|
|
Post by Bowyer83 on Sept 18, 2014 18:40:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Sept 18, 2014 18:42:58 GMT
Non-news from a bored journalist I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Sept 18, 2014 18:46:02 GMT
Maybe he should lock himself in his office like a 5 year old. Would make him a hero in some posters eyes.
|
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Sept 18, 2014 18:52:09 GMT
Needs to win a few home games first
|
|
|
|
Post by stokesaint1 on Sept 18, 2014 18:59:42 GMT
This is just a change round of the words from a Sentinel article over a week ago, with a bit about QPR added to attempt to make it look current.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2014 19:21:14 GMT
Needs to win a few home games first Don't you think he won enough of those last season to deserve a new deal? |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 18, 2014 19:25:07 GMT
Needs to win a few home games first Don't you think he won enough of those last season to deserve a new deal? I do think the board will delay things a little just in case our form doesn't pick up. If that was the case (and it won't be) then Scholes would have to be shown the door as well as LMH because LMH was his choice as manager. That, of course, would pave the way for the return of the capped hero. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2014 19:47:52 GMT
Don't you think he won enough of those last season to deserve a new deal? I do think the board will delay things a little just in case our form doesn't pick up. If that was the case (and it won't be) then Scholes would have to be shown the door as well as LMH because LMH was his choice as manager. That, of course, would pave the way for the return of the capped hero. He deserves a new contract right now in my opinion. It won't be long before our team is firing on all cylinders again and Hughes will be getting plaudits again,well that is apart from off the deluded few who still dream of having their god like hero back. (I'm not saying that you are deluded by the way March,you're far too good at what you do to be deluded)  |
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Sept 18, 2014 20:20:54 GMT
He has a contract. If he is doing ok when that one expires then we can think about renewing. Why do it now?
|
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 18, 2014 20:24:10 GMT
To show that we reward good work.
Will pay dividends should a 'bigger' club comes calling.
Sends out a message of stability.
|
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Sept 18, 2014 20:55:55 GMT
To show that we reward good work. Will pay dividends should a 'bigger' club comes calling. Sends out a message of stability. I think it's too early to be dishing out new contracts. Does one good season merit another 2 years making his contract 5 years? I'm certainly not against us having discussions but feel we should really see how this season goes before making decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Sept 18, 2014 21:04:49 GMT
Don't you think he won enough of those last season to deserve a new deal? I do think the board will delay things a little just in case our form doesn't pick up. If that was the case (and it won't be) then Scholes would have to be shown the door as well as LMH because LMH was his choice as manager. You were in the boardroom when Peter and Jon Coates, Tony Scholes and the other board members were discussing the appointment were you? You sat in on the interview with Hughesy did you? Come on March, I knows it's a "boring Thursday evening", but let's not get silly. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Sept 18, 2014 21:07:43 GMT
He has a contract. If he is doing ok when that one expires then we can think about renewing. Why do it now? Because it provides stability and confidence. Also, complacently letting a gaffers contract expire led to us losing a good manager once. An horrendous error. |
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Sept 18, 2014 21:15:29 GMT
He has a contract. If he is doing ok when that one expires then we can think about renewing. Why do it now? Because it provides stability and confidence. Also, complacently letting a gaffers contract expire led to us losing a good manager once. An horrendous error. But contracts mean fuck all. If he wants to go he will but if we want to get rid it will cost more. He should wait until he is in his final 6 months before talks of a new contract. |
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Sept 18, 2014 21:19:34 GMT
Because it provides stability and confidence. Also, complacently letting a gaffers contract expire led to us losing a good manager once. An horrendous error. But contracts mean fuck all. If he wants to go he will but if we want to get rid it will cost more. He should wait until he is in his final 6 months before talks of a new contract. Leaving it until next Christmas to discuss his contract would be madness and the equivalent of a vote of no confidence. Half way through the contract (i.e now) would seem the exact right time to do it with both parties seemingly very happy with each other. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Sept 18, 2014 21:21:09 GMT
Because it provides stability and confidence. Also, complacently letting a gaffers contract expire led to us losing a good manager once. An horrendous error. But contracts mean fuck all. If he wants to go he will but if we want to get rid it will cost more. He should wait until he is in his final 6 months before talks of a new contract. Contracts dont mean that much when it comes to tying someone to a club but it does tell a manager the powers that be have confidence in his ability and work. It enables a club to move forward and everyone knows the score as well as reducing the possibility of losing a good manager. |
|
|
|
Post by heisenberg88 on Sept 18, 2014 21:22:14 GMT
I do think the board will delay things a little just in case our form doesn't pick up. If that was the case (and it won't be) then Scholes would have to be shown the door as well as LMH because LMH was his choice as manager. You were in the boardroom when Peter and Jon Coates, Tony Scholes and the other board members were discussing the appointment were you? You sat in on the interview with Hughesy did you? Come on March, I knows it's a "boring Thursday evening", but let's not get silly. Why do you let his posts wind you up so much? I enjoy reading them |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 18, 2014 21:26:07 GMT
I do think the board will delay things a little just in case our form doesn't pick up. If that was the case (and it won't be) then Scholes would have to be shown the door as well as LMH because LMH was his choice as manager. You were in the boardroom when Peter and Jon Coates, Tony Scholes and the other board members were discussing the appointment were you? You sat in on the interview with Hughesy did you? Come on March, I knows it's a "boring Thursday evening", but let's not get silly. This was a public pronouncement wasn't it Dave, that Scholes had lived near to Blackburn and been impressed by the work that LMH had done on a limited budget. Consequently he recommended him. Am I dreaming this????? I know I haven't had my Complan yet, but I'm sure this was well reported at the time! Anyone????? |
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Sept 18, 2014 21:33:08 GMT
Well, he may have recommended him, but that doesn't mean that he appointed him.
