Rusko187 Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 I don't want a been around the block and done nothing for years aged manager. This is the man we need, if we can't get the German Klopp let's get the French one. http://www.espnfc.co.uk/blog/espn-fc-united-blog/68/post/2291796/jocelyn-gourvennec-guingamps-answer-to-jurgen-klopp Sometimes that may be our only option, we are not a top 4 club.. this Gourvennec looks exciting but it's if he wants to move too. I'm starting to think that maybe it will end up coming down to Cotterill and Lennon. Think we need to have a reality check, we aren't getting Klopp, Mourinho, Guardiola and whoever else you want to throw in that mix. We have a chance to take Ranieri who did a fantastic job at a number of clubs. Get him in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 I don't think anyone is suggesting that a potential replacement for the manager IF he happens to leave should be in the directors box for a match involving said manager. That's not planning for the future, that's trying to push a manager out. If you're sacking someone at the time we sacked Pearson you better be damn sure you have a favoured replacement and that this person will join you. As it happens, whatever the process, it's clear we've sacked a manager without a good enough plan to ensure a) we have an upgrade as 1st choice and b) the first choice is interested. That is poor going. It's time people stopped defending the owners no matter how farcical their decisions are. You're working on the assumption that the owners were always planning to sack Pearson and it wasn't the result of an unforseen incident. If Pearson had gone at the end of the season then most people would have assumed Mark Warburton would have got the job. That's not possible now as he has a job which just proves you can make all the targets you like but circumstances willoften make them irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesWelshFox Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Dodged a bullet with Hiddink. Klopp would be a stunning capture, but being realistic I would be happy with Lennon. He has solid managerial experience under his belt, and still has the fire and drive to want to make a success of himself as a manager. Afterall, he will have learnt much of what he knows of management from O'Neill possibly the best manager we ever had. If it is Lennon, I think he may surprise a few on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 That's not possible now as he has a job which just proves you can make all the targets you like but circumstances willoften make them irrelevant. So what, you'd rather us just not bother? Whether they come or not it saves valuable time. Your manager will leave for one reason or another, that's guaranteed. To check out candidates regularly means you are a step ahead of the game. It can save time and it means your selection process could be exceptionally thorough, rather than rushing it in a few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramboacdc Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 has this been linked yet? http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Leicester-City-rumours-Guus-Hiddink-uninterested/story-26861497-detail/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitchandro Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 You're working on the assumption that the owners were always planning to sack Pearson and it wasn't the result of an unforseen incident. If Pearson had gone at the end of the season then most people would have assumed Mark Warburton would have got the job. That's not possible now as he has a job which just proves you can make all the targets you like but circumstances willoften make them irrelevant. But this is just a useless excuse that really means nothing to me. Whatever the 'incident' (and it's only speculation that there was an unforseen incident, with barely even any real rumours of one let alone concrete evidence) they made the decision to sack him. That was their decision, no one else's. It's their responsibility to make sure they made the right appointment and preferably in good time. It's fairly clear they haven't organised things well enough. None of the reasoning for this will mean anything if we don't do well next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Prussian Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 So what, you'd rather us just not bother? Whether they come or not it saves valuable time. Your manager will leave for one reason or another, that's guaranteed. To check out candidates regularly means you are a step ahead of the game. It can save time and it means your selection process could be exceptionally thorough, rather than rushing it in a few weeks. It's also a bit mind-boggling that following the first sacking in February, a decision that was then reversed shortly after, you'd think that the owners must've made their minds up as early as late last year about possible replacements. Where is/was that shortlist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettsj2 Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 It's better that they are taking time over the appointment to get it right. Its quite obvious the sacking wasnt planned so the process of finding a new man started the day after. All this, 'they sacked him without anyone lined up' well yeah and so what? Whatever has occured (lets not speculate as we still dont know anything) that resulted in Pearsons sacking meant that he couldnt continue. If they wanted him sacked, it could not be the case that they left him in situ, allowed him to take training, have input on transfers stringing him along until they find someone else. This is the only way it could be done and please dont say, 'should have just kept Pearson then'. In the owners eyes he had to go. When we learn of the reasons i'm sure some will disagree and some will agree but he's gone. They need to find the right man. If that takes a month rather than a week, fine. Lets not hark on about it putting us at risk of relegtion if someone isnt appointed now. We saw last season that you can be in danger of relegation right to the last and get out of it. The owners seem to be looking at not just managers but managerial structure too. This suggests longer term thinking and not the quick fix approach that some people seem to be suggesting they're searching for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeman's Wharfer Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 O'Neill as 'supervisor' with Lennon as coach? Has it been suggested yet?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 So what, you'd rather us just not bother? Whether they come or not it saves valuable time. Your manager will leave for one reason or another, that's guaranteed. To check out candidates regularly means you are a step ahead of the game. It can save time and it means your selection process could be exceptionally thorough, rather than rushing it in a few weeks. No, I'm not saying that and for all we know our club has a list of candidates themselves. What im saying is having targets is no guarantee of landing one of them. Also, its been just over a week, if we still haven't got a manager in August then maybe we should panic, until then lets just see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos88LCFC Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 It's better that they are taking time over the appointment to get it right. Its quite obvious the sacking wasnt planned so the process of finding a new man started the day after. All this, 'they sacked him without anyone lined up' well yeah and so what? Whatever has occured (lets not speculate as we still dont know anything) that resulted in Pearsons sacking meant that he couldnt continue. If they wanted him sacked, it could not be the case that they left him in situ, allowed him to take training, have input on transfers stringing him along until they find someone else. This is the only way it could be done and please dont say, 'should have just kept