Paul Ince

[Flynny]

To be fair what have Fulham ever won? and staying in the Premiership is an achievement for them.

Not particularly with Al Fayed behind them, not like it is for other clubs. They're an established side now, and instead of kicking on they're stagnating.

[AyewJoking]

Paul Ince is a big gamble and will Milan really put his "3 year plan" at risk by bringing in a coach with so little experience?

However, I'm so disillusioned with Rob Kelly I'd be willing to give it a go.

I doubt its true. If it is true then it makes you wonder just how stable Milans mind is.

[lookwhaticando]

Chris Coleman who's in danger of getting Fulham relagated and has done fook all?

Or a different one?

Chris Coleman - who's managed over 170 games at Fulham in nearly four years, with a 35% win ratio (in the top flight) and approximately 1.3 points per game (again in the top flight)... or Rob Kelly who's won a similar percentage of his games and has a points per game average around 1.4 and falling - all in the division below Coleman.

Do Fulham under Coleman play shit, uninspiring football each week?

Coleman has managed in the top flight since 2003 and has yet to actually relegate Fulham. Granted they've bricked it from time to time, but it's not like they sit in the bottom four all season then escape at the last minute (like Coventry used to do under Strachan). Coleman, indeed, got the job because he saved Fulham from the slide back into Division One.

Fulham also finished 9th in Coleman's first full season. During that season, Saha was flogged to Man U for a wedge and a half and I can't recall much of that money being reinvested (I'll willingly retract that statement if someone proves it wrong).

Bottom line is, Coleman has done acceptably well in the Premiership - considering he was thrown in at the deep end for his first managerial position. Granted they play dangerously close to the trap door from time to time, but one way or another they survive with time on their side. He's not exactly broken the bank to remain in the league either.

You may not rate him, and that's fine, but I do rate him and I'd take him over just about every other managerial possibility mentioned - even some of the truly fanciful ones!

The bottom line, also... Coleman or Kelly?

No brainer, no?

[Fez of Mahrez]

Chris Coleman - who's managed over 170 games at Fulham in nearly four years, with a 35% win ratio (in the top flight) and approximately 1.3 points per game (again in the top flight)... or Rob Kelly who's won a similar percentage of his games and has a points per game average around 1.4 and falling - all in the division below Coleman.

Do Fulham under Coleman play shit, uninspiring football each week?

Coleman has managed in the top flight since 2003 and has yet to actually relegate Fulham. Granted they've bricked it from time to time, but it's not like they sit in the bottom four all season then escape at the last minute (like Coventry used to do under Strachan). Coleman, indeed, got the job because he saved Fulham from the slide back into Division One.

Fulham also finished 9th in Coleman's first full season. During that season, Saha was flogged to Man U for a wedge and a half and I can't recall much of that money being reinvested (I'll willingly retract that statement if someone proves it wrong).

Bottom line is, Coleman has done acceptably well in the Premiership - considering he was thrown in at the deep end for his first managerial position. Granted they play dangerously close to the trap door from time to time, but one way or another they survive with time on their side. He's not exactly broken the bank to remain in the league either.

You may not rate him, and that's fine, but I do rate him and I'd take him over just about every other managerial possibility mentioned - even some of the truly fanciful ones!

The bottom line, also... Coleman or Kelly?

No brainer, no?

Sounds great. I've seen enough win ratios for one lifetime now.

[Flynny]

Chris Coleman - who's managed over 170 games at Fulham in nearly four years, with a 35% win ratio (in the top flight) and approximately 1.3 points per game (again in the top flight)... or Rob Kelly who's won a similar percentage of his games and has a points per game average around 1.4 and falling - all in the division below Coleman.

Do Fulham under Coleman play shit, uninspiring football each week?

Coleman has managed in the top flight since 2003 and has yet to actually relegate Fulham. Granted they've bricked it from time to time, but it's not like they sit in the bottom four all season then escape at the last minute (like Coventry used to do under Strachan). Coleman, indeed, got the job because he saved Fulham from the slide back into Division One.

