|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Nov 6, 2017 20:14:06 GMT
You certainly make some reasoned points. But your 4 divisions of those who want a managerial change don't cover the bases. There has been some short sighted thinking during successive transfer windows from Hughes and his team and it has shown on the pitch over the last 20 odd months. I believe we should be playing better and given that Hughes oversaw a definite improvement at the beginning of his tenure he should be capable of achieving that again. However it now seems that he is struggling with finding a style that suits our personnel, personnel that he has bought and as a result that struggle is showing up on the pitch. If he doesn't lift us before the end of this season and, presuming we stay up, I think the board should be thinking about viable replacements and that thought process needs to start now. We cannot be caught in the position of replacing a manager during a relegation fight. The short sighted thinking comes from the very top of the club. Coates is on his knees every night praying to the football Gods that Hughes does the business and keeps us up on the relatively piss poor budget he gives him. Fair enough Pugsley but it could be rebutted that the money he received wasn't very well spent.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on Nov 6, 2017 21:02:56 GMT
The only thing the anti Hughes camp have in common is they want Hughes gone, Beyond that its split into: 1 Those that want a backs against the wall grind out results manager. Preferably northern and preferably with a gravelly voice 2 Those that want thrilling expansive football at all costs. Preferably with Pace (presumably because Hale is past it) and Youth - a dozen ovum and a test tube of sperm will do 3 Those with completely unrealistic expectations - just maybe Pep will get bored with the lack of a challenge by mid season? 4 Those sticking pins into a random list of famous names. Gary Neville, Seriously, Gary Neville. Changing the manager might make some feel better. But the chances of a change making a significant positive difference are slim. And the one thing it won't do is galvanise the support - if anything it will be more split than ever before. Unless we can find a a backs against the wall northerner with a gravelly voice who will play an expansive game based on pace and youth who is totally out of our league due to a high media profile but absolutely no experience of managing a football team in the Premier League. Step forward Barbara from the League of Gentlemen. You know it makes sense. Hughes in. We're a mid table side with some decent players and a proven manager who knows the club and has a successful track record in the Premier League, The alternatives vary from uninspiring to just plain bonkers. You certainly make some reasoned points. But your 4 divisions of those who want a managerial change don't cover the bases. There has been some short sighted thinking during successive transfer windows from Hughes and his team and it has shown on the pitch over the last 20 odd months. I believe we should be playing better and given that Hughes oversaw a definite improvement at the beginning of his tenure he should be capable of achieving that again. However it now seems that he is struggling with finding a style that suits our personnel, personnel that he has bought and as a result that struggle is showing up on the pitch. If he doesn't lift us before the end of this season and, presuming we stay up, I think the board should be thinking about viable replacements and that thought process needs to start now. We cannot be caught in the position of replacing a manager during a relegation fight. Don't know for sure but I'd think there's a constant eye on succession planning. The manager merry go round is a 'thing' and the inner world of football is far cosier and incestuous than us spectators get to appreciate.
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Nov 6, 2017 21:13:52 GMT
Just having a manager who knows what his best team is would be a start.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on Nov 6, 2017 21:32:26 GMT
Just having a manager who knows what his best team is would be a start. Squad game.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 21:34:08 GMT
There is no best team,never will be. Form,injuries, conditions and the opposition mean any side needs to be flexible.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 6, 2017 21:35:42 GMT
The last two sides to win the league did so by having a recognisable first choice starting XI. Think a settled side counts for a lot.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 21:38:08 GMT
The last two sides to win the league did so by having a recognisable first choice starting XI. Think a settled side counts for a lot. Settled...up to a point. They didn't play the same XI game in game out. Not saying we should have eleven changes and completely different tactics every week either. Balance to be struck.