Pearson then'. In the owners eyes he had to go. When we learn of the reasons i'm sure some will disagree and some will agree but he's gone. They need to find the right man. If that takes a month rather than a week, fine. Lets not hark on about it putting us at risk of relegtion if someone isnt appointed now. We saw last season that you can be in danger of relegation right to the last and get out of it. The owners seem to be looking at not just managers but managerial structure too. This suggests longer term thinking and not the quick fix approach that some people seem to be suggesting they're searching for. I am of the opinion of if they sacked him earlier on into last season and re-instated him, they should have candidates lined up as his job was always going to be on the line. Its a case of 'the straw that broke the camels back'... He is a manager that is very outspoken and doesn't really care what other people think of him. In the owners eyes it should have been clear that eventually he would be gone due to his actions... So they should have thought of who might replace him and not leave it until last minute when they sacked him. But I don't own a billion dollar company, probably never will, so I will just let the owners get on with it. Just think it would of been logical to have targets in place before the inevitable happened. The owners do keep their cards close to their chests, who's to know what is REALLY going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merging Cultures Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 You're working on the assumption that the owners were always planning to sack Pearson and it wasn't the result of an unforseen incident. If Pearson had gone at the end of the season then most people would have assumed Mark Warburton would have got the job. That's not possible now as he has a job which just proves you can make all the targets you like but circumstances willoften make them irrelevant. To be fair, they did 'sack' him once already this season and he was clearly on a final warning. So they could have been ready just in case he did mess up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhysm Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 So what, you'd rather us just not bother? Whether they come or not it saves valuable time. Your manager will leave for one reason or another, that's guaranteed. To check out candidates regularly means you are a step ahead of the game. It can save time and it means your selection process could be exceptionally thorough, rather than rushing it in a few weeks. Surprises me too. I read somewhere that the Director of Football should have 5/6/7 options in place at all times for each position including manager. They should know their availability and whether they might be able to lure them in by liaising with agents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston. Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Lennon seems to want the job and also Ranieri , they have not been my first choice , Hiddink was but i say give it to someone who wants the job and lets move on . Jesus wept. I want the job. Lump on @40/1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benpicko Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 I don't want a been around the block and done nothing for years aged manager. This is the man we need, if we can't get the German Klopp let's get the French one. http://www.espnfc.co.uk/blog/espn-fc-united-blog/68/post/2291796/jocelyn-gourvennec-guingamps-answer-to-jurgen-klopp If the people in charge of the appointment are so desperate to get Hiddink that they actually not only approached him but offered him some supervisor role, then I'm imagining the people in charge haven't heard of Gourvennec at all let alone approached him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox123 Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 If were talking of Hiddink in a supervisory role, I think I'd rather Kevin Phillips be his under study than Lennon. Least it would keep some sort of structure and Phillips knows what got the best out of the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royston. Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 lets offer it to fergie, if he doesnt fancy, tell him he can work from home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPH Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Of course, you're right. But this isn't just "life", it's football, a world following a certain set of rules - and you can overcomplicate it all by not planning ahead early enough. Which to me seems to be the case here. You cant always plan ahead.. you just don't know what was said between the Thais and Pearson... for example, If i had gone to be my boss and called him f this and f that, i could expect to be out of a job immediately.... Wether thay had a replacement lined up or not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchsntf Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 O'Neill as 'supervisor' with Lennon as coach? Has it been suggested yet?! yup, said from the outset that from the so called 1st list, that the call of Mon and Lennon, but not alone, these 2 were the only candidates worth a mention.Mind you so far the list hasnt had many that would interest a coal miners daughter, let alone a club with ambitious dreams not avoiding the drop but one that really wants to be kicking on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cc_star Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 They thought they'd be able to get Hiddink & after feelers have gone out, he doesn't fancy us, or the challenge he fancies retirement... unless some no mark international job come up... What price Hiddink for Azerbaijan or similar? Shambles, indefensible too - watching people try is my new pastime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 To be fair, they did 'sack' him once already this season and he was clearly on a final warning. So they could have been ready just in case he did mess up again. We dont know that the owners don't have a list of candidates who they are approaching as we speak and as I've already said it's been just over a week. If Pearson had resigned because he'd found out the owners had a list of replacements the people on here complaining that the owners haven't planned would be accusing the owners of treachery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thybluefox Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Hiddink in a supervisory role? Cambiasso under him? Cotterill in to make the tea and Lennon to tickle Estebans balls? For the love of god can't we just get one manager in? What's the obsession with trying to assemble some kind of crack team of football 'experts'? Football management by committee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Prussian Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 We dont know that the owners don't have a list of candidates who they are approaching as we speak and as I've already said it's been just over a week. If Pearson had resigned because he'd found out the owners had a list of replacements the people on here complaining that the owners haven't planned would be accusing the owners of treachery. He would have known as early as February (if not earlier) that he was walking on thin ice from an owner's perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Hiddink in a supervisory role? Cambiasso under him? Cotterill in to make the tea and Lennon to tickle Estebans balls? For the love of god can't we just get one manager in? What's the obsession with trying to assemble some kind of crack team of football 'experts'? Football management by committee? Well clearly somebody has forgotton the days of Frank Burrows and Gerry Taggart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bettsj2 Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Well clearly somebody has forgotton the days of Frank Burrows and Gerry Taggart. That flat cap and moustache combo that Burrows had was fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.