|
Post by GeneralFaye on Dec 20, 2017 12:01:42 GMT
As much as we all love Muni he isn't the answer. The decision to let him go wasn't the wrong one, the choice of his replacement was the shocker.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 20, 2017 12:35:29 GMT
Dunno doesn't look like he's very good at sharing. Are these Hughes signings or Cartwright and Co, I am beginning to think lattter by Hughes comments Saido and Wimmer What, comments like these? 😁 "Bringing Kevin here is a real coup in my view, because he is a hugely talented young player who will undoubtedly add further quality to the group. As soon as the possibility of bringing Kevin here presented itself to us we moved quickly on it, and have managed to get the deal done, so we are understandably delighted to have brought him in." "It's been a bit of a saga but we have managed to get it over the line, thankfully. At times it appeared like Berahino wasn't likely to happen but, as always with these kind of deals, you have to be patient and hope that all the work you have done throughout the talks pays off. Evidently, it gained a fair amount of speed this afternoon and we have been able to conclude the deal, which we are all absolutely delighted about."
|
|
|
Post by boweryboy on Dec 20, 2017 12:35:49 GMT
Not enough players in the side to save us,when it comes to a battle for survival,too many players who don't want to put the hard yards in to win the ball back when we have lost it yet again(and that happens far too often and is part of the problem) for me it's like we are playing with nine men every time we start a game and inevertabley we collapse result wise.....
|
|
|
Post by maliciousdamage on Dec 20, 2017 12:39:08 GMT
Don't get me wrong I'd get rid of the lot just to be sure but how can you be so certain he's shit. We've had good players in for talks who've gone elsewhere and done well, maybe they were his picks. Given our club is so secretive about exactly who is responsible for what its really difficult to pin down who's most responsible for the shit show that is our squad. At least we can say for sure that Hughes deserves to be sacked for tactics, selection and game management alone. He was brought in with a brief to improve our recruitment. Four years later, that can be seen as a complete failure. He has to go. I'm with you here Sheik that bloke is a charlatan of the highest order, I've said before if we 'have' to keep Scholes let him handle the day to day affairs, commercial, advertising, corporate etc and bring in a proper Director of Football not some random that thinks he 'knows' big players and agents!
|
|
|
Post by maliciousdamage on Dec 20, 2017 12:44:54 GMT
Are these Hughes signings or Cartwright and Co, I am beginning to think lattter by Hughes comments Saido and Wimmer What, comments like these? 😁 "Bringing Kevin here is a real coup in my view, because he is a hugely talented young player who will undoubtedly add further quality to the group. As soon as the possibility of bringing Kevin here presented itself to us we moved quickly on it, and have managed to get the deal done, so we are understandably delighted to have brought him in." "It's been a bit of a saga but we have managed to get it over the line, thankfully. At times it appeared like Berahino wasn't likely to happen but, as always with these kind of deals, you have to be patient and hope that all the work you have done throughout the talks pays off. Evidently, it gained a fair amount of speed this afternoon and we have been able to conclude the deal, which we are all absolutely delighted about." To be fair any manager will have to 'enthuse' about a player bought in however I think there is something definitely fishy going on, I still think Hughes gave them a list comprising players 'playing' in teams that were 25m plus and the transfer team shat it and went running to PC saying there is no way we can afford these to which Peter said to Mark look we've kept you on because we believe in you but you'll have to make do with what the transfer team can manage to bring in and use the youth. I think Hughes probably had it out with PC at the weekend and said "I told you this wasn't going to work with the targets you landed me". So now we are either: Giving in to Hughes and giving him a slightly bigger sum and higher targets in Jan Or Biding their time whilst they look for a replacement and try to say they are actually sticking with Hughes.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Dec 20, 2017 12:47:25 GMT
Are these Hughes signings or Cartwright and Co, I am beginning to think lattter by Hughes comments Saido and Wimmer What, comments like these? 😁 "Bringing Kevin here is a real coup in my view, because he is a hugely talented young player who will undoubtedly add further quality to the group. As soon as the possibility of bringing Kevin here presented itself to us we moved quickly on it, and have managed to get the deal done, so we are understandably delighted to have brought him in." "It's been a bit of a saga but we have managed to get it over the line, thankfully. At times it appeared like Berahino wasn't likely to happen but, as always with these kind of deals, you have to be patient and hope that all the work you have done throughout the talks pays off. Evidently, it gained a fair amount of speed this afternoon and we have been able to conclude the deal, which we are all absolutely delighted about." Let's face it Paul, we're splitting hairs here. If one goes, both have to go. This is the article on the Stoke website when Cartwright was unveiled: www.stokecityfc.com/news/city-appoint-technical-directorIt's a failure on all counts isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by reddipotter on Dec 20, 2017 12:57:46 GMT
Why would any decent player come to a club in steady decline with a manager on the brink of the sack? With a new manager, we might have a chance of persuading someone to join us. A dirty word called money. It makes the world go around don't you know? I agree that players usually move for more money, but what kind of players are we going to offer more than they already earn? Good ones?
