Prestwich_Blue said:Difficult one to answer but I'll try. A manager has his level, give or take. If we take Mark Hughes, he did a great job at Blackburn & Fulham but failed spectacularly when he had money to spend. His level was getting a group of unfashionable players to overachieve. Baconface proved that a great manager doesn't need great players in every position. Pulis couldn't get Stoke in the top half yet he did a spectacular job in getting Stoke up & keeping Palace up. I suspect Pellegrini's level is well above Hughes but less than Baconface. His greatest success came at unfashionable clubs with an unfancied group of players.mosssideblue said:Prestwich_Blue said:I think we're a Yaya replacement and top class left back from that.
You know where I'm heading with this..................
If we had those additional players, which I agree with you we definitely need, could Pellers then take that team to the next level. If not, what do you think he is lacking?
What makes that difference? A manager who can instil iron will and total belief in his players. Do you see that in our players at the moment? I don't.
My greatest hope after last season is that the players would start to recognise both how good they are individually, but how good the club can be as a team. The shit poor start last season can be slightly forgiven, lots of poor souls in need of a hug, but we got there. There were many doubts about Pellegrini, I had plenty, mostly whether he was just a nearly man, and like you say perhaps just does best as the underdog. The title win laid a lot of that to rest, and I genuinely thought we would kick on finally full of belief that we were the best team in the league. We would charge to club after club, whipping out our humongous member and smacking it on the desk of every manager foolish enough to get in our way.
And then we lost at home to Stoke.
Stoke.
At home.
And we didn't even score.
It's certainly never boring.