Is now the time to consider Mancini's tenure at the club

[vaziooo]

not wumming, just want honest opinions - what do you think if Mancini and pisscan swap places with current squads ? would the rags be 1st

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

The ramifications extend beyond even the commercial ones. Attracting top players is incredibly important. We saw last summer Hazard choose Chelsea, no doubt in part because of the fact they were European champions. Lets face it, if they hadn't won that competition, they wouldn't have gotten into this season's group stages and most likely Hazard would be playing elsewhere. What about the best young European prospects. If you're Isco, and you can choose between Arsenal, United, City, Chelsea, Madrid, and Barca, where do City come on that list ? Can we reasonably expect Silva to make a compelling argument for why City is the place to be ? I don't see it with Mancini in charge. He's such a divisive character even players he actively chased and signed now wouldn't shed a tear if he was sacked.

I've read numerous times on this forum and outside that I must be a Jonny Come Lately supporter because anyone who remembers where we were 10 years ago would not want Mancini sacked. Another lazy argument. Viewing City through the prism of even Mark Hughes' team of three and half years ago is a manifest nonsense, let alone doing it through the prism of a 2nd division team. We all know where we've been and as thankful as we are that we aren't there anymore, it shouldn't mean that a guy like Mancini who has disrespected our club this season (IMO), has failed in his European targets spectacularly, and is currently failing with his league targets, is given unlimited grace and shouldn't be questioned or criticised.

What happens next is anyone's guess. If we were to drop further behind over the next few weeks, I'd personally sack Mancini immediately. I don't think we're any less likely to win the league were even Kidd be placed in temporary charge until May. It would then be a clear signal of intent to all prospective new managers that there's a job going at City and that they can discuss it without fear of disrespecting the current incumbent.

Our showings in Europe over the last two seasons have done more damage than FFPR could ever do.

There will be players across Europe who have witnessed our showcasing to the rest of the world, and wondered is that the best we have, really?

And those who are happy to overlook our deficiencies, are perhaps not coming for the right reasons?

 

[baildon blue]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

The ramifications extend beyond even the commercial ones. Attracting top players is incredibly important. We saw last summer Hazard choose Chelsea, no doubt in part because of the fact they were European champions. Lets face it, if they hadn't won that competition, they wouldn't have gotten into this season's group stages and most likely Hazard would be playing elsewhere. What about the best young European prospects. If you're Isco, and you can choose between Arsenal, United, City, Chelsea, Madrid, and Barca, where do City come on that list ? Can we reasonably expect Silva to make a compelling argument for why City is the place to be ? I don't see it with Mancini in charge. He's such a divisive character even players he actively chased and signed now wouldn't shed a tear if he was sacked.

I've read numerous times on this forum and outside that I must be a Jonny Come Lately supporter because anyone who remembers where we were 10 years ago would not want Mancini sacked. Another lazy argument. Viewing City through the prism of even Mark Hughes' team of three and half years ago is a manifest nonsense, let alone doing it through the prism of a 2nd division team. We all know where we've been and as thankful as we are that we aren't there anymore, it shouldn't mean that a guy like Mancini who has disrespected our club this season (IMO), has failed in his European targets spectacularly, and is currently failing with his league targets, is given unlimited grace and shouldn't be questioned or criticised.

What happens next is anyone's guess. If we were to drop further behind over the next few weeks, I'd personally sack Mancini immediately. I don't think we're any less likely to win the league were even Kidd be placed in temporary charge until May. It would then be a clear signal of intent to all prospective new managers that there's a job going at City and that they can discuss it without fear of disrespecting the current incumbent.

If we do sack are manager mid season kidd wont get it Viera will

 

[JamesA]

I feel that many of the Mancini lovers are the same ones who were saying it was stupid to get rid of Hughes. Let's go back a few years and have a look at those discussions?

End of the day, stability is a good thing I agree, but we have been absolutely embarassing in the Champions League 2 seasons running, we scraped a title last year from the jaws of embarassing deeat and this year we have been in the main poor and coasting through games.

I am all for giving him the season, now is not the time to make a change, but I certainly won't be arguing if they get rid of Mancini at the end of this season.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

This is so important. Even setting aside the valid arguments about players, going out of the CL might have cost us something like £30m or more in total this season. That money might well have got us through FFP.

Mancini costs us £5m a season in salary so it's worth giving him a couple of years compo in favour of getting a manager who can get us that extra £30m+ a season.

 

[chesterbells]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

The ramifications extend beyond even the commercial ones. Attracting top players is incredibly important. We saw last summer Hazard choose Chelsea, no doubt in part because of the fact they were European champions. Lets face it, if they hadn't won that competition, they wouldn't have gotten into this season's group stages and most likely Hazard would be playing elsewhere. What about the best young European prospects. If you're Isco, and you can choose between Arsenal, United, City, Chelsea, Madrid, and Barca, where do City come on that list ? Can we reasonably expect Silva to make a compelling argument for why City is the place to be ? I don't see it with Mancini in charge. He's such a divisive character even players he actively chased and signed now wouldn't shed a tear if he was sacked.

