Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Damo70 on June 02, 2011, 05:46:37 PM
-
Says he has not been approached by another club and has not been influenced by outside parties but wishes to further his footballing career and experience.
-
Yeah, just got up and saw it. Delighted, my number one choice.
Could be going somewhere else though I suppose. Roma?
-
Poo
-
Chelsea bound.
-
Ball bags,just spent the afternoon daydreaming about Ancelotti.
-
So it's Mark Hughes then. Let's get behind him IF he is the choice. Hopefully he can persuade Downing to stay (and possiblt Ash?)
-
Looks like we have our man. I think he'll do well. He's not the man to get us top 4, but I don't think anyone capable enough on our budget wouuld come here.
I think he'll sort us out and perhaps even get the best out of Ireland.
I'm not blown away, but I'm not disappointed either.
-
You'd have to think it's going to be Hughes for us, then. I'll be very pleased, if that's how it works out. I think he might just be the very thing for us, and us the very thing for him (for reasons I waffled on about in another thread somewhere!) - more so than Ancelotti, in my opinion.
-
Like finding out you have won the lottery, then finding out it's only a tenna - average appointment, if it is him. Well, after all these years no more ST for me.
-
Could be worse. Could be better.
Meh.
-
Underwhelmed in the extreme if it is.
-
That's the point, if it could be better then why not???
-
Fair to say they're not taking it too well on the Fulham forums. But "hope he gets AIDS" is out of order. Mind you, that is from someone calling himself Matthew Simmons. Thought he was a Palace fan.
http://cc.fulhamfc.com/forum/topics/mark-hughes-you-dirty-fking
ETA: he's since modified his post
-
Tell you what, though, as soon as they get it priced up, I'm going on MON for Fulham.
-
I'd feel a bit better about it if O'Neill went to Fulham.
-
I think its a good move he has worked with Ireland, Dunne before he wont stand any rubbish from the players and hopefully he can bring Hangeeland with him
-
Like finding out you have won the lottery, then finding out it's only a tenna - average appointment, if it is him. Well, after all these years no more ST for me.
If it IS him, give him a chance. Support the Club NOT THE MAN!!!!
-
Somewhat underwhelmed I'm afraid.
It's my own fault, I really thought we could get Ancelotti.
Oh well.
-
Me too, I want Carlo and I'm going to scream till he arrives
-
Mon will go to fulham, you can certainly bet on that.
I think Hughes will do a good job here and be around for a few years, I expect Ireland and warnock will be on the champers tonight-a good solid appointment and I look forward to next season with excitement.
-
This is not the right appointment. The club showed signs of moving forward and improving our network for player recruitment under Houllier though I'd admit it hadn't showed on the pitch. I hope I'm wrong but I don't really want a load of welsh hoofers like Savage and Reid down the Villa. Anyway hasn't happened yet so ITSOTP.
-
Like finding out you have won the lottery, then finding out it's only a tenna - average appointment, if it is him. Well, after all these years no more ST for me.
If it IS him, give him a chance. Support the Club NOT THE MAN!!!!
Why should I give him a chance, I didn't want him. I cannot just keep paying up to go regardless. After the inept choice of GH and now the very average choice of Mark Hughes, I have decided not to re-new......my choice (if it is him).
-
Like finding out you have won the lottery, then finding out it's only a tenna - average appointment, if it is him. Well, after all these years no more ST for me.
You will be back db when you see how good a job he is doing!
If it IS him, give him a chance. Support the Club NOT THE MAN!!!!
Why should I give him a chance, I didn't want him. I cannot just keep paying up to go regardless. After the inept choice of GH and now the very average choice of Mark Hughes, I have decided not to re-new......my choice (if it is him).
-
You will be back when you see how well he is doing.
-
If Hughes gets the job the first thing he should do is fuck Ireland off, never mind give the idle bastard anymore time in a Villa shirt.
The departure of GH may make people think twice about not renewing, but if Hughes comes I don't believe it will spark a boom in new sales.
-
Randy's not very good at this choosing manager lark is he?
-
Way better than last seasons manager , players play for him - he's well respected in the game - all in all, a great prospect imo
-
Like finding out you have won the lottery, then finding out it's only a tenna - average appointment, if it is him. Well, after all these years no more ST for me.
You will be back db when you see how good a job he is doing!
If it IS him, give him a chance. Support the Club NOT THE MAN!!!!
Why should I give him a chance, I didn't want him. I cannot just keep paying up to go regardless. After the inept choice of GH and now the very average choice of Mark Hughes, I have decided not to re-new......my choice (if it is him).
If he he does do well then great, but right now it's a very un-inspiring appointment and that is all I have to go at this point in time.
-
If Hughes gets the job the first thing he should do is fuck Ireland off, never mind give the idle bastard anymore time in a Villa shirt.
The departure of GH may make people think twice about not renewing, but if Hughes comes I don't believe it will spark a boom in new sales.
Sparky Hughes? Spark a boom?
-
"Mark Hughes claret and blue army" doesn't rhyme so will we go with "Mark Hughes'es claret and blue army"? I couldn't bring myself to call him S P A R K Y, I've always hated him. OH well. Hughes it is.
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
-
Was hoping for Ancellotti, but looks like it's Hughes now.
-
Randy's not very good at this choosing manager lark is he?
All a matter of opinion, obviously. He chose a mug last September when there were only mugs available. The other two have been good.
-
The situation of the new manager is very uncertian and complicated now.
On one side, Mark Hughes has quitted Fulham.
On the other side, he declared that he hasn't been approached by any other club and that he wants to do a new experience.
AVFC declared that they have not contacted the Welsh.
(http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/3162/anonimok.jpg)
Que sera sera, whatever will be, will be. . .
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
I agree.
-
Randy's not very good at this choosing manager lark is he?
If he gets Hughes, I reckon he's doing pretty well to be honest.
-
:( disappointing if it happens but will have to get behind him don't want another season like last one
-
What an underwhelming appointment. Far better choices were available on a free...and we end up with him. Mid table here we come.
-
We haven't appointed him yet.
-
Hughes contract clause has been activated, but according to Fulham sites he is staying until end June. The plot thickens.
-
Ah bollocks.
I'm not sure that I see the fact that he can work with Dunne, Warnock and Ireland is a good thing. I couldn't wait till the end of the season to see the back of that 3. I have never seen 3 players twho care less about the club.
Not very inspiring at all. Couldn't we please go for someone to create a bit of excitement. Footbal costs a fortune, it has been turned into an entertainment business and Villa go for Mark Hughes.
Didn't have a season ticket this season as live in London but went to about 10 games. This potential appointment isn't giving me a nudge to keep that up. Top players leaving, uninspiring manager. Bullshit. Would have preferred to keep Gerard.
-
Bellamy to be one of his signings we think? The sad thing is, cnut as he is, he'd actually do well for a year or two here. Sparky gets the best out of him. He was superb for City under Hughes. As soon as Hughes is confirmed I'm putting a fiver on Bellend joining us before the window shuts.
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
I agree.
My gut feeling as well. Any odds anywhere on it not being Hughes?
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
I agree.
Based on ? Don't get my hopes up!
-
Somewhat underwhelmed I'm afraid.
It's my own fault, I really thought we could get Ancelotti.
Oh well.
This
Cheerio Stuart -
underwhelmed in the extreme, Ancelotti / Wilkins could have made us so much more attractive - Hughes will keep us nicely in mid table, nothing appointment for me
Onwards and upwards though - not like I can support another team!!
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
I agree.
Based on ? Don't get my hopes up!
Based on Hughes is still Fulham manager until the 30th of June.
-
Randy's not very good at this choosing manager lark is he?
If he gets Hughes, I reckon he's doing pretty well to be honest.
So do I. I think Mark Hughes could do very well at Villa. But as other people have said nothing is definite. I have no 'sneaky feelings' either way.
Hughes to Chelsea and Ancelotti to Villa?
-
I think he will do well here he his a winner and a battler and the players wont mess with him and he has that fire in his belly on the touchline which says he cares about football.
-
I had already decided not to renew on financial and personal grounds, but I am not swayed at all to re consider by Hughes becoming the manager. It just makes me very sad that we have wasted such an important managerial appointment.
-
If Avramovich knew what he was doing then Hughes would be next Chelsea boss, thankfully for us he doesn't so we could benefit from that oversight.
Hughes will be a top manager, of that I am convinced.
Let's get him.
-
If it is Hughes i will be pleased with that,couldnt ever see Ancelloti coming here!
-
He hasn't even joined us yet and people have written him off. Let's calm down, chaps
-
Just seen a villa fan on SSN outside the club shop saying we should have gone for Mourinho.......
Bless him.
-
Fulham fans on TalkSport insisting Villa aren't a bigger proposition than Fulham.
I know we all think our club is the greatest, but, reallly .... Fulham?
-
Not disappointed at all if it is him. He's a good manager in my opinion. Can't understand the negativity at all.
-
Really really depressing news if he comes here. Predictable, safe, dull appointment.
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
I agree.
Based on ? Don't get my hopes up!
Based on Hughes is still Fulham manager until the 30th of June.
So we have to wait til the end of June to have it confirmed?
-
Just seen a villa fan on SSN outside the club shop saying we should have gone for Mourinho.......
Bless him.
Not guilty.
-
What is interesting is looking at the Fulham message boards, seeing the general lack of excitement at the thought of MON
-
SSN are tipping him for Villa or maybe Chelsea (not rocket science seeing as both need a manager). If you like a bet I've checked it out and the best price you will get for him to be the next Chelsea manager is 25/1. Next Villa manager? - 1/5 (1/10 with most firms).
-
I suppose, although I expect he would still be able to, ah, direct transfer policy. When doe Pre-season training start?
-
So we have to wait til the end of June to have it confirmed?
Can't see them enforcing that. It would fuck up their pre-season.
-
I suppose, although I expect he would still be able to, ah, direct transfer policy. When doe Pre-season training start?
Early July ish..........
-
Mark Hughes Claret and Blue Army don't sound right either.
Come on Randy, you could have done better than this.
-
So we have to wait til the end of June to have it confirmed?
Can't see them enforcing that. It would fuck up their pre-season.
Fulham play a EL qualifier on June 30th.
That'd be interesting
-
I had already decided not to renew on financial and personal grounds, but I am not swayed at all to re consider by Hughes becoming the manager. It just makes me very sad that we have wasted such an important managerial appointment.
Ozzjim - Out of interest, would you renew if Ancelotti were appointed ?
-
Mark Hughes Claret and Blue Army don't sound right either.
Come on Randy, you could have done better than this.
The most accurate post of the year.
-
Of course he won't be at fulham until 30 June- they will appoint a new manager long before then , Hughes is free to talk to who the he'll he likes and phil Thompson said last night on sky news he expected Hughes to be villa manager within 48 hrs, and thommo had spoken to houllier the day before .
-
It could have been worse, it could have been Steve McLaren, I am still hoping for a late Carlo bid.
-
It's all a bit "meh" to me. I'll support him if he is hired but wouldn't be too upset if he went somewhere else while we appoint Ancellotti instead.
-
You'd have to think it's going to be Hughes for us, then. I'll be very pleased, if that's how it works out. I think he might just be the very thing for us, and us the very thing for him (for reasons I waffled on about in another thread somewhere!) - more so than Ancelotti, in my opinion.
Same here. Delighted if it's Hughes, some people on here really need to give themselves a shake. Hughes has more potential than any of the other names mentioned.
-
Same here. Delighted if it's Hughes, some people on here really need to give themselves a shake. Hughes has more potential than any of the other names mentioned.
And fewer accomplishments.
-
Anyone who can make Sidwell look good has to have something. He also signed (by far) the best centre-half in the country, Kompany.
I understand what some have posted about wanting to see the back of Dunne, Warnock and Ireland, but I'm of the opinion that he won't take any shit from the likes of them.
-
Same here. Delighted if it's Hughes, some people on here really need to give themselves a shake. Hughes has more potential than any of the other names mentioned.
And fewer accomplishments.
Lets's get Gerrard Houllier then, erm, oh er, sorry.
-
Same here. Delighted if it's Hughes, some people on here really need to give themselves a shake. Hughes has more potential than any of the other names mentioned.
And fewer accomplishments.
Who had the best CV of any Villa manager, ever? Wasn't that clown from last season was it?
-
It was Hughes who sold dunne- I think he will get the best from Ireland and warnock though which will save us a few million.
-
Being a complete anorak when it comes to reading football autobiographies my gripe with GH was the negativity from his former players. Hughes is the opposite. I've never heard anything but comments of respect and admiration. Fulham fans are gutted, even City fans with their new expectations were gutted. Blackburn fans would have him back tomorrow. The Welsh FA would give anything to have him back. Instead of their qualifying campaigns being over after three games he took it to the last game or two and put bums on seats in the Millenium stadium. I despise Man Ure and Fergie but a bit of that winning mentality/bad loser that has obviously rubbed off on him will do for me. As for looking forward to mid-table mediocracy, i'm backing a bloke that gets Fulham to 8th and Blackburn to 7th to take Villa higher than sixth.
-
Who had the best CV of any Villa manager, ever? Wasn't that clown from last season was it?
Be that as it may, Hughes has less on his CV than most, if not all, of those who are available now.
-
Houllier was no clown and you should be grateful for him being able to get Bent in when he did.
In response to the question of renewing, I would be seriously looking into the villa easy payment plan if Ancelotti came in.
-
The thing is Guardiola is free at the end of next season, I could see Chelsea giving Hughes the job and then dump him next year for Pep.
-
Being a complete anorak when it comes to reading football autobiographies my gripe with GH was the negativity from his former players. Hughes is the opposite. I've never heard anything but comments of respect and admiration. Fulham fans are gutted, even City fans with their new expectations were gutted. Blackburn fans would have him back tomorrow. The Welsh FA would give anything to have him back. Instead of their qualifying campaigns being over after three games he took it to the last game or two and put bums on seats in the Millenium stadium. I despise Man Ure and Fergie but a bit of that winning mentality/bad loser that has obviously rubbed off on him will do for me. As for looking forward to mid-table mediocracy, i'm backing a bloke that gets Fulham to 8th and Blackburn to 7th to take Villa higher than sixth.
You're just about spot on.
-
Being a complete anorak when it comes to reading football autobiographies my gripe with GH was the negativity from his former players. Hughes is the opposite. I've never heard anything but comments of respect and admiration. Fulham fans are gutted, even City fans with their new expectations were gutted. Blackburn fans would have him back tomorrow. The Welsh FA would give anything to have him back. Instead of their qualifying campaigns being over after three games he took it to the last game or two and put bums on seats in the Millenium stadium. I despise Man Ure and Fergie but a bit of that winning mentality/bad loser that has obviously rubbed off on him will do for me. As for looking forward to mid-table mediocracy, i'm backing a bloke that gets Fulham to 8th and Blackburn to 7th to take Villa higher than sixth.
THis the Houllier that Gerard and Carragher both say is the best manager they have ever had? What would they know eh.
I really hope he comes in, signs some really exciting players and makes us entertaining and winning, but I think we will be the same as the last 3 years, holding on to tight games and defending like mad men.
I will admit Hangelaand and Dempsey would be nice, the latter replacing Young quite well in a 4-3-3-
-
Houllier was no clown
It takes some doing to be out-performed by Kevin MacDonald and Gary McAlister.
-
Being a complete anorak when it comes to reading football autobiographies my gripe with GH was the negativity from his former players. Hughes is the opposite. I've never heard anything but comments of respect and admiration. Fulham fans are gutted, even City fans with their new expectations were gutted. Blackburn fans would have him back tomorrow. The Welsh FA would give anything to have him back. Instead of their qualifying campaigns being over after three games he took it to the last game or two and put bums on seats in the Millenium stadium. I despise Man Ure and Fergie but a bit of that winning mentality/bad loser that has obviously rubbed off on him will do for me. As for looking forward to mid-table mediocracy, i'm backing a bloke that gets Fulham to 8th and Blackburn to 7th to take Villa higher than sixth.
You're just about spot on.
Absolutely ....
-
Forget Chelsea , hiddinck is on his way there after the weekends internationals, Hughes is our man and he will be a great manager for Aston villa- expect some very good times in the coming years.
-
Being a complete anorak when it comes to reading football autobiographies my gripe with GH was the negativity from his former players. Hughes is the opposite. I've never heard anything but comments of respect and admiration. Fulham fans are gutted, even City fans with their new expectations were gutted. Blackburn fans would have him back tomorrow. The Welsh FA would give anything to have him back. Instead of their qualifying campaigns being over after three games he took it to the last game or two and put bums on seats in the Millenium stadium. I despise Man Ure and Fergie but a bit of that winning mentality/bad loser that has obviously rubbed off on him will do for me. As for looking forward to mid-table mediocracy, i'm backing a bloke that gets Fulham to 8th and Blackburn to 7th to take Villa higher than sixth.
