Happy Fox Posted 31 October 2011 Author Posted 31 October 2011 Mark Hughes is the only one I want as manger he will get this team promoted whether it is this season or next, Lee Clark would be a huge gamble not saying he couldn't make the step up, but prefer the experience of Mark Hughes.
Poakey Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 The level of delusion on this forum is breath taking. Seriously, turning your nose up at a manager like Mark Hughes?? :dunno: I know what you mean, some of the statement's i see on here are hilarious but the people writing them are deadly serious.
B52 Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 The level of delusion on this forum is breath taking. Seriously, turning your nose up at a manager like Mark Hughes?? :dunno: Talking about delusion. I can see only one turning his nose up and thats me. I thought he was a failure at Man City because of the players and how he handled the hot spot. Talking about Fulham and Wales isn't the same ..... But some people is satisfied with mediocracity. How much truth was it in the documentary with Robson and foreign owners looking for some sheep cash.
BIEREDeLuxe Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Talking about delusion. I can see only one turning his nose up and thats me. I thought he was a failure at Man City because of the players and how he handled the hot spot. Talking about Fulham and Wales isn't the same ..... But some people is satisfied with mediocracity. How much truth was it in the documentary with Robson and foreign owners looking for some sheep cash. You simply cannot compare LCFC and Manchester City, get real! They are in different stratospheres and probably always will be! The club you maybe can compare LCFC to is Fulham. Sparky did a really good job at Fulham, yay or nay? And his leaving can be excused - I can't imagine Al Fayed being the easiest chairman to work for. Jeez, this is the bloke who has a massive statue of Wacko Jacko outside the ground.
Matt Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 You simply cannot compare LCFC and Manchester City, get real! I agree, we're MUCH bigger than Man City! Or so some people would seriously like to believe.
seenitall Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 You simply cannot compare LCFC and Manchester City, get real! They are in different stratospheres and probably always will be! The club you maybe can compare LCFC to is Fulham. Sparky did a really good job at Fulham, yay or nay? And his leaving can be excused - I can't imagine Al Fayed being the easiest chairman to work for. Jeez, this is the bloke who has a massive statue of Wacko Jacko outside the ground. I know they're only facts but his win rate was 32% at Fulham - which is crap
darko2k7 Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 You simply cannot compare LCFC and Manchester City, get real! They are in different stratospheres and probably always will be! The club you maybe can compare LCFC to is Fulham. Sparky did a really good job at Fulham, yay or nay? And his leaving can be excused - I can't imagine Al Fayed being the easiest chairman to work for. Jeez, this is the bloke who has a massive statue of Wacko Jacko outside the ground. Just what I was about to post. I really do wonder sometimes if we are better off with all this money or not. I mean sure the excitement getting this star player or that star player and money and increased fame of our club is unreal, but if all that as turned alot of people in such a short time into delusional fans that think we are as big as man city and Mark Hughes is to small time for LCFC then is this money really making us a better happier club, Im not so sure anymore.
B52 Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 The club you maybe can compare LCFC to is Fulham. Seriously, comparing us with Fulham. They scraped together 5000 fans not long ago and now they have similar attendances as we have in a lower league. I think you have a very own statue of Fergie, Bie Red de luxe, and planning one for your dear Sparky.
Guest Col city fan Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 We've spent loads and we're not even in the top half of the table. The players have still got to perform, and there are players there now who were there during Hughes reign that are now sitting top of the premier league. Bert... Any news yet? I thought there might be something by now?
BIEREDeLuxe Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Seriously, comparing us with Fulham. They scraped together 5000 fans not long ago and now they have similar attendances as we have in a lower league. I think you have a very own statue of Fergie, Bie Red de luxe, and planning one for your dear Sparky. OK, go ahead and compare yourself to Man City but it will all end in tears.
He's not bald Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 I don't want Mark Hughes here but it's not because I don't think he's good enough or he's not a big enough name of course he his or he would'nt have managed Wales, Fulham or Man City that's obvious, it's just that I don't think he's the right manager for the job that needs doing now, I can't even say why tbh, under different circumstances he would be a fantastic appointment!
Babylon Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 I can't even say why tbh How can you say he's not if you don't know why?