I've read numerous times on this forum and outside that I must be a Jonny Come Lately supporter because anyone who remembers where we were 10 years ago would not want Mancini sacked. Another lazy argument. Viewing City through the prism of even Mark Hughes' team of three and half years ago is a manifest nonsense, let alone doing it through the prism of a 2nd division team. We all know where we've been and as thankful as we are that we aren't there anymore, it shouldn't mean that a guy like Mancini who has disrespected our club this season (IMO), has failed in his European targets spectacularly, and is currently failing with his league targets, is given unlimited grace and shouldn't be questioned or criticised.

What happens next is anyone's guess. If we were to drop further behind over the next few weeks, I'd personally sack Mancini immediately. I don't think we're any less likely to win the league were even Kidd be placed in temporary charge until May. It would then be a clear signal of intent to all prospective new managers that there's a job going at City and that they can discuss it without fear of disrespecting the current incumbent.

If we do sack are manager mid season kidd wont get it Viera will

Platt over Viera

 

[Nevizade]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

The ramifications extend beyond even the commercial ones. Attracting top players is incredibly important. We saw last summer Hazard choose Chelsea, no doubt in part because of the fact they were European champions. Lets face it, if they hadn't won that competition, they wouldn't have gotten into this season's group stages and most likely Hazard would be playing elsewhere. What about the best young European prospects. If you're Isco, and you can choose between Arsenal, United, City, Chelsea, Madrid, and Barca, where do City come on that list ? Can we reasonably expect Silva to make a compelling argument for why City is the place to be ? I don't see it with Mancini in charge. He's such a divisive character even players he actively chased and signed now wouldn't shed a tear if he was sacked.

I've read numerous times on this forum and outside that I must be a Jonny Come Lately supporter because anyone who remembers where we were 10 years ago would not want Mancini sacked. Another lazy argument. Viewing City through the prism of even Mark Hughes' team of three and half years ago is a manifest nonsense, let alone doing it through the prism of a 2nd division team. We all know where we've been and as thankful as we are that we aren't there anymore, it shouldn't mean that a guy like Mancini who has disrespected our club this season (IMO), has failed in his European targets spectacularly, and is currently failing with his league targets, is given unlimited grace and shouldn't be questioned or criticised.

What happens next is anyone's guess. If we were to drop further behind over the next few weeks, I'd personally sack Mancini immediately. I don't think we're any less likely to win the league were even Kidd be placed in temporary charge until May. It would then be a clear signal of intent to all prospective new managers that there's a job going at City and that they can discuss it without fear of disrespecting the current incumbent.

Good point re Europe.

 

[@BluePhil8]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

The ramifications extend beyond even the commercial ones. Attracting top players is incredibly important. We saw last summer Hazard choose Chelsea, no doubt in part because of the fact they were European champions. Lets face it, if they hadn't won that competition, they wouldn't have gotten into this season's group stages and most likely Hazard would be playing elsewhere. What about the best young European prospects. If you're Isco, and you can choose between Arsenal, United, City, Chelsea, Madrid, and Barca, where do City come on that list ? Can we reasonably expect Silva to make a compelling argument for why City is the place to be ? I don't see it with Mancini in charge. He's such a divisive character even players he actively chased and signed now wouldn't shed a tear if he was sacked.

I've read numerous times on this forum and outside that I must be a Jonny Come Lately supporter because anyone who remembers where we were 10 years ago would not want Mancini sacked. Another lazy argument. Viewing City through the prism of even Mark Hughes' team of three and half years ago is a manifest nonsense, let alone doing it through the prism of a 2nd division team. We all know where we've been and as thankful as we are that we aren't there anymore, it shouldn't mean that a guy like Mancini who has disrespected our club this season (IMO), has failed in his European targets spectacularly, and is currently failing with his league targets, is given unlimited grace and shouldn't be questioned or criticised.

What happens next is anyone's guess. If we were to drop further behind over the next few weeks, I'd personally sack Mancini immediately. I don't think we're any less likely to win the league were even Kidd be placed in temporary charge until May. It would then be a clear signal of intent to all prospective new managers that there's a job going at City and that they can discuss it without fear of disrespecting the current incumbent.

What a well articulated post. I agree with everything, including the last paragraph.

 

[moomba]

I also think a lot of people consistently miss the point about our appalling European campaigns under Mancini. European football might well be a "bonus" for the supporters, but for the people throwing huge sums of money at our club it is vital to commercial progress and the loss of income from exits last season and this season in the group stages, coupled with the regression of our UEFA co-efficient are reasons enough for Mancini to have his tenure questioned.

This is so important. Even setting aside the valid arguments about players, going out of the CL might have cost us something like £30m or more in total this season. That money might well have got us through FFP.

Mancini costs us £5m a season in salary so it's worth giving him a couple of years compo in favour of getting a manager who can get us that extra £30m+ a season.

That's presuming that a new manager will guarantee progression in the champions league, and Mancini is a guarantee that we won't progress.

I think another failed Champions League campaign will be the end of Mancini regardless of how we go in the league, but I can't imagine we'll have a tougher draw than we have for the past two seasons.

 

[117 M34]

If we don't win the league, which isn't looking likely at the moment, I can't see mancini being here come the start of next season