The UEFA Cup is Hughes' only hope

[southstand117]

If we get 7th in the league its better than last year,or 8th why should he go!!!!!!!

 

[RACHACE]

If we get 7th in the league its better than last year,or 8th why should he go!!!!!!!

I think u need to take into consideration the points tally, we finished on 55 points last season and I doubt we will match that this season also look at the 2 domestic cups this season, knocked out by lower league opposition on both occasions. For me the only thing that will save him is a Uefa cup semi final/final and finishing 8th, which are both still very much do-able (imo)

C&ETID

 

[hgblue]

Sorry mate, but stability isn't the key (just ask Steve Gibson at Middlesborough). Having the right manager at the helm is the key. Okay, once you feel you have the right man in place, then you have to adopt a long term approach. Question is, do our owners think Hughes is the right man for the job? We'll find out soon enough, but I wouldn't mind betting that if he doesn't win the uefa cup, he could be history. Hence the title of this thread.

You're citing Middlesbrough as an example of stability? Hardly. In the last 10 or 11 years, they've had 4 managers (Robson, Venables, McLaren and Southgate). Granted, it doesn't come close to our record of hiring and firing, but I wouldn't call it stable.

What I am saying is that Gibson could have sacked Southgate on a number of occasions over the last season or two, but didn't. Probably because of the 'stability' argument. Hope that's a consolation to him when his team are playing in the Championship next season! My question is:- were Arsenal and United successful because they were stable, or because Wenger and Ferguson are bloody good managers?

 

[Soulboy]

If Chelsea were West Brom, we still would have lost.

a strong contender for most nonsensical post of the year

Actually... we did lose at West Brom!

 

[Bunk]

I would have thought that the last 30-odd years would have told people that sacking managers every 5 minutes DOES NOT WORK. I don't like using the vermin as an example, but who are the 2 most successful clubs in the brief history of the premiership? Correcet, Arsenal and the vermin. Whinger has been at the gunners since '96 (?), while Taggart has been at the sty since 1986. The key word is stability. But hey, let's not bother with that; let's get another new manager in, with another bunch of new players and coaching staff.

The Baconface model is a commonly used argument by those favouring the retention of Mark Hughes, however, what it pays no attention to is that the dynamics of the game are almost unrecognisable from those when Baconface took over at the rags. It took him over 3 years to win his first trophy, when he finally retires if anyone thinks the new manager will be afforded 3 years to win a trophy in the name of 'stability' then they are badly mistaken.

 

[jimharri]

Sorry mate, but stability isn't the key (just ask Steve Gibson at Middlesborough). Having the right manager at the helm is the key. Okay, once you feel you have the right man in place, then you have to adopt a long term approach. Question is, do our owners think Hughes is the right man for the job? We'll find out soon enough, but I wouldn't mind betting that if he doesn't win the uefa cup, he could be history. Hence the title of this thread.

You're citing Middlesbrough as an example of stability? Hardly. In the last 10 or 11 years, they've had 4 managers (Robson, Venables, McLaren and Southgate). Granted, it doesn't come close to our record of hiring and firing, but I wouldn't call it stable.

What I am saying is that Gibson could have sacked Southgate on a number of occasions over the last season or two, but didn't. Probably because of the 'stability' argument. Hope that's a consolation to him when his team are playing in the Championship next season! My question is:- were Arsenal and United successful because they were stable, or because Wenger and Ferguson are bloody good managers?

I don't remember Taggart being called "good" in 1990. There were regular calls for his head, and it is strongly rumoured that he was one game from the bullet. They went to Forest in the cup, won and went on to win the cup that year. The rest we all know about. That was 4 years after he was appointed. Not the one year that Hughes (or Sven, for that matter) have been given.

 

[Soulboy]

Sorry mate, but stability isn't the key (just ask Steve Gibson at Middlesborough). Having the right manager at the helm is the key. Okay, once you feel you have the right man in place, then you have to adopt a long term approach. Question is, do our owners think Hughes is the right man for the job? We'll find out soon enough, but I wouldn't mind betting that if he doesn't win the uefa cup, he could be history. Hence the title of this thread.

You're citing Middlesbrough as an example of stability? Hardly. In the last 10 or 11 years, they've had 4 managers (Robson, Venables, McLaren and Southgate). Granted, it doesn't come close to our record of hiring and firing, but I wouldn't call it stable.

What I am saying is that Gibson could have sacked Southgate on a number of occasions over the last season or two, but didn't. Probably because of the 'stability' argument. Hope that's a consolation to him when his team are playing in the Championship next season! My question is:- were Arsenal and United successful because they were stable, or because Wenger and Ferguson are bloody good managers?

Nah mate, you're so wrong. Changing managers in mid-season never works.

I mean look at Hiddink at Chelsea... takes over a club who look like they'd packed it in, struggling in the league, unimpressive in Europe, and what has he achieved?

Oh yeah, six wins on the bounce...

Alright, bad example. What about Redknapp?

Ah, yes. Good one. Okay, took Spurs to as Carling Cup final, but that's no big deal... I mean we did that just a mere 33 years ago, didn't we? And having been about 12 points berhind City when he took over, by the end of today he might be equal on points with us...

Okay, another bad example!

Right. Fat Sam at Th'Rovers. When he took over they were about 12 points behind us, has hardly spent a bean, and is now just 6 poins behind us...

Okay, another not very good example....

But changing managers is the wrong thing. it's all about stability and sticking with your manager. Just like West Brom and Boro...

 

[Bunk]

I’m a member of the Hughes out camp. I’ve said it several times on the forum before and I’ll say it again, it doesn’t matter what he achieves from here on out I’m positive he will get sacked at the end of the season, UEFA Cup or no UEFA Cup.

He no longer fits the profile of the club and does not command the professional respect of at least several high profile players.

There are players in the squad who will look at Mark Hughes’ achievements as a player and as a manager and genuinely believe that they could probably manage the team just as good if not better themselves. Whilst this is the case you will always have unrest in the changing room, you need to have a manager who the players want to play for, there are too many who don’t want to play for Hughes and never will.

 

[moomba]

That was 4 years after he was appointed. Not the one year that Hughes (or Sven, for that matter) have been given.

Are you suggesting we give all our managers 4 years to show some signs of progress?

 

[Da_Blu_Moona]

The UEFA cup is OUR only hope rather than Hughes' only hope IMO.