Stop abusing the Hughes out brigade - we have a valid point

[Unknown_Genius]

uote]

Jim, yes you can't argue with Wenger and Baconface, hugely successful.
Honestly though, I'm not sure what thats got to do with MH performance as a manager??
Here's my 2 questions to you..
With what he inherited and spent has he made progress?
Have you been happy with MHs contribution and effect as our manager?

Right; I'll answer them before I go to bed. People seem to be equating us having this money with suddenly, from years of dross, going on to win trophies overnight. Money seems to be one of the major points used by the Hughes out people to back up their argument (granted, not the only point but it does keep cropping up. And in answer to your second point, no I haven't been totally happy with Hughes' contribution in his first season. But, as I said in my earlier post, there comes a point when we have to stop these endless managerial sackings. Say we get rid of Hughes in the summer (and I think we probably will) and get a new man in. What happens if he only gets us to 8th or 9th and no trophy in his first season? And I'm not saying that will happen; I, like everybody else on here can't possibly know what would happen in those circumstances. Do we then get rid of him as well? Anyway, I'm off to bed!

That's the gamble you take but it's less of a gamble the better the manager you get in. If we brought in Van Gaal or Rijkaard or Mourinho etc then we are moving in the right direction. They'd probably get more out of the current squad than Hughes, would attract a better calibre of player etc etc. I see more upside/ potential than downside.

Chelsea probably thought the same thing when they got Scolari to replace Avram Grant-big name international manager-who will definitely improve the situation.A differentiation should be made between Mourinho and the other two because he has been successful in England-Scolari had no track record in England and it showed in his training methods-Just because a manager has been very successful abroad doesnt mean success dealing with British players-see Paul le Guen at Rangers after his success at Lyon.

Very good point, Juande Ramos was another one.

 

[Soulboy]

uote]

Jim, yes you can't argue with Wenger and Baconface, hugely successful.
Honestly though, I'm not sure what thats got to do with MH performance as a manager??
Here's my 2 questions to you..
With what he inherited and spent has he made progress?
Have you been happy with MHs contribution and effect as our manager?

Right; I'll answer them before I go to bed. People seem to be equating us having this money with suddenly, from years of dross, going on to win trophies overnight. Money seems to be one of the major points used by the Hughes out people to back up their argument (granted, not the only point but it does keep cropping up. And in answer to your second point, no I haven't been totally happy with Hughes' contribution in his first season. But, as I said in my earlier post, there comes a point when we have to stop these endless managerial sackings. Say we get rid of Hughes in the summer (and I think we probably will) and get a new man in. What happens if he only gets us to 8th or 9th and no trophy in his first season? And I'm not saying that will happen; I, like everybody else on here can't possibly know what would happen in those circumstances. Do we then get rid of him as well? Anyway, I'm off to bed!

That's the gamble you take but it's less of a gamble the better the manager you get in. If we brought in Van Gaal or Rijkaard or Mourinho etc then we are moving in the right direction. They'd probably get more out of the current squad than Hughes, would attract a better calibre of player etc etc. I see more upside/ potential than downside.

Chelsea probably thought the same thing when they got Scolari to replace Avram Grant-big name international manager-who will definitely improve the situation.A differentiation should be made between Mourinho and the other two because he has been successful in England-Scolari had no track record in England and it showed in his training methods-Just because a manager has been very successful abroad doesnt mean success dealing with British players-see Paul le Guen at Rangers after his success at Lyon.

I must be miising your point. So Chelsea replaced Grant with Scolari... a World Cup winner. And it didn't work out.

So within 6 months they sack him and replace him with Hiddink. What's the problem?

I wish we had a board that acted with such brutality and conviction!

It's called having a winning mentality. Where personalities and being fair matter far less than actually being successful. It's what ALL the top clubs do nowadays.

Mancini won the Italian League with Inter, Del Bosque won the Spanish league with Madrid... and both were sacked.

Nobody cared. Nobody protested. The club wanted to be even better. Where's the harm in that?

Spurs sacked Jol and brought in Ramos. Won the Carling Cup. 6 months later he's sacked. Harry comes in, turns it round, takes them to wembley... and he's got next season to break the top 6 or else he'll be out as well.

Stability in football nowadays is absolute bollocks. Youth set-ups and 5 year plans are for clubs with no money. And that's the harsh reality.

 

[Biglebowski]

Soulboy.

Some great posts there mate.

I don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

And even going along with such a bizarre outdated 1970s type formula to bring some silverware, when do you begin to say to yourself we might have got it wrong yet again ?

There is no case for retaining Hughes services, nobody ever makes a valid case in his defence because there is not one to put forward, except pointing out how many managers we have had.

Interesting point regardless off how many we have hired and then fired none of gone on to do anything.

That suggests we have a 100% success rate firing the wrong ones.