|
|
|
Post by riproaring on Dec 20, 2017 13:02:44 GMT
Are these Hughes signings or Cartwright and Co, I am beginning to think lattter by Hughes comments Saido and Wimmer What, comments like these? 😁 "Bringing Kevin here is a real coup in my view, because he is a hugely talented young player who will undoubtedly add further quality to the group. As soon as the possibility of bringing Kevin here presented itself to us we moved quickly on it, and have managed to get the deal done, so we are understandably delighted to have brought him in." That’s press talk isn’t it bigging up the new signing , what about he doesn’t fit our system at the minute for one. The Burnley one where he said if Zouma stays on we wouldn’t have lost "It's been a bit of a saga but we have managed to get it over the line, thankfully. At times it appeared like Berahino wasn't likely to happen but, as always with these kind of deals, you have to be patient and hope that all the work you have done throughout the talks pays off. Evidently, it gained a fair amount of speed this afternoon and we have been able to conclude the deal, which we are all absolutely delighted about."
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 20, 2017 13:12:41 GMT
What, comments like these? 😁 "Bringing Kevin here is a real coup in my view, because he is a hugely talented young player who will undoubtedly add further quality to the group. As soon as the possibility of bringing Kevin here presented itself to us we moved quickly on it, and have managed to get the deal done, so we are understandably delighted to have brought him in." "It's been a bit of a saga but we have managed to get it over the line, thankfully. At times it appeared like Berahino wasn't likely to happen but, as always with these kind of deals, you have to be patient and hope that all the work you have done throughout the talks pays off. Evidently, it gained a fair amount of speed this afternoon and we have been able to conclude the deal, which we are all absolutely delighted about." Let's face it Paul, we're splitting hairs here. If one goes, both have to go. This is the article on the Stoke website when Cartwright was unveiled: www.stokecityfc.com/news/city-appoint-technical-directorIt's a failure on all counts isn't it? That maybe Dave but I was responding to the suggestion that there's some sort of conspiracy going on where Mark Hughes isn't playing players because he didn't actually want them here himself in the first place. It's a narrative that has gained quite a bit of traction in recent days as people attempt to see things in the manager's comments that just aren't there imo. They'd rather put their own twist on his comments that have nothing to do with the signing of players, whilst at the same time seemingly be prepared to rubbish the comments that the manager actually HAS made about his signings.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 13:26:28 GMT
That maybe Dave but I was responding to the suggestion that there's some sort of conspiracy going on where Mark Hughes isn't playing players because he didn't actually want them here himself in the first place. It's a narrative that has gained quite a bit of traction in recent days as people attempt to see things in the manager's comments that just aren't there imo. They'd rather put their own twist on his comments that have nothing to do with the signing of players, whilst at the same time seemingly be prepared to rubbish the comments that the manager actually HAS made about his signings. Like you I don't believe that he hasn't signed off on any of our signings. Thing is I've just been through all his permanent signings at the club and in monetary terms they're ok. For every disaster there are players that have/would show a profit that would at the very least offset all the losses even if the disastrous ones ended up in total loss to the point where there's a very good chance that his dealings would actually turn a profit overall. I've said many times I think the transfer stick is a red herring and the more I examine it the more I'm convinced that to be the case. Personally I think it only detracts from his woeful performance managing the football team on the pitch which does not hold up to similar scrutiny.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Dec 20, 2017 13:26:59 GMT
Wow you want to get nasty and physical and then replace Ramadan with Choupo who despite being a big lad is about as nasty and physical as the insides of a walnut whip. Then we sign a better player to replace Jese and start him. Ramadan doesn't have the wherewithal to battle this shitstorm out. Choupo is a better player. Christ, Shaq isn't exactly The Punisher. Why split hairs when we're all trying to suggest options without buying a whole new team. Because alster's sole MO on here is to argue with everything someone else suggests. You are not his first target and will, no doubt, not be his last. We are all in this together as Stokies FFS.........