You're just about spot on.
Absolutely ....
Almost. He got Blackburn to 6th (and 7th, granted).
-
If it is Hughes look at the many positives:
Young
Ambitious
PL experience
Point to prove
Played abroad
Managed at an International level
Has improved every club he has managed
Popular with the players he has managed
I'm quite pleased if it is him, more so than Ancelloti who would need to build a team and I'm not sure he would be around long enough to see it through.
UTV
-
Has anyone considered that as a Taff he may fancy the challenge of taking Cardiff to the Premiership ;D
-
If it was to be Hughes we'd have the bonus of being a physical side and finishing bottom of the Fair Play League each year - none of this rolling over anymore
-
Houllier was no clown
It takes some doing to be out-performed by Kevin MacDonald and Gary McAlister.
Or to win the FA Cup, UEFA Cup, and League Cup in one season.
-
Maybe that's why Fulhan topped the fair play league this season...
-
A lot of hype in the Italian media that Carlo will be our man within 48 hours.... No smoke without fire??
Should this come to fruition, I'd be over the moon!!! :D
Could Hughes be off elsewhere? ???
-
If it was to be Hughes we'd have the bonus of being a physical side and finishing bottom of the Fair Play League each year - none of this rolling over anymore
Remind who qualified this year through the fair play league?
-
they came 3rd behind chelsea and blackpool didnt they?
-
Anyone who can make Sidwell look good has to have something.
You're basing this on what exactly? I saw him play for Fulham several times. He re-defined ordinary, Not shit, not good.
Oh, and fwiw I think Hughes is not the best, but a long way from the worst.
-
If it was to be Hughes we'd have the bonus of being a physical side and finishing bottom of the Fair Play League each year - none of this rolling over anymore
Have Fulham not just qualified for the Europa League via Fiarplay? ???
-
If it was to be Hughes we'd have the bonus of being a physical side and finishing bottom of the Fair Play League each year - none of this rolling over anymore
Didn't Fulham just qualify for Europe through the fair play league?
-
A lot of hype in the Italian media that Carlo will be our man within 48 hours.... No smoke without fire??
Should this come to fruition, I'd be over the moon!!! :D
Could Ailsa Stewart be off elsewhere? ???
Sorry to disappoint you but no!
-
A switched on Ireland behind Darren Bent = lots of goals.
Sort the defence out and we'll be very nifty again next season.
-
A switched on Ireland behind Darren Bent = lots of goals.
Sort the defence out and we'll be very nifty again next season.
Agreed and Warnock sorted out.............
-
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CCcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thisislondon.co.uk%2Fstandard-sport%2Ffootball%2Farticle-23955867-carlo-ancelotti-and-mark-hughes-top-aston-villas-wish-list.do&ei=WtTnTfTjKoKDhQfWptirCg&usg=AFQjCNHILrGGZm2gzabNKauP3_A2UTg7bw
dont know how to short link, says carlo or hughes by end of the wee
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
-
Houllier was no clown
It takes some doing to be out-performed by Kevin MacDonald and Gary McAlister.
Or to win the FA Cup, UEFA Cup, and League Cup in one season.
Indeed. Sorry, didn't get the significance of the word 'was' in Ozz's post. Obviously, I meant is a clown.
I wonder how good Fergie will be in ten years time.
-
Hughes is a very good manager. He did a great job with Wales, Blackburn and Fulham, with limited resources, and he was unlucky to get sacked by Man City before he'd had a chance to bed in a hastily assembled new team.
Warnock and Ireland certainly played well for him.
If he is the man, I won't be displeased.
-
I'd say this is more underwhelming than when Houllier took over. If he does come I'll give him a chance.
-
Anyone who can make Sidwell look good has to have something.
You're basing this on what exactly? I saw him play for Fulham several times. He re-defined ordinary, Not shit, not good.
Fair enough. Was just listening to some pundits saying it on Sky. Looked okay at our place this season, better than he was anyway, but I take your point.
-
if hughes comes to the villa, then we are out of the frying pan and into the fire...
if he comes, any optimism i had left dies as we have gone for a mediocre cheapo option...
this is a manager with a 32% win ratio and finished 1 place and 1 point above a very shit villa in a season of complete turmoil for us...
i wont be happy if he is coming in...
-
Almost. He got Blackburn to 6th
Which means he can certainly take Villa to the next stage in my book.
-
Who had the best CV of any Villa manager, ever? Wasn't that clown from last season was it?
Be that as it may, Hughes has less on his CV than most, if not all, of those who are available now.
Hughes' CV as a manager...
Wales - took them to the play-off stage of Euro 2004.
Blackburn - took over a struggling side and in his second season took them to 6th place, followed by 10th, then 7th. Also took them to domestic cup semi-finals in three successive seasons, and to the last 32 of the UEFA Cup. Got the best out of flair players like David Bentley, and Roque Santa Cruz. Ruffled the feathers of people like Mourinho because he didn't send his side out to rolled over by the big boys - in fact Blackburn did to Chelsea what Mourinho later did to Barca with Inter and Real.
City - It's difficult to judge his buys there because you get the impression the big named players like Robinho and Adebayor were "names" brought in by people higher up. However his side played some exciting attacking football and he took City to a first semi-final in donkeys years (but was replaced before they played it) as well as the quarter-finals of the UEFA Cup in his first season. Who's to say he might not have gone on to add trophies to his cv there if he'd been given a fair chance. His record at the time they sacked him was exactly the same as Mancini's was at the same stage last season.
Fulham - they finished in their second best league position ever, and played some really good football.
No trophies, but not a bad cv surely... and I'm sure he's hungry and young enough to improve on it at the right club.
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
-
Has anyone considered that as a Taff he may fancy the challenge of taking Cardiff to the Premiership ;D
No because he is from mid-Wales and hates Cardiff.
-
Isn't his CV very similar to MON's? i.e. takes journeyman players and get's them to perform better and finish 6th - 8th. Does he have that extra quality to take a team above that jus outside level - surely that is what we want next
-
Hughes' CV as a manager...
Wales - took them to the play-off stage of Euro 2004.
Blackburn - took over a struggling side and in his second season took them to 6th place, followed by 10th, then 7th. Also took them to domestic cup semi-finals in three successive seasons, and to the last 32 of the UEFA Cup. Got the best out of flair players like David Bentley, and Roque Santa Cruz. Ruffled the feathers of people like Mourinho because he didn't send his side out to rolled over by the big boys - in fact Blackburn did to Chelsea what Mourinho later did to Barca with Inter and Real.
City - It's difficult to judge his buys there because you get the impression the big named players like Robinho and Adebayor were "names" brought in by people higher up. However his side played some exciting attacking football and he took City to a first semi-final in donkeys years (but was replaced before they played it) as well as the quarter-finals of the UEFA Cup in his first season. Who's to say he might not have gone on to add trophies to his cv there if he'd been given a fair chance. His record at the time they sacked him was exactly the same as Mancini's was at the same stage last season.
Fulham - they finished in their second best league position ever, and played some really good football.
No trophies, but not a bad cv surely... and I'm sure he's hungry and young enough to improve on it at the right club.
That's my point in a nutshell: even when you accentuate the positives, as you have done, it's still very light on achievement. Nevertheless, if it's enough to convince you he's the right man to take Villa forward, then fair play to you. It's not enough for me. Time will tell (assuming he does actually get the job).
-
FWIW I dont think this is a done deal. Chelsea job open, QPR job potentially open. I can see Hughes turning up at QPR to do another Man City.
-
Who had the best CV of any Villa manager, ever? Wasn't that clown from last season was it?
Be that as it may, Hughes has less on his CV than most, if not all, of those who are available now.
Hughes' CV as a manager...
Wales - took them to the play-off stage of Euro 2004.
Blackburn - took over a struggling side and in his second season took them to 6th place, followed by 10th, then 7th. Also took them to domestic cup semi-finals in three successive seasons, and to the last 32 of the UEFA Cup. Got the best out of flair players like David Bentley, and Roque Santa Cruz. Ruffled the feathers of people like Mourinho because he didn't send his side out to rolled over by the big boys - in fact Blackburn did to Chelsea what Mourinho later did to Barca with Inter and Real.
City - It's difficult to judge his buys there because you get the impression the big named players like Robinho and Adebayor were "names" brought in by people higher up. However his side played some exciting attacking football and he took City to a first semi-final in donkeys years (but was replaced before they played it) as well as the quarter-finals of the UEFA Cup in his first season. Who's to say he might not have gone on to add trophies to his cv there if he'd been given a fair chance. His record at the time they sacked him was exactly the same as Mancini's was at the same stage last season.
Fulham - they finished in their second best league position ever, and played some really good football.
No trophies, but not a bad cv surely... and I'm sure he's hungry and young enough to improve on it at the right club.
There's nothing on that list you could complain about but there's nothing exciting either. He's just not a wow appointment, which I'd normally be fine with but not when there is a wow appointment available and seemingly interested.
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
-
As I’ve said elsewhere, I’d welcome Hughes.
I would prefer Ancelotti and Rafa, but Hughes is a good choice. He comes with a solid coaching staff, plenty of experience, a good record and he’s a nasty bastard who produces horribly nasty teams.
We’ve got a litany of cracking players. It would be very nice to get them organised and add some devilment to them.
I’m with Percy, he’d be a good appointment.
-
Well, well. Coincidence?
Well if he's heading our way I wouldn't mind at all and I'll be glad if it is sorted quick. It's going to be an interesting summer.
A very decent center forward in his day so I'm sure Bent will have a lot of respect for him and also Gabby could learn from him too. Lets see what happens.
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
For being a snide twat?
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
For being a snide twat?
That about covers it.
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
Because he was playing like a cnut and when houllier suggested he might benefit from living nearer the club he threw his toys out of the pram?
-
Hughes' CV as a manager...
Wales - took them to the play-off stage of Euro 2004.
Blackburn - took over a struggling side and in his second season took them to 6th place, followed by 10th, then 7th. Also took them to domestic cup semi-finals in three successive seasons, and to the last 32 of the UEFA Cup. Got the best out of flair players like David Bentley, and Roque Santa Cruz. Ruffled the feathers of people like Mourinho because he didn't send his side out to rolled over by the big boys - in fact Blackburn did to Chelsea what Mourinho later did to Barca with Inter and Real.
City - It's difficult to judge his buys there because you get the impression the big named players like Robinho and Adebayor were "names" brought in by people higher up. However his side played some exciting attacking football and he took City to a first semi-final in donkeys years (but was replaced before they played it) as well as the quarter-finals of the UEFA Cup in his first season. Who's to say he might not have gone on to add trophies to his cv there if he'd been given a fair chance. His record at the time they sacked him was exactly the same as Mancini's was at the same stage last season.
Fulham - they finished in their second best league position ever, and played some really good football.
No trophies, but not a bad cv surely... and I'm sure he's hungry and young enough to improve on it at the right club.
That's my point in a nutshell: even when you accentuate the positives, as you have done, it's still very light on achievement. Nevertheless, if it's enough to convince you he's the right man to take Villa forward, then fair play to you. It's not enough for me. Time will tell (assuming he does actually get the job).
Whilst true, every successful manager has to start winning somewhere. May as well be here for Hughes.
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
Did you watch him play for the last few months of his first season and the first half of last season? He was sheer garbage. He was caught out of position and even when he was in the right place he was diving in like Tom Daly leading to free kicks that cost us points. People on here were baffled by his England call up.
Also wasn't it rumoured he said 'Fuck you and this poxy club' to Houllier? I don't mind the snideness. I mind the fact that he is a dire footballer.
-
He cost us up at Man City too, the fucking Scouse gimp. They were never in it until diving champ Warnock gives away a penalty.
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
Because he was playing like a cnut and when houllier suggested he might benefit from living nearer the club he threw his toys out of the pram?
Thats the same manager that let Pires live in London and sent taxi's to pick him up every day...............
-
As I’ve said elsewhere, I’d welcome Hughes.
I would prefer Ancelotti and Rafa, but Hughes is a good choice. He comes with a solid coaching staff, plenty of experience, a good record and he’s a nasty bastard who produces horribly nasty teams.
We’ve got a litany of cracking players. It would be very nice to get them organised and add some devilment to them.
I’m with Percy, he’d be a good appointment.
I agree.
Brillo Pad will get the job done.
Look, Lady Ha Ha has made a jumper out of his hair:
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTowwwF-G18FvJPHb4zvXqmNChyqIKB5QP75TRXh4t856i9gpbiSQ)
-
Hughes? How underwhelming if it comes to fruition. He'll still get my full support if so. Still holding out hope for Ancelotti, though...
-
Im absolutely gutted.
Have nothing against Hughes, as a player I thought he showed tenacity, passion and fight.
As a managerial appointment at AVFC, Im gutted. Just like Taylor MKII, Gregory and Turner - uninspiring prospect and will say the right noises but gives the board exactly what they want - float about in mid table and the odd cup run. Ancelotti, Advocaat, Rijkaard - this level manager would have given the fans and the world a statement of our intent.
Darren Bent was simply a swap for Milner. Cant see the fans climbing aboard on this one.
All we need is for a stripey home kit and green and black away kit and another season for me a washout.
(Toasts drink) Here's to the 25th Season supporting the Claret and Blues. :'(
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
Did you watch him play for the last few months of his first season and the first half of last season? He was sheer garbage. He was caught out of position and even when he was in the right place he was diving in like Tom Daly leading to free kicks that cost us points. People on here were baffled by his England call up.
Also wasn't it rumoured he said 'Fuck you and this poxy club' to Houllier? I don't mind the snideness. I mind the fact that he is a dire footballer.
Cannot beat a good rumour.
-
Someone has just text me Hughes to Spurs and Harry to Chelsea.
100% Speculation but amusing still.
-
If it was to be Hughes we'd have the bonus of being a physical side and finishing bottom of the Fair Play League each year - none of this rolling over anymore
Remind who qualified this year through the fair play league?
Oh shit! Yeah, I was thinking of the Blackburn years! 4 on the trot bottom every year. It hadn't registered that Fulham won it this year. That's quite a shock lol
-
I'll welcome Hughes if it's him coming, but I draw the line at those two wankers Warnock and Ireland.
Bollocks to Warnock, the snidey Scouse twat. But you can forgive Ireland for two reasons;
1) He's a really good player
2) He's a mentalist who porbably doesn't know what year it is or what planet he's living on.
Why is Warnock a snidey twat? Houllier took from the England World Cup Squad to training with the Youth Team, he made him an outcast, for what?
Did you watch him play for the last few months of his first season and the first half of last season? He was sheer garbage. He was caught out of position and even when he was in the right place he was diving in like Tom Daly leading to free kicks that cost us points. People on here were baffled by his England call up.
Also wasn't it rumoured he said 'Fuck you and this poxy club' to Houllier? I don't mind the snideness. I mind the fact that he is a dire footballer.
Cannot beat a good rumour.
he never once came out in the press to tell gerrard he was going to prove him wrong and fight for his place either tho
-
How can anyone feel so sad or put out? It's not even confirmed and if it's true he might turn out to be bloody good.
Every manager, signing is a gamble. Look how Scolari turned out at Chelsea? Look how Collymore turned out at Villa.
-
Someone has just text me Hughes to Spurs and Harry to Chelsea.
100% Speculation but amusing still.
Had not crossed my mind that one. But not a bad shout if you think about it.
-
I was very disappointed a few years ago when we appointed a safe, solid, experienced but (in our eyes) boring and uninspiring manager. Within a couple of years he'd built the most exciting Villa team I can remember and then rebuilt to produce the team that won the league and the European Cup.
-
he never once came out in the press to tell gerrard he was going to prove him wrong and fight for his place either tho
Looks like there wasn't much point seeing as he was bombed out at Liverpool by the same Manager. At least Hughes has man managed well some of the biggest c-unts in football succesfully Bellamy, Savage, Hartson, Ireland, Giggs etc
-
I was very disappointed a few years ago when we appointed a safe, solid, experienced but (in our eyes) boring and uninspiring manager. Within a couple of years he'd built the most exciting Villa team I can remember and then rebuilt to produce the team that won the league and the European Cup.
He had something to prove to Manchester City as well. AND 95% of our fans wanted someone else.
-
Someone has just text me Hughes to Spurs and Harry to Chelsea.
100% Speculation but amusing still.
*crosses fingers*
-
I'll be quite chuffed with Hughes. I was massively underwhelmed with GH after MON and whilst Hughes wouldn't be the most exciting of appointments I think he's the kind of no nonsense manager our club needs.
Deano as his assistant?
-
The only assistant that Mark Hughes will work with is Mark Bowen and he already lives in the area !
-
I was very disappointed a few years ago when we appointed a safe, solid, experienced but (in our eyes) boring and uninspiring manager. Within a couple of years he'd built the most exciting Villa team I can remember and then rebuilt to produce the team that won the league and the European Cup.
