Had Sven enjoyed the same level of investment?

[Blue Streak]

That both Hughes and then Mancini were given would we have been successful?

I look over that Sven era fondly (especially the first half of the season) as after the dross of Pearce it was a breath of fresh air.

However was he a 'busted flush' when he came to City or could he have achieved something?

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

That both Hughes and then Mancini were given would we have been successful?

I look over that Sven era fondly (especially the first half of the season) as after the dross of Pearce it was a breath of fresh air.

However was he a 'busted flush' when he came to City or could he have achieved something?

No

 

[davymcfc]

No, his management skills weren't the best. Mancini is a lot more of a knowledgable tactician than most give him credit for. He took over a team that was all over the show and made them in to a team that was was very difficult to beat.

Sven just bought a load of players and left them to play. Worked in some cases but we were badly shown up at the end of that season.

 

[Franny Lee's Barrel Chest]

He seems to have gone to other teams that have spent a lot of money considering the leagues they were in, for example Notts County and Leicester City. Despite this he didn't seem to do anything so working on the same logic, I daresay he wouldn't have won the league with us.

 

[greasedupdeafguy]

Had major investment at Lazio and won loads of trophies, would have done better than Hughes.

 

[Shaelumstash]

He actually did better than Hughes without the money - he got more points and finished higher in the League than Hughes after that useless twat spent an additional £150m on Sven's squad.

We fell to pieces after xmas under Sven, but before xmas we were in the top 3, and this was the season after Pearce nearly got us relegated! Given the circumstances and the time frame he had, Sven did a remarkable job and it was absolutely scandalous that he lost his job to make way for Hughesless.

Sven might not be on Mancini's level, but he was a lot closer to it than Hughes was, Lesley set us back 3 years in his 18 months in the job.

It always absolutely baffled me the idiots that continued to sing Hughes' name after he'd gone, they seem to have gone rather quiet this season though...

 

[Gelsons Dad]

Better than Hughes without a doubt. It's difficult to say what he would have done on the transfer front but I would guess he may well have equaled Mancini or even bettered him having been at the club much longer.

What is certain is that he would have had a lot of sex along the way ;-)

 

[cleavers]

He was great for us when we had a pretty shit side, he brought in some good players, but spent a lot of money (that it appears now we never had). Nice guy, but not sure we'd have won much with him, even with money.

 

[Breaker]

He actually did better than Hughes without the money - he got more points and finished higher in the League than Hughes after that useless twat spent an additional £150m on Sven's squad.

We fell to pieces after xmas under Sven, but before xmas we were in the top 3, and this was the season after Pearce nearly got us relegated! Given the circumstances and the time frame he had, Sven did a remarkable job and it was absolutely scandalous that he lost his job to make way for Hughesless.

Sven might not be on Mancini's level, but he was a lot closer to it than Hughes was, Lesley set us back 3 years in his 18 months in the job.

It always absolutely baffled me the idiots that continued to sing Hughes' name after he'd gone, they seem to have gone rather quiet this season though...

you're forgetting that Hughes got us to the quarterfinals of Europa League first season which cost points in the league considering we didn't really have a deep enough squad at the time to do both, Fulham at home in particular was basically a throwaway in preparation for Hamburg later in the week where we were brilliant, would have surely finished on more points if not for that.

Sven was decent but has done nothing since leaving us and even the second half of his year with us was apalling.

 

[paulchapo]

What was that song from a few years ago now?.....''Would have/could have/should have'' i think.

All conjecture and not worth thinking about as we have moved on.Hughes was appointed because Thaskin realised we had no cash and thought he could make a decent fist of keeping us up without any.When the takeover happened the goalposts changed big time.

At the time the jury was out on whether Hughes was the brightest young British manager out there,or one who had reached his level at clubs like Blackburn[No disrespect Blackburn fans.] I think the answer now is a lot clearer....