Peter Coates has been a football director for 30 years. I think he's more than capable of making a decision on appointing the manager of his club.
In an interview I heard, Peter spoke about how he'd followed Hughesy's career and always felt that he would be a decent appointment if we were looking for a new manager.
Edit: YouTube interview with Peter Coates after the appointment.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Sept 18, 2014 21:37:05 GMT
I thought Coates snr indicated it was Coates jnr who had championed Hughes's cause the most?
The two Coates and Scholes interviewed him and he was described as their 'unanimous choice'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2014 21:38:50 GMT
He has a contract. If he is doing ok when that one expires then we can think about renewing. Why do it now? What a strange way of thinking. For a start Hughes did a lot better than just "ok" last season and all the top players and managers get tied down as soon as possible with improved contracts don't they? I know contracts aren't particarly worth the paper they're written on in the grand scheme of things,but they send out a message of positivity to everyone in and around the club. In my opinion Mark Hughes proved himself more than capable of taking this club forward for the foreseeable future so get him signed up I say. I wouldn't expect you to agree though as obviously you are still trying to back yourself further into that rather large corner you've got stuck into  |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 18, 2014 21:38:57 GMT
Well, he may have recommended him, but that doesn't mean that he appointed him. Peter Coates has been a football director for 30 years. I think he's more than capable of making a decision on appointing the manager of his club. In an interview I heard, Peter spoke about how he'd followed Hughesy's career and always felt that he would be a decent appointment if we were looking for a new manager. You are correct, of course. Scholes did appear to recommend him though as the following article suggests; www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/stoke-city/10079587/Stoke-City-begin-search-for-new-manager-by-contacting-Mark-Hughes.htmlIf LMH became a disaster (which he won't) it could weaken Scholes' position at the club. |
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Sept 18, 2014 21:42:20 GMT
"The Welshman is interested in taking charge at the Britannia Stadium and could be interviewed next week, though Stoke are determined to bide their time before making an appointment. Hughes is not believed to the No 1 choice at this stage, with approaches to other candidates expected to be made next week."
Well judging by the Peter Coates YouTube interview above and the swiftness of the appointment that would appear to be just speculation on Percy's party.
I really can't see how Scholes' position at the club would be weakened if Hughes fails. Like I said, Coates has been in the game long enough to know that fortunes change in football, and if you ask me, he didn't really need Scholes' input to make a decision on appointing Hughes.
|
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Sept 18, 2014 21:48:33 GMT
"The Welshman is interested in taking charge at the Britannia Stadium and could be interviewed next week, though Stoke are determined to bide their time before making an appointment. Hughes is not believed to the No 1 choice at this stage, with approaches to other candidates expected to be made next week." Well judging by the Peter Coates YouTube interview above and the swiftness of the appointment that would appear to be just speculation on Percy's party. Of course it could be - it just seems to be a strange thing to say. And in any case, LMH will be our manager for years to come and so the whole discussion is wholly academic - which is exactly how it should be on a quiet Thursday night, while we are all waiting to see if Jamie Ness will need a work permit tomorrow morning to play in England |
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Sept 18, 2014 21:50:44 GMT
Why not have joint managers as Koeman could take first half of the season followed by Hughes for the second.
|
|
|
|
Post by ayem on Sept 18, 2014 22:28:50 GMT
Hughes is a quality coach, and im glad to say he's a fit at stoke. Id like to stay far from the carousel of coaching changes, and keep him for the years to come. He can have roy's job after he's done here, but not for many years.
|
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Sept 18, 2014 22:31:36 GMT
File it in the pile along with stadium expansion, bigger concourse and wider bog doors.
|
|