Ric Flair Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 I don't want Mark Hughes here but it's not because I don't think he's good enough or he's not a big enough name of course he his or he would'nt have managed Wales, Fulham or Man City that's obvious, it's just that I don't think he's the right manager for the job that needs doing now, I can't even say why tbh, under different circumstances he would be a fantastic appointment! Hahaha how perculiar.
seenitall Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 And Sven's never wasted money on a player in his career? Fergie once spent God knows what on Veron, does that make him a bad manager? There's probably not a manager in the world who hasn't wasted money when they've had a lot to spend. And as for the Elano point, Hughes turned David Bentley into one of the best Midfielders in the Premier League. Who's to say he couldn't do the same, at Championship level, with Beckford? So Sven was alright then?
Corky Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 I know they're only facts but his win rate was 32% at Fulham - which is crap 55% of the league finished below him last season.
David Guiza Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Well I didn't really agree with the sacking, Sven wasn't amazing but he wasn't shocking either. But it's happened now so the King is dead long live the King. I just don't understand why so many people are slating Mark Hughes as if he's never done anything with his managerial career.
Number 6 Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Hughes' managerial stats stack up but the way he left Fulham made him look rather foolish. I'd be worried that he may not be here for the long haul and if something else comes up he'll be off.
Callabinho Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Hughes was a failure at Man City...... You don't get rid of Sven to get a worse manager. But he maybe fits the championship manager role. Excuse me?
Spudulike Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Come on Top for gawds sake....give Mark Hughes the job NOW !!!
pSinatra Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 Hughes' managerial stats stack up but the way he left Fulham made him look rather foolish. I'd be worried that he may not be here for the long haul and if something else comes up he'll be off. Anyone who proves themselves to be a decent manager will do exactly that. As much as I love Leicester, we are only Leicester. MON, Little, McGhee walked out on us for 'bigger' clubs & it will happen again. That may well be what Hughes would do, but the same could be said of any of the candidates. If we can get a decent manager in & he can prove to be successful..............I hope we can keep him for a good few years.
Tielemans63 Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 (Sorry if was posted earlier) The Merc are suggesting that Hughes' people are trying to push through a deal with the owners. That would suggest to me they he's more keen on us than we are on him. I still think, aside from MON, Hughes is far and away the best candidate for the job.
Guest Col city fan Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 (Sorry if was posted earlier) The Merc are suggesting that Hughes' people are trying to push through a deal with the owners. That would suggest to me they he's more keen on us than we are on him. I still think, aside from MON, Hughes is far and away the best candidate for the job. would be my choice Paddy...
Spudulike Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 (Sorry if was posted earlier) The Merc are suggesting that Hughes' people are trying to push through a deal with the owners. That would suggest to me they he's more keen on us than we are on him. I still think, aside from MON, Hughes is far and away the best candidate for the job.
inckley fox Posted 31 October 2011 Posted 31 October 2011 I'd have thought the Sven era would have taught us that a glittering CV isn't all it's cracked up to be. Especially not when the applicant is at retirement age and his last success was 10 years ago, in a different league. A few things we all need to accept- a Sven didn't do a good job. Maybe he would have gone on to, but in the time given he was a failure. b His record is intimidating, but his credentials to manage at this level were never that good. If you want to employ a Maths teacher then you wouldn't give the job to a 63-year-old French teacher, not even if he was the best French teacher in town. Or had been some ten years ago. c Quite a few of the candidates may well do fine at this level, with these resources. It's not that hard to imagine Keane, Davies, Keegan, Hughes, Clark, Curbishley etc. doing a job. Some are better qualified than others, obviously. d The board want a name and experience of success at this level. That seems to exclude Clark for one reason and Hughes for another. O'Neill and Keegan fit the bill better. e If all these guys in the know (Bert etc.) really are in the know, it suggests that they're being deliberately given misinformation. If the club is smokescreening, then why? You'd guess that means the cogs are in motion and have been for some time. Or, that we know even less than we think we do. Which is about nothing. f There's still no out-and-out denial on O'Neill. Why don't the board give this, seeing as there'll be disappointment at almost any other appointment, including Hughes? Something certainly seems to be going on already. If Hughes or Clark get the job I'd be surprised, and it would suggest the board have failed to meet their own criteria AND failed to handle the PR properly.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.