We need to change our mentality, we are now the wealthiest club on the planet, we don’t need to hang around for the next 5 years whilst Hughes cuts his managerial teeth and we pray he gets it right.

He is not the man for the job.

 

[bluemanc]

Soulboy.

Some great posts there mate.

I don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

And even going along with such a bizarre outdated 1970s type formula to bring some silverware, when do you begin to say to yourself we might have got it wrong yet again ?

There is no case for retaining Hughes services, nobody ever makes a valid case in his defence because there is not one to put forward, except pointing out how many managers we have had.

Interesting point regardless off how many we have hired and then fired none of gone on to do anything.

That suggests we have a 100% success rate firing the wrong ones.

We need to change our mentality, we are now the wealthiest club on the planet, we don’t need to hang around for the next 5 years whilst Hughes cuts his managerial teeth and we pray he gets it right.

He is not the man for the job.

don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

If proof was needed that you are a fool this has got to be it.
Hope you managed to get a ticket for Thursday though.

 

[poh]

So within 6 months they sack him and replace him with Hiddink. What's the problem?

I wish we had a board that acted with such brutality and conviction!

It's called having a winning mentality. Where personalities and being fair matter far less than actually being successful. It's what ALL the top clubs do nowadays.

Mancini won the Italian League with Inter, Del Bosque won the Spanish league with Madrid... and both were sacked.

Nobody cared. Nobody protested. The club wanted to be even better. Where's the harm in that?

Spurs sacked Jol and brought in Ramos. Won the Carling Cup. 6 months later he's sacked. Harry comes in, turns it round, takes them to wembley... and he's got next season to break the top 6 or else he'll be out as well.

Stability in football nowadays is absolute bollocks. Youth set-ups and 5 year plans are for clubs with no money. And that's the harsh reality.[/quote]

At last someone with sense and who can see the reality of the situation in football in the year 2009-Well said sir !

 

[Biglebowski]

Soulboy.

Some great posts there mate.

I don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

And even going along with such a bizarre outdated 1970s type formula to bring some silverware, when do you begin to say to yourself we might have got it wrong yet again ?

There is no case for retaining Hughes services, nobody ever makes a valid case in his defence because there is not one to put forward, except pointing out how many managers we have had.

Interesting point regardless off how many we have hired and then fired none of gone on to do anything.

That suggests we have a 100% success rate firing the wrong ones.

We need to change our mentality, we are now the wealthiest club on the planet, we don’t need to hang around for the next 5 years whilst Hughes cuts his managerial teeth and we pray he gets it right.

He is not the man for the job.

don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

If proof was needed that you are a fool this has got to be it.
Hope you managed to get a ticket for Thursday though.

I should have been a bit more specific.

The point I was endeavouring to try and make is, giving a manager time, and hoping that because you give him say 3-5 years it will in turn give you stability, which will then give you success is fundamentally flawed by its very concept because you are basing this argument on the assumption that success will then surely follow, the reality is it does not really happen and there are no guarantees.

Usually giving a manager time does indeed give you stability, but you inturn then turn in to a midtable side, unless you use the exception in this argument over in Trafford.

The game has changed drastically; the normal rules no longer apply to us because off our substantial wealth.

If people used this argument when our club was on a strict budget, I would whole heartedly agree it would be our best chance of success.


As Soulboy rightly pointed out the top clubs hire and fire at will, it is all part of the top clubs psychi for success.

I would love to know how many of the top clubs who have won plenty off silverware and championships have long serving managers.

With the exception off baconface at the swamp, for me he is the exception in this argument.

 

[cleavers]

When the quality of the man in charge is found wanting time and again, 'stability' is not a valid reason to keep anyone!

Absolutely correct, and nothing to do with last night either. Our away league form is now 8 months old, and shows no sign of improving.

 

[bluemanc]

Soulboy.

Some great posts there mate.

I don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

And even going along with such a bizarre outdated 1970s type formula to bring some silverware, when do you begin to say to yourself we might have got it wrong yet again ?

There is no case for retaining Hughes services, nobody ever makes a valid case in his defence because there is not one to put forward, except pointing out how many managers we have had.

Interesting point regardless off how many we have hired and then fired none of gone on to do anything.

That suggests we have a 100% success rate firing the wrong ones.

We need to change our mentality, we are now the wealthiest club on the planet, we don’t need to hang around for the next 5 years whilst Hughes cuts his managerial teeth and we pray he gets it right.

He is not the man for the job.

don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

If proof was needed that you are a fool this has got to be it.
Hope you managed to get a ticket for Thursday though.

I should have been a bit more specific.

The point I was endeavouring to try and make is, giving a manager time, and hoping that because you give him say 3-5 years it will in turn give you stability, which will then give you success is fundamentally flawed by its very concept because you are basing this argument on the assumption that success will then surely follow, the reality is it does not really happen and there are no guarantees.

