Plus i reckon there are more similarities between fergie at scum than you give credit for ,ie the money given to bacon face and hughes , hughes came highly recommended after wales and blackburn and our youth set up is on a par with the scums at that particular time...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
in the defence of the hughes outers
- Thread starter Bill
- Start date
TheLegendOfBerti said:Soulboy said:And herein lies the problem with way too many City fans... constantly comparing ourselves to the Rags.
"The rags gave baconface time..."
"We gave them Busby, now we've got Hughes, so it will all turn out all right..."
"United showed patience with Ferguson.."
Yeah, and for that ONE example of faith in a manager, that has now become the benchmark for too many City fans blinded by the glow of success at the swamp.
Fergie didn't succeed because the club "showed patience". Surly Alex succeeded because he was a top quality mnanager BEFORE he ever entered Old Trafford. He was then given the largest budget in football at that time, and then landed lucky that the youth set-up handed him half a dozen players. Please do not be fooled that Ferguson succeeded because the board showed patience. That was way down the list of reasons for his success.
Chelsea have had 6 managers in 5 seasons... and has that affected their success?
Benitez did all his best work at Liverpool in his first season. Wenger did his best work at Arsenal in the first couple of years.
The use of "patience" as a measure of managerial success is a crock of shit.
Mercer transformed us in 3 years. Clough won the First Division in his first season back.
Money transforms a club nowadays. We've got oil barrels full of the stuff, yet we're talking as if we need to lay down a long-term plan that needs careful nurturing. Tosh!
If we don't make Champions League football for next season, we may very well have blown our chances. Players of the required level will not come, some of the better ones we have may move on... and worst of all, Platini's Plan might very well be in place excluding us from the top table.
This project has to achieve its first target of Chanmpions League as soon as possible otherwise our consequent plans become irrelevant.
I think you'll find since Mourinho have won 1 credible trophy, the FA Cup last season, and 4 managers have been and gone since then.
Wenger won the double early yes but it took him time to win it again added to they haven't won anything for years.
Benitez fluked the Champions League and the FA Cup(2bh), if it weren't for Gerrard they wouldn't have won either. They've won nothing since.
Fergie is once in a lifetime and the Rag's will never have a more successful manager.
I read your points mate, but I'm not really sure what you're telling me.
Chelsea have been in Champions League finals and semi-finals... I know it's not much but from my position that looks pretty much like success to me! I'm sure our owners would be fairly happy if we were achieving that.
Wenger hasn't won anything for 4 years... yes, but that sort of blows out of the water the idea that "patience" brings success, does it not? In Wenger's case, patience has actually seen them diminish rather than improve surely?
And okay Benitez was really lucky to win the Champoions League and FA Cup in his first season in charge. My God, that we could ever be that "lucky"!
Ferguson... I agree. But what has any of this to do with the underlying theme which is that we need success FAST, and cannot wait for long-term developments as the Gravy Train will have passed us by within the next couple of years.
Maybe that explains why the owners sanctioned the spending of £250m in 18 months... maybe they also thought that we needed Champions League football pretty fucking quickly as well!
cleavers
Moderator
Soulboy said:And herein lies the problem with way too many City fans... constantly comparing ourselves to the Rags.
"The rags gave baconface time..."
"We gave them Busby, now we've got Hughes, so it will all turn out all right..."
"United showed patience with Ferguson.."
Yeah, and for that ONE example of faith in a manager, that has now become the benchmark for too many City fans blinded by the glow of success at the swamp.
Fergie didn't succeed because the club "showed patience". Surly Alex succeeded because he was a top quality mnanager BEFORE he ever entered Old Trafford. He was then given the largest budget in football at that time, and then landed lucky that the youth set-up handed him half a dozen players. Please do not be fooled that Ferguson succeeded because the board showed patience. That was way down the list of reasons for his success.
Chelsea have had 6 managers in 5 seasons... and has that affected their success?
Benitez did all his best work at Liverpool in his first season. Wenger did his best work at Arsenal in the first couple of years.
The use of "patience" as a measure of managerial success is a crock of shit.
Mercer transformed us in 3 years. Clough won the First Division in his first season back.
Money transforms a club nowadays. We've got oil barrels full of the stuff, yet we're talking as if we need to lay down a long-term plan that needs careful nurturing. Tosh!
