|
|
Post by mightymike on Apr 24, 2013 10:20:12 GMT
Is Holden a client of theirs FM?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 10:22:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Apr 24, 2013 10:22:04 GMT
At least Owen Coyle would unite the fans base instantly ...  |
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 24, 2013 10:26:15 GMT
Is Holden a client of theirs FM? I don't think so, Mike. But that Tim Ream bloke seems to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 10:46:28 GMT
Over the past week I've realised the more we actually assess potential candidates the less I want Pulis to leave, it all seems a risk.
I wouldn't go for Hughes though, he throws money at problems with no result (QPR, Man City).
|
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Apr 24, 2013 10:50:09 GMT
was told at the weekend, from someone who works at the club that Owen Coyle has been lined up Dunno if you're being serious...  But Beswicks seemed very close to Burnley doing his tenure there. And they seem to have remained close to him at Bolton. Not that it'll be the determining factor in the choice! To be honest I've always liked Owen Coyle. Gets his teams playing football for a start. Should never have left Burnley. He was working wonders there and was looking set to keep a team in the premier league on a very limited budget while playing decent stuff. He was a disaster at Bolton. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 10:56:57 GMT
Micky Adams.
|
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Apr 24, 2013 10:57:05 GMT
Dunno if you're being serious... But Beswicks seemed very close to Burnley doing his tenure there. And they seem to have remained close to him at Bolton. Not that it'll be the determining factor in the choice! To be honest I've always liked Owen Coyle. Gets his teams playing football for a start. Should never have left Burnley. He was working wonders there and was looking set to keep a team in the premier league on a very limited budget while playing decent stuff. He was a disaster at Bolton. To be honest mate, if anyone had suggested (2 years ago) replacing Pulis with Coyle, most Stoke fans would have had a fit laughing. We've been shocking for quite some time now and so I understand people's desire for change but the names that keep 'coming up' as viable replacements just get more and more bizarre IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by stockportstokie on Apr 24, 2013 11:02:51 GMT
Over the past week I've realised the more we actually assess potential candidates the less I want Pulis to leave, it all seems a risk. This sentiment is bizarre. If you 'assess' Pulis' record it doesn't exactly glitter, his resume paints a picture of failure before he came here. A lower league failure at that. It's seemingly okay for Pulis to do nothing at Bournemouth and fail at both Bristol City & Portsmouth... Yet woe betide anyone else who doesn't boast an unblemished record. |
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Apr 24, 2013 11:04:52 GMT
Over the past week I've realised the more we actually assess potential candidates the less I want Pulis to leave, it all seems a risk. This sentiment is bizarre. If you 'assess' Pulis' record it doesn't exactly glitter, his resume paints a picture of failure before he came here. A lower league failure at that. It's seemingly okay for Pulis to do nothing at Bournemouth and fail at both Bristol City & Portsmouth... Yet woe betide anyone else who doesn't boast an unblemished record. When Pulis came here we were on the very brink of third-tier football NOT an established Premier League Club. He wasn't our first choice as manager and had previously turned us down. |
|
|
|
Post by stokeramblers on Apr 24, 2013 11:07:03 GMT
Dunno if you're being serious... But Beswicks seemed very close to Burnley doing his tenure there. And they seem to have remained close to him at Bolton. Not that it'll be the determining factor in the choice! To be honest I've always liked Owen Coyle. Gets his teams playing football for a start. Should never have left Burnley. He was working wonders there and was looking set to keep a team in the premier league on a very limited budget while playing decent stuff. He was a disaster at Bolton. Rossi descends further into his Pulisball induced madness. So very very sad. Pulis, look at what you've done, for shame! |
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 24, 2013 11:09:22 GMT
There are plenty of viable candidates if you take your head out of the current Managers backside. The manager had a very mediocre record in the Championship before he came to Stoke (TWICE) - now people are debating whether established PL managers are up to the job ffs.
Allardyce, McLaren, Hughes would piss the job.
|
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Apr 24, 2013 11:12:59 GMT
Couldn't agree more, Doz.