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Dec 20, 2017 13:27:00 GMT
That maybe Dave but I was responding to the suggestion that there's some sort of conspiracy going on where Mark Hughes isn't playing players because he didn't actually want them here himself in the first place. It's a narrative that has gained quite a bit of traction in recent days as people attempt to see things in the manager's comments that just aren't there imo. They'd rather put their own twist on his comments that have nothing to do with the signing of players, whilst at the same time seemingly be prepared to rubbish the comments that the manager actually HAS made about his signings. When Hughes was going well at Stoke you used to see lots of comments along the lines of how good it was that he (especially compared to the previous manager)didn't have favorites, if a player wasn't performing they woudl go out of the side regardless of who bought them. Since the Imbula signing & the general decline no one is saying it anymore. I'm not buying that the manager is choosing not pick players because someone else signed him.Just isn't Hughes style imho.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 13:33:30 GMT
Then we sign a better player to replace Jese and start him. Ramadan doesn't have the wherewithal to battle this shitstorm out. Choupo is a better player. Christ, Shaq isn't exactly The Punisher. Why split hairs when we're all trying to suggest options without buying a whole new team. Because alster's sole MO on here is to argue with everything someone else suggests. You are not his first target and will, no doubt, not be his last. We are all in this together as Stokies FFS......... What's up jezza have I debated something you've suggested and won the debate and now I'm the bogeyman. They have a smiley for everything except crying maybe they need one for when you're being a mardarse.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Dec 20, 2017 13:33:38 GMT
Money available: Butland: 35 million Shaq: 25 million Ryan: 10 million Would Palarse swap Benteke for Wimmer? He scores goals, he scores goals, Benty teke, he scores goals, he score goals up front.....
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Dec 20, 2017 13:35:24 GMT
The recruitment team includes Hughes, of course it does. He is not the type of man to ordinarily allow others to foist players on him, especially after the QPR debacle where this did seem to be happening towards the end. He clearly wanted Saido, he clearly was happy to sign Wimmer.
Equally, any failures in recruitment are down to more than him. Scholes and, especially, Cartwright have to take their share of the blame.
Where Hughes stands alone is in his management of the squad and of each game - his selections, formations, tactics, substitutions. On these, the buck stops with him. His record in this aspect of the role in the last 18 months is so poor as to warrant the sack without considering his part in a disappointing recruitment policy. Add in the latter, and it is absolutely gob-smackingly amazing that he is still in the job.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Dec 20, 2017 13:36:33 GMT
Because alster's sole MO on here is to argue with everything someone else suggests. You are not his first target and will, no doubt, not be his last. We are all in this together as Stokies FFS......... What's up jezza have I debated something you've suggested and won the debate and now I'm the bogeyman. They have a smiley for everything except crying maybe they need one for when you're being a mardarse. Ooooooh, such a keyboard warrior......blocked.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 20, 2017 13:37:04 GMT
That maybe Dave but I was responding to the suggestion that there's some sort of conspiracy going on where Mark Hughes isn't playing players because he didn't actually want them here himself in the first place. It's a narrative that has gained quite a bit of traction in recent days as people attempt to see things in the manager's comments that just aren't there imo. They'd rather put their own twist on his comments that have nothing to do with the signing of players, whilst at the same time seemingly be prepared to rubbish the comments that the manager actually HAS made about his signings. Like you I don't believe that he hasn't signed off on any of our signings. Thing is I've just been through all his permanent signings at the club and in monetary terms they're ok. For every disaster there are players that have/would show a profit that would at the very least offset all the losses even if the disastrous ones ended up in total loss to the point where there's a very good chance that his dealings would actually turn a profit overall. I've said many times I think the transfer stick is a red herring and the more I examine it the more I'm convinced that to be the case. Personally I think it only detracts from his woeful performance managing the football team on the pitch which does not hold up to similar scrutiny. Hmmm ... you can't just assess the signings in the vacuum of ... does the balance sheet actually tally up? No doubt you are right and it does but you can't then just ignore what you're left with. We have got an absolute dog's dinner of a squad, completely unbalanced, severely lacking in pace, lacking in heart and low on overall quality. It is virtually impossible to create a credible starting XI out of it and this is squarely down to appalling choices in the transfer market. I seriously believe that ANY manager would struggle with this squad. Hughes has proved before that when he's got good players at his disposal, then he CAN be a good manager but the squad has got worse and worse over the last two years, it's no coincidence that our performances have got increasingly worse too during that period. However Hughes is completely complicit in the decisions that have lead to this happening.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 13:37:18 GMT
The recruitment team includes Hughes, of course it does. He is not the type of man to ordinarily allow others to foist players on him, especially after the QPR debacle where this did seem to be happening towards the end. He clearly wanted Saido, he clearly was happy to sign Wimmer. Equally, any failures in recruitment are down to more than him. Scholes and, especially, Cartwright have to take their share of the blame. Where Hughes stands alone is in his management of the squad and of each game - his selections, formations, tactics, substitutions. On these, the buck stops with him. His record in this aspect of the role in the last 18 months is so poor as to warrant the sack without considering his part in a disappointing recruitment policy. Add in the latter, and it is absolutely gob-smackingly amazing that he is still in the job. See I agree with you when you're right.