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on Nov 6, 2017 21:43:00 GMT
Just having a manager who knows what his best team is would be a start. Squad game. Chelsea last season won the league playing basically the same team every week and so did Leicester the season before. Continuity is essential when possible.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Nov 6, 2017 21:50:04 GMT
The only thing the anti Hughes camp have in common is they want Hughes gone, Beyond that its split into: 1 Those that want a backs against the wall grind out results manager. Preferably northern and preferably with a gravelly voice 2 Those that want thrilling expansive football at all costs. Preferably with Pace (presumably because Hale is past it) and Youth - a dozen ovum and a test tube of sperm will do 3 Those with completely unrealistic expectations - just maybe Pep will get bored with the lack of a challenge by mid season? 4 Those sticking pins into a random list of famous names. Gary Neville, Seriously, Gary Neville. Changing the manager might make some feel better. But the chances of a change making a significant positive difference are slim. And the one thing it won't do is galvanise the support - if anything it will be more split than ever before. Unless we can find a a backs against the wall northerner with a gravelly voice who will play an expansive game based on pace and youth who is totally out of our league due to a high media profile but absolutely no experience of managing a football team in the Premier League. Step forward Barbara from the League of Gentlemen. You know it makes sense. Hughes in. We're a mid table side with some decent players and a proven manager who knows the club and has a successful track record in the Premier League, The alternatives vary from uninspiring to just plain bonkers. I think 1 & 2 would have done and you have a point, that in the main we are a split fanbase who want polar opposites in football terms. 3 & 4 went off on some sort of bonkers tangent. I'd argue that the chances of making a significant positive difference being slim is wrong. Its a mild form of sacking Pulis will see us in oblivion from a few years ago. Hughes came in was not a universally popular choice but I'd say he made a significant positive difference for at least two years. In the last two and a bit years he's become more like Tone than Tone boring, negative, bizarre selection, hammering very square pegs into round holes. So why is there only a slim chance of someone coming in and making a significant positive difference does Hughes have a monopoly on that? What you really mean is "I don't want to change manager, so anyone who does is just daft". People wouldn't buy it then and they won't now. Hughes has over half a season to start making a significant positive difference or somebody else needs to try doing so instead. I'm not saying anyone who wants to change manager is daft. However some of the options being bandied about are daft and others are uninspiring or unrealistic. I do think Hughes is a pretty good manager and he's put together a pretty good squad that is finding its feet after a tough opening fixture list and some unfortunate injuries to the defence - which hopefully are clearing up. If we're in the bottom three at Xmas talk of changing manager has some merit and if we don't end up top half I think Hughes may well go. But Coates backed Hughes in the close season and the start to the season hasn't been a disaster - it could have been. Hughes was pretty nailed on to see it through to Xmas at least barring a complete nightmare start - and nothing has happened to make me think that position has changed or there is good reason to change direction now. The other thing I have a problem with is the blind faith that changing the manager will automatically change things for the better. It won't. Many of Stokes "problems" are down to the fact we are Stoke and not Man City. Our budget, pulling power and potential are limited by the fact that we are a medium sized club in a medium sized, unfashionable city. A change of manager (or ownership) isn't going to fundamentally change who we are. And to be honest I'm fine with that, If I wanted to support a club like Man City I'd support Man City. If we do change manager (and the end of the season is the best time to do that - not mid season, unless you absolutely have to) I'd like to see us have some ambition - a manager who wants us to play decent football and have aspirations to be in the top half (a bit like that Hughes bloke). However I don't believe we should play good football just for the sake of it - every manager should start pragmatic and build from there (a bit like that Hughes bloke). It might not be Coates' inclination but to move forward I think we should look for a talented overseas manager - I really don't think there are any outstanding British candidates - they are either punts in the dark or a step backwards,
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 22:05:28 GMT
I think 1 & 2 would have done and you have a point, that in the main we are a split fanbase who want polar opposites in football terms. 3 & 4 went off on some sort of bonkers tangent. I'd argue that the chances of making a significant positive difference being slim is wrong. Its a mild form of sacking Pulis will see us in oblivion from a few years ago. Hughes came in was not a universally popular choice but I'd say he made a significant positive difference for at least two years. In the last two and a bit years he's become more like Tone than Tone boring, negative, bizarre selection, hammering very square pegs into round holes. So why is there only a slim chance of someone coming in and making a significant positive difference does Hughes have a monopoly on that? What you really mean is "I don't want to change manager, so anyone who does is just daft". People wouldn't buy it then and they won't now. Hughes has over half a season to start making a significant positive difference or somebody else needs to try doing so instead. I'm not saying anyone who wants to change manager is daft. However some of the options being bandied about are daft and others are uninspiring or unrealistic. I do think Hughes is a pretty good manager and he's put together a pretty good squad that is finding its