If we don't make Champions League football for next season, we may very well have blown our chances. Players of the required level will not come, some of the better ones we have may move on... and worst of all, Platini's Plan might very well be in place excluding us from the top table.
This project has to achieve its first target of Chanmpions League as soon as possible otherwise our consequent plans become irrelevant.
That's a very good post, many will disagree with you (and me), simply because sacking managers doesn't work.
That's not a reason (see Chelsea this year I expect), in my opinion we have either the best, or the second best squad in the league, and its currently under performing. Yesterday was a GOOD result, but we still should have won, we were the better team for long periods. The only reason we didn't win was because we failed, once again, to defend properly. The managerial team have all week to sort out our crap defending (its basic mistakes every week), and for 16 months they have failed to sort them out, despite a huge spend on new defenders, to replace those who are not good enough, but in my opinion all the new players, and those we have let go are more than competent individually.
City Raider
Well-Known Member
Soulboy said:
And herein lies the problem with way too many City fans... constantly comparing ourselves to the Rags.
"The rags gave baconface time..."
Please do not be fooled that Ferguson succeeded because the board showed patience. That was way down the list of reasons for his success.
I agree with a lot of what you say and believe me mate, I'm not constantly comparing us to the rags - that was just a point to help make my point. All I'll say is, it IS the number 1 reason for his success, coz without it the rest just doesn't happen.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Me too. Managers need time, even good ones.jimharri said:Not me Moomba. The same argument I use for backing Hughes is true for Sven as well. Changing managers every season or two is not the answer. I was disappointed when Sven left, and was very pissed off with the way the rug was pulled from under his feet by Thaksin.moomba said:I wonder how many people that preach the "manager needs time" mantra have decided that Sven wasn't good enough on the strength on 10 months at the club. I wonder how many were supporters of the Save Our Sven campaign.
I think one of the problems, and certainly my biggest with Hughes (I'm a Hughes In until at least the end of the season), is that he comes across a lot as if he doesn't give a fuck.
He could be managing any team, with any set of players, there is nothing unique about our club, and I find that a little distasteful. I remember his first press conference, where he said that he is a professional, and will manage any club to the best of his abilities.
Obviously, professionalism is great, but not at the expense of the soul of the club. City is turning into a well oiled machine (if you excuse the pun) from top to bottom, and there currently may as well be any name or badge on the strip. The team has lost it's Cityness, and will lose more of it once Richards and possibly Ned move on. Our team is now another group of professionals, doing their job, with a few obvious exceptions.
Of course, I prefer this now to the madness of Pearce, but at least Pearce had a respect for what went ahead of him. All Hughes seems to say, is about how we need to change our attitude, our outlook on football, and change our culture as a club. I like our culture as a club, that gallows humour has always been a big part of our identity.
Many like the idea of Jose Mourinho, because from listening to him, you get the idea that he is passionate about the clubs he manages. He even said that he loved Chelsea at one point, and went on to have a discussion about which Chelsea legend was better than another.
Hughes is doing his job, and somehow, I just want more than that. This could be overlooked as a passing annoyance but when stacked up with the results, the Cassell thing, and the performance and especially, the attitude of his players, a picture starts to be painted of a team that I don't particularly like.
He could be managing any team, with any set of players, there is nothing unique about our club, and I find that a little distasteful. I remember his first press conference, where he said that he is a professional, and will manage any club to the best of his abilities.
Obviously, professionalism is great, but not at the expense of the soul of the club. City is turning into a well oiled machine (if you excuse the pun) from top to bottom, and there currently may as well be any name or badge on the strip. The team has lost it's Cityness, and will lose more of it once Richards and possibly Ned move on. Our team is now another group of professionals, doing their job, with a few obvious exceptions.
Of course, I prefer this now to the madness of Pearce, but at least Pearce had a respect for what went ahead of him. All Hughes seems to say, is about how we need to change our attitude, our outlook on football, and change our culture as a club. I like our culture as a club, that gallows humour has always been a big part of our identity.
Many like the idea of Jose Mourinho, because from listening to him, you get the idea that he is passionate about the clubs he manages. He even said that he loved Chelsea at one point, and went on to have a discussion about which Chelsea legend was better than another.
Hughes is doing his job, and somehow, I just want more than that. This could be overlooked as a passing annoyance but when stacked up with the results, the Cassell thing, and the performance and especially, the attitude of his players, a picture starts to be painted of a team that I don't particularly like.