It's beginning to look like a cry for change just for change's sake.
Even if we ignore the valid reasons of loyalty to a manager who has given us a fantastic rise from the bottom of the Championship, and who has delivered an effective and exciting team before, and who has a terrific working relationship with the Chairman, there just doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to replace TP with one of the names in this thread.
I honestly don't see the benefits of change at this time. There will be changes to the squad in the summer, and I really can't see why TP isn't given the opportunity to make the changes to the squad to add goals to his established, competitive Premier League side. That is the main change to the playing style that everybody is clamouring for.
|
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Apr 24, 2013 11:15:32 GMT
There are plenty of viable candidates if you take your head out of the current Managers backside. The manager had a very mediocre record in the Championship before he came to Stoke (TWICE) - now people are debating whether established PL managers are up to the job ffs. Allardyce, McLaren, Hughes would piss the job. Pulis did have a checkered history before Stoke but came here to take over a less-than-average Championship club and HE took us to where we are now (with the Chairman's backing). Pulis has proved himself HERE. Allardyce is NOT a viable option since he'll be West Ham's manager next season. The other two MIGHT do better than Pulis but it's very much open to question. You seem to think that it's fine to ask all kinds of questions about a manager with a proven record at THIS club but we're not allowed to ask questions of potential replacements. It's not the likes of me with my head buried anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 11:18:12 GMT
Couldn't agree more, Doz. It's beginning to look like a cry for change just for change's sake. Even if we ignore the valid reasons of loyalty to a manager who has given us a fantastic rise from the bottom of the Championship, and who has delivered an effective and exciting team before, and who has a terrific working relationship with the Chairman, there just doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to replace TP with one of the names in this thread. I honestly don't see the benefits of change at this time. There will be changes to the squad in the summer, and I really can't see why TP isn't given the opportunity to make the changes to the squad to add goals to his established, competitive Premier League side. That is the main change to the playing style that everybody is clamouring for. TP was given that chance at the start of this season after a poor end to last season and singularly failed to deliver. The team has continued to stagnate. Where's the evidence to suggest this won't continue as it did with Bolton and Sunderland? We're exactly like Sunderland and MON were and few seem to think sacking him was the wrong decision. And it wasn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 24, 2013 11:18:48 GMT
There are plenty of viable candidates if you take your head out of the current Managers backside. The manager had a very mediocre record in the Championship before he came to Stoke (TWICE) - now people are debating whether established PL managers are up to the job ffs. Allardyce, McLaren, Hughes would piss the job. Pulis did have a checkered history before Stoke but came here to take over a less-than-average Championship club and HE took us to where we are now (with the Chairman's backing). Pulis has proved himself HERE. Allardyce is NOT a viable option since he'll be West Ham's manager next season. The other two MIGHT do better than Pulis but it's very much open to question. You seem to think that it's fine to ask all kinds of questions about a manager with a proven record at THIS club but we're not allowed to ask questions of potential replacements. It's not the likes of me with my head buried anywhere. After 18 months of mis-management I think it is only to be expected that questions are asked. The manager has brought everything on himself. Allardyce is a viable option if he leaves West Ham which is not beyond the realms of possibility given his contract situation. |
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Apr 24, 2013 11:25:26 GMT
I think the people calling for a change of manager are now losing the argument. There are many reasons for this but one of the main ones is that no suitable replacement has been identified. The records of the managers that are available don't stand up to close scrutiny, whereas Tony Pulis has a record with Stoke that does.