feet after a tough opening fixture list and some unfortunate injuries to the defence - which hopefully are clearing up. If we're in the bottom three at Xmas talk of changing manager has some merit and if we don't end up top half I think Hughes may well go. But Coates backed Hughes in the close season and the start to the season hasn't been a disaster - it could have been. Hughes was pretty nailed on to see it through to Xmas at least barring a complete nightmare start - and nothing has happened to make me think that position has changed or there is good reason to change direction now. The other thing I have a problem with is the blind faith that changing the manager will automatically change things for the better. It won't. Many of Stokes "problems" are down to the fact we are Stoke and not Man City. Our budget, pulling power and potential are limited by the fact that we are a medium sized club in a medium sized, unfashionable city. A change of manager (or ownership) isn't going to fundamentally change who we are. And to be honest I'm fine with that, If I wanted to support a club like Man City I'd support Man City. If we do change manager (and the end of the season is the best time to do that - not mid season, unless you absolutely have to) I'd like to see us have some ambition - a manager who wants us to play decent football and have aspirations to be in the top half (a bit like that Hughes bloke). However I don't believe we should play good football just for the sake of it - every manager should start pragmatic and build from there (a bit like that Hughes bloke). It might not be Coates' inclination but to move forward I think we should look for a talented overseas manager - I really don't think there are any outstanding British candidates - they are either punts in the dark or a step backwards, That's where I'm at. Hughes has got the season for me. Have a think then.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on Nov 6, 2017 22:05:29 GMT
The last two sides to win the league did so by having a recognisable first choice starting XI. Think a settled side counts for a lot. Of course. But where would that leave you for developing youth, integrating new talent etc. It's obv about balance. Tone liked his set formation and stuck on players. You don't want that mate. Chelsea could bring Willian etc on. And did.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 6, 2017 22:09:14 GMT
The last two sides to win the league did so by having a recognisable first choice starting XI. Think a settled side counts for a lot. Settled...up to a point. They didn't play the same XI game in game out. Not saying we should have eleven changes and completely different tactics every week either. Balance to be struck. Nobody can play the same xi week in week out, but both knew their best xi and played it when they could.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 22:12:19 GMT
Settled...up to a point. They didn't play the same XI game in game out. Not saying we should have eleven changes and completely different tactics every week either. Balance to be struck. Nobody can play the same xi week in week out, but both knew their best xi and played it when they could. Ranieri stuck with his side mostly but he did vary his forwards quite often.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 6, 2017 22:12:21 GMT
The last two sides to win the league did so by having a recognisable first choice starting XI. Think a settled side counts for a lot. Of course. But where would that leave you for developing youth, integrating new talent etc. It's obv about balance. Tone liked his set formation and stuck on players. You don't want that mate. Chelsea could bring Willian etc on. And did. You want room for upward mobility in your squad and bringing youth through. You can still do that and have a settled side and know your best team. Hughes did that for much of his first couple of seasons. Picked the team on form, but knew his best system and team by and large.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 6, 2017 22:15:26 GMT
Nobody can play the same xi week in week out, but both knew their best xi and played it when they could. Ranieri stuck with his side mostly but he did vary his forwards quite often. Not massively. Vardy started 36 games, Okazaki 28.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2017 22:18:28 GMT
The short sighted thinking comes from the very top of the club. Coates is on his knees every night praying to the football Gods that Hughes does the business and keeps us up on the relatively piss poor budget he gives him. Fair enough Pugsley but it could be rebutted that the money he received wasn't very well spent. You could say that about every single PL manager.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 6, 2017 22:45:12 GMT
There is no best team,never will be. Form,injuries, conditions and the opposition mean any side needs to be flexible. Hughes has tried TWELVE (nine of which he signed himself) different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 22:53:04 GMT
There is no best team,never will be. Form,injuries, conditions and the opposition mean any side needs to be flexible. Hughes has tried TEN different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there. Indeed,Hughes is at the other end of the spectrum. I'm just wary of managers who pick their favorites regardless. Both forms of bad management. Must be someone out there who would fit Stoke,just can't see who right now,Hughes will do till summer. Generally a better time to change anyway and in world Cup summer should be lots of movement in the manager market. If we make top ten and have a cup run we probably won't change. Fifteenth and lose to another Championship reserve side and he's got no chance.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2017 22:53:15 GMT
There is no best team,never will be. Form,injuries, conditions and the opposition mean any side needs to be flexible. Hughes has tried TWELVE (nine of which he signed himself) different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there. Any advance on 12?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 6, 2017 22:58:21 GMT
