|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 4, 2018 13:10:13 GMT
He left us in a better position than when he arrived, yeah. He also took us backwards from where we'd been a couple of seasons previously for no good reason. The only difference was that he was sacked at the right time and Hughes was allowed to continue too long. Also there's no 'possibly' about it. For his first 2.5 years he did a really good job. Plenty of managers walk into more solid set-ups (ie ones that hadn't failed to win all but three games over the preceding five months and were riven with division in the dressing room) and completely squander that inheritance. Hughes took it further than it had previously been in the Premier League era. He cocked it up spectacularly but it wasn't five years of relentless failure and shouldn't be painted as such. Pulis had lost it but left us in a great place to pick up relative to when he came, Hughes, not so much. Not at all in fact Only because the board acted swiftly in one instance and didn't in the other. We were going backwards under both. Pulis actually left a team that couldn't score, didn't win much and allegedly weren't getting on with each other. It could defend and it was still in the Premier League, so in that sense it was in a good place.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Dec 4, 2018 13:38:25 GMT
Pulis had lost it but left us in a great place to pick up relative to when he came, Hughes, not so much. Not at all in fact Only because the board acted swiftly in one instance and didn't in the other. We were going backwards under both. Pulis actually left a team that couldn't score, didn't win much and allegedly weren't getting on with each other. It could defend and it was still in the Premier League, so in that sense it was in a good place. I always felt Pulis would have kept us up, Tox. He knew how to scrape a win when absolutely needed, it's just that he didn't go out to win often enough. Hughes had the bollocks to let the players play, and the effect was astounding. I just about remember the seventies side, and Stoke under Hughes were nearly as good. What surprised me, is that Hughes failed with several of the players he craved at Southampton. Also surprised that they got rid of him after a decent showing against Manchester United.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 4, 2018 13:47:56 GMT
Only because the board acted swiftly in one instance and didn't in the other. We were going backwards under both. Pulis actually left a team that couldn't score, didn't win much and allegedly weren't getting on with each other. It could defend and it was still in the Premier League, so in that sense it was in a good place. I always felt Pulis would have kept us up, Tox. He knew how to scrape a win when absolutely needed, it's just that he didn't go out to win often enough. Hughes had the bollocks to let the players play, and the effect was astounding. I just about remember the seventies side, and Stoke under Hughes were nearly as good. What surprised me, is that Hughes failed with several of the players he craved at Southampton. Also surprised that they got rid of him after a decent showing against Manchester United. I think he was a dead man walking going into it Dicky. They just needed to make sure they had their replacement lined up. Not an especially nice way to treat a bloke but at least they had a plan. Imagine that... I actually think if we’d kept Pulis we’d have gone down the next season. It was over.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Dec 4, 2018 14:01:13 GMT
We should have sacked him after the third season That smacks of being wise after the event. He was hardly going to get the sack after achieving three 9th place finishes. I posted on here after our 3rd 9th placed season that it was a retrogressive season, the second season at 9th place being acceptable due the very high number of injuries experienced. I was derided by other posters. His 4th season was clearly a marked deterioration and, in retrospect he should have been replaced at some point, but our league position was good up till March so he was unlikely to be sacked. Personally, I continued to back him as I felt he had credit in the bank from his first three seasons and deserved the chance to turn things round. He never did, so it was misplaced loyalty on my part, nevertheless he has lead Stoke through its best ever period in the top flight in English football in over 150 years, at a time when it was arguably most difficult to achieve. For that we should be grateful; it is doubtful it will ever be repeated again in the next 150 years. At least we do have Port Vale's record of being the club that has spent the most years in the football league and never been in the top flight. Sacking him at the end of the third season would have been ridiculous. That was the season that we hit the heights with that performance against Man City and were within a post's width of reaching the League Cup Final. The wheels started to come off towards the end of that season, but by then, the defence was missing Butland, Shawcross and Johnson (many people's player of the year up to his injury that season). Few mid-table teams could have taken that kind of hit without repercussions. The fourth season was really disappointing, but even then we finished just two points off 8th place, though by then, the mid-table teams had started to bunch up as the big clubs were creaming bigger and bigger amounts from the money pot. In an ideal world, the end of Hughes 4th season should have been the point of ejection, but for a loyal board and owner, I can see why even then, there was a reluctance to get rid at that point. If they'd done so, we'd probably have stayed up, and Hughes would have left with massive amounts of goodwill from the supporters. Perfect scenarios like that rarely happen.