An ex-centre-forward too. And we could have had Cloughie.
I don't think I wrote to the Mail to say 'I won't be renewing' though.
-
Just reported on SSN that Hughes is now quoted at 8/1 for the Chelsea job. Let's hope he gets it!
-
Its an exciting start to the summer in any event!
-
Can I suggest an instant lifetime ban on anyone referring to Hughes as 'Sparky', should he get the job?
Thank You.
-
I was very disappointed a few years ago when we appointed a safe, solid, experienced but (in our eyes) boring and uninspiring manager. Within a couple of years he'd built the most exciting Villa team I can remember and then rebuilt to produce the team that won the league and the European Cup.
He had something to prove to Manchester City as well. AND 95% of our fans wanted someone else.
If Hughes takes us to Premier League and Champions League glory I will congratulate you on your foresight and agree that the parallels are spooky.
-
I see the word filter is in full effect.
-
I see the word filter is in full effect.
I was about to say did you mean Ailsa Stewart or Sparky?
-
Ah yes, the word filter. Top work Paulie, top work
-
Hughes would be a good appointment, he has a solid record, over 40% win record at Blackburn with a poor squad compared to ours and a good record with Wales, City and Fulham. If he sorts out the defence and Bent keeps scoring then we will be greatly improved. I for one would be happy with that
-
I don't think you can knock his CV - ok he hasn't won anything yet, but apart from being Man City boss in the very early days of the takeover, who has he managed who have been capable of winning trophies ?
To get Blackburn into Europe, Fulham in top 8 and Wales to brink of qualification to a tournament sounds pretty decent to me.
Plus he's got age on his side, unlike Houllier, and I think the players would respect him.
We could do a lot worse. Time to get realistic, Ancelloti was on £6 million a year at Chelsea and we aint gonna pay that sort of money.
-
If it is Hughes, he can bring that big centre-back with him and Dempsey.
-
If it is Hughes, he can bring that big centre-back with him and Dempsey.
Shay Given nailed on first signing. Bellamy on loan.
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
-
Ah well, plenty of other good candidates.
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Yeah right. Garden leave 'til July 1.
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Yeah right. Garden leave 'til July 1.
So why would we say we are not considering him?
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Hilarious! Cue frantic back-pedalling. "Hughes has never done anything. Ancelotti's won the lot etc etc"
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Hilarious! Cue frantic back-pedalling. "Hughes has never done anything. Ancelotti's won the lot etc etc"
Why?
-
This is getting very interesting - Hughes to Chelsea then?
That still leaves a whole host of names who could come to us - no-one predicted Houllier so we may be in for another surprise.
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Hilarious! Cue frantic back-pedalling. "Hughes has never done anything. Ancelotti's won the lot etc etc"
Weren't most people more interested in getting Ancelotti anyway?
-
This maybe a case of be careful what you wish for...
-
It's all a bit weird. I don't think that Villa have approached him, our word is worth a great deal in footie circles. Why then would Hughes resign? He's taking a bit of a chance that we actually want him. Could this all be a red herring and that he is actually bound for elsewhere? Chelsea perhaps?
-
It's never boring at Villa anymore.
-
This is getting very odd.
-
Time will tell. Please be Carlo. Please be Carlo. Please be Carlo. Please be Carlo.
-
This maybe a case of be careful what you wish for...
...welcome Steve McClaren!
-
Jimbo, don't !
-
Maybe he's heard that there might soon be a job going at one of his old clubs, like Everton perhaps? Just a thought.
-
Mark Hughes used to play for Barcelona.
Tiki taka next season, gentlemen.
-
I thought Hughes was nailed on but now I believe it will be ancelotti!
-
This maybe a case of be careful what you wish for...
...welcome Steve McClaren!
You are a sick,sick man.
-
I thought Hughes was nailed on but now I believe it will be ancelotti!
Even thought Sky Italia are saying he's turned Villa down?
-
Weren't most people more interested in getting Ancelotti anyway?
Which makes some of the posts on this thread even more baffling.
-
Not McClaren please.
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Yeah right. Garden leave 'til July 1.
So why would we say we are not considering him?
Maybe they don't want legal action from Fulham, they may start considering him tomorrow, with the view to appointing him at the end of the month.
-
Just caught a bit of Kia Jorabchin (?) (Hughes adviser/agent) interview on talkshite. He was adament Hughes has not spoken to Villa, has no job lined up and that's its basically pure speculation.
He said Hughes is completely sincere and didn't want to be in a position where he committed to a new contract, only for a top 5/6 job to come available in England OR abroad and then have to drop Fulham in it.
Interesting.
-
It's all a bit weird. I don't think that Villa have approached him, our word is worth a great deal in footie circles. Why then would Hughes resign? He's taking a bit of a chance that we actually want him. Could this all be a red herring and that he is actually bound for elsewhere? Chelsea perhaps?
Except Sunderland and Blackpool and ................
-
Weren't most people more interested in getting Ancelotti anyway?
Which makes some of the posts on this thread even more baffling.
You're easily baffled sometimes hilts. People gave their opinion on Mark Hughes' abilities as a manager and speculated on how good or bad a Villa manager he would be. Can't see why one's views on those things would have to change if he doesn't get the job.
-
if Ancelotti has turned us down, then David Moyes is my first choice
-
Just caught a bit of Kia Jorabchin (?) (Hughes adviser/agent) interview on talkshite. He was adament Hughes has not spoken to Villa, has no job lined up and that's its basically pure speculation.
He said Hughes is completely sincere and didn't want to be in a position where he committed to a new contract, only for a top 5/6 job to come available in England OR abroad and then have to drop Fulham in it.
Interesting.
Unfortunately, this guy sounded completely insincere
Wouldn't trust him further than I can spit...
-
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_6963886,00.html
Intriguing - suggesting won't be Hughes. Not sure I believe this, or see why we would rule him out even if he's not the first choice. Other rumours that Carlo's turned us down seem dubious too (though perhaps less so). IF we were of the view that Hughes wasn't the right man, I guess that would mean we're after people with experience of carrying on the 'club-building' activities of Houllier or someone who's won stuff. So perhaps Jol, Ancelotti, Benitez, Deshamps, Blanc?
-
You're easily baffled sometimes hilts. People gave their opinion on Mark Hughes' abilities as a manager and speculated on how good or bad a Villa manager he would be. Can't see why one's views on those things would have to change if he doesn't get the job.
I think some people are keen to be seen to be delighted whoever is appointed, even if it was Alan Ball. So when that falls through they do the same for the next guy.
It's the same with transfers: we try to sign player x = player x is terrific and would be great for us; player x goes somewhere else = player x is shite and we didn't want him anyway.
Cognitive dissonance.
-
Hughes has said he has left Fulham for a greater challenge, this is interesting because it kind of gives you a clue.
Cardiff would be a massive challenge and a real chance for him to earn some brownie points on his cv.
However, if he took over at Chelsea with Abramovich stating his intentions that he's got 1 season to hack it and then if not the club would look to Pep from Barca, which is what Abramovich really wants, then that would be a real sweet challange for Hughes to take on. If he pulled it of he becomes world class manager over night.
Is the Villa job really a challenge and if it is the Villa job, are we really in that kind of crap that other managers perceive us to be that p*ss poor, that they see the job as a real task.
-
I thought sky italia were saying Carlo turned down Roma to take the villa job?
Does any other club have such drama appointing managers, we are certainly not boring in this department.
-
Might have a cheeky punt on Rafa then.
-
Perhaps Hughes knows there's going to be a vacancy somewhere with Villa looking for a new manager and is getting himself well positioned to take advantage. Everton maybe? Chelsea perhaps?
-
if Ancelotti has turned us down, then David Moyes is my first choice
Moyes doesn't want the job. He's said as much.
-
You're easily baffled sometimes hilts. People gave their opinion on Mark Hughes' abilities as a manager and speculated on how good or bad a Villa manager he would be. Can't see why one's views on those things would have to change if he doesn't get the job.
I think some people are keen to be seen to be delighted whoever is appointed, even if it was Alan Ball. So when that falls through they do the same for the next guy.
Or maybe there are people who can see the positives in a number of different candidates?
I think that any of Moyes, Benitez, Ancelotti and Hughes have their plus points and wouldn't have a problem with us giving any of them a go.
-
The one thing you can believe is quotes from the Villa site and they have told Fulham we have not approached Hughes, Hughes then says he has not been approached by another club. I think most have jumped the gun on this and just as with Houllier the new manager may take us all by suprise.
-
You're easily baffled sometimes hilts. People gave their opinion on Mark Hughes' abilities as a manager and speculated on how good or bad a Villa manager he would be. Can't see why one's views on those things would have to change if he doesn't get the job.
I think some people are keen to be seen to be delighted whoever is appointed, even if it was Alan Ball. So when that falls through they do the same for the next guy.
It's the same with transfers: we try to sign player x = player x is terrific and would be great for us; player x goes somewhere else = player x is shite and we didn't want him anyway.
Cognitive dissonance.
Be prepared for some of that from me then mate, I think there a few good candidates. I won't change my mind about them if we don't employ them, though. Same goes for players.
-
Perhaps Hughes knows there's going to be a vacancy somewhere with Villa looking for a new manager and is getting himself well positioned to take advantage. Everton maybe? Chelsea perhaps?
I agree, he's placed himself in the shop window, just can't see Hughes at Villa.
-
Or maybe there are people who can see the positives in a number of different candidates?
I think that any of Moyes, Benitez, Ancelotti and Hughes have their plus points and wouldn't have a problem with us giving any of them a go.
I don't disagree. But I also think there are some people who are keen to be seen to be delighted no matter who is appointed. Or that whoever is appointed is the best man for the job.
-
Apparently we are NOT considering Mark Hughes as manager. According to SSN.
Hilarious! Cue frantic back-pedalling. "Hughes has never done anything. Ancelotti's won the lot etc etc"
I never rated him.
-
Today's i-paper reported that Roberto Martinez is 'under consideration'.
-
I won't change my mind about them if we don't employ them, though. Same goes for players.
Me either. Like I said earlier, Hughes may end up being the best man for the job, but he isn't while some others are still available. And if he does come it won't alter what I think of his CV. If he does, and proves me wrong, then so much the better.
Similarly, I was very disappointed when Barry left, when Milner left and will be when Ashley goes (as seems likely). No 'good riddance to the petulant diving tosser etc etc' from me.
-
Today's i-paper reported that Roberto Martinez is 'under consideration'.
Potentially be happy with that.
-
Perhaps Hughes knows there's going to be a vacancy somewhere with Villa looking for a new manager and is getting himself well positioned to take advantage. Everton maybe? Chelsea perhaps?
So basically nobody can take Hughes on til the beginning of July.
So he's either joining Chelsea or Villa. But not for a few weeks. The deal will have already been done, bearing in mind his agent is the same as Tevez's.
-
The one thing you can believe is quotes from the Villa site and they have told Fulham we have not approached Hughes, Hughes then says he has not been approached by another club. I think most have jumped the gun on this and just as with Houllier the new manager may take us all by suprise.
I think this is where the real truth lies, I think Randy Lerner will have been making up some ground on this over the last few weeks expecting Houllier to go, I would even go as far as to say they didn't even wait for the med report on Houllier, hence the club statement that Houllier departure was club based and not in the interest of Houllier.
We may indeed be shocked at who we find managing the lads........................
-
I won't change my mind about them if we don't employ them, though. Same goes for players.
Me either. Like I said earlier, Hughes may end up being the best man for the job, but he isn't while some others are still available.
How do you know? Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
-
The one thing you can believe is quotes from the Villa site and they have told Fulham we have not approached Hughes, Hughes then says he has not been approached by another club. I think most have jumped the gun on this and just as with Houllier the new manager may take us all by suprise.
I think this is where the real truth lies, I think Randy Lerner will have been making up some ground on this over the last few weeks expecting Houllier to go, I would even go as far as to say they didn't even wait for the med report on Houllier, hence the club statement that Houllier departure was club based and not in the interest of Houllier.
We may indeed be shocked at who we find managing the lads........................
Yes but shocked good or shocked bad......that is the question.
-
I'm glad we're not after Hughes, if he can walk out on Fulham after 10 months who is to say he wouldn't do the same to us if Chelsea or Man Utd come calling in 12 months time.
It looks like Randy is trying to get Ancelotti, naturally I hope we get him, if not then we could be looking at Benitez, Jol, or even McLa..... no i'm not going there
-
Just done a bit of net research, and I am now definitely of the opinion that Hughes will be joing Chelsea, shortly followed by Carlos Tevez.
-
i've a sneaky feeling it won't be Hughes
I agree.
Is there a smug emotion?
-
The one thing you can believe is quotes from the Villa site and they have told Fulham we have not approached Hughes, Hughes then says he has not been approached by another club. I think most have jumped the gun on this and just as with Houllier the new manager may take us all by suprise.
I think this is where the real truth lies, I think Randy Lerner will have been making up some ground on this over the last few weeks expecting Houllier to go, I would even go as far as to say they didn't even wait for the med report on Houllier, hence the club statement that Houllier departure was club based and not in the interest of Houllier.
We may indeed be shocked at who we find managing the lads........................
Yes but shocked good or shocked bad......that is the question.
Indeed, in fact I've just posted in another thread about a text a mate has just sent me form Germany, and the name Van Basten has been mentioned.....
-
Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
I don't know. What I do know is that there are better managers than Hughes available now.
-
I won't change my mind about them if we don't employ them, though. Same goes for players.
Me either. Like I said earlier, Hughes may end up being the best man for the job, but he isn't while some others are still available.
How do you know? Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
And Saunders? Not covered in glory when he became Villa manager.
The Hughes situation has certainly confused me! He's eith er a total bullsh*tter or a gambler (re the other options available / becoming available)
-
Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
I don't know. What I do know is that there are better managers than Hughes available now.
You don't know that. By your formula, BFR should have got the Arsenal job over Wenger.
-
What a load of old scrotum.
Well, IF he comes.....I will get behind him, but I will be fairly disappointed with the appointment if it happens - I feel it shows a real lack of ambition. Mid table bore-a-thons here we come.
-
Chelsea tend to go for proven foreign, technical, tactically astute coaches so I'm sceptical about them going for Hughes. If they go British surely Redknapp would be the one as he has got Spurs into and had a good run in the CL, but Hughes is unproven there. So the Redknapp to Chelsea and Hughes to Spurs may be a possibility, but I would guess Hiddink to Russian gas and oil eleven and Hughes to us. I'd rather a foreign, technical coach myself, but if we are going to go British I think we could do a lot worse than Hughes. He's done as much as could reasonably expected and more at all the jobs he's done and was unlucky not to be given a proper go at establishing Sheikh your booty FC in the upper echelons. And he's miles better than McLaren, Curbishley and a few others.
-
Just heard his tool of an agent talk on the radio. He mentioned jobs abroad,wonder if he's been already sounded out for an overseas post......not that I give a fcuk.
-
Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
I don't know. What I do know is that there are better managers than Hughes available now.
there maybe better managers who are out of work, but if they dont want to come to VP then they arnt available,
it doesnt matter how many times posters say saomeone like Anceloti is available if he doesnt want to come thats it i'm afraid
i would stake my life on the fact that Randy has approached Anceloti to see how the land lies,
but if he wont deal, he has no cards to play with
i accept that you might well have meant other names and not just Carlo, but the same applies
-
You don't know that. By your formula, BFR should have got the Arsenal job over Wenger.
And you'd have been pushing for Wenger because? We all have our opinions about the respective merits of the current names in the frame; mine is that there are several better managers than Hughes among them. If you disagree, fine, but don't tell me there's no good reason to believe that.
-
Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
I don't know. What I do know is that there are better managers than Hughes available now.
You don't know that. By your formula, BFR should have got the Arsenal job over Wenger.
And he may have done a better job. We will never know.
-
Perhaps Hughes knows there's going to be a vacancy somewhere with Villa looking for a new manager and is getting himself well positioned to take advantage. Everton maybe? Chelsea perhaps?
So basically nobody can take Hughes on til the beginning of July.
So he's either joining Chelsea or Villa. But not for a few weeks. The deal will have already been done, bearing in mind his agent is the same as Tevez's.
I don't think villa have spoken to him. Integrity is a big word at VP it seems.
-
I wouldn't be amazed if Chelsea appoint Hughes assistant manager to someone like Hiddink, with the promise he will succeed him.
-
there maybe better managers who are out of work, but if they dont want to come to VP then they arnt available,
it doesnt matter how many times posters say saomeone like Anceloti is available if he doesnt want to come thats it i'm afraid
i would stake my life on the fact that Randy has approached Anceloti to see how the land lies,
but if he wont deal, he has no cards to play with
i accept that you might well have meant other names and not just Carlo, but the same applies
I totally agree with you, if we approach them and they say no we move on to the next. If we go through that process and we happen to exhaust the possibilities that I reckon are better than Hughes then I'll be happy to accept it. He'd only be a really bad appointment, in my opinion, if we took him on without having sounded out some other better ones first.