|
|
|
|
Post by stockportstokie on Apr 24, 2013 11:25:46 GMT
This sentiment is bizarre. If you 'assess' Pulis' record it doesn't exactly glitter, his resume paints a picture of failure before he came here. A lower league failure at that. It's seemingly okay for Pulis to do nothing at Bournemouth and fail at both Bristol City & Portsmouth... Yet woe betide anyone else who doesn't boast an unblemished record. When Pulis came here we were on the very brink of third-tier football NOT an established Premier League Club. He wasn't our first choice as manager and had previously turned us down. On the brink? He arrived in November not late April for gawd sake. He also left the club in a state first time round, just 12 first team players wasn't it? I''d hazard a guess it was the £100m that established us in the PL. |
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Apr 24, 2013 11:26:20 GMT
I think the people calling for a change of manager are now losing the argument. There are many reasons for this but one of the main ones is that no suitable replacement has been identified. The records of the managers that are available don't stand up to close scrutiny, whereas Tony Pulis has a record with Stoke that does. Geoff what are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 24, 2013 11:29:00 GMT
I think the concerns about replacements are valid. Sometimes you just have to take a punt I suppose. You just hope that the 365 suits have a proper succession plan mapped out if he is to leave in the summer. They will also need the PR machine to be well oiled if the replacement is a Coyle type figure, as that would seem to me to have even the most ardent anti Pulis supporter quickly 'being careful what they wished for.' |
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Apr 24, 2013 11:30:05 GMT
Couldn't agree more, Doz. It's beginning to look like a cry for change just for change's sake. Even if we ignore the valid reasons of loyalty to a manager who has given us a fantastic rise from the bottom of the Championship, and who has delivered an effective and exciting team before, and who has a terrific working relationship with the Chairman, there just doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to replace TP with one of the names in this thread. I honestly don't see the benefits of change at this time. There will be changes to the squad in the summer, and I really can't see why TP isn't given the opportunity to make the changes to the squad to add goals to his established, competitive Premier League side. That is the main change to the playing style that everybody is clamouring for. TP was given that chance at the start of this season after a poor end to last season and singularly failed to deliver. The team has continued to stagnate. Where's the evidence to suggest this won't continue as it did with Bolton and Sunderland? We're exactly like Sunderland and MON were and few seem to think sacking him was the wrong decision. And it wasn't. That's the point rob. You mention Bolton and Sunderland and yet the two managers involved have both been suggested as Pulis replacements. You know where my loyalties lie but I do understand the argument you offer and we have been dreadful (particularly this season). However, I am probably one of the reasons why, in truth, since I clammered for the manager to buy a creative midfield player and to give himself 'options' other than our one dimensional approach. To be fair, he HAS tried to introduce some of the changes I wanted but, because he steadfastly sticks to the formation he knows and trusts, he simply tries to 'shoehorn' unsuitable players into that system. I was wrong and accept that Pulis should have stuck to what he knows best and should use players that best suit his system. we were good at it and I would hope (and I DO believe) that he will have learned much from the past 18 months. In truth, some of his biggest supporters (of which I am one) have probably not helped at all by urging him to 'tinker' with what he had. It may well be time for change but many of the options offered up don't make me want to leap to replace him. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 11:35:23 GMT
