indierich06

Genuinely, what use is his 'premier league experience' in our situation? He's never managed a newly promoted club who are expected to go down, he's generally managed established premier league clubs with good squads, and he's still bored everyone to tears so much that they couldn't wait to see the back of him. If you thought the football was boring under Maresca, just get this guy in and you'll be begging for a bit of Enzoball.

How could appointing a boring, uninspired manager with the intention of playing defensive football to keep us up be considered in any way innovative? Moyes won West Ham a European trophy and they were still all glad to see the back of him, tells you all you need to know. If you want to be bored to tears and then go down anyway, get Moyes by all means.

Great goal but let's be honest, wtf was that keeper doing? 😂

Yeah I agree - looks like Chelsea have done that with Enzo, he will 'start work on July 01'. Clearly to get around PSR. Maybe the board are keen not to appear like they're trying to fudge the financials? Who knows. Or maybe they're just cracking on with recruitment and we're all speculating because we're bored AF hahaha.

I do feel like the longer it goes on, the more likely it is that we're trying to poach someone from a club. If it was a free agent then that would be a lot easier to tie up

I think it'll roll along until the end of this month so they can sneak it into next year's financials, regardless of who it is. It's not like we're really losing out on much time, a lot of players from big clubs will be off at the Euros, so no-one's really stealing a march on us. Might be the same situation as Chelsea - we announce someone and they start on July 1st or something like that.

I just don't buy the idea that having managed in the league before gives you some kind of special insight or way of working that other managers can't possibly have. What a manager did with other teams has no bearing on what he'll be able to do with ours. It's easy to say 'oh but they've been there and done it', they've 'got experience' - well not with this club, not with these players, not in this scenario. I'd go so far as to say that 'premier league experience' is one of the things I'm least worried about. For me, the appointment should be made with only one thing in mind - who is best equipped to get the most out of the players at their disposal? That's what gives us the best chance of staying up. I'm not saying Moyes wouldn't be able to get a tune out of this lot, but all the people who are interested him are citing his PL experience and that he's a 'safe' appointment - I don't think that he has any attributes that set him apart significantly from some of the other names I've seen mentioned. There's almost an assumption that if we can just get someone with the right experience, we'll be fine - personally I think this kind of appointment would show a lack of ambition, fear of the season ahead, and putting survival at all costs over the long term vision for the football club. We are going to start the seasons odds-on to go straight back down, I would rather we be bold and progressive, and if we go down, we go down playing the way we WANT to play, not just abandoning everything we've tried to build for an extra season on the Premier League teat.

Why is there this idea that we can either a) make an exciting appointment and go down or b) make a boring 'pragmatic' appointment and stay up? We just need a good coach, regardless of system. Kompany's style is similar to Guardiola's and Man City's, and they went down, but then you've got Luton who play the kind of counter attacking football people on here think will keep us up, and Sheffield, who are about as no-nonsense as you can get. They both went down.

They will when we go in with our dream team

Come on, I agree with most of what you're saying, and I think Cooper would be a good shout, but this in bold is a complete dismissal of Corberan's record. Yes, Cooper took Forest from the dregs and got them promoted via the playoffs. I'd say Corberan did a better job getting Huddersfield to that playoff final in the first place - Cooper undoubtedly had a better squad at Forest than Corberan had at Huddersfield, and the playoff final that saw Forest go up was contentious to say the least - it could have been either of them. Corberan's job at West Brom is probably the most comparable to what Cooper did with Forest in terms of similar squad quality - yes he missed out on promotion in the playoffs, but I'd say for both Cooper and Corberan, what's more interesting and useful as a barometer for success is what they did to take these teams from being underperformers to being among the best in the league, not how they performed in the playoff lottery.

Genuinely why? He seems a boring, uninspired man with no discernible tactical style, whose fans mostly hated his football and were glad to see him go?

I mean, odds are basically meaningless. A couple of baseless tweets, people take a punt, it means nothing. If some random journo tweeted that we were in conversations with Sam Allardyce, his odds would move, but it doesn't mean it's happening.

Man, I do not understand the love for Moyes, it would be absolutely turgid, dreadful stuff.

Because when you're making up ITK lies for clout on an internet forum, you have to make yourself sound as much like Fabrizio Romano as possible, and that includes adding weird nonsensical details that don't really make any sense or stand up to any scrutiny.

Tbh that post has got more holes in it than a slice of swiss cheese. About 5 caveats he can use to explain why it didn't happen if it's someone else.

Unfortunately, a rumour in The Sun and a post from somebody with a username like SteveLynexsForeskin is enough to have most people on here thinking it's gospel.

So he's been offered the job, but they're still negotiating, but he's not sure on recruitment, or his own safety (????) and he's just going to... ask his staff if they fancy it? Half the staff he's worked with in the past are in jobs. And the club are only speaking to one candidate, for one of the most crucial appointments in years. Is that the long and short of it? Christ.

Again, Cooper and Corberan are actually quite similar in terms of their football and their philosophy.

What do we do with the players we invested in last summer in order to try and play this way? I don't think we have the 'right' players to perfectly implement any one style to be honest. Do you think we've got the pace, the finishers and the workrate in the squad to play even half as well as we did in 15/16? People assume that possession/technical-based footballer is 'harder', and that other ways of playing are 'easier' - it's nonsense. You employ the style that suits that players you have, or something approximating that, and we've spent quite a lot investing in players who play a certain way and are used to a certain style. The board aren't going to throw the baby out with the bathwater, chasing some type of football that we don't have the players for and goes against what we're actually trying to build - well, they might do, they've made plenty of stupid decisions before.

Any rumblings about pre-season friendlies yet? Going on the piss in Leicester with a bunch of old mates on 27th July, hoping there might be a home game we can go to? I think in recent seasons we've had a fairly decent marquee game at the KP around that time in pre-season.

Again, have you seen how Corberan's teams play, or are you just basing 'tippy tappy' on an assumption? https://breakingthelines.com/tactical-analysis/carlos-corberans-tactical-set-up-at-west-brom This shows you how he literally sets up to counter the likes of Maresca.

Yeah let's set up old school and try not to get beat like Sheff U and Luton... Oh, wait. Fact of the matter is, you can set up however what you like, as long as the team buys into it and you have enough quality, that's what keeps you up. Style of football doesn't come into it - you can play tippy tappy football like Burnley and go down, or you can play more direct football like Sheff and go down. Corberan and Cooper are more or less one and the same, they've both taken on clubs that were struggling and improved them, they both like to employ a more patient, passing, possession based game, but they're both pragmatic in terms of adapting their style to the players they have, they sides they're facing and the situation they're in. It's no wonder we're looking at them. People assuming Corberan is a 'tiki taka' merchant because he's got a foreign sounding name is about as stupid as people thinking Cooper is some old fashioned route one manager because he's British. Every argument in this thread seems to be based on ridiculous assumptions.

Doubt it, sounds like there's just been a bit of wrangling over fee etc.

Because he's done a good job in difficult circumstances at Hudderdfield and West Brom. He plays attractive football, but he's pragmatic, he's worked with minimal wage/transfer budgets and gotten the best out of the players at his disposal. Why do Chelsea think Enzo would be ok in the Premier League? Why did Arsenal think Arteta would be ok in the Premier League? Why are clubs after McKenna when he's had no Premier League experience? Why did Brighton appoint Graham Potter when he'd only had experience in the Championship and in Sweden? Why did Palace appoint Glasner? No PL experience there. Why did Bournemouth appoint Areola? He's not got any PL experience! Spurs must have been mad appointing Postecoglou, no PL experience at all! What were United thinking appointing Ten Hag? He's never managed in the PL.