It's all about timing. If we'd got him before appointing Houllier then I'd have been happy because the cupboard was bare at that time. It's less bare now. That's all I'm saying.
-
Were there not managers about with better CVs than Busby, Shankley and Stein when they got the jobs where they made their names (and their clubs' names)?
I don't know.
They were young in managerial terms. Of course there were lots of managers around at the time with your infallible measure of talent - better CVs, more achievements. Yet none of them were in the same class.
-
I wouldn't be amazed if Chelsea appoint Hughes assistant manager to someone like Hiddink, with the promise he will succeed him.
Yeah, but would Hughes want to do that? - with his CV and ego, I'd be surprised if he goes as a #2 to anyone, TBH.
-
Hughes moyes , ancelotti or Benitez would be fine with me, I really would be deeply saddened though if it is mclaren.
-
They were young in managerial terms. Of course there were lots of managers around at the time with your infallible measure of talent - better CVs, more achievements. Yet none of them were in the same class.
If Hughes goes on to take his place alongside those greats then I'll happily accept you're right. Until then, I'm happy to stick with my opinion. Which is that while Hughes isn't a bad manager, as things stand there are better currently available. Which, given that includes Carlo Ancelotti and Rafa Benitez, I don't think it's a particularly outrageous view to hold. Whether they want to come to Villa is a different matter and something I hope Randy is currently exploring.
If you'd like to explain why you think Hughes is a better manager than Ancelotti and Benitez then knock yourself out. I'm willing to be persuaded by any convincing argument.
-
Rafa would be a no no for me. Too much Liverpool bullshit and tapping up Barry for starters.
-
I'm not sure whether I want Benitez but couldn't care less about the way he conducted himself over the Barry non-transfer. Succesful clubs always tap players up. I believe we've been far too naive and nice in the transfer market and would be quite happy if we left some team in tears after we stole their best player... exactly like Sunderland were!
If we were to appoint him, our Board would have a quiet word with him before the Anfield game and tell him to keep it toned-down. They aren't idiots.
-
Rafa would be a no no for me. Too much Liverpool bullshit and tapping up Barry for starters.
i'd probably manage to forgive him if he won the champs league for us though
-
Good blog from Phil Mcnulty at the BBC: http://goo.gl/ntPU1
-
You don't know that. By your formula, BFR should have got the Arsenal job over Wenger.
And you'd have been pushing for Wenger because? We all have our opinions about the respective merits of the current names in the frame; mine is that there are several better managers than Hughes among them. If you disagree, fine, but don't tell me there's no good reason to believe that.
You can believe what you like, but you don't know.
-
I wouldn't be amazed if Chelsea appoint Hughes assistant manager to someone like Hiddink, with the promise he will succeed him.
Yeah, but would Hughes want to do that? - with his CV and ego, I'd be surprised if he goes as a #2 to anyone, TBH.
You're right. Hughes is nobody's number 2, why would he be? Top managers need a bit of arrogance and no way would a manger with Hughes experience take a 2nd in command role. Plus Hughes was linked with Chelsea when Grant got sacked.
-
He was. Him turning up there would not shock, but imagine how their fans would see it. If we are not doing cartwheels they would be gutted.
Anyhow, I have resigned myself to Ailsa taking charge now.
-
You can believe what you like, but you don't know.
I know Ancelotti is a better manager than Mark Hughes. I know Benitez is a better manager than Mark Hughes. Just as I know all three are better managers than Glenn Roeder and Alan Ball.
-
They were young in managerial terms. Of course there were lots of managers around at the time with your infallible measure of talent - better CVs, more achievements. Yet none of them were in the same class.
If Hughes goes on to take his place alongside those greats then I'll happily accept you're right. Until then, I'm happy to stick with my opinion. Which is that while Hughes isn't a bad manager, as things stand there are better currently available. Which, given that includes Carlo Ancelotti and Rafa Benitez, I don't think it's a particularly outrageous view to hold. Whether they want to come to Villa is a different matter and something I hope Randy is currently exploring.
If you'd like to explain why you think Hughes is a better manager than Ancelotti and Benitez then knock yourself out. I'm willing to be persuaded by any convincing argument.
That's better, you're talking about your views and opinions now rather than getting them mixed up with facts.
I think Hughes would perhaps be a better Villa manager as I think he is better suited (than the two you mention) to a club that is seemingly unwilling to pay top money to top players.
-
From BBC:
Even before Houllier's departure was confirmed, Mark Hughes's name had been bandied around, and less than 24 hours after Houllier left his post, so did Hughes.
But BBC Radio 5 live's Midlands football reporter Pat Murphy said that did not necessarily mean that the former Manchester United striker was being lined up by Villa.
"I don't believe that Hughes is Villa's number one target - I think they've already settled on a number one target and quite rightly they won't tell me who that is," he said.
"I don't think this has done Mark Hughes a lot of favours in the eyes of [Villa owner] Randy Lerner who is quite hot on these things.
"It's not true that they coveted Hughes last summer. I understand Fulham are also unimpressed by Hughes's behaviour in the last 24 hours or so. I would say the odds against Mark Hughes have lengthened over the last few hours in terms of being Villa manager.
"It's a bit of a myth Lerner doesn't want managers under contract. What he'll do is approach the club and say we want to talk to your manager and that brings in [Everton boss] David Moyes.
"There are also free agents - Steve McClaren, Martin Jol, Rafa Benitez - but being a free agent is not getting them extra bonus points in the eyes of Randy Lerner. They'll have no qualms about approaching a club for a manager that's under contract."
-
He was. Him turning up there would not shock, but imagine how their fans would see it. If we are not doing cartwheels they would be gutted.
Anyhow, I have resigned myself to Ailsa taking charge now.
wouldn't be the end of the world Ozz. He'd be a decent appointment. However, if you make Hughes arriving the lowest you'll feel, just imagine your delight if it actaully ends up being Carlo!!
-
a club that is seemingly unwilling to pay top money to top players.
Is that an opinion? Or a fact?
-
You can believe what you like, but you don't know.
I know Ancelotti is a better manager than Mark Hughes. I know Benitez is a better manager than Mark Hughes.
No, you don't. Unless your a time-traveller.
-
You can believe what you like, but you don't know.
I know Ancelotti is a better manager than Mark Hughes. I know Benitez is a better manager than Mark Hughes.
No, you don't. Unless your a time-traveller.
Today I've had one of my crappest days at work ever. For whatever reason, the above post has brought the one and only smile to my face today. It's like old times. It's why this site is my drug of choice.
-
No, you don't. Unless your a time-traveller.
Yes, I do. Those are true statements. Any objective measure will support that. If you are suggesting that, in time, Mark Hughes may become a better manager than either Benitez or Ancelotti, then that's something else again. But I've seen nothing in his career to date to suggest he has what it takes to win the domestic league in England, Spain or Italy, let alone the Champions League. I'd put him on a par with Moyes and O'Neill.
-
I don't want Hughes if he is joining us but if he is joining Chelsea then I definitely do.
-
From BBC:
Even before Houllier's departure was confirmed, Mark Hughes's name had been bandied around, and less than 24 hours after Houllier left his post, so did Hughes.
But BBC Radio 5 live's Midlands football reporter Pat Murphy said that did not necessarily mean that the former Manchester United striker was being lined up by Villa.
"I don't believe that Hughes is Villa's number one target - I think they've already settled on a number one target and quite rightly they won't tell me who that is," he said.
"I don't think this has done Mark Hughes a lot of favours in the eyes of [Villa owner] Randy Lerner who is quite hot on these things.
"It's not true that they coveted Hughes last summer. I understand Fulham are also unimpressed by Hughes's behaviour in the last 24 hours or so. I would say the odds against Mark Hughes have lengthened over the last few hours in terms of being Villa manager.
"It's a bit of a myth Lerner doesn't want managers under contract. What he'll do is approach the club and say we want to talk to your manager and that brings in [Everton boss] David Moyes.
"There are also free agents - Steve McClaren, Martin Jol, Rafa Benitez - but being a free agent is not getting them extra bonus points in the eyes of Randy Lerner. They'll have no qualms about approaching a club for a manager that's under contract."
I can imagine Randy on the phone to Everton would sound something like this:
Randy: Hi Bill, this is Randy Lerner here from Aston Villa
Bill Kenwright: Alright Laar Randy
Randy: Listen Bill, we are keen on having David Moyes come to Aston Villa and would like to negotiate the opportunity to speak to him.
Bill Kenwright: I'm sorry Randy, we'd like to keep him here and can't give you that blessing.
Randy: Ok, thanks for your time.
I honestly think Randy has enough class about him that he wouldn't be a shit about it.
-
a club that is seemingly unwilling to pay top money to top players.
Is that an opinion? Or a fact?
I think the word 'seemingly' establishes that.
-
Percy, Benitez and Ancelotti ARE better managers than Mark Hughes. That is a fact. They are only 3 years his senior and have both won trophies. The fact they have both won trophies in 2 countries is even more impressive. Both have won domestic leagues. The best Hughes has done is 6th, and had the opportunity to push on at City and in reality didn't take it, was a little unlucky but go the boot from the big time.
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
-
From BBC:
Even before Houllier's departure was confirmed, Mark Hughes's name had been bandied around, and less than 24 hours after Houllier left his post, so did Hughes.
But BBC Radio 5 live's Midlands football reporter Pat Murphy said that did not necessarily mean that the former Manchester United striker was being lined up by Villa.
"I don't believe that Hughes is Villa's number one target - I think they've already settled on a number one target and quite rightly they won't tell me who that is," he said.
"I don't think this has done Mark Hughes a lot of favours in the eyes of [Villa owner] Randy Lerner who is quite hot on these things.
"It's not true that they coveted Hughes last summer. I understand Fulham are also unimpressed by Hughes's behaviour in the last 24 hours or so. I would say the odds against Mark Hughes have lengthened over the last few hours in terms of being Villa manager.
"It's a bit of a myth Lerner doesn't want managers under contract. What he'll do is approach the club and say we want to talk to your manager and that brings in [Everton boss] David Moyes.
"There are also free agents - Steve McClaren, Martin Jol, Rafa Benitez - but being a free agent is not getting them extra bonus points in the eyes of Randy Lerner. They'll have no qualms about approaching a club for a manager that's under contract."
I can imagine Randy on the phone to Everton would sound something like this:
Randy: Hi Bill, this is Randy Lerner here from Aston Villa
Bill Kenwright: Alright Laar Randy
Randy: Listen Bill, we are keen on having David Moyes come to Aston Villa and would like to negotiate the opportunity to speak to him.
Bill Kenwright: I'm sorry Randy, we'd like to keep him here and can't give you that blessing.
Randy: Ok, thanks for your time.
I honestly think Randy has enough class about him that he wouldn't be a shit about it.
If the Bent transfer has told us anything, it's that the next line of the conversation would likely be "how much would it cost us for you to give us that blessing?"
-
I honestly think Randy has enough class about him that he wouldn't be a shit about it.
When push came to shove.....
Ged left, and not willingly by the looks of it. Randy may not be Sullivan or gold, but he can still get what he wants.
-
Percy, Benitez and Ancelotti ARE better managers than Mark Hughes. That is a fact. They are only 3 years his senior and have both won trophies. The fact they have both won trophies in 2 countries is even more impressive. Both have won domestic leagues. The best Hughes has done is 6th, and had the opportunity to push on at City and in reality didn't take it, was a little unlucky but go the boot from the big time.
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
Thank you.
-
I think Randy has a stronger backbone than some give him credit for. Just because he doesn't mouth of in the press doesn't mean he is weak.
-
Percy, Benitez and Ancelotti ARE better managers than Mark Hughes. That is a fact. They are only 3 years his senior and have both won trophies. The fact they have both won trophies in 2 countries is even more impressive. Both have won domestic leagues. The best Hughes has done is 6th, and had the opportunity to push on at City and in reality didn't take it, was a little unlucky but go the boot from the big time.
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
Ancelotti I'd give you.
Three years ago I'd give you Rafa. Now I'm not so sure.
-
Jesus. Things getting crazy. Hughes has quit, but we've said we haven't spoken to him and he says he's spoken to no one. Honestly, it seems like Hughes isn't coming to us. Chelsea sounds possible, but would be a shock. Surely he has something lined up, otherwise I'm confident he wouldn't walk away.
If we're lucky, we'll get Ancelotti. That'd be the perfect appointment - but there is every chance (rightfully) he'd turn us down. If he did, the only reason we shouldn't consider Hughes is the fact he just easily left Fulham (and that may well be for us, anyway). If Hughes is available, Ancelotti turns us down, and we don't go for Hughes we may end up McClaren or Curbs.
-
What a terribly exhausting day. I resigned myself to Hughes, spoke of how he'd bring us stability and build for the future, being a relatively young manager. I don't think he'll be a bad appointment, but to have the chance of bringing a bloke like Ancelotti to the club would be such a great statement that we mean effin business.
It could be the start of something fantastic. I really hope he wants to be part of Aston Villa.
If he's not and does turn out to be the Welshman, then I'll revert back to telling my mates and myself what I wrote in the first couple of sentences.
I must admit, it's all rather exciting...and infuriating for that matter. Nobody knows what's going on, other than Randy and the board.
Good evening.
-
For the record, I wasn't implying Randy was weak, or lacking a backbone. I LIKE how he goes about his work it's important that Aston Villa act with dignity and class
-
I love it how hughes is suddenly a better manager than CL/double winners. If he's that good he wouldn't have been at Fulham.
-
Randy is alpha as fuk
(http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/birmmail/jun2011/2/9/randy-lerner-615228404.jpg)
Swagga is off the charts
-
I love it how hughes is suddenly a better manager than CL/double winners.
Which once again, is something that nobody, anywhere has said.
-
I love it how hughes is suddenly a better manager than CL/double winners. If he's that good he wouldn't have been at Fulham.
I know it is all about opinions, but it is pretty hard to see how anyone could argue that Hughes is a better manager than either Benitez or Ancelotti.
-
oh i'm sorry. A better manager for villa, whatever that means
-
But did Randy slap his helmet on Kenwright's desk?
-
Grauniad (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jun/02/mark-hughes-fulham-aston-villa/print)
Mark Hughes leaves Fulham but Aston Villa do not want him as manager
• Hughes activates break clause to leave Craven Cottage
• Aston Villa unimpressed by course of events
Stuart James, Jamie Jackson and David Hytner
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 2 June 2011 23.00 BST
Mark Hughes will not be the new Aston Villa manager, despite walking out on Fulham on Thursday night. The Welshman had been the favourite to succeed Gérard Houllier but Villa, unimpressed with the course of events that culminated in Hughes activating a break clause in his contract and leaving Fulham, have turned their attention elsewhere. Hughes has been left without a club and Martin Jol and Steve McClaren are at the top of Villa's short list.
In a further twist Jol and McClaren, who are out of work and eager to return to employment in the Premier League, will also be leading candidates to take over at Craven Cottage, where Hughes had been expected to sign an improved two-year contract. Martin O'Neill, a former Villa manager, will be another major contender for that post.
Mohamed Al Fayed, the Fulham chairman, was furious after Hughes activated the break clause and tendered his resignation. A Fulham spokesperson said: "The chairman became increasingly annoyed by Mark positioning himself for another club, whilst still negotiating with us, and having agreed terms."
Fayed was, however, ready to extend Hughes's deal. One view from sources at the club is that contract talks with Hughes fell apart when Fulham felt unable to match the fees demanded by his representative, Kia Joorabchian.
Villa's reluctance to move for Hughes comes as something of a surprise. He has been the frontrunner for the Villa post since it emerged this week that Houllier would be stepping down on health grounds. Villa, however, told Fulham that they would not be making an approach for Hughes in the hours before his decision to leave.
The Midlands club have since made it clear that their stance has not changed after Hughes's departure from Fulham. It is understood they would have grave reservations about appointing the former Blackburn Rovers and Manchester City manager because of how his departure from Fulham has been handled.
Hughes, who is on holiday in Dubai, said in a statement: "I would like to take this opportunity to clarify that neither myself nor my representative have approached or have been approached by another club. This decision to leave Fulham has not been influenced by any outside party."
When Villa parted company with Houllier on Wednesday evening, Fulham believed that Hughes would stay loyal to them, as Fayed had done with him on Boxing Day, when the Craven Cottage crowd had called for Hughes's sacking after a 3-1 home defeat by West Ham United that dropped the club into the relegation zone. Hughes's new contract had even gone to the lawyers, with the terms and conditions agreed, in readiness for his signature.
