seasons in a row- it just doesn’t happen. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that everything in the garden is rosy and we should all sit there happy-clapping every dismal bit of football that we see under Mark Hughes, and we should certainly question some of his recent transfer dealings, but for God’s sake people, please try to get a grip. A club like Stoke cannot keep churning out continual progress- otherwise we’d win the league in about seven or eight years- and we all know that’s not going to happen. We’re bound to have some seasons where the squad needs to be rebuilt and a period of consolidation is needed, or maybe even a lower finish in order that we bed in new players and new ideas so that we can move forwards again in the future. The culture of hysterical tantrums and unrealistic demands seems very much a modern phenomenon- the 21st Century an age of instant gratification, where nobody is prepared to wait for anything or accept that things in life cannot always be perfect. Everything is always somebody’s fault, someone has to be blamed and hounded, and mistakes just aren’t allowed to happen. Well, here’s what could happen if we don’t give a proven manager the time and space to sort things out: we sack him and appoint one of the absolute duffers who go round the managerial merry-go-round year upon year, ballsing up at one club after another, and if we do get sucked through that relegation trapdoor as a result, then it could take another twenty-three year absence (or even longer) before we come back again. Don’t think it can happen? Ask Leeds, ask Wolves, ask Portsmouth, ask Charlton, ask Coventry City, ask Derby County. I could go on. Whatever your views are on Mark Hughes’s team selections, his transfers or his tactics, all I ask is that we as fans- the only people with the success of the football club truly in our hearts- exercise a little more patience and tinge our expectations with a dose of realism. Hound out a good manager during his first bad spell and we could pay the consequences for generations to come. Give him time and support, a bit of leeway, and he’s already shown that he has the ability to get us moving in the right direction again. One day, the time may come when Mark Hughes’s time really is up and the man his simply run out of ideas or motivation to keep Stoke City performing at a successful level. When that happens, then like all managers, it’ll be time for both parties to move on- even Tony Waddington reached that point, although the circumstances surrounding his departure were also laced with the terrible luck of The Butler Street Stand roof blowing off and the subsequent sale of half his team. At this stage, one below average season is really not grounds for the axe to fall. Good read that. Until some of the idiots and so called supporters start raising that we are enjoying the most successful era in the club's history, then we will always have clueless prats calling for Hughes out. For who? Look at Leicester. Hodgson is apparently in the frame. I mean FFS. People need to get a grip. Get behind the team and the manager or do one. Simple really SGS
|
|
|
Post by SneydGreenStokie on Feb 28, 2017 23:02:42 GMT
18 months of dreary football. Something had to change this season and it didn't. Now the issues look bigger. We need a massive overhaul. Yeah - We are in deep shit aren't we. I mean, the purchase of on of the best young English players to our ranks is a disaster isn't it. Arguably out best player in Arnie committing to the club for another 4 years. Things look really bad dont they. Get a grip FFS. Raise how good we have relative to even 10 years ago, then go to 15, 20 and so on. What the hell do you want? SGS
|
|
|
Post by SneydGreenStokie on Feb 28, 2017 23:04:54 GMT
From football 365: The list of teams that Stoke have beaten in all competitions since the end of 2015: Doncaster, Norwich, Liverpool (then lost on pens), Bournemouth, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Watford, West Ham, Stevenage, Sunderland, Hull, Swansea, Burnley and Crystal Palace. We are currently 10th. Whats your point? SGS
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Feb 28, 2017 23:11:02 GMT
18 months of dreary football. Something had to change this season and it didn't. Now the issues look bigger. We need a massive overhaul. Yeah - We are in deep shit aren't we. I mean, the purchase of on of the best young English players to our ranks is a disaster isn't it. Arguably out best player in Arnie committing to the club for another 4 years. Things look really bad dont they. Get a grip FFS. Raise how good we have relative to even 10 years ago, then go to 15, 20 and so on. What the hell do you want? SGS For us not to have the main tactic of hoofing it to Crouch. That'd be nice.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Feb 28, 2017 23:19:28 GMT
Yeah - We are in deep shit aren't we. I mean, the purchase of on of the best young English players to our ranks is a disaster isn't it. Arguably out best player in Arnie committing to the club for another 4 years. Things look really bad dont they. Get a grip FFS. Raise how good we have relative to even 10 years ago, then go to 15, 20 and so on. What the hell do you want? SGS For us not to have the main tactic of hoofing it to Crouch. That'd be nice. I wouldn't care if we finished 7th doing it I'd still fucking hate it.