TP was given that chance at the start of this season after a poor end to last season and singularly failed to deliver. The team has continued to stagnate. Where's the evidence to suggest this won't continue as it did with Bolton and Sunderland? We're exactly like Sunderland and MON were and few seem to think sacking him was the wrong decision. And it wasn't. That's the point rob. You mention Bolton and Sunderland and yet the two managers involved have both been suggested as Pulis replacements. You know where my loyalties lie but I do understand the argument you offer and we have been dreadful (particularly this season). However, I am probably one of the reasons why, in truth, since I clammered for the manager to buy a creative midfield player and to give himself 'options' other than our one dimensional approach. To be fair, he HAS tried to introduce some of the changes I wanted but, because he steadfastly sticks to the formation he knows and trusts, he simply tries to 'shoehorn' unsuitable players into that system. I was wrong and accept that Pulis should have stuck to what he knows best and should use players that best suit his system. we were good at it and I would hope (and I DO believe) that he will have learned much from the past 18 months. In truth, some of his biggest supporters (of which I am one) have probably not helped at all by urging him to 'tinker' with what he had. It may well be time for change but many of the options offered up don't make me want to leap to replace him. Any appointment is a gamble though Doz - a manager failing at one club doesn't mean they won't succeed at another. Who'd have thought Pulis would achieve what he has here after his Bristol City disaster? Even the very best managers fail sometimes. We're at the stage now where keeping Pulis is just as big a gamble as appointing a new gaffer. |
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Apr 24, 2013 11:37:05 GMT
It may well be time for change but many of the options offered up don't make me want to leap to replace him. Exactly how I feel doz. I think he's had a good run at it (more than most get) and it might time to part the ways. However, most of the realistic options don't do it for me at all and that's why I wouldn't campaign for him to go and why, if the current rumours are bullshit, the thought of booing and Pulis Out chants at the 150th game are bang out of order. |
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Apr 24, 2013 11:40:33 GMT
When Pulis came here we were on the very brink of third-tier football NOT an established Premier League Club. He wasn't our first choice as manager and had previously turned us down. On the brink? He arrived in November not late April for gawd sake. He also left the club in a state first time round, just 12 first team players wasn't it? I''d hazard a guess it was the £100m that established us in the PL. Yes we were 'on the brink' because we were a bloody awful team looking certain relegation fodder and were well installed as one of the favourites to go down (rightly so). He steadied the ship, bringing in loan players and organizing us into a 'team' that could survive. From that point it has been nothing but upward under Pulis and he only got any significant funds to make a real challenge in our promotion season. He also had his tenure hampered and then terminated by some of the games the Icelanders played and still managed to get us back on a forward track when he returned, despite many fans not wanting him back. Yes he's had good financial backing since promotion. So have many others that have failed. (Some of them being suggested as possible replacements). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 11:44:44 GMT
Spot on Rob.
Any new Manager would be a gamble but it'd equally be a gamble to change nothing and let things go the way they are heading.
|
|
|
|
Post by okeydokeystokie2 on Apr 24, 2013 11:45:41 GMT
Rob, you know where I am on this. I think he wants to develop our playing style but it is very difficult to get it right first time.
The Palacios signing was a disaster, but he looked like exactly the kind of player we needed at the time. He gambled on Adam and Kightly this summer for relatively low money in Premier League terms, and it hasn't worked out as we hoped.
But make no mistake he has delivered big time before. Whatever SwanseaStokie says, he arrived when we were deep in the mire at the bottom of the Championship. When we got hammered away at Forest, I thought we were going back down. At that point, Mark Crossley and Gerry Taggart were inspirational signings.
On our climb through the Championship, Dioa, Higginbotham, Fuller, Lawrence, Delap, Shawcross and even Hendrie and Creswell to a degree were great acquisitions. When we got promoted, Abdy Faye and Soro were key, and the January window gave us Beattie and Etherington. When it has really mattered, he's got the big player decisions bang on.
He now has an opportunity to find those kind of players again. All managers get it wrong sometimes. Why are these other names going to do better than a bloke who has succeeded so well before?