Yet in the hours that followed Villa's announcement of Houllier's departure, Hughes went cold on Fulham – and nobody at the London club considered the two events to be unrelated. What Fulham could not understand, however, was that Paul Faulkner, the Villa chief executive, had made it clear to Alistair Mackintosh, his counterpart at Craven Cottage, with whom he gets on well, that Villa did not want Hughes. The Welshman, who describes himself as an ambitious young manager, may have taken a leap of faith as there was a deadline of midnight on Wednesday on the activation of his break clause. The clause permits him to walk away from the club as a free agent at the end of June. Premier League rules prevent him or his representative from contacting or being contacted by other clubs until after that.
His back-room entourage, which includes Mark Bowen, Eddie Niedzwiecki, Glyn Hodges and Kevin Hitchcock, remain under contract at Fulham for another year, with no break clauses in their deals.
Fulham accepted Hughes's resignation and their impression was that he thought he would get the Villa job, despite the assurances they had received from Faulkner that he would not. Fayed is clear that there is no way back for Hughes at the club. "Roy Hodgson appreciated the club after he had left and [Fayed] believes Mark will do the same," a spokesperson said.
Villa say they have an open mind about filling their vacancy. Speculation that Carlo Ancelotti is among their leading candidates is wide of the mark, however. The former Chelsea manager has not received any contact from Villa and he is known to have no interest in the position. Ancelotti, according to sources close to the Italian, is holding out for a club that can offer Champions League football. Roberto Martínez, the Wigan Athletic manager, has, however, emerged as an outsider for the Villa post.
O'Neill, who has been out of work since leaving Villa last August, is the bookmakers' favourite for the Fulham jobAs well as Jol and McClaren, other names likely to feature on Fulham's shortlist may include Gianfranco Zola, the former West Ham manager, and Chris Hughton, who led Newcastle United back to the Premier League at the first attempt before being sacked in December. Jol had been Fulham's No1 target last summer, ahead of Hughes, and he had wanted to come. He was blocked by his then club, Ajax.
-
I love it how hughes is suddenly a better manager than CL/double winners.
Which once again, is something that nobody, anywhere has said.
No but some - well, one - has been taking great exception to my saying that he is not.
-
I love it how hughes is suddenly a better manager than CL/double winners. If he's that good he wouldn't have been at Fulham.
I know it is all about opinions, but it is pretty hard to see how anyone could argue that Hughes is a better manager than either Benitez or Ancelotti.
You'd think, wouldn't you?
-
oh i'm sorry. A better manager for villa, whatever that means
I'll explain for you greg.
Sometimes clubs have different remits. It's perfectly possible that a manager is skilled at avoiding relegation and scrapping at the bottom but might not be able to win the title. It's also possible that Pep Guardiola, without Lionel Messi and Xavi might not have the necessary skills to get West Ham promoted.
I'm pretty sure that if you extrapolate that to it's natural conclusions then you'll stumble over Percy's point.
-
Randy is alpha as fuk
(http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/birmmail/jun2011/2/9/randy-lerner-615228404.jpg)
Swagga is off the charts
Have you been watching The Shadow Line on BBC2?
Don't mess with Gatehouse if you know what's good for you.
-
YAY! At last some good news.
-
Hmmmmmm
-
oh i'm sorry. A better manager for villa, whatever that means
I'll explain for you greg.
Sometimes clubs have different remits. It's perfectly possible that a manager is skilled at avoiding relegation and scrapping at the bottom but might not be able to win the title. It's also possible that Pep Guardiola, without Lionel Messi and Xavi might not have the necessary skills to get West Ham promoted.
I'm pretty sure that if you extrapolate that to it's natural conclusions then you'll stumble over Percy's point.
bollocks. we're not a club scrapping at the bottom so even if the point had validity it wouldn't apply to us. Both rafa/Anceloti are better coaches, have better contacts for players and would do a better job than Hughes. After all most of these managers earned their reputation to start with because the teams they took over weren't doing very well when they joined.
-
Interesting to hear that Hughes' agent is that absolute fucking parasite Joorabchian
-
I'll explain for you greg.
Sometimes clubs have different remits. It's perfectly possible that a manager is skilled at avoiding relegation and scrapping at the bottom but might not be able to win the title. It's also possible that Pep Guardiola, without Lionel Messi and Xavi might not have the necessary skills to get West Ham promoted.
I'm pretty sure that if you extrapolate that to it's natural conclusions then you'll stumble over Percy's point.
Perhaps I'd better explain for you Dave because that's not quite right.
Percy's main point was that it is not possible to state as fact as I did that Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Mark Hughes, which of course it is.
When invited to explain why, he came up with a different argument, that is to say Hughes may be better suited to the Villa job than Ancelotti or Benitez, although he said he believed this to be true because we don't pay top money to top players. Personally I don't take that view because a) I don't believe the rebuilding job is as big as some make out, b) I reckon Ancelotti and Benitez's record of success in more than one country demonstrates a skill and adaptability that would cope with the different challenge, and c) I think we will pay top money to top players within reason.
-
So... Jol and McClaren are top of our list...? Martinez, hell, ANYONE ELSE, fill in an application form and leave it at the front desk, please!
-
I hope fulham have got sidwell on suicide watch. MON turning up just after he signed a long contract could be the final straw.
-
I hope fulham have got sidwell on suicide watch. MON turning up just after he signed a long contract could be the final straw.
I would really feel for Steve if that happens. Maybe Sidder's needs to have a word with Damon and get the loon MON locked up in his cellar to keep Curb's company?
-
I hope fulham have got sidwell on suicide watch. MON turning up just after he signed a long contract could be the final straw.
I would really feel for Steve if that happens. Maybe Sidder's needs to have a word with Damon and get the loon MON locked up in his cellar to keep Curb's company?
Mclaren his fellow ginger will save him. I hope.
-
Interesting to hear that Hughes' agent is that absolute fucking parasite Joorabchian
Two things would put me off Hughes. This ^ and how he did say a few weeks ago he was staying, he could confirm that and he was looking forward to strengthening the squad in the summer.
I don't see why Villa should be particularly miffed that he had a clause in his contract and he chose to activate it though, whatever our interest. To my mind, Fulham took a chance when they inserted that. I'm not sure, but it could be a two way thing, maybe Fulham could have let him go after a year if it hadn't worked out and not have to pay any compo.
-
Well it seems the gun was well and truly jumped, if it were not the fact that previously it has been stated only a manager with prem experience would be considered i could see us getting someone from abroad, surely if it was going to be the likes of Jol or the fsw then he would have already been appointed. It is slightly annoying but you have to give Lerner one thing, he runs a tight ship as far as leaks go, no-one has a clue who he is after.
-
I'm guessing Lerner has had enough of managers who walk out on clubs after giving assurances they'd stay.
-
I'm guessing Lerner has had enough of managers who walk out on clubs after giving assurances they'd stay.
I agree Greg. While Hughes can't be ruled out altogether, you have to think that the Villa brass won't have been that happy with how it played out. That said, it wasn't like he wasn't entitled to that decision based on his contract. At least he had a clause that he exercised which gives him an out so to speak. However, it's still left a bitter taste for Fulham, a taste that Randy will know all too well.
-
I suppose Hughes was better to do it now and not to unexpectedly say I'm staying and then do a u-turn a few days before the season kicks off and leave Fulham up the creak without a paddle.
-
well if thats right and faulkner gave assurances we didn't want him then i think its highly unlikely we'd go for him now. Not our style.
-
Why would we be upset with Hughes leaving Fulham if we aren't interested in him anyway?
-
l
I hope fulham have got sidwell on suicide watch. MON turning up just after he signed a long contract could be the final straw.
I would really feel for Steve if that happens. Maybe Sidder's needs to have a word with Damon and get the loon MON locked up in his cellar to keep Curb's company?
Mclaren his fellow ginger will save him. I hope.
One I have heard tonight is McLeish to Fulham. Seems a good fit to me.
-
Interesting to hear that Hughes' agent is that absolute fucking parasite Joorabchian
I was amazed by that, and it made me more determined that I don't want him. That shady git is single handedly trying to ruin football.
-
Why would we be upset with Hughes leaving Fulham if we aren't interested in him anyway?
Well if he applies now i doubt he'll get it. Randy's learned his lesson with mercanary managers
-
Why would we be upset with Hughes leaving Fulham if we aren't interested in him anyway?
Crikey.
That's actually a very good point.
-
If the number of trophies won in the past is the mark of who will be the best manager to appoint at this moment then I'm afraid Sven trumps both Benitez and Ancelotti.
Hang on though, didn't the young upcoming bosses Paul Lambert and Brendan Rodgers win promotion, not Leicester?
-
yeah but hughes didn't know that. Looks like he made a leap of faith and i doubt Villa would want to fuel Fulham's suspicion we'd tapped him up by appointing him now.
Anyway who cares? GREAT NEWS!
-
If the number of trophies won in the past is the mark of who will be the best manager to appoint at this moment then I'm afraid Sven trumps both Benitez and Ancelotti.
Hang on though, didn't the young upcoming bosses Paul Lambert and Brendan Rodgers win promotion, not Leicester?
Having had full seasons, yes. Sven didn't. Lets see how he does next.
-
If the number of trophies won in the past is the mark of who will be the best manager to appoint at this moment then I'm afraid Sven trumps both Benitez and Ancelotti.
Ancelotti won the double a little over twelve months ago. That's a bit more relevant that the fact Sven won plenty of trophies years ago, before blotting his copy book like nobody's business.
-
Christ almighty, Svennis Pennis is even more yesterday's man than, er, Houllier.
-
quite interestingly, Hughes is as big a price as 10 / 11 to be next manager now, after being as short as 1 / 14 earlier.
even more interestingly, Anceloti is now as short as 6 / 4.
-
so say it is Mark Hughes
does that mean then that wee prick Ireland will decide to give his all for us again?
he seems to love eating the peanuts out of the shite that exits Hughes' hole
i typed in sparky earlier :D
-
Percy, Benitez and Ancelotti ARE better managers than Mark Hughes. That is a fact. They are only 3 years his senior and have both won trophies. The fact they have both won trophies in 2 countries is even more impressive. Both have won domestic leagues. The best Hughes has done is 6th, and had the opportunity to push on at City and in reality didn't take it, was a little unlucky but go the boot from the big time.
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
So if a forward plays for Man Utd and has a better goal ratio than one playing for say, Everton, he is better - FACT! Nothing to do with playing for a team that attacks all the time, rather than playing for one that doesn't create half as many chances. Makes you wonder why someone as clued up as Fergie buys these inferior strikers from clubs like Everton when he's already got players with better goal ratios.
And of course, when Stein, Busby, Shankley and Wenger were appointed as managers of the clubs they built into what they are today, there were other managers with more achievements, therefore - better managers - FACT! - who should have got the job before them. If only!
-
Reading the dailys i think Highes was overlooked because Villa didn't want to deal with his dodgy agent and sensed that he would be using us as a stepping stone, leaving us as soon as a better offer came along. The times say we have gone back for Ancelotti and Lerner is not put off by his wages, the sticking point though is Ancelotti would want ba very large transfer budget, something that Randy would very nervous about.
-
Reading the dailys i think Highes was overlooked because Villa didn't want to deal with his dodgy agent and sensed that he would be using us as a stepping stone, leaving us as soon as a better offer came along. The times say we have gone back for Ancelotti and Lerner is not put off by his wages, the sticking point though is Ancelotti would want ba very large transfer budget, something that Randy would very nervous about.
He shouldn't be put off my a big transfer budget. Randy had no problem paying 20 plus million for Bent when we were awful at the time and at that time it was brave money to spend given the position we were in.
Ancelotti didn't spend that much money at chelsea. Torres was an Abrahmovic signing I think.
-
I've just read in the sun that the door is closing on Hughes I hope not I would like either Moyes or Hughes whoever we get I will be behind 110% has long as they show me they are doing the right things for the Villa I dont mind who it is we do need to make the right appointment for the club and I have faith in Randy getting the right man for the job.
-
Jesus man have you lost the full stop button on your pc? :-)
-
Jesus man have you lost the full stop button on your pc? :-)
No, he's using a female keyboard. :)
-
I have read elseware that he has quit but cannot take a job until July.
-
Is Hughes such a bad option? I'm surprised so many of us are depressed at the thought of him in the dugout. Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer Ancelotti, Van Basten, Van Gaal etc but think Hughes would be better than a lot of the other names being bandied about.
Hughes is desperate to prove himself and has done well in his career. I think he could really take us forward over the next four or five years. He hasn't had a job long enough to build a dynasty, this could be his chance.
-
Well I for one don't want the bastard. He was a dirty conniving player At ManUre and I shouldn't think he's changed one iota.
-
I have read elseware that he has quit but cannot take a job until July.
I wouldn't worry about that. If managers can walk out on clubs with three or four years left on their contracts I see no reason why he won't leave with a month left if somebody comes in for him. It just means Fulham will be able to demand a token amount of compensation.
I suppose Al-Fayed could adopt a "cut off your nose to spite your face" approach and force him to see out his contract. If it's Chelsea this would be a bad idea though. Fulham have loaned a fair few Chelsea players over the years and it wouldn't be in their interest to antagonise them. Maybe Chelsea could sweeten a deal by offering Kakuta or even Sturridge on a year's loan.
-
Reading the dailys i think Highes was overlooked because Villa didn't want to deal with his dodgy agent and sensed that he would be using us as a stepping stone, leaving us as soon as a better offer came along. The times say we have gone back for Ancelotti and Lerner is not put off by his wages, the sticking point though is Ancelotti would want ba very large transfer budget, something that Randy would very nervous about.
Heard his agent is Kia whats his face involved with the Tevez Mascherano deals.
-
I have read elseware that he has quit but cannot take a job until July.
It would probably mean we'd have to pay compensation to Fulham if we want to speak to him before July 1st.
-
Percy, Benitez and Ancelotti ARE better managers than Mark Hughes. That is a fact. They are only 3 years his senior and have both won trophies. The fact they have both won trophies in 2 countries is even more impressive. Both have won domestic leagues. The best Hughes has done is 6th, and had the opportunity to push on at City and in reality didn't take it, was a little unlucky but go the boot from the big time.
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
So if a forward plays for Man Utd and has a better goal ratio than one playing for say, Everton, he is better - FACT! Nothing to do with playing for a team that attacks all the time, rather than playing for one that doesn't create half as many chances. Makes you wonder why someone as clued up as Fergie buys these inferior strikers from clubs like Everton when he's already got players with better goal ratios.
And of course, when Stein, Busby, Shankley and Wenger were appointed as managers of the clubs they built into what they are today, there were other managers with more achievements, therefore - better managers - FACT! - who should have got the job before them. If only!
Well said
-
Isn't some of the stuff about Hughes a bit harsh?
He had a clause in his contract allowing him to leave if he gave 30 days notice on June 1st
He's done that.
-
Isn't some of the stuff about Hughes a bit harsh?
He had a clause in his contract allowing him to leave if he gave 30 days notice on June 1st
He's done that.
That's pretty much how I see it. Zoltan Gera joined Fulham on a free because his contract had run out. Nobody suggested they should feel morally obliged to give West Brazil compensation.
-
Absolutely paulie.
Momo al Fayed gave him the contract with the clause in, he's triggered it, end of contract. Arguably al Fayed was smart enough to know Hughes would be looking elsewhere, hence the contract terms.
My only question mark would be his loyalty to the Villa cause. He, like Ancelotti would be off after one successful season.
-
Neill O'Martin on Twitter is on fire lately.
I loved this one this morning:
NeillOMartin
Could I work with the wee Harrods fella, seriously? An excitable conspiracy theorist associated with extortionate shopping...and Al Fayed?
Fantastic!
-
Absolutely paulie.
Momo al Fayed gave him the contract with the clause in, he's triggered it, end of contract. Arguably al Fayed was smart enough to know Hughes would be looking elsewhere, hence the contract terms.
My only question mark would be his loyalty to the Villa cause. He, like Ancelotti would be off after one successful season.
That would be my big concern too. You can say what you want about him only triggering a clause in his contract, but somehow I think if a villa manager did similar (assuming he was somewhat successful), there'd be a lot of justifiably angry people on here, myself included.
-
Those who use their past achievements in temrs of trophies won, to justify that Rafa and Carlo are better managers than Hughes, are showing a failing of logic of epic proportions.
Had Carlo won two champions leagues with blackburn the comparsion would be fair, but as they were at different clubs it is not fair to compare the two. Avram Grant took Chelsea to second in the league and the chapions league final.....yet most would prefer Hughes who has never finished that high.
Not saying Hughes is superior, just pointing out the painful flaws in the argument
-
Maybe Hughes was so annoyed about the Wacko statue, and Al Fayed's subsequent statement that if the fans don't like it they can fuck off to Chelsea, that he thought it wasn't the sort of club he wanted to work for. Just a thought.