Usually giving a manager time does indeed give you stability, but you inturn then turn in to a midtable side, unless you use the exception in this argument over in Trafford.

The game has changed drastically; the normal rules no longer apply to us because off our substantial wealth.

If people used this argument when our club was on a strict budget, I would whole heartedly agree it would be our best chance of success.


As Soulboy rightly pointed out the top clubs hire and fire at will, it is all part of the top clubs psychi for success.

I would love to know how many of the top clubs who have won plenty off silverware and championships have long serving managers.

With the exception off baconface at the swamp, for me he is the exception in this argument.

You are so desperate to be proved right it's scary,you have no other football related thoughts in your head other than Hughes out.
That's all you exist for on this board,how can you possibly go to a game wanting us to win with the attitude you've got.
I'll be at COMS on Sun & Thursday knowing that these two games would go a long way into making this our most succsessful season for nearly 30 yrs & i will be on cloud fuckin 9 when it happens how can you want that,the answer is you can't because everything you have believed in will be proved wrong.
Seriously i don't understand you & i never will.

 

[Biglebowski]

Soulboy.

Some great posts there mate.

I don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

And even going along with such a bizarre outdated 1970s type formula to bring some silverware, when do you begin to say to yourself we might have got it wrong yet again ?

There is no case for retaining Hughes services, nobody ever makes a valid case in his defence because there is not one to put forward, except pointing out how many managers we have had.

Interesting point regardless off how many we have hired and then fired none of gone on to do anything.

That suggests we have a 100% success rate firing the wrong ones.

We need to change our mentality, we are now the wealthiest club on the planet, we don’t need to hang around for the next 5 years whilst Hughes cuts his managerial teeth and we pray he gets it right.

He is not the man for the job.

don’t buy in to all this bollocks of time = stability = success, seriously that formula is the exception rather than the norm.

If proof was needed that you are a fool this has got to be it.
Hope you managed to get a ticket for Thursday though.

I should have been a bit more specific.

The point I was endeavouring to try and make is, giving a manager time, and hoping that because you give him say 3-5 years it will in turn give you stability, which will then give you success is fundamentally flawed by its very concept because you are basing this argument on the assumption that success will then surely follow, the reality is it does not really happen and there are no guarantees.

Usually giving a manager time does indeed give you stability, but you inturn then turn in to a midtable side, unless you use the exception in this argument over in Trafford.

The game has changed drastically; the normal rules no longer apply to us because off our substantial wealth.

If people used this argument when our club was on a strict budget, I would whole heartedly agree it would be our best chance of success.


As Soulboy rightly pointed out the top clubs hire and fire at will, it is all part of the top clubs psychi for success.

I would love to know how many of the top clubs who have won plenty off silverware and championships have long serving managers.

With the exception off baconface at the swamp, for me he is the exception in this argument.

You are so desperate to be proved right it's scary,you have no other football related thoughts in your head other than Hughes out.
That's all you exist for on this board,how can you possibly go to a game wanting us to win with the attitude you've got.
I'll be at COMS on Sun & Thursday knowing that these two games would go a long way into making this our most succsessful season for nearly 30 yrs & i will be on cloud fuckin 9 when it happens how can you want that,the answer is you can't because everything you have believed in will be proved wrong.
Seriously i don't understand you & i never will.

I think you’re mixing up heart and head in the argument mate.

When I take my seat on Thursday I want us to win so badly it is untrue, I am as blue as the next man, if you cut me I would bleed blue.

I don’t think there’s a fan on this forum that does not want us to win something, I am in my late 30s and have been waiting a long time.

Not entirely true have done a Full Members Cup Final and play off final.

I would love nothing more than Hughes to prove me wrong, I hate the turmoil changing a manager brings, but I am sorry if it isn’t happening it isn’t happening.

And I don’t want to wait for ever.

 

[hgblue]

You are so desperate to be proved right it's scary,you have no other football related thoughts in your head other than Hughes out.
That's all you exist for on this board,how can you possibly go to a game wanting us to win with the attitude you've got.
I'll be at COMS on Sun & Thursday knowing that these two games would go a long way into making this our most succsessful season for nearly 30 yrs & i will be on cloud fuckin 9 when it happens how can you want that,the answer is you can't because everything you have believed in will be proved wrong.
Seriously i don't understand you & i never will.[/quote]

Classic example of someone who this thread was actually about (see my post at the top of page 6)! What, exactly, is so difficult understand? There are many people on here who love the club as much as you do, who have come to the conclusion that Hughes is not the man for the job. You can disagree, argue your point, but because your case is so weak, and getting weaker by the day, you have to insult your fellow blues, by questioning their loyalty to the club. That's low, really low. I could question your passion for the club, because of your meek acceptance of the mediocrity (at best), being served up by the current manager, but I won't, because I know how much that accusation hurts when coming from fellow blues!