|
|
|
|
Post by thesandbankskid on Apr 24, 2013 11:47:23 GMT
Spot on Rob. Any new Manager would be a gamble but it'd equally be a gamble to change nothing and let things go the way they are heading. The latter wouldn't be a gamble mate it would be suicide. It strange how nobody has mentioned Sven Eriksson, he could be a dark horse and has a C.V that makes TP's look like a Christmas cracker joke. |
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Apr 24, 2013 11:49:46 GMT
That's the point rob. You mention Bolton and Sunderland and yet the two managers involved have both been suggested as Pulis replacements. You know where my loyalties lie but I do understand the argument you offer and we have been dreadful (particularly this season). However, I am probably one of the reasons why, in truth, since I clammered for the manager to buy a creative midfield player and to give himself 'options' other than our one dimensional approach. To be fair, he HAS tried to introduce some of the changes I wanted but, because he steadfastly sticks to the formation he knows and trusts, he simply tries to 'shoehorn' unsuitable players into that system. I was wrong and accept that Pulis should have stuck to what he knows best and should use players that best suit his system. we were good at it and I would hope (and I DO believe) that he will have learned much from the past 18 months. In truth, some of his biggest supporters (of which I am one) have probably not helped at all by urging him to 'tinker' with what he had. It may well be time for change but many of the options offered up don't make me want to leap to replace him. Any appointment is a gamble though Doz - a manager failing at one club doesn't mean they won't succeed at another. Who'd have thought Pulis would achieve what he has here after his Bristol City disaster? Even the very best managers fail sometimes. We're at the stage now where keeping Pulis is just as big a gamble as appointing a new gaffer. Yes I understand that rob and I realise that his time might be up. I just get riled at how some dismiss any (perfectly justified) questions about suggested replacements with accusations that we (the likes of me) are simply 'up the manager's arse'. It's not true at all. I'd love to give him 200% support because (IMO) he deserves it but I am perfectly realistic about football. Clearly there is the risk that Puliis will continue nexte season, will have taken nothing on board and we will struggle but it's also fair to question the suitability of some of the names offered up as replacements. The club will make it's decisions and I will support them but, as I've said many times, it will be a very, very sad day that I watch Tony Pulis walk away from The Brit. Maybe I'm being far too sentimental for a hard-nosed football fan but I think I owe him my loyalty. |
|
|
|
Post by thesandbankskid on Apr 24, 2013 11:52:29 GMT
Any appointment is a gamble though Doz - a manager failing at one club doesn't mean they won't succeed at another. Who'd have thought Pulis would achieve what he has here after his Bristol City disaster? Even the very best managers fail sometimes. We're at the stage now where keeping Pulis is just as big a gamble as appointing a new gaffer. Yes I understand that rob and I realise that his time might be up. I just get riled at how some dismiss any (perfectly justified) questions about suggested replacements with accusations that we (the likes of me) are simply 'up the manager's arse'. It's not true at all. I'd love to give him 200% support because (IMO) he deserves it but I am perfectly realistic about football. Clearly there is the risk that Puliis will continue nexte season, will have taken nothing on board and we will struggle but it's also fair to question the suitability of some of the names offered up as replacements. The club will make it's decisions and I will support them but, as I've said many times, it will be a very, very sad day that I watch Tony Pulis walk away from The Brit. Maybe I'm being far too sentimental for a hard-nosed football fan but I think I owe him my loyalty. Wow. I find it hard to believe that for all his faults some people still think TP is best man for the job, unbelievable Geoff |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2013 11:54:48 GMT
Rob, you know where I am on this. I think he wants to develop our playing style but it is very difficult to get it right first time. The Palacios signing was a disaster, but he looked like exactly the kind of player we needed at the time. He gambled on Adam and Kightly this summer for relatively low money in Premier League terms, and it hasn't worked out as we hoped. But make no mistake he has delivered big time before. Whatever Rossi says, he arrived when we were deep in the mire at the bottom of the Championship. When we got hammered away at Forest, I thought we were going back down. At that point, Mark Crossley and Gerry Taggart were inspirational signings. On our climb through the Championship, Dioa, Higginbotham, Fuller, Lawrence, Delap, Shawcross and even Hendrie and Creswell to a degree were great acquisitions. When we got promoted, Abdy Faye and Soro were key, and the January window gave us Beattie and Etherington. When it has really mattered, he's got the big player decisions bang on. He now has an opportunity to find those kind of players again. All managers get it wrong sometimes. Why are these other names going to do better than a bloke who has succeeded so well before? They're not, necessarily, but we may not be far off a point where they couldn't do a whole lot worse. What exactly is Pulis going to do differently this time? Is Adam playing in the hole behind Crouch suddenly going to work? Is he going to start playing two wingers, which he could've done at any time over the last season yet has chosen to on only five occasions? Is he going to ditch 4-4-1-1? Is he going to replace Crouch with another Fuller after convincing him to stay in Jan? The evidence doesn't suggest we're in for anything beyond another tiresome, low-scoring slog towards 40 points. I'd rather risk getting rid and have a hope of enjoying my football again. |
|