-
Not saying Hughes is superiour, just pointing out the painful flaws in the argument
You can point to theoretical flaws but the fact is that Benitez and Ancelotti are better managers than Mark Hughes by any objective measure. If Hughes has not had the plum jobs they have had there is a reason for that. If someone wants to offer a convincing argument in support of the claim that Hughes is as good as those two, if not better, then I'm willing to be persuaded. Pointing out that he hasn't been at the clubs they have is not such an argument; it's mitigation for his lack of achievement. Besides he did have a plum job at Man City, with megabucks to spend, and was bombed out in 18 months.
-
And how long was it before Benitez was bombed out of his last job?
-
And how long was it before Benitez was bombed out of his last job?
Fair point, but he can console himself with the knowledge that he has league titles and domestic and continental trophies on his CV to remind him that he is a quality manager. Hughes ... well Hughes does not.
-
Not saying Hughes is superiour, just pointing out the painful flaws in the argument
You can point to theoretical flaws but the fact is that Benitez and Ancelotti are better managers than Mark Hughes by any objective measure. If Hughes has not had the plum jobs they have had there is a reason for that. If someone wants to offer a convincing argument in support of the claim that Hughes is as good as those two, if not better, then I'm willing to be persuaded. Pointing out that he hasn't been at the clubs they have is not such an argument; it's mitigation for his lack of achievement. Besides he did have a plum job at Man City, with megabucks to spend, and was bombed out in 18 months.
I like ozzjim's argument, which you thanked him for, that 'proves' as a 'fact' that any striker with a superior goal ratio to another one is always better. Your theory also supports, sorry, establishes as a fact, that Alex McLeish is a better manager than Graham Taylor.
-
I like ozzjim's argument, which you thanked him for, that 'proves' as a 'fact' that any striker with a superior goal ratio to another one is always better. Your theory also supports, sorry, establishes as a fact, that Alex McLeish is a better manager than Graham Taylor.
While your argument, such as it is, holds that Mark Hughes is as a great a manager as Shankley, Busby, Stein and Wenger on the basis of all the honours he has yet to win.
-
Personally for a young manager, I think Hughes has done nicely. Whose to say that Mark Hughes won't be in a plum job in 5 years time? Most managers don't just walk in to a massive club, they work their way through by consistently proving their ability and improving.
I think Hughes has so far done that where ever he has been.
-
And how long was it before Benitez was bombed out of his last job?
Fair point, but he can console himself with the knowledge that he has league titles and domestic and continental trophies on his CV to remind him that he is a quality manager. Hughes ... well Hughes does not.
He should have got the Barcelona job instead of that inferior manager - FACT - Guardiola. Being a superior manager - FACT - he would have achieved much more - FACT.
Are you Rafa Benitez hilts?
-
He should have got the Barcelona job instead of that inferior manager - FACT - Guardiola. Being a superior manager - FACT - he would have achieved much more - FACT.
Whereas it should have gone to Lee Clark who is as good as Arsene Wenger - FACT.
-
Are you Rafa Benitez hilts?
Are you Alf Stewart?
-
I like ozzjim's argument, which you thanked him for, that 'proves' as a 'fact' that any striker with a superior goal ratio to another one is always better. Your theory also supports, sorry, establishes as a fact, that Alex McLeish is a better manager than Graham Taylor.
While your argument, such as it is, holds that Mark Hughes is as a great a manager as Shankley, Busby, Stein and Wenger on the basis of all the honours he has yet to win.
When did I say that? I haven't even said he's better than CA or RF. I'm just saying that your theory, that the manager with the best CV or list of achievements is always the best, is not a fact. Am I right or wrong?
-
hilts_coolerking
You can point to theoretical flaws but the fact is that Benitez and Ancelotti are better managers than Mark Hughes by any objective measure. If Hughes has not had the plum jobs they have had there is a reason for that. If someone wants to offer a convincing argument in support of the claim that Hughes is as good as those two, if not better, then I'm willing to be persuaded. Pointing out that he hasn't been at the clubs they have is not such an argument; it's mitigation for his lack of achievement. Besides he did have a plum job at Man City, with megabucks to spend, and was bombed out in 18 months.
To be fair it is not a theoretical flaw, it is a gaping chasm in the validity of your argument.
-
When did I say that? I haven't even said he's better than CA or RF. I'm just saying that your theory, that the manager with the best CV or list of achievements is always the best, is not a fact. Am I right or wrong?
When did I say that? What I said, before you grabbed hold of the wrong end of the stick with both hands, is that Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Mark Hughes. Any objective measure will tell you that. You've done nothing to prove that statement to be false and it appears you might even agree with it. I said nothing about whether I consider them to be better managers than Guardiola, Shankley, Wenger et al.
If you don't agree with it, perhaps you could explain why you believe Mark Hughes is as good as or better than Benitez or Ancelotti. You said yesterday you thought there might be a case for him being a better fit for the Villa job, given our current circumstances, than those two, but that is a different argument.
-
To be fair it is not a theoretical flaw, it is a gaping chasm in the validity of your argument.
An argument to which you have as yet offered no reply. Like I say, I'm willing to be persuaded by any convincing argument which sets out why Hughes is a better manager - or even just as good as - Ancelotti or Benitez but so far no-one has even tried.
-
it's all personal opinion isn't it? A bit like with strikers - some people think those who score the most can be defined as the best and others think it is more complex than that..
-
it's all personal opinion isn't it? A bit like with strikers - some people think those who score the most can be defined as the best and others think it is more complex than that..
Indeed but sometimes it is as simple as saying Darren Bent is a better striker than Brett Ormerod.
-
To be fair it is not a theoretical flaw, it is a gaping chasm in the validity of your argument.
An argument to which you have as yet offered no reply. Like I say, I'm willing to be persuaded by any convincing argument which sets out why Hughes is a better manager - or even just as good as - Ancelotti or Benitez but so far no-one has even tried.
Perhaps because no-one, as far as I can recall, has stated it.
You think, sorry, know, that CA and RF are better than Hughes. This is, according to you, what makes it a fact: their achievements, up to now, in the game. Have I got that right?
-
Ancelotti, Hughes, moyes and Benitez are all good condensers and each would do a good job- my worry is we might end up with mclaren and he is not in my opinion of the calibre of the other 4.
-
An argument to which you have as yet offered no reply. Like I say, I'm willing to be persuaded by any convincing argument which sets out why Hughes is a better manager - or even just as good as - Ancelotti or Benitez but so far no-one has even tried.
I am not arguing against what you are saying as such, just that method at which you arrive at your conclusion is flawed. Not taking account of the clubs and situations managers find themselves in when assesing their merits means that what you are claiming as an objective measure is actually not. An analogy is watching how the fortunes of Formula One drivers change when the relative perfomace of their cars / teams change.
-
Another analogy, the headmaster/mistress of a top private school gets better A level results than the local comp...
Who's the better headmaster/headmistres?
You can't tell, till you look at the "value added"
-
Perhaps because no-one, as far as I can recall, has stated it.
You think, sorry, know, that CA and RF are better than Hughes. This is, according to you, what makes it a fact: their achievements, up to now, in the game. Have I got that right?
You took great exception to me stating last night that they are better managers than Hughes. It seems logical to conclude that is because you disagree.
If you are now saying you don't disagree then fine. I'm glad you've finally seen sense. Although if you do agree, I'm puzzled as to why you apparently think their achievements (and Hughes's lack of) has little to do with it and would have to ask what you're basing it on.
If you do disagree, and you do think Hughes is as good a manager, or better, than Ancelotti and Benitez then perhaps you'd like to explain why you think that.
-
Ancelotti, Hughes, moyes and Benitez are all good condensers and each would do a good job- my worry is we might end up with mclaren and he is not in my opinion of the calibre of the other 4.
Help Randy sort all our debt into one manageable monthly payment.
-
I am not arguing against what you are saying as such, just that method at which you arrive at your conclusion is flawed. Not taking account of the clubs and situations managers find themselves in when assesing their merits means that what you are claiming as an objective measure is actually not. An analogy is watching how the fortunes of Formula One drivers change when the relative perfomace of their cars / teams change.
So although you think the method is flawed, the conclusion is correct? As I said, your argument about not having been at the same clubs, while correct, is not an argument that Hughes is as good a manager as Benitez or Ancelotti; it is a mitigation for his lack of achievement. It does not indicate that had Hughes had the same opportunities as Ancelotti or Benitez, that he would have achieved the same as them. He may have done, he may not; I have seen nothing outstanding in his career, no evidence of exceptional skill, to indicate he would have.
What I'm still looking for is a convincing argument that Hughes can be considered as good as or better than Ancelotti or Benitez.
-
You think, sorry, know, that CA and RF are better than Hughes. This is, according to you, what makes it a fact: their achievements, up to now, in the game. Have I got that right?
Hey Perc, Rafa's a massive fan of zonal marking isn't he?
*wink*
-
I am not commenting on the conclusion. There would seem little point.
Personally I may think that Benitez is a fucking train wreck. He finished below Hughes last season they were in the Premier League together. You may point that the situation with the owners at Liverpool made things difficult for Rafa, I could then counter the point that the situation at City made it difficult for Hughes. I may see Rafa as damaged goods and Hughes as a future star of the game.
They key difference is you would claim your view point is based on objective measures, while I undertand that without accounting for variables that are too many to detail it is essentially down to opions, and that you can compare appled to oranges all day long and you will never be talking from a position where the basis for your opinions are valid.
-
Perhaps because no-one, as far as I can recall, has stated it.
You think, sorry, know, that CA and RF are better than Hughes. This is, according to you, what makes it a fact: their achievements, up to now, in the game. Have I got that right?
You took great exception to me stating last night that they are better managers than Hughes. It seems logical to conclude that is because you disagree.
If you are now saying you don't disagree then fine. I'm glad you've finally seen sense. Although if you do agree, I'm puzzled as to why you apparently think their achievements (and Hughes's lack of) has little to do with it and would have to ask what you're basing it on.
If you do disagree, and you do think Hughes is as good a manager, or better, than Ancelotti and Benitez then perhaps you'd like to explain why you think that.
I don't disagree, I just don't know. You say you do know, that's what I disagree with. My opinion is that perhaps Hughes might be a better Villa manager, and that's based on where we are as a club as much as on the respective merits of the candidates. If Randy is planning to get Ancelotti in and surround him with the kind of players he had at Milan, I'm with you. He's proved himself at that level. If the financial backing is going to be similar to what we've seen the last four years - and I'm not knocking it - I think Hughes - with his record of exceeding expectations wherever he's been - could maybe take us a couple of steps closer to a point where we could attract the kind of players and coaches that so-called elite clubs do.
You say 'by any measure' CA and RF are better. Here's a couple for you: exceeding expectations at low-to-middle ranking Premiership clubs; exceeding expectations at international level.
-
I am not commenting on the conclusion. There would seem little point.
Personally I may think that Benitez is a fucking train wreck. He finished below Hughes last season they were in the Premier League together. You may point that the situation with the owners at Liverpool made things difficult for Rafa, I could then counter the point that the situation at City made it difficult for Hughes. I may see Rafa as damaged goods and Hughes as a future star of the game.
They key difference is you would claim your view point is based on objective measures, while I undertand that without accounting for variables that are too many to detail it is essentially down to opions, and that you can compare appled to oranges all day long and you will never be talking from a position where the basis for your opinions are valid.
The bases for my opinions are perfectly valid, supported as they are by objective analysis. Valid enough, in fact, for you to agree with the conclusions. But while we're on the subject of invalids, on what are you basing your opinion that Hughes is a 'future star of the game'. What's he dones thus far to lead you to that conclusion?
-
I see I may have over estimated you.
-
You think, sorry, know, that CA and RF are better than Hughes. This is, according to you, what makes it a fact: their achievements, up to now, in the game. Have I got that right?
Hey Perc, Rafa's a massive fan of zonal marking isn't he?
*wink*
Yes, although amazingly, that know-nothing incompetent who ripped the Villa off for four years somehow managed to fluke the Villa defence into doing it better than Rafa the genius did with Liverpool. But one particular expert poster on here thinks it's shit, so it's probably shit, whatever Rafa and the anti-Christ think.
-
I don't disagree, I just don't know. You say you do know, that's what I disagree with. My opinion is that perhaps Hughes might be a better Villa manager, and that's based on where we are as a club as much as on the respective merits of the candidates. If Randy is planning to get Ancelotti in and surround him with the kind of players he had at Milan, I'm with you. He's proved himself at that level. If the financial backing is going to be similar to what we've seen the last four years - and I'm not knocking it - I think Hughes - with his record of exceeding expectations wherever he's been - could maybe take us a couple of steps closer to a point where we could attract the kind of players and coaches that so-called elite clubs do.
You say 'by any measure' CA and RF are better. Here's a couple for you: exceeding expectations at low-to-middle ranking Premiership clubs; exceeding expectations at international level.
So all this ridiculous toing and froing for the last 24 hours boils down to me saying "I know such and such" whereas you prefer to say "I believe such and such", and yet we both agree on the substance? If you're not confident enough about your opinions (and I can't believe that's true of you) to say "I know such and such" and prefer to qualify it, that's fine but it's got nothing to do with me or how I express myself. I'm happy with what I said and I'm 100% confident it's true. As I've said (many times now) Hughes may or may not go on to prove himself to be a better manager than the other two, although it'll take more than a couple of reasonable finishes at lower league clubs to convince me of that. Also, there is a case to say he may be a better fit for the Villa job than the other two, as things stand; I don't hold to that view myself and have said why. I accept others think differently. But as of today I know Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Mark Hughes.
For the life of me I can't understand why you've decided to cause such a fuss about this relatively minor point.
-
I see I may have over estimated you.
I'm brighter than you think I am but not as bright as you think you are.
-
hilts -you are getting some stick because of the last sentence in your post - to say that you "know" that Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Hughes is a huge claim. What's more, you not only claim that, you claim that you know that!
-
I know that on current form Benitez is the worst of the three and that Hughes over achieved while Ancelotti was sacked for his performance.
-
hilts -you are getting some stick because of the last sentence in your post - to say that you "know" that Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Hughes is a huge claim. What's more, you not only claim that, you claim that you know that!
As I've said to the rest, tell me why Hughes should be regarded in the same class as the other two.
-
I think we need to refer to this thread: http://www.heroesandvillains.info/forumv3/index.php?topic=43689.0
Is it a fact that Hughes is a poorer manager than Benitez, is it a perception or is it an opinion? My opinion is that it is an opinion. It is a valid opinion (I'm tempted to agree with it) as it can be supported by evidence but then so can the opposing view. My point is that for all the talk of Benitez being a better manager than Hughes and this supposedly being pointed to by all objective measures is false. Football is not scientific or objective. If it was Man United would win pretty much all their games as their team is so much better than other ones and betting on football would be a piece of piss. It is completely wrong to compare Hughes' performance at Blackburn to Rafa's at Liverpool or Carlo's at Chelsea. Different clubs, different times and differing dependent and independent variables. Therefore my opinion is that it is not an absolute truth.
However, I would rather have Ancelotti or Benitez as manager than Hughes. But I'm not absolutely sure I will prove to be right with Benitez. As my perception of him is that he may have lost it, that he is on his way down and may be bat shit mental which is why I cannot guarantee he would do a better job than Hughes and why if our board share my perception I can understand them going for Hughes instead of him. I find it harder to argue this about Ancelotti but maybe they believe he will be a better fit for Villa than him. I still think Hughes is a decent enough appointment which is why I am unhappy to see a lot of people dismissing his quality (by all means reject him on grounds of being an utter prick though!) as we can do so much worse.
However, the subject is about as academic as this post is long boring as I don't see Hughes being our new manager now.
-
Can we go back to discussing spurs' accounts please?
-
hilts -you are getting some stick because of the last sentence in your post - to say that you "know" that Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Hughes is a huge claim. What's more, you not only claim that, you claim that you know that!
Exactly.
I THINK that Alex Ferguson is a better manager than Ian Holloway - but if both were given 12 months in charge of say Tamworth, Ian Holloway might well make a better job of it.
I would be happy with either Ancelotti or Hughes in charge of the Villa - but looking at the technically average squad the new manager will inherit no-one could say for sure which of those two would do a better job with them. It's all a matter of opinion and guesswork on our part, none of us KNOW.
-
I think we need to refer to this thread: http://www.heroesandvillains.info/forumv3/index.php?topic=43689.0
Is it a fact that Hughes is a poorer manager than Benitez, is it a perception or is it an opinion? My opinion is that it is an opinion. It is a valid opinion (I'm tempted to agree with it) as it can be supported by evidence but then so can the opposing view. My point is that for all the talk of Benitez being a better manager than Hughes and this supposedly being pointed to by all objective measures is false. Football is not scientific or objective. If it was Man United would win pretty much all their games as their team is so much better than other ones and betting on football would be a piece of piss. It is completely wrong to compare Hughes' performance at Blackburn to Rafa's at Liverpool or Carlo's at Chelsea. Different clubs, different times and differing dependent and independent variables. Therefore my opinion is that it is not an absolute truth.