|
|
|
Post by toppercorner on Dec 20, 2017 13:41:31 GMT
Money available: Butland: 35 million Shaq: 25 million Ryan: 10 million Would Palarse swap Benteke for Wimmer? He scores goals, he scores goals, Benty teke, he scores goals, he score goals up front..... 2 are vastly underpriced in todays market no less than 60m for Butland, 40m for Shaq, (10m possibly right for Shawcross with age and injury history)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 13:43:33 GMT
I said when he went back to Spain this time that he would not be coming back. I stand by that comment. So many questions to be asked over that deal. The main one being.... What the fuck were we thinking?
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 13:43:37 GMT
Like you I don't believe that he hasn't signed off on any of our signings. Thing is I've just been through all his permanent signings at the club and in monetary terms they're ok. For every disaster there are players that have/would show a profit that would at the very least offset all the losses even if the disastrous ones ended up in total loss to the point where there's a very good chance that his dealings would actually turn a profit overall. I've said many times I think the transfer stick is a red herring and the more I examine it the more I'm convinced that to be the case. Personally I think it only detracts from his woeful performance managing the football team on the pitch which does not hold up to similar scrutiny. Hmmm ... you can't just assess the signings in the vacuum of ... does the balance sheet actually tally up? No doubt you are right and it does but you can't then just ignore what you're left with. We have got an absolute dog's dinner of a squad, completely unbalanced, severely lacking in pace and low on quality. It is virtually impossible to create a credible starting XI out of it and this is squarely down to appalling choices in the transfer market. I seriously believe that ANY manager would struggle with this squad. Hughes has proved before that when he's got good players at his disposal he CAN be a good manager but the squad has got worse and worse over the last two seasons, it's no coincidence that our performances have got increasingly worse too. However Hughes is completely complicit in this happening. No doubt I'm not even arguing he's bought players for the right positions but focusing as many are on his 3 big failures in the market is a red herring. If we're keeping him there is no excuse not to back him in the market because his previous record tells you you have as much chance of making a profit as you do a loss. Its not an argument to keep him at all I want him out.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Dec 20, 2017 13:46:29 GMT
Money available: Butland: 35 million Shaq: 25 million Ryan: 10 million Would Palarse swap Benteke for Wimmer? He scores goals, he scores goals, Benty teke, he scores goals, he score goals up front..... 2 are vastly underpriced in todays market no less than 60m for Butland, 40m for Shaq, (10m possibly right for Shawcross with age and injury history) We are selling not buying!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 20, 2017 13:48:35 GMT
Hmmm ... you can't just assess the signings in the vacuum of ... does the balance sheet actually tally up? No doubt you are right and it does but you can't then just ignore what you're left with. We have got an absolute dog's dinner of a squad, completely unbalanced, severely lacking in pace and low on quality. It is virtually impossible to create a credible starting XI out of it and this is squarely down to appalling choices in the transfer market. I seriously believe that ANY manager would struggle with this squad. Hughes has proved before that when he's got good players at his disposal he CAN be a good manager but the squad has got worse and worse over the last two seasons, it's no coincidence that our performances have got increasingly worse too. However Hughes is completely complicit in this happening. No doubt I'm not even arguing he's bought players for the right positions but focusing as many are on his 3 big failures in the market is a red herring. If we're keeping him there is no excuse not to back him in the market because his previous record tells you you have as much chance of making a profit as you do a loss. Its not an argument to keep him at all I want him out. As I said, you've got to look at the bigger picture, it's not just about whether the signings have left us in the black or not, you can't ignore the fact that we're left with an absolutely appalling squad of players as a result of his transfer choices. Being in the black doesn't excuse that fact. And yes I know you want him out but I dont agree with your point that his activity in the transfer market is a red herring. In the simplest of terms, if any manager sells 30, 40 or 50 million pounds worth of good players and then spends the same amount on bad players, that doesn't then make it okay because the balance sheet tallies up.