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Dec 4, 2018 15:03:11 GMT
Ironically one of the few teams we beat in his latter stages was , I think, Leipzig
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 16:41:14 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners.
He’s a good manager who lost his touch.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Dec 6, 2018 16:46:08 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. I want to dislike Hughes and I do, but I agree on the brief, brilliant spell we had under him. I don't think he or we got the credit we deserved at the time. We were fucking great to watch.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 16:51:43 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. This. Life's too short......
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Dec 6, 2018 16:52:19 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. Going to Southampton so soon after leaving us left a bitter taste in my mouth. He was still getting paid off by us, while actively aiming to relegate us. Just a bit shitty. Ah well, morals eh?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Dec 6, 2018 17:10:31 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. Going to Southampton so soon after leaving us left a bitter taste in my mouth. He was still getting paid off by us, while actively aiming to relegate us. Just a bit shitty. Ah well, morals eh? Unemployed man takes job.
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Dec 6, 2018 17:46:50 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. Going to Southampton so soon after leaving us left a bitter taste in my mouth. He was still getting paid off by us, while actively aiming to relegate us. Just a bit shitty. Ah well, morals eh? He managed to get a massive 8 points from the 8 games he was in charge at Southampton. He did everything he could to get Southampton relegated. It just turned out there were 3 teams that managed to look that particular gift horse in the mouth.
|
|
|
Post by silsdenstokie on Dec 7, 2018 17:22:06 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. This. Life's too short...... Yep, that's where I sit too
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Dec 7, 2018 17:47:23 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. Going to Southampton so soon after leaving us left a bitter taste in my mouth. He was still getting paid off by us, while actively aiming to relegate us. Just a bit shitty. Ah well, morals eh? You know he was being paid off when he was Soton boss? Doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by saintquin on Dec 7, 2018 18:36:59 GMT
I want to dislike Hughes but I can’t. The way he had us playing for a brief moment was unbelievable. Playing Arsenal and MCFC off the park. Attracting CL winners. He’s a good manager who lost his touch. Going to Southampton so soon after leaving us left a bitter taste in my mouth. He was still getting paid off by us, while actively aiming to relegate us. Just a bit shitty. Ah well, morals eh? Would have thought Stoke stopped paying him once he became our manager.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2018 19:12:13 GMT
Going to Southampton so soon after leaving us left a bitter taste in my mouth. He was still getting paid off by us, while actively aiming to relegate us. Just a bit shitty. Ah well, morals eh? Would have thought Stoke stopped paying him once he became our manager. How long was left on his contact ? We would have paid that up surely or whatever the contract stipulated
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2018 19:42:03 GMT
Would have thought Stoke stopped paying him once he became our manager. How long was left on his contact ? We would have paid that up surely or whatever the contract stipulated The terms of the sacking will have been that the club paid him until the moment he accepted a new job, at least that’s what happens 99% of the time.....
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Dec 7, 2018 22:04:26 GMT
How long was left on his contact ? We would have paid that up surely or whatever the contract stipulated The terms of the sacking will have been that the club paid him until the moment he accepted a new job, at least that’s what happens 99% of the time..... All depends on whether he was settled out with a compromise agreement regardless it was our choice to sack him
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Dec 8, 2018 11:06:33 GMT
Personally I'm glad Hughes has been found out again. The blinkered negative and ultimately destructive approach he took at the end of his tenure here got virtually no mention in the media and it felt like he got away with it.
|
|