Scottyboi
Well-Known Member
Damocles said:I think one of the problems, and certainly my biggest with Hughes (I'm a Hughes In until at least the end of the season), is that he comes across a lot as if he doesn't give a fuck.
He could be managing any team, with any set of players, there is nothing unique about our club, and I find that a little distasteful. I remember his first press conference, where he said that he is a professional, and will manage any club to the best of his abilities.
Obviously, professionalism is great, but not at the expense of the soul of the club. City is turning into a well oiled machine (if you excuse the pun) from top to bottom, and there currently may as well be any name or badge on the strip. The team has lost it's Cityness, and will lose more of it once Richards and possibly Ned move on. Our team is now another group of professionals, doing their job, with a few obvious exceptions.
Of course, I prefer this now to the madness of Pearce, but at least Pearce had a respect for what went ahead of him. All Hughes seems to say, is about how we need to change our attitude, our outlook on football, and change our culture as a club. I like our culture as a club, that gallows humour has always been a big part of our identity.
Many like the idea of Jose Mourinho, because from listening to him, you get the idea that he is passionate about the clubs he manages. He even said that he loved Chelsea at one point, and went on to have a discussion about which Chelsea legend was better than another.
Hughes is doing his job, and somehow, I just want more than that. This could be overlooked as a passing annoyance but when stacked up with the results, the Cassell thing, and the performance and especially, the attitude of his players, a picture starts to be painted of a team that I don't particularly like.
You have hit the nail on the head for me. Its the main reason why i have become so down hearted about hughes. Their is no personality or aura about him.
A
A
Anonymous
Guest
De Niro is right on this point. Hughes splits the fans like no other manager I can remember.
I was for him when he arrived, he did wonders at Blackburn but I began to have my doubts LAST November and by January I wanted him gone. I so want him to be successfull but it is plain it will never happen in a million years.
The main reasons for my opinion are this:
1. Hughes is tactically inept. How anyone can presume otherwise is frankly beyond belief. No come from behind wins (in normal time) since Hughes became manager is testament to his tactical limitations. Sitting in the dug out with his arms folded doing nothing really anoys too.
2. Negativity and Cautiousness. Accepting a point from a match may well work in the lower half of the league but at the top it simply doesn't work. If you push for the win against lower league clubs (I accept settling a draw against close rivals like Vila and Liverpool is justified) and then win 50% of 'draws' and accept that you will lose 25% of 'draws' you get 7 pts from every 4 'draw' rather than 4 pts. We'd just be behind the Rags and Arse now if Hughes went for it at the death like Baconface does.
3. No squad ethic. Hughes plays his latest buys in preference to players who were already here. Not good for player moral this. If a player plays well then he should stay in the team for sure if the next opponent is not a top club. I do see that against the best then a manager has to stand by his gut instinct - even then if the game goes wrong the 'form' player should be brought on.
4. Why bother giving Hughes a massive fortune to spend if he isn't good enough to win the trophies that ADUG and City fans want. Best to give it to a proven manager who will spend it in a way more likely to win trophies.
I was for him when he arrived, he did wonders at Blackburn but I began to have my doubts LAST November and by January I wanted him gone. I so want him to be successfull but it is plain it will never happen in a million years.
The main reasons for my opinion are this:
1. Hughes is tactically inept. How anyone can presume otherwise is frankly beyond belief. No come from behind wins (in normal time) since Hughes became manager is testament to his tactical limitations. Sitting in the dug out with his arms folded doing nothing really anoys too.
2. Negativity and Cautiousness. Accepting a point from a match may well work in the lower half of the league but at the top it simply doesn't work. If you push for the win against lower league clubs (I accept settling a draw against close rivals like Vila and Liverpool is justified) and then win 50% of 'draws' and accept that you will lose 25% of 'draws' you get 7 pts from every 4 'draw' rather than 4 pts. We'd just be behind the Rags and Arse now if Hughes went for it at the death like Baconface does.
3. No squad ethic. Hughes plays his latest buys in preference to players who were already here. Not good for player moral this. If a player plays well then he should stay in the team for sure if the next opponent is not a top club. I do see that against the best then a manager has to stand by his gut instinct - even then if the game goes wrong the 'form' player should be brought on.
4. Why bother giving Hughes a massive fortune to spend if he isn't good enough to win the trophies that ADUG and City fans want. Best to give it to a proven manager who will spend it in a way more likely to win trophies.