|
|
|
Post by chonburipotter on Mar 1, 2017 2:29:39 GMT
From football 365: The list of teams that Stoke have beaten in all competitions since the end of 2015: Doncaster, Norwich, Liverpool (then lost on pens), Bournemouth, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Watford, West Ham, Stevenage, Sunderland, Hull, Swansea, Burnley and Crystal Palace. We are currently 10th. Whats your point? SGS I think he's means it's not very good
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Mar 1, 2017 2:31:49 GMT
The crucial factor is that we know Hughes is a good manager. His track record is indisputably a good one. Getting rid of a good manager is pretty much making the admission that he's lost the plot to the point of no return- do you think we're at that point yet? There's a big difference between ditching someone who has done the business here and elsewhere, and showing some complete duffer the door. Pulis was an example of when a good manager had reached that point of no return- and it was a seriously hard decision to get rid of him. It involved us flirting dangerously close to relegation, on top of the poor performances and lack of entetainment, before Coates finally-and rightfully- pulled the trigger. Hughes hasn't even come close to that though. To answer your question, transfer wise he's brought in Lee Grant for £1 million, BMI on a season long loan, and Sobhi is starting to look like a steal for £6m. There are other deals that look questionable (I believe Allen will prove to be agood signing for £13m but isn't a No.10) while others just look like howlers (Imbula mainly). Transfer wise, like every other manager, it's a mixed bag. Tactically I think he's getting more wrong than right at the moment. Allen at No 10 has gone on at least three weeks too long, Adam in a midfield 2 is a liability etc. However, it can't be that much of a disaster if we've been picking up results that are sufficient to see us 10th in the league. I also think that given that he's not wedded to one system in the same way that TP was, there's every chance he'll switch things round once Saido is fit and try a few different things. Things can change quickly in football, and we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering to them before the predicted collapse happens. I can't say that I'm not concerned with some of the things that have been going on, particularly defensively, but I can't bring myself to start ranting and raving about sacking a man who has the track record that MH has here...it just seems laughable.
No as I said originally we haven't reached that point yet, he must be given (at least) until the summer but what the board did in 1969 is neither here nor there in my opinion, what matters is the here and now.
We are fielding the slowest and the oldest starting XI in the league and our tactic is too simply twat it long to a 36 year old striker - that's it. Why?
Every striker that he has brought to the club has failed, Joselu, Diouf, Bony all deemed not good enough so he has had to resort to a player that should have left ages ago. Why?
Adam and Whelan clearly shot, yet our record £18 million pound signing can't get a whiff of a game. Why?
BMI has been an excellent signing but at the end of the day he isn't even our player. I think Hughes got very lucky with Grant, he was clearly brought here to replace the utterly appalling Haugaard (who signed him?), if he hadn't he would have gone straight into the team but in the end Given was so dreadful (who signed him?) Hughes had no other choice but to give Grant a go. Sobhi I'll give you.
We look a shadow of the team that finished 2015 and have done so since the Anfield semi-final and you are right we've seen many examples of when teams' league positions are extremely flattering before the predicted collapse and it is this that worries me, I think it's a valid concern.
I think we should see how the rest of the season pans out and revisit the question in the summer.