Hughes has tried TEN different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there. Indeed,Hughes is at the other end of the spectrum. I'm just wary of managers who pick their favorites regardless. Both forms of bad management. Must be someone out there who would fit Stoke,just can't see who right now,Hughes will do till summer. Generally a better time to change anyway and in world Cup summer should be lots of movement in the manager market. If we make top ten and have a cup run we probably won't change. Fifteenth and lose to another Championship reserve side and he's got no chance. Oh I agree. I wanted him gone in the summer but said at the time, that if we were to continue with him this season, then we would have to stick with him, pretty much regardless of how poorly he performed, for the very reasons you mention. I'm praying that somehow we can manage to accumulate enough points to keep us away from the drop, before making a considered decision about his replacement next summer.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 23:01:01 GMT
Indeed,Hughes is at the other end of the spectrum. I'm just wary of managers who pick their favorites regardless. Both forms of bad management. Must be someone out there who would fit Stoke,just can't see who right now,Hughes will do till summer. Generally a better time to change anyway and in world Cup summer should be lots of movement in the manager market. If we make top ten and have a cup run we probably won't change. Fifteenth and lose to another Championship reserve side and he's got no chance. Oh I agree. I wanted him gone in the summer but said at the time, that if we were to continue with him this season, then we would have to stick with him, pretty much regardless of how poorly he performed, for the very reasons you mention I'm praying that somehow we can manage to accumulate enough points to keep us away from the drop, before making a considered decision about his replacement next summer. We will get enough points,as we did last year. If we get some entertainment that would help. I see Ranieri is weaving his magic at Nantes. Could he be tempted back to England? He's one foreigner Coates might go for.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2017 23:02:45 GMT
There is no best team,never will be. Form,injuries, conditions and the opposition mean any side needs to be flexible. Hughes has tried TWELVE (nine of which he signed himself) different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there. That's the problem with signing squad fillers. Our highest fee for a goalscorer is 12million quid. I can't be arsed to look it up but I'd hazard a guess we're in the bottom 3 in that stat. Palace were in the PL 5 minutes and were signing a CF for 30 million quid. Even Burnley have spent more on a forward than us. Hughes does fuck around with his selections though which is annoying.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 6, 2017 23:06:50 GMT
Hughes has tried TWELVE (nine of which he signed himself) different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there. That's the problem with signing squad fillers. Our highest fee for a goalscorer is 12million quid. I can't be arsed to look it up but I'd hazard a guess we're in the bottom 3 in that stat. Palace were in the PL 5 minutes and were signing a CF for 30 million quid. Even Burnley have spent more on a forward than us. Hughes does fuck around with his selections though which is annoying. To be fair we did offer £20 miillion+ for Berahino a year before we finally got him but West Brom rejected our bid. More fool them!
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 23:09:40 GMT
We need someone who can get more out of the players we got.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2017 23:10:35 GMT
That's the problem with signing squad fillers. Our highest fee for a goalscorer is 12million quid. I can't be arsed to look it up but I'd hazard a guess we're in the bottom 3 in that stat. Palace were in the PL 5 minutes and were signing a CF for 30 million quid. Even Burnley have spent more on a forward than us. Hughes does fuck around with his selections though which is annoying. To be fair we did offer £20 miillion+ for Berahino a year before we finally got him but West Brom rejected our bid. More fool them! So why didn't we spend it on another forward? Why after 10 years of PL money we are sill pissing around with bits and pieces players?
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2017 23:11:40 GMT
We need someone who can get more out of the players we got. Probably yes but who?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 6, 2017 23:13:24 GMT
To be fair we did offer £20 miillion+ for Berahino a year before we finally got him but West Brom rejected our bid. More fool them! So why didn't we spend it on another forward? Why after 10 years of PL money we are sill pissing around with bits and pieces players? Because Hughes was determined he would finally get Berahino? We offered good money for Diouf too but our offer was declined before finally nailing him a year later.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on Nov 6, 2017 23:13:38 GMT
Hughes has tried TWELVE (nine of which he signed himself) different strikers up front for us since he's been here and he's still as far away from knowing who his best option is in that role than he's ever been. That's not a sign of a manager being flexible with his selection but a sign of a manager not having the faintest idea who he should be playing there. Any advance on 12? Crouch counts as three. Kenwynne Jones (shitehawk) Cameron Jerome (gambler), Peter Odemwingie (cruciate), Guidetti (? chicken difficulties), Bojan (lightweight) Walters (gone nah) Wilfreid Bony (bone China), Joselu (widge), Diouf (family), Berahino (future?) It's a difficult quiz.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Nov 6, 2017 23:14:59 GMT
We need someone who can get more out of the players we got. Probably yes but who? Ranieri?
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2017 23:16:47 GMT
So why didn't we spend it on another forward? Why after 10 years of PL money we are sill pissing around with bits and pieces players? Because Hughes was determined he would finally get Berahino? We offered good money for Diouf too but our offer was declined before finally nailing him a year later. And Gabbiadini... didn't sign. It's bollocks, like the whole of our recruitment.
|
|