However, I would rather have Ancelotti or Benitez as manager than Hughes. But I'm not absolutely sure I will prove to be right with Benitez. As my perception of him is that he may have lost it, that he is on his way down and may be bat shit mental which is why I cannot guarantee he would do a better job than Hughes and why if our board share my perception I can understand them going for Hughes instead of him. I find it harder to argue this about Ancelotti but maybe they believe he will be a better fit for Villa than him. I still think Hughes is a decent enough appointment which is why I am unhappy to see a lot of people dismissing his quality (by all means reject him on grounds of being an utter prick though!) as we can do so much worse.
However, the subject is about as academic as this post is long boring as I don't see Hughes being our new manager now.
A good post. One comment I would make though is that comparisons about performances at different clubs at different times can be made and are made, all the time. And conclusions can be drawn and are drawn from them. Otherwise you could substitute Hughes name for Glenn Roeder, Alan Ball or any other very poor manager and say exactly the same about him: i.e. you can't say Ancelotti and Benitez are better than Glenn Roeder because they haven't done the same jobs. Meaning, you could never say that any one manager was better than any other. Meaning there would be no pantheon of great managers, like those Percy referred to yesterday. So (and I hesitate to say this because no doubt some bright spark will pipe up to the contrary) I think it's is perfectly possibile to say I know Matt Busby was a better manager than John Sitton, despite them coming from different eras, having been at different clubs and all the rest of it.
The grey area comes at the point at which you are no longer confident in being able to identify the gap between any two managers. So I would say I know Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Mark Hughes, but I wouldn't say I know David Moyes is a better manager than Martin O'Neill, because I don't.
-
I THINK that Alex Ferguson is a better manager than Ian Holloway - but if both were given 12 months in charge of say Tamworth, Ian Holloway might well make a better job of it.
And if Holloway did that, would you seriously begin to doubt your view that Ferguson is a better manager?
-
But as of today I know Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Mark Hughes.
For the life of me I can't understand why you've decided to cause such a fuss about this relatively minor point.
Well, IMO, it was you who caused a fuss by continuing to assert your opinion as fact, when there are countless examples that prove your logic to be flawed.
For instance, Christmas 1989, when the Man Utd fans at Villa Park were watching their team getting stuffed and singing 'Fergie, Fergie, on the dole', by your logic George Graham was a better manager than theirs. How did that 'fact' pan out?
As regards certain managers suiting certain jobs, who else could have took on the 'shambles' at the Villa in '87, with Doug Ellis as their boss, and leave us three years later as the second best team in the country, the only English team in Europe, with players like McGrath, Yorke and Platt in the squad? That achievement was bordering on the miraculous IMO.
Were there better managers than Graham Taylor available? Maybe. Could anybody in the world done that particular job better? Well, I suppose that depends if you think somebody else could have won us the league. I'm pretty sure they couldn't, but I don't actually know.
-
For instance, Christmas 1989, when the Man Utd fans at Villa Park were watching their team getting stuffed and singing 'Fergie, Fergie, on the dole', by your logic George Graham was a better manager than theirs. How did that 'fact' pan out?
At that point, George Graham was a better manager than Ferguson, though. That's the point.
Ferguson had lots of potential, which he went on to fulfill in spades, but at that point, he'd achieved comparatively little.
Mark Hughes may well go on to be a great manager, he might even top Ferguson's achievements, but at this point we don't know. There are thousands of examples of managers who have been ranked as very good when in the early stages of their career, but have gone on to achieve fuck all.
Looked at that way, i can see why people would use trophies won as a measure of managers, as that is fact - achievements in the bank, not achievements which you think might happen.
That was certainly the case when people on here spent four years telling us how meaningful O'Neill's two league cups and bunch of Scottish trophies were, anyway, although that seems not to be the case now.
-
Weren't Newton Heath also in Europe as cup winners?
-
And it's near impossible to know how a manager will do in the future. Are they just a flash in the pan having a couple of good seasons, have they lost the hunger having done it all etc?
I remember Brian Little looking the most likely candidate to be next England manager, and Gregory being a "good" enough manager to have his club top of the league for months. Who would have thought at those times that their careers would go into such rapid decline?
-
Well, IMO, it was you who caused a fuss by continuing to assert your opinion as fact, when there are countless examples that prove your logic to be flawed.
For instance, Christmas 1989, when the Man Utd fans at Villa Park were watching their team getting stuffed and singing 'Fergie, Fergie, on the dole', by your logic George Graham was a better manager than theirs. How did that 'fact' pan out?
As regards certain managers suiting certain jobs, who else could have took on the 'shambles' at the Villa in '87, with Doug Ellis as their boss, and leave us three years later as the second best team in the country, the only English team in Europe, with players like McGrath, Yorke and Platt in the squad? That achievement was bordering on the miraculous IMO.
Were there better managers than Graham Taylor available? Maybe. Could anybody in the world done that particular job better? Well, I suppose that depends if you think somebody else could have won us the league. I'm pretty sure they couldn't, but I don't actually know.
As I recall this thread was proceeding along perfectly sedately until you waded in. What you've done is mistake someone saying "I know x to be true" for someone saying "I know everything". All I have said is that I know Benitez and Ancelotti are better managers than Mark Hughes.
Similarly you have somehow, and bizarrely, mistaken me saying that I know Benitez and Ancelotti are better managers than Mark Hughes for me saying something about the relative merits of George Graham and Alex Ferguson in 1989, and the availability of better managers for Villa in 1987 than Graham Taylor.
It's stretching a point too far to keep this up because we differ as to whether the word "believe" or "know" should be used, surely?
-
I think it's as much to do with timing as it is with managerial talent. Ferguson was blessed with the crop of talent that has only just reached it's sell by date. Wenger inherited a super-tight back 4.
Houllier, good manager though he is, came t Villa at the wrong time (we all know the reasons).
Whoever is next actually comes to us at a good stage in our journey. We've under-achieved and so the new manager will have little to follow. However, it needs to be the right manager at the right time in his own development. We are, as ever, floating around underneath the upper-reaches of the table. We have some promising talent and some existing players who have already proved they can play a bit. We also have a chairman who backs his man. All reasons why I think Moyes is the best bet. He has something to prove but isn't a relative novice (like Martinez) and can point towards one qualification into the CL - something Hughes, O Neill etc etc cannot boast. He cant take Everton any further without them being bought by a Sheik and MUST be ready for a crack somewhere else by now. He aint going to get a bigger gig without proving himself somewhere else. Might as well be at Villa.
There ya go, easy.
:)
-
i know this is long shot , but what about simon grayson as manager
-
i know this is long shot , but what about simon grayson as manager
See Roberto Matinez.
Not yet, thanks.
-
Mark Hughes may well go on to be a great manager, he might even top Ferguson's achievements, but at this point we don't know
Hilts reckons he does.
Of the three under discussion, two got sacked last season for not achieving the targets set them while one did better than expected.
Scott Parker played in a relegates team last season yet was voted player of the year, by the simplistic reasoning being put forward Micheal Carrick is a better player because he got a champions medal.
-
Mark Hughes may well go on to be a great manager, he might even top Ferguson's achievements, but at this point we don't know
Hilts reckons he does.
Of the three under discussion, two got sacked last season for not achieving the targets set them while one did better than expected.
Scott Parker played in a relegates team last season yet was voted player of the year, by the simplistic reasoning being put forward Micheal Carrick is a better player because he got a champions medal.
I've said nothing of the sort. I know Benitez and Ancelotti are superior to Hughes now. Whether Hughes will prove himself to be their equal in time, who knows? I haven't seen any signs of exceptional talent or any outstanding skills from him so far, so I have my doubts.
You're making the same mistake as Percy. What I know about Benitez, Ancelotti and Hughes has no bearing on the relative merits of Carrick and Parker.
-
I THINK that Alex Ferguson is a better manager than Ian Holloway - but if both were given 12 months in charge of say Tamworth, Ian Holloway might well make a better job of it.
And if Holloway did that, would you seriously begin to doubt your view that Ferguson is a better manager?
Whatever I thought, I'd look pretty stupid either way to then come out and say I KNOW which one is the best - because people could quite rightly argue otherwise.
It's a similar arguement that often crops up when it comes round to the Manager of the Year Award, take 2009-10 for instance.
Ancelotti won the double with Chelsea, yet the Manager of the Year award went to Roy Hodgson after he'd worked wonders with Fulham on limited resources. But who really was the best manager that season? Impossible for anyone really to KNOW, because of the different hand of cards they'd been dealt.
-
Let's compare managerial records:
Ancelotti
Trophies
Juventus
Intertoto Cup: 1 1999
Milan
Serie A: 1 2004
Coppa Italia: 1 2003
Supercoppa Italiana: 1 2004
UEFA Champions League: 2 2003, 2007
UEFA Super Cup: 2 2003, 2007
FIFA Club World Cup: 1 2007
Chelsea
Premier League: 1 2009–10
FA Cup: 1 2010
Community Shield: 1 2009
Awards
Serie A coach of the Year: 2001, 2004
Albo Panchina d'Oro: 2002–03, 2003–04
UEFA Manager of the Year: 2002–03
World Soccer Magazine Manager of the Year: 2003
The World's best Club Coach 2007
Premier League Manager of the Month : November 2009, August 2010, March 2011, April 2011[15]
UEFA Champions League Manager of the Year: 2002–03
Benitez
Trophies
Real Madrid U-19s
Spain U-19 League (1): 1993
Spain U-19 Cup (2): 1991, 1993
Extremadura
Segunda División Promotion (1): 1997–98
Tenerife
Segunda División (1): 2000–01
Valencia
La Liga (2): 2001–02, 2003–04
UEFA Cup (1): 2003–04
Liverpool
UEFA Champions League (1): 2004–05
FA Cup (1): 2005–06
FA Community Shield (1): 2006
UEFA Super Cup (1): 2005
Internazionale
Supercoppa Italiana (1): 2010
FIFA Club World Cup (1): 2010
Awards
Don Balón Award (1): 2001–02
UEFA Manager of the Year(2): 2003–04, 2004–05
FA Premier League Manager of the Month (5): November 2005, December 2005, January 2007, October 2008, March 2009
Hughes
Trophies
None
Awards
None
I'd say that there is evidence of career progression and having a good record at a lower level in Benitez' case, a consistent record from Ancelotti.
In addition, both Benitez and Ancelotti have been recognised as being the best coach/manager on a number of occasions.
I'd say it's a fact that Hughes isn't as good as the others.
It's hard to argue that Hughes could be considered to be a better manager whichever way you look at it.
-
Also, we'd have never have signed Dwight Yorke if Graham Taylor had worked on the policy of who was the best striker at that time. Sometimes, you have to take a "leap of faith". What's best now, might not be best for the future and how long does "now" last?
-
Whatever I thought, I'd look pretty stupid either way to then come out and say I KNOW which one is the best - because people could quite rightly argue otherwise.
It's a similar arguement that often crops up when it comes round to the Manager of the Year Award, take 2009-10 for instance.
Ancelotti won the double with Chelsea, yet the Manager of the Year award went to Roy Hodgson after he'd worked wonders with Fulham on limited resources. But who really was the best manager that season? Impossible for anyone really to KNOW, because of the different hand of cards they'd been dealt.
I think you'd only look pretty stupid if you argued that Holloway was a better manager than Ferguson based on one good season at Tamworth. Similarly I wouldn't argue Woy is a better manager than Ancelotti on the basis of one season. As it goes, they both had good seasons. But look at their career records and it's clear that Ancelotti is the better manager; they're closer than Ancelotti and Hughes certainly but there's still daylight between them.
-
Mark Hughes may well go on to be a great manager, he might even top Ferguson's achievements, but at this point we don't know
Hilts reckons he does.
Of the three under discussion, two got sacked last season for not achieving the targets set them while one did better than expected.
Scott Parker played in a relegates team last season yet was voted player of the year, by the simplistic reasoning being put forward Micheal Carrick is a better player because he got a champions medal.
I've said nothing of the sort. I know Benitez and Ancelotti are superior to Hughes now. Whether Hughes will prove himself to be their equal in time, who knows? I haven't seen any signs of exceptional talent or any outstanding skills from him so far, so I have my doubts.
You're making the same mistake as Percy. What I know about Benitez, Ancelotti and Hughes has no bearing on the relative merits of Carrick and Parker.
Your whole reasoning is simplistic, it's been pointed out by far more patient men than me but you will accept no other view point. You have decided that more trophies automatically means better when it is only one of many factors. If you were a big enough man to accept that it is just your opinion and that others are also valid it would have nipped this whole boring exchange in the bud.
-
Of the three under discussion, two got sacked last season for not achieving the targets set them while one did better than expected.
One of them got sacked by a known mentalist who likes to run the team himself, 12 months after winning the double.
Martin O'Neill's trophy haul was frequently cited on here as proof of his being a good manager, despite the last meaningful one being 10 plus years prior to his arrival here, so how is it so easy to dismiss someone who this time last year was riding around on an open top bus holding two trophies?
Scott Parker played in a relegates team last season yet was voted player of the year, by the simplistic reasoning being put forward Micheal Carrick is a better player because he got a champions medal.
Not the same. It is much easier to judge players than managers because we see their performances week in week out, in that sense Parker demonstrated himself to currently be a better player than Carrick this season.
With managers a lot of their work happens out of sight, they get judged on results - which are facts - far more than players do.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's one way and one way only to judge managers, just that trophies banked are more of a measure than potential.
I remember Owen Coyle getting hyped as the new wunder kid three months ago, and look how that turned out.
-
Dr. Um, please also note that many of the achievements that Ancelotti and Benitez have are from 5 or more years ago and Hilts is at pains to talk about who is best "now", not in the past and not in the future - RIGHT NOW
-
Dr. Um, please also note that many of the achievements that Ancelotti and Benitez have are from 5 or more years ago and Hilts is at pains to talk about who is best "now", not in the past and not in the future - RIGHT NOW
Even if you look at the last five years, Ancelotti still slips in a Champions League, a PL title, an FA Cup and a UEFA Super Cup.
In other words, barring league cups, Aston Villa's entire trophy haul for 80 odd years.
-
With managers a lot of their work happens out of sight, they get judged on results - which are facts - far more than players do
Within the context of the targets they've been set. You only have to see the lack of consensus among a few people on this site to who would be better for us now to realise that is far more subjective than is being suggested.
-
Pires won a hell of a lot in his time, too.
-
Your whole reasoning is simplistic, it's been pointed out by far more patient men than me but you will accept no other view point. You have decided that more trophies automatically means better when it is only one of many factors. If you were a big enough man to accept that it is just your opinion and that others are also valid it would have nipped this whole boring exchange in the bud.
If you think Hughes is a better manager than Ancelotti or Hughes, and that I should reconsider what I know, then perhaps you would explain why. Perhaps you can also explain what all these other factors are and why they mean that Hughes's career to date means he can be considered in the same class as Ancelotti and Benitez.
What other conclusion can be reached about their merits as managers, based on their careers up until now? If I hear a convincing argument that Ancelotti and Benitez are no better than Hughes then I'm happy to be persuaded but so far there has been nothing offered. If, as you say, other opinions of their relative merits are valid, let's hear them and put them to the test.
So far, despite various people taking umbrage at me for saying I know it to be true, no-one has actually been bold enough to say that it isn't. All there has been is unrelated arguments, i.e. that Hughes may be a better fit for the Villa job, given our current circumstances; or that one day Hughes may prove himself to be as good as Ancelotti and Benitez (without saying what leads them to believe that).
-
Dr. Um, please also note that many of the achievements that Ancelotti and Benitez have are from 5 or more years ago and Hilts is at pains to talk about who is best "now", not in the past and not in the future - RIGHT NOW
Ancellotti won the league and FA Cup a year ago. He finished second in the league this time behind the team that have won it more than any other and four out of the last five years, that was classed as failing.
Benitez won the Italian Cup in August, he won the World Club cup in December, that's fairly recent and not long after he left as his team weren't doing so well in the league.
Hughes did ok though his team finished a place lower in the league than his predecessor's and really the only club you could argue that perhaps he shouldn't have finished above was Villa.
-
I don't think Benitez could have done as good a job with Wales as Hughes. I don't think Ancelotti could have got Fulham to 8th in the table last season. I wouldn't claim that either was unequivocal proof of superiority because it does not take in to account context. You think it is all 100% objective, I don't.
If by making a good job of managing a small department you get put in charge of larger one and are a success at that does that mean you have become a better manager or were you always good only didn't have the opportunities previously?
-
Ancellotti won the league and FA Cup a year ago. He finished second in the league this time behind the team that have won it more than any other and four out of the last five years, that was classed as failing.
Benitez won the Italian Cup in August, he won the World Club cup in December, that's fairly recent and not long after he left as his team weren't doing so well in the league.