That's not exactly a glowing endorsement.
|
|
|
Post by lowlands on Mar 1, 2017 13:22:37 GMT
Predictably, the Hughes Out calls have started again after an admittedly shite performance today. The following post is taken from my article in the fanzine a few issues back. I expect that barring some some sort of catastrophic collapse, this will be my view on the manager's position for some time yet.It’s fair to say that we’re looking at a likely finish somewhere between 10th and 15th this season and a points total below the 50 point mark. Not as good as previous campaigns in terms of position, points or entertainment. However, this is the first season under Hughes that hasn’t been, overall, a positive one. Is the mind-frame of the modern supporter really as impatient as demanding that a successful manager’s first indifferent season should result in him being sacked? Well, for those who answer ‘yes’, I’d like to draw your attention to Stoke’s final league positions in The Waddington era, particularly those years in the late sixties after we’d been promoted in 1962-63 and before the halcyon days of the mid-Seventies: Year Points Total Finishing Position 1963/64 38 17th 1964/65 42 11th 1965/66 42 10th 1966/67 41 12th 1967/68 35 18th 1968/69 33 19th 1969/70 45 9th 1970/71 37 13th 1971/72 35 17th 1972/73 38 15th 1973/74 46 5th 1974/75 49 5th 1975/76 41 12th 1976/77 34 21st (RELEGATED) As you can see, The Waddington-era wasn’t one long party of beer, skittles and year-on-year progress. The first three seasons were each more successful than the last, but they were followed by three years of continual regression, where points totals and league positions got progressively worse every year. However, the pattern was stopped with a 9th place finish in 69/70 before, once again, the team slid down the table for a few years. Between 1973 and 1975 though, double 5th place finishes were achieved by what most people around at the time consider to be our best ever side. Only being born in 1978, obviously I wasn’t around to witness this first hand, but I asked my father (a regular attendee in those days, as he still is) what the mood was like in the stands during the late sixties when the team, after an initial burst of progress, seemed to be on the slide. He said that he couldn’t remember any talk of Waddington being sacked, just the usual week-to-week grumbling that football supporters tend to emit however their team’s performing. However, whether fans were whinging or not about Waddington’s team in that spell, the fact is that anyone who wanted him sacked would have been left with egg on their face by the period of success that followed. Waddington is rightly held in high esteem by all Stoke fans; even for people too young to have been there at the time it’s obvious from his record that the man was a very good football manager. However, scattered throughout all the good years were some average ones and a couple of outright bad ones. The board and the fans stuck with him though, obviously realising that a good manager is a good manager and should be rewarded with time and patience to get things right again. Would that happen nowadays? Probably not, as it seems that as soon as any team goes through any sort of prolonged sticky patch, fans start whipping themselves up into a frenzy and demanding that the boss pays for it with his job. It’s fortunate that people didn’t do that in 1968 or 1969 though, otherwise we wouldn’t have won a League Cup, wouldn’t have finished 5th, wouldn’t have signed Alan Hudson and wouldn’t have faced the likes of Ajax in European competition. When you have a rank bad manager in charge of your side, it’s a good idea to get rid of them at the earliest opportunity as they’ll only take you one way. Could anybody, taking his track record at every club he’s been at (barring the basket case that was QPR), claim that Mark Hughes is a bad manager? I’m not saying that he’s in Tony Waddington’s class, but bad managers do not guide relatively small clubs to top-half finishes in The Premier League three seasons in a row- it just doesn’t happen. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that everything in the garden is rosy and we should all sit there happy-clapping every dismal bit of football that we see under Mark Hughes, and we should certainly question some of his recent transfer dealings, but for God’s sake people, please try to get a grip. A club like Stoke cannot keep churning out continual progress- otherwise we’d win the league in about seven or eight years- and we all know that’s not going to happen. We’re bound to have some seasons where the squad needs to be rebuilt and a period of consolidation is needed, or maybe even a lower finish in order that we bed in new players and new ideas so that we can move forwards again in the future. The culture of hysterical tantrums and unrealistic demands seems very much a modern phenomenon- the 21st Century an age of instant gratification, where nobody is prepared to wait for anything or accept that things in life cannot always be perfect. Everything is always somebody’s fault, someone has to be blamed and hounded, and mistakes just aren’t allowed to happen. Well, here’s what could happen if we don’t give a proven manager the time and space to sort things out: we sack him and appoint one of the absolute duffers who go round the managerial merry-go-round year upon year, ballsing up at one club after another, and if we do get sucked through that relegation trapdoor as a result, then it could take another twenty-three year absence (or even longer) before we come back again. Don’t think it can happen? Ask Leeds, ask Wolves, ask Portsmouth, ask Charlton, ask Coventry City, ask Derby County. I could go on. Whatever your views are on Mark Hughes’s team selections, his transfers or his tactics, all I ask is that we as fans- the only people with the success of the football club truly in our hearts- exercise a little more patience and tinge our expectations with a dose of realism. Hound out a good manager during his first bad spell and we could pay the consequences for generations to come. Give him time and support, a bit of leeway, and he’s already shown that he has the ability to get us moving in the right direction again. One day, the time may come when Mark Hughes’s time really is up and the man his simply run out of ideas or motivation to keep Stoke City performing at a successful level. When that happens, then like all managers, it’ll be time for both parties to move on- even Tony Waddington reached that point, although the circumstances surrounding his departure were also laced with the terrible luck of The Butler Street Stand roof blowing off and the subsequent sale of half his team. At this stage, one below average season is really not grounds for the axe to fall. Also 85% of those finishes were mid table as there were 22 teams in the league. So apart from 19th and 17th Stoke also made Europe twice, came within a whisker of winning the league title, had 2 FA Cup semis and In my view cheated out of both them and won the league cup final in 72 and were also runners up in the league cup final in 1964 and Waddington also got Stoke promoted in 1963 as Champions.
Now compare that to Hughes so far and if we go on evidence of his first 4 years, well Waddington, had a Div 2 Champion side, league cup finalists. Hughes league cup semi, FA Cup beaten by lower opposition twice Blackburn and Wolves. Waddo also got the England goalkeepers signature and some great players who actually could play extremely well, Salmons, Hudson, Hurst, Greenhoff, Ritchie, whereas Hughes has got us Bojan, Imbula, Joselu and Shakiri all who are on their day fantastic but their day is whenever they can be bothered.
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Mar 1, 2017 14:01:13 GMT
Also 85% of those finishes were mid table as there were 22 teams in the league. So apart from 19th and 17th Stoke also made Europe twice, came within a whisker of winning the league title, had 2 FA Cup semis and In my view cheated out of both them and won the league cup final in 72 and were also runners up in the league cup final in 1964 and Waddington also got Stoke promoted in 1963 as Champions.
Now compare that to Hughes so far and if we go on evidence of his first 4 years, well Waddington, had a Div 2 Champion side, league cup finalists. Hughes league cup semi, FA Cup beaten by lower opposition twice Blackburn and Wolves. Waddo also got the England goalkeepers signature and some great players who actually could play extremely well, Salmons, Hudson, Hurst, Greenhoff, Ritchie, whereas Hughes has got us Bojan, Imbula, Joselu and Shakiri all who are on their day fantastic but their day is whenever they can be bothered.