Fulham also finished 9th in Coleman's first full season. During that season, Saha was flogged to Man U for a wedge and a half and I can't recall much of that money being reinvested (I'll willingly retract that statement if someone proves it wrong).

Bottom line is, Coleman has done acceptably well in the Premiership - considering he was thrown in at the deep end for his first managerial position. Granted they play dangerously close to the trap door from time to time, but one way or another they survive with time on their side. He's not exactly broken the bank to remain in the league either.

You may not rate him, and that's fine, but I do rate him and I'd take him over just about every other managerial possibility mentioned - even some of the truly fanciful ones!

The bottom line, also... Coleman or Kelly?

No brainer, no?

Coleman's had little money but escaped relagation = good.

Kelly's had no money but escaped relagation (hopefully) = dire?

I'd take most people over Kelly, probably, but it doesn't make Coleman brilliant. And he's not really achieved too much, just been steady, so in what way is he not a gamble like Ince?

[lookwhaticando]

Sounds great. I've seen enough win ratios for one lifetime now.

Just throwing the numbers out there.

Coleman's had little money but escaped relagation = good.

Kelly's had no money but escaped relagation (hopefully) = dire?

I'd take most people over Kelly, probably, but it doesn't make Coleman brilliant. And he's not really achieved too much, just been steady, so in what way is he not a gamble like Ince?

Coleman done it at a higher level.

That's the cut and thrust of it.

A top 10 finish isn't bad for a crap team like Fulham, either.

[Joe.]

I don't think any manager can be judged until they join a club and have a couple of moths settled in personally.

Just look at Dowie for example. We all thought he was shit and he's done a great job so far at Cov.

[potter3]

I don't think any manager can be judged until they join a club and have a couple of moths settled in personally.

Just look at Dowie for example. We all thought he was shit and he's done a great job so far at Cov.

Purple Patch

[lookwhaticando]

Coventry 0-1 QPR

Hmmm? *scratches head*

Shit hot Coventry!

[Hullfox]

I didn't say money didn't matter,

Yes you did.

but someone like Ince, who has played at the top level etc would be more likely to attempt bigger singings, however much money he had available

[Stevosevic]

Yes you did.

he used the word attempt.

[potter3]

Yes you did.

Show me.

[morris1234]

one thing that Ince has over Kelly and that is RESPECT.

he is respected as a player amongst fellow pros and has a reputation as a winner, I would imagine much like Keane at Sunderland that when he speaks fellow footballers sit back, listen and take in what he is saying.

he has always had the mentality of a winner and has been there and done it at the highest level.

and he'd no which players are actually good!

[Hullfox]

Show me.

Get a grown up to show you post number 60

[Blue Bob]

Interesting post.

I do think that Ince would be a hell of a gamble. Points for him

Played at the highest level.

Winning mentality.

Done an OK job at Macclesfield.

Might have some contacts.

Points against:

Only had half a season of experience managing

No experience of spending money

For me the points against him are too much. Half a season managing is not enough experience for a club the size of LCFC. Yes Keane has done it for Sunderland (but he is a one off), if Ince was that good Sunderland would have signed him instead of Keane - they did not. Keane has other attributes like he scares the shit out of the players, Ince doesn't!!

Look at Peter Taylor good record in the lower leagues but no experience of spending money and he nearly killed our club permanently.

MON had at least a couple of years in the lower leagues before we took him on.

Tony Adams, Ian Rush and many more, great players, winners - crap managers

We have been lucky that MM has bought us and is happy to invest in the club. We have one shot at this we (or should I say MM) cannot gamble with this. It must be a manager with good experience, ideally in getting a club promoted into the premier league, a fighter, a motivator. Good contacts in the business. Experience of spending money and can attract quality.

SO I think this job is a season or two too early for Ince.

I think Kevin Kegan would have this experience as would Bryan Robson.