|
|
|
Post by itsallgonepetetone on Dec 20, 2017 13:52:36 GMT
The big question is what will be made available and how will our wage structure affect our recruitment?
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 14:01:31 GMT
No doubt I'm not even arguing he's bought players for the right positions but focusing as many are on his 3 big failures in the market is a red herring. If we're keeping him there is no excuse not to back him in the market because his previous record tells you you have as much chance of making a profit as you do a loss. Its not an argument to keep him at all I want him out. As I said, you've got to look at the bigger picture, it's not just about whether the signings have left us in the black or not, you can't ignore the fact that we're left with an absolutely appalling squad of players as a result of his transfer choices. Being in the black doesn't excuse that fact. No but it does scupper the argument that if he stays he should not be allowed any money because it would be akin to throwing it away. Obviously if Coates is hell bent on keeping him there'd be a better chance of him keeping us in the division if he were allowed to add to the squad.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 20, 2017 14:03:20 GMT
As I said, you've got to look at the bigger picture, it's not just about whether the signings have left us in the black or not, you can't ignore the fact that we're left with an absolutely appalling squad of players as a result of his transfer choices. Being in the black doesn't excuse that fact. No but it does scupper the argument that if he stays he should not be allowed any money because it would be akin to throwing it away. Obviously if Coates is hell bent on keeping him there'd be a better chance of him keeping us in the division if he were allowed to add to the squad. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that he should keep his job, the fact that he's been so poor in the transfer market, simply adds to the many reasons why he should go.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 14:05:28 GMT
No doubt I'm not even arguing he's bought players for the right positions but focusing as many are on his 3 big failures in the market is a red herring. If we're keeping him there is no excuse not to back him in the market because his previous record tells you you have as much chance of making a profit as you do a loss. Its not an argument to keep him at all I want him out. As I said, you've got to look at the bigger picture, it's not just about whether the signings have left us in the black or not, you can't ignore the fact that we're left with an absolutely appalling squad of players as a result of his transfer choices. Being in the black doesn't excuse that fact. And yes I know you want him out but I dont agree with your point that his activity in the transfer market is a red herring. In the simplest of terms, if any manager sells 30, 40 or 50 million pounds worth of good players and then spends the same amount on bad players, that doesn't then make it okay because the balance sheet tallies up. Come off it you know that isn't what has happened at all he's made signings that look like they will hit us for big losses and he's also made signings that have/would make very tidy profits to offset those losses.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 20, 2017 14:07:39 GMT
No but it does scupper the argument that if he stays he should not be allowed any money because it would be akin to throwing it away. Obviously if Coates is hell bent on keeping him there'd be a better chance of him keeping us in the division if he were allowed to add to the squad. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that he should keep his job, the fact that he's been so poor in the transfer market, simply adds to the many reasons why he should go. As I said I'm not arguing for him to stay but if the bloke who can make that decision says he stays I'd sooner he had money to spend than not.
|
|
|
Post by realstokebloke on Dec 20, 2017 14:09:14 GMT
What's up jezza have I debated something you've suggested and won the debate and now I'm the bogeyman. They have a smiley for everything except crying maybe they need one for when you're being a mardarse. Ooooooh, such a keyboard warrior......blocked. Can't believe it's taken you this long to shut out that twonk J.
Do keep up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 14:14:11 GMT
We need a minimum of four new first teamers, not squad players, genuine "one of the first names on the team sheet" starters. Whether the current recruitment team can manage that and whether old man Coates will sanction the spending remains the big question. You are asking four genuine first names on any team sheet starters , who are busy promoting their own careers, to join a club that will be playing championship football next season by the looks of it, to sacrifice their careers for our sake. Who'd want to do that? That will pose an even bigger question.
|
|