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.
Looking back, how do you feel about Hughes now?
- Thread starter marca_uk
- Start date
sweep said:18 months ago I thought he was average, I now think I overestimated him.
He did OK buying, paid over the odds sometimes, got the occasional bargain sometimes, a so so performance in the market overall. He failed miserably at the squad/team management because of a complete lack of tactical nouse and poor interpersonal skills.
If the game was fantasy football where you pick players to be magicked into your side then sit back and watch the points rack up he'd do OK, he's had 18 months of practice at it.
There seems to be a view on this forum that Hughes was a transfer market genius. I don't really get why.
I always backed Hughes and didn't want him sacked. As has been said I think "his" signings were excellent (not sure Jo Robinho were players he wanted). I think Hughes handled himself with great dignity during his time and was a good ambassador for the club. Also in two consecutive games we beat Chelsea and Arsenal (don't care what teams they had out) and we were harder to beat this season
What has made me subsequently think is that Hughes wasn't top drawer is in the tactical dept. Mancini does look more clued up and from what I read more hands on in training, which if true is an indicement of Hughes.
I think with some City fans with the good start Mancini has made it is now open season on Hughes. Whilst I am thrilled with the start our new manager has made all this talk of City taking over from United is and how far we can go is making me uneasy. Until the defence is sorted out (a legacy from Hughes perhaps) we have some way to go to be top four. (Sorry if I sound negative)
Hopefully though the good times are here.
What has made me subsequently think is that Hughes wasn't top drawer is in the tactical dept. Mancini does look more clued up and from what I read more hands on in training, which if true is an indicement of Hughes.
I think with some City fans with the good start Mancini has made it is now open season on Hughes. Whilst I am thrilled with the start our new manager has made all this talk of City taking over from United is and how far we can go is making me uneasy. Until the defence is sorted out (a legacy from Hughes perhaps) we have some way to go to be top four. (Sorry if I sound negative)
Hopefully though the good times are here.
El Boy Wonder
Well-Known Member
I feel a bit sorry for him, perhaps he could have gone on and learned from his mistakes and took us to the top 4 but ultimately he didnt quite have that edge
he assembled a fantastic team and put the groundwork in for Roberto to come in and pick up the baton
Anyone slagging him off and calling him all sorts is quite immature. He did his best which was ultimately not good enough, hardly the crime of the century to lead us to 6th and a semi final
Its not like he went and pissed on Foe's memorial garden is it?
he assembled a fantastic team and put the groundwork in for Roberto to come in and pick up the baton
Anyone slagging him off and calling him all sorts is quite immature. He did his best which was ultimately not good enough, hardly the crime of the century to lead us to 6th and a semi final
Its not like he went and pissed on Foe's memorial garden is it?
Wheelsy
Well-Known Member
I was Hughes in except for two periods: after THAT game against West Brom and after the Tottenham loss. So I'm not going to slag him.
But look at these players from last night.
Richards
Benjani
Petrov
Garrido
All players that were bought in under Sven or earlier. They are all players who were on the outer under Hughes, and Mancini has managed to get the best of.
Vladi could barely get on the bench — already Mancini has used him and Boyata, showing faith in the youth system.
This makes me believe that Hughes was only comfortable with players he knew inside out — making him a poor man-manager.
But look at these players from last night.
Richards
Benjani
Petrov
Garrido
All players that were bought in under Sven or earlier. They are all players who were on the outer under Hughes, and Mancini has managed to get the best of.
Vladi could barely get on the bench — already Mancini has used him and Boyata, showing faith in the youth system.
This makes me believe that Hughes was only comfortable with players he knew inside out — making him a poor man-manager.
Cheltblue
Well-Known Member
We did ourselves no favours in hanging on to him for so long.
I still cant think of a manager who could not do what Hughes did after being gifted £300million+
As far back as December 2008 he looked out of his depth.
I still cant think of a manager who could not do what Hughes did after being gifted £300million+
As far back as December 2008 he looked out of his depth.
Bill
Moderator
greenie said:markbmcfc said:Hughes can take a lot of credit for where we are, he just wasnt good enough to take us the extra mile.
Its Hughes's team thats in fourth place right now, just playing better under better management.
exactly that, and we did treat him terribly at the end
this and that.
1894
Well-Known Member
Some thoughtful posts on here.
Hughes was Thaksin's man who was brought in to replace Sven who was also Thaksin's man. Many of us felt overjoyed when Frank took charge but sorry for the way Sven was treated at the end. When Hughes was appointed, I felt rather ambivalent but at the time, it seemed a sensible appointment. Sven probably didn't think so though.
I don't think many of us felt sorry for Frank when he sold out and made a few million profit, but Frank had kick-started the whole revival and influx of better players. Sven's charisma certainly worked its charm...compared to the total lack of it during Hughes's time.
Yes, he brought a certain discipline to the place, and added players of his own choice but no other manager in the entire history of Manchester City spent as much on transfers for so average a return. That was his downfall. The new owners are nothing like any of City's previous owners.
Hughes will probably be quite pleased with our performance now, because he will say that it was 'his team' that is beginning to gel and perform. But Mancini is the man for me. Hughes may have assembled the squad, but Mancini knows how to encourage, manage and motivate. That's the difference.
Hughes was Thaksin's man who was brought in to replace Sven who was also Thaksin's man. Many of us felt overjoyed when Frank took charge but sorry for the way Sven was treated at the end. When Hughes was appointed, I felt rather ambivalent but at the time, it seemed a sensible appointment. Sven probably didn't think so though.
I don't think many of us felt sorry for Frank when he sold out and made a few million profit, but Frank had kick-started the whole revival and influx of better players. Sven's charisma certainly worked its charm...compared to the total lack of it during Hughes's time.
Yes, he brought a certain discipline to the place, and added players of his own choice but no other manager in the entire history of Manchester City spent as much on transfers for so average a return. That was his downfall. The new owners are nothing like any of City's previous owners.
Hughes will probably be quite pleased with our performance now, because he will say that it was 'his team' that is beginning to gel and perform. But Mancini is the man for me. Hughes may have assembled the squad, but Mancini knows how to encourage, manage and motivate. That's the difference.
pissedagain
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2008
- Messages
- 3,226
if we had got mancini from the start where would we be now