Hughes did ok though his team finished a place lower in the league than his predecessor's and really the only club you could argue that perhaps he shouldn't have finished above was Villa.
Exactly right. And yet stating that Ancelotti and Benitez are better managers than Hughes has inexplicably caused a fuss.
-
I bet Ireland is rubbing his hands at the prospect of Hughes coming here... and if he does, we'll never get rid of him.
-
It's stretching a point too far to keep this up because we differ as to whether the word "believe" or "know" should be used, surely?
I tend to use the word 'believe' when I mean 'believe', and the word 'know' when I mean 'know' - saves confusion. You think you know but really you just believe, as with the careers of the candidates ongoing it's impossible to know and ridiculous to say that you do. Never mind, most seem to have worked that out now anyway.
-
Ancelotti has managed
Regianna, Parma, Juve , Milan and Chelsea
Now , from reading Wiki - he had success as EVERY club. Regianna - promoted, Parma 2nd , Juve 2nd, Milan League winners, Champs league winners, Chelsea league winners cup winners, 2nd.
success at EVERY club - in fact, with Ancelotti - finishing 2nd seems to be deemed a failure. And don't tell me he was at big clubs. all the teams he took over had won BUGGER ALL - and there was a reason he got the job - coz the predessor had been sacked ! - he then got those clubs challenging, which they wasn't before he came.
Benitez
Took over a good Valencia - WON the league , finished 5th, WON the league and Uefa Cup - thus maintaining success over 3 years, which means you cant just put it down to what he inherited. He then went to Liverpool, where he took over an OKish side, and they got to 5th and a cup final (better than we have acheived for a while) , he then WON the Euro cup mainly with the side he inherited granted, but then BUILT his own side and 5 years later pushed Man U to the final two weeks of the season.
Thus - sustained success over 5 yrs - building his side.
Hughes - over last 7 yrs
Wales - didn't acheive anything before jumping ship at first opportunity for Blackburn
Blackburn - got to 7th - then jumped ship as soon as as Man City offerred him a better opportunity
Man City - sacked after underperforming (open to debate I admit) but still spent nearly 100m and acheived nowt
Fulham - quit after one year as soon as (it appeared) an opportunity came
Villa ? - well if it is - 5th job in 7 years ?
So where is this evidence that Hughes is "better suited to Villa where we are now" - he has NO credentials for building sides - he has never stayed at anywhere long enough to build a team. it seems to me we are looking at the "possibility" with Hughes. Well if thats the case,we might as well get Alex McLeish ! - he has all the hallmarks of Hughes, only he has won things !
So - he isn't a "long term" manager, he hasn't built a side , he has never won anything
THAT is why he is not as good as Benitez and Ancelotti
I rest my case for the prosecution your honour !!!
-
Your whole reasoning is simplistic, it's been pointed out by far more patient men than me but you will accept no other view point. You have decided that more trophies automatically means better when it is only one of many factors. If you were a big enough man to accept that it is just your opinion and that others are also valid it would have nipped this whole boring exchange in the bud.
If you think Hughes is a better manager than Ancelotti or Hughes, and that I should reconsider what I know, then perhaps you would explain why. Perhaps you can also explain what all these other factors are and why they mean that Hughes's career to date means he can be considered in the same class as Ancelotti and Benitez.
What other conclusion can be reached about their merits as managers, based on their careers up until now? If I hear a convincing argument that Ancelotti and Benitez are no better than Hughes then I'm happy to be persuaded but so far there has been nothing offered. If, as you say, other opinions of their relative merits are valid, let's hear them and put them to the test.
So far, despite various people taking umbrage at me for saying I know it to be true, no-one has actually been bold enough to say that it isn't. All there has been is unrelated arguments, i.e. that Hughes may be a better fit for the Villa job, given our current circumstances; or that one day Hughes may prove himself to be as good as Ancelotti and Benitez (without saying what leads them to believe that).
I see what you are saying up to a point. If I was forced to construct a table based on who is the better manger, I would place Ancelotti and Benitez above Hughes. So I would agree with you.
But when trying to solve a specific problem the adjective "better" is vacuous outside of context, and it is the details that make up this context which is the real issue. The foundation of this context is the relative strength of our current position, or where we are now: there is nothing like a consensus even on that on this forum.
For example, we have a large number of very promising youngsters. Those of us paying close attention have worked out that it is now a strategic policy that we must use this resource more than we have before. This does not mean that we will not shell out for a decent player: that is a false dichotomy. Even the most brilliant of all the best managers, if he wants to achieve his objective over a limited term, will be reticent to take the risks to do this. Why should he? By many criteria, Appy Arry rates higher than Hughes, but you sure as hell wouldn't want him to achieve this task.
The big hitters would no doubt energise the fan base and provide some excitement, but they are unlikely to be suited to taking the risk of damaging their reputation by deserting the pragmatic methods which got them where they are.
I think Benitez might work, but then I thought GH might work, so what do I know.
-
With managers a lot of their work happens out of sight, they get judged on results - which are facts - far more than players do
Within the context of the targets they've been set. You only have to see the lack of consensus among a few people on this site to who would be better for us now to realise that is far more subjective than is being suggested.
Chris, are you for Hughes?
Prior to Houllier's appointment you wanted someone to manage us who 'had a history of silverware'
Hughes doesn't fit that bill, unless you're counting his stupid fucking hair.
-
There have been plenty of managers appointed in the past based on glittering success elsewhere. Vialli at Watford, BFR at Coventry, Houllier to us and so forth.
Their past honours don't automatically transfer over to their new club.
Based on trophies only, Vialli was a better manager than Graham Taylor. But who was more suited to the Watford job and who ultimately achieved more based on that clubs targets?
I've nailed my colours to the mast as far as an Ancelotti or Van Gaal are concerned. If there is any possibility they would be interested we should exhaust all avenues.
But I can see where Percy and Chris are coming from and their argument certainly isn't without merit.
-
Your whole reasoning is simplistic, it's been pointed out by far more patient men than me but you will accept no other view point. You have decided that more trophies automatically means better when it is only one of many factors. If you were a big enough man to accept that it is just your opinion and that others are also valid it would have nipped this whole boring exchange in the bud.
If you think Hughes is a better manager than Ancelotti or Hughes, and that I should reconsider what I know, then perhaps you would explain why. Perhaps you can also explain what all these other factors are and why they mean that Hughes's career to date means he can be considered in the same class as Ancelotti and Benitez.
What other conclusion can be reached about their merits as managers, based on their careers up until now? If I hear a convincing argument that Ancelotti and Benitez are no better than Hughes then I'm happy to be persuaded but so far there has been nothing offered. If, as you say, other opinions of their relative merits are valid, let's hear them and put them to the test.
So far, despite various people taking umbrage at me for saying I know it to be true, no-one has actually been bold enough to say that it isn't. All there has been is unrelated arguments, i.e. that Hughes may be a better fit for the Villa job, given our current circumstances; or that one day Hughes may prove himself to be as good as Ancelotti and Benitez (without saying what leads them to believe that).
Your whole reasoning is simplistic, it's been pointed out by far more patient men than me but you will accept no other view point. You have decided that more trophies automatically means better when it is only one of many factors. If you were a big enough man to accept that it is just your opinion and that others are also valid it would have nipped this whole boring exchange in the bud.
If you think Hughes is a better manager than Ancelotti or Hughes, and that I should reconsider what I know, then perhaps you would explain why. Perhaps you can also explain what all these other factors are and why they mean that Hughes's career to date means he can be considered in the same class as Ancelotti and Benitez.
What other conclusion can be reached about their merits as managers, based on their careers up until now? If I hear a convincing argument that Ancelotti and Benitez are no better than Hughes then I'm happy to be persuaded but so far there has been nothing offered. If, as you say, other opinions of their relative merits are valid, let's hear them and put them to the test.
So far, despite various people taking umbrage at me for saying I know it to be true, no-one has actually been bold enough to say that it isn't. All there has been is unrelated arguments, i.e. that Hughes may be a better fit for the Villa job, given our current circumstances; or that one day Hughes may prove himself to be as good as Ancelotti and Benitez (without saying what leads them to believe that).
God help us. The point is everything you say might be true. Apart from you saying that you know it is. Nobody can prove you wrong, because it is not a matter of fact, and they don't know either. But most people admit it.
Sorry about the quote mishap.
-
I tend to use the word 'believe' when I mean 'believe', and the word 'know' when I mean 'know'. You think you 'know', when really you just 'believe', as with the careers of the candidates ongoing it's impossible to 'know' and ridiculous to say that you do. Never mind, most seem to have worked that out now anyway.
I know what I know; you evidently don't. Anyway, you've totally missed the point again: what part of "careers to date" are you struggling with? Whether in future, Mark Hughes goes on to be mentioned as the equal of Ancelotti and Moyes is not something I've made any definitive statement about. You're the one who has brought that up, not me. As you should know.
-
Dont be bloody daft !
BFR to Coventry , Vialli to Watford etc........
How on earth are you comparing a guy who has won Champions League trophies x 2 , various cups, and English League (and all the rest for Benitez) to an ex player who won one FA cup taking over a championship club.
JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I bet if we were linked with Guardiola , Mourinho, Ancelotti, Fergusun, Van Gaal and Vinnie Jones - someoone on here would argue Vinnie Jones would be the better manager for Villa !
If we COULD get Ancelotti - it would be the biggest scoop this club has ever made. And if he gets success himself or not , the statement to the world that Villa are a big club will be made.
We have a chance here to change our history - or just be what we have been - a top 8 club.
Only time will tell if the opportunity works , no one can predict the future , look at Scholari - seemed a match made in heaven that did.
But if we don't even try - then to be fair, we are no more than a small time club like Blues - always talking the talk - never walking the walk !
-
We're far superior to Small Heath Alliance. Always have been, always will be. Check up on your history.
-
I see what you are saying up to a point. If I was forced to construct a table based on who is the better manger, I would place Ancelotti and Benitez above Hughes. So I would agree with you.
But when trying to solve a specific problem the adjective "better" is vacuous outside of context, and it is the details that make up this context which is the real issue. The foundation of this context is the relative strength of our current position, or where we are now: there is nothing like a consensus even on that on this forum.
For example, we have a large number of very promising youngsters. Those of us paying close attention have worked out that it is now a strategic policy that we must use this resource more than we have before. This does not mean that we will not shell out for a decent player: that is a false dichotomy. Even the most brilliant of all the best managers, if he wants to achieve his objective over a limited term, will be reticent to take the risks to do this. Why should he? By many criteria, Appy Arry rates higher than Hughes, but you sure as hell wouldn't want him to achieve this task.
The big hitters would no doubt energise the fan base and provide some excitement, but they are unlikely to be suited to taking the risk of damaging their reputation by deserting the pragmatic methods which got them where they are.
I think Benitez might work, but then I thought GH might work, so what do I know.
That's precisely the distinction I'm drawing. Benitez and Ancelotti are better managers than Hughes, based on their respective careers to date; only a fool or a pedant would attempt to argue otherwise. And for Percy's benefit, it has to spelled out that that doesn't necessarily mean it will always be the case (although no-one has actually said how or why they think Hughes will eventually go on to have a career as successful as theirs).
A separate issue is who is the best fit for the Villa job now, given our current circumstances; I recognise there is a case that can be made for Hughes here although I disagree with it.
I don't see any of that is particularly controversial.
-
Ancelotti and Benitez are well ahead of Hughes for me.
-
We're far superior to Small Heath Alliance. Always have been, always will be. Check up on your history.
Then again most clubs are.
If we were inferior to that lot it would be time to give up.
-
There have been plenty of managers appointed in the past based on glittering success elsewhere. Vialli at Watford, BFR at Coventry, Houllier to us and so forth.
Their past honours don't automatically transfer over to their new club.
Based on trophies only, Vialli was a better manager than Graham Taylor. But who was more suited to the Watford job and who ultimately achieved more based on that clubs targets?
I've nailed my colours to the mast as far as an Ancelotti or Van Gaal are concerned. If there is any possibility they would be interested we should exhaust all avenues.
But I can see where Percy and Chris are coming from and their argument certainly isn't without merit.
I agree with all of that, but that's to do with the separate issue of who is the best fit for the Villa job, given our current circumstances. And even taking that into account, I'd still prefer Ancelotti or Benitez to Hughes because, as I've said, they are demonstrably better managers.
-
Jesus fucking H Christ, give it a fucking rest. Please.
-
I tend to use the word 'believe' when I mean 'believe', and the word 'know' when I mean 'know'. You think you 'know', when really you just 'believe', as with the careers of the candidates ongoing it's impossible to 'know' and ridiculous to say that you do. Never mind, most seem to have worked that out now anyway.
I know what I know; you evidently don't. Anyway, you've totally missed the point again: what part of "careers to date" are you struggling with? Whether in future, Mark Hughes goes on to be mentioned as the equal of Ancelotti and Moyes is not something I've made any definitive statement about. You're the one who has brought that up, not me. As you should know.
.
Is it your assertion that the ability a manager possesses can be factually decided based upon their career to date, with the conditions under which they previously worked of no account?
-
Jesus fucking H Christ, give it a fucking rest. Please.
That is something I would dearly love to do, believe me. This whole thing has been a fuss over the use of one fucking word. One word. That must be some sort of record for H&V.
-
Please stop. My head is spinning.
-
If we COULD get Ancelotti - it would be the biggest scoop this club has ever made.
I agree with this. However, I can't help feeling it'd be a bit like going out and somehow pulling a beautiful woman who you knew was out of your league then spending the forseeable future waiting for the day when somebody more attractive inevitably takes her off you.
-
Please stop. My head is spinning.
I'm getting a swelling in my trousers and my top lip keeps curling up like Elvis.......
-
Terry wants Hughes (or Hiddink) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13641595.stm)
-
Dont be bloody daft !
BFR to Coventry , Vialli to Watford etc........
How on earth are you comparing a guy who has won Champions League trophies x 2 , various cups, and English League (and all the rest for Benitez) to an ex player who won one FA cup taking over a championship club.
JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I bet if we were linked with Guardiola , Mourinho, Ancelotti, Fergusun, Van Gaal and Vinnie Jones - someoone on here would argue Vinnie Jones would be the better manager for Villa !
Trapattoni is effectively working part time for Ireland and is living in London. Maybe we should go for him? Based on your narrow criteria, how could we look past a guy that has won the league in four different countries and a myriad of cups. Svennis is only up the road at Leicester too. The point remains, despite your footstamping and tunnel vision, that other factors aside from trophies won elsewhere might form part of the decision making process occasionally.
Only time will tell if the opportunity works , no one can predict the future , look at Scholari - seemed a match made in heaven that did.
Thankyou for illustrating my point.
But if we don't even try - then to be fair, we are no more than a small time club like Blues - always talking the talk - never walking the walk !
How do you know for certain that we haven't tried? What do you advocate if -heaven forbid- he or any of the other in vogue names turn the job down? Abduction? Waterboarding? Blackmail?
-
Terry wants Hughes (or Hiddink) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13641595.stm)
In the showers maybe.
-
Ancelotti has managed
Regianna, Parma, Juve , Milan and Chelsea
Now , from reading Wiki - he had success as EVERY club. Regianna - promoted, Parma 2nd , Juve 2nd, Milan League winners, Champs league winners, Chelsea league winners cup winners, 2nd.
success at EVERY club - in fact, with Ancelotti - finishing 2nd seems to be deemed a failure. And don't tell me he was at big clubs. all the teams he took over had won BUGGER ALL - and there was a reason he got the job - coz the predessor had been sacked ! - he then got those clubs challenging, which they wasn't before he came.
Benitez
Took over a good Valencia - WON the league , finished 5th, WON the league and Uefa Cup - thus maintaining success over 3 years, which means you cant just put it down to what he inherited. He then went to Liverpool, where he took over an OKish side, and they got to 5th and a cup final (better than we have acheived for a while) , he then WON the Euro cup mainly with the side he inherited granted, but then BUILT his own side and 5 years later pushed Man U to the final two weeks of the season.
Thus - sustained success over 5 yrs - building his side.
Hughes - over last 7 yrs
Wales - didn't acheive anything before jumping ship at first opportunity for Blackburn
Blackburn - got to 7th - then jumped ship as soon as as Man City offerred him a better opportunity
Man City - sacked after underperforming (open to debate I admit) but still spent nearly 100m and acheived nowt
Fulham - quit after one year as soon as (it appeared) an opportunity came
Villa ? - well if it is - 5th job in 7 years ?
So where is this evidence that Hughes is "better suited to Villa where we are now" - he has NO credentials for building sides - he has never stayed at anywhere long enough to build a team. it seems to me we are looking at the "possibility" with Hughes. Well if thats the case,we might as well get Alex McLeish ! - he has all the hallmarks of Hughes, only he has won