[potter3]

Get a grown up to show you post number 60

Well done, you've mastered the art of condescension

I meant it in relative terms. If RK had £1'000'000 to spend he'd proabably spend it on players he knows are available, or ones that would command less of a fee, because then he hasn't spent all his money. Whereas Ince, may attempt to sing Alan Smith, as he is confident he may have a chance. If they both had £4 millions RK would collect decentish players from the lower diviosns that don't cost as much, but Ince would look for good players in the Premiership that may have fallen out of favour (eg. Earnshaw to Norwich)

[Hullfox]

Well done, you've mastered the art of condescension

I meant it in relative terms. If RK had £1'000'000 to spend he'd proabably spend it on players he knows are available, or ones that would command less of a fee, because then he hasn't spent all his money. Whereas Ince, may attempt to sing Alan Smith, as he is confident he may have a chance. If they both had £4 millions RK would collect decentish players from the lower diviosns that don't cost as much, but Ince would look for good players in the Premiership that may have fallen out of favour (eg. Earnshaw to Norwich)

You cannot prove any of that.

Maybe your first point yes but the rest is complete hypothesising.

[Mort]

...RK would collect decentish players from the lower diviosns that don't cost as much...

Newton, Yeates, Glombard, Jarret, Horsefield, Low, Johnson....

[brookfox]

Newton, Yeates, Glombard, Low

Good old Rob, can't spot a decent right winger can he?!

[Filbert_Ross]

You've read that wrong, these managers you've mentioned are not good enough, and they never were. You're talking about peoples perceptions of managers. just because people hailed Levein as thye new MON, it doesn't mean he was good at first and became bad, it's just that more and more people turned on him. MON wasn't exactly liked in his first few games (apparently, I wouldn't have noticed as I was 5 when he was appointed) but he was good, and he showed it.

i feel old now.

[Mort]

Good old Rob, can't spot a decent right winger can he?!

Does have an eye for "smashing lads" though

[Bryn]

I think Kevin Kegan would have this experience as would Bryan Robson.

Why the fook is Bryan Robson's name anything like linked to our job? He is dire. He is in fact the epitomisation of what you're talking about - great player, bags of experience, but utterly wank manager. He couldn't manage to find his arse with both hands, let alone manage a football club. The WBA fans HATED him, he was utterly useless. People like you annoy the fook out me via sheer wrongness.

I'm gonna come out and say this now. If you think Bryan Robson is anything but useless, you're an idiot.

I agree with the rest of what you said though.

[Jay]

Why the fook is Bryan Robson's name anything like linked to our job? He is dire. He is in fact the epitomisation of what you're talking about - great player, bags of experience, but utterly wank manager. He couldn't manage to find his arse with both hands, let alone manage a football club. The WBA fans HATED him, he was utterly useless. People like you annoy the fook out me via sheer wrongness.

I'm gonna come out and say this now. If you think Bryan Robson is anything but useless, you're an idiot.

I agree with the rest of what you said though.

lets not forget Boro either where he managed to spend about £40million had an insane wage bill and still managed to turn the team into a pile of crap!!

how he keeps getting put forward for jobs is beyond me!!

[Flynny]

Why the fook is Bryan Robson's name anything like linked to our job? He is dire. He is in fact the epitomisation of what you're talking about - great player, bags of experience, but utterly wank manager. He couldn't manage to find his arse with both hands, let alone manage a football club. The WBA fans HATED him, he was utterly useless. People like you annoy the fook out me via sheer wrongness.

I'm gonna come out and say this now. If you think Bryan Robson is anything but useless, you're an idiot.

Well said. Souness is similar, though he's done 2 good jobs and 5 crap ones, unlike Robson who's done two sub-par jobs and a crap one.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Well said. Souness is similar, though he's done 2 good jobs and 5 crap ones, unlike Robson who's done two sub-par jobs and a crap one.

Exactly. Peter Reid is another one.