[/quote] Lets not pretend that we were a wonderful cup team all the time under Waddo. He served up his fair share of cup disasters. I was there to see us lose 2-0 at home to 3rd Division Walsall in the 1966 FA Cup with a full first team and a performance as bad as any seen in my lifetime. We also managed to lose 2-1 at Walsall the following season in the League Cup. The season after we won the League Cup we went and lost 3-1 at 3rd Division Notts County in the League Cup as well as 2-1 at 4th Division Lincoln City in 1976. There were also a number of defeats to Division 2 (Championship) Teams. We have always been rubbish in the Cups with the exception of the odd golden season here and there.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Mar 1, 2017 14:05:15 GMT
From football 365: The list of teams that Stoke have beaten in all competitions since the end of 2015: Doncaster, Norwich, Liverpool (then lost on pens), Bournemouth, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Watford, West Ham, Stevenage, Sunderland, Hull, Swansea, Burnley and Crystal Palace. Good heavens, that is pitiful, so the best (only) reasonable Premier League match scalp since 2015 is West Ham, it's not hard to see why the feel good factor is not there despite us clinging on to a respectable league position for the moment at least.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Mar 1, 2017 14:11:49 GMT
The only thing I would enforce in the background if I was Coates is a new defensive and fitness coach to work with the players and get them up to speed. I think if this season peters out as it looks likely to do (finally debunking the myth about his teams in the second half of the season) and we have our annual horrendous start to proceedings next year, then you’d think he’d be on the thinnest of ice. It might be unfair when couched against our history but football has never been fair. Raised expectations meet stagnation, sprinkle on a regular supply of absolutely shambolic shellacking’s and a dash of double digit million footballers completely out of the picture and it starts to look fairly grim for Hughes. Good companies have a vision of the future combined with short-, medium- and long-term objectives, as well strong leadership. If you don't hit the short-term objectives you'l go out of business and never get to the medium- and long-term stuff.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Mar 2, 2017 10:00:31 GMT
I was lucky enough to see the latter part of the Waddington era and be indoctrinated by my old man about the seasons I missed.
In response to the OP some of the Boothen faithful did in fact moan and call for his head shamefully.
Lets not also forget that after finally assembling our best and most successful side he was victim of a board that had woefully under insured the ground and resulted in the selling of the heart of that team and Greenhoff in particular.
At that point he walked.
There was plenty of dire stuff in the early 1st division years and took a long time to build to the heights by signing forgotten journeyman pros and taking a few punts. Some of which didn't come off.
Hughes is no Waddington but his record stands up. Consecutive top half finishes since his arrival beats anything in recent history. His win percentage is higher than Waddington in a different era, possibly one that Waddington would have struggled with.
The only conclusions that I can see from history, unless we go back to the 1920s, is that this has been comparable and exceeded our highest ever league position. Achieved consistently in the most competitive and fiscally cut throat in the world.
Secondly successful Stoke teams have always been built on consistency in the board room and in the dug out.
Finally Waddington and the 1970s team is what made me a Stoke fan for life so I have enormous respect for what he did. But Mark Hughes is up there with the most successful since and he deserves his seat in the dugout.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Mar 2, 2017 10:52:42 GMT
I was lucky enough to see the latter part of the Waddington era and be indoctrinated by my old man about the seasons I missed. In response to the OP some of the Boothen faithful did in fact moan and call for his head shamefully.
Lets not also forget that after finally assembling our best and most successful side he was victim of a board that had woefully under insured the ground and resulted in the selling of the heart of that team and Greenhoff in particular. At that point he walked. There was plenty of dire stuff in the early 1st division years and took a long time to build to the heights by signing forgotten journeyman pros and taking a few punts. Some of which didn't come off. Hughes is no Waddington but his record stands up. Consecutive top half finishes since his arrival beats anything in recent history. His win percentage is higher than Waddington in a different era, possibly one that Waddington would have struggled with. The only conclusions that I can see from history, unless we go back to the 1920s, is that this has been comparable and exceeded our highest ever league position. Achieved consistently in the most competitive and fiscally cut throat in the world. Secondly successful Stoke teams have always been built on consistency in the board room and in the dug out. Finally Waddington and the 1970s team is what made me a Stoke fan for life so I have enormous respect for what he did. But Mark Hughes is up there with the most successful since and he deserves his seat in the dugout. Yes, I can remember as a boy "Waddington out" ringing round the Boothen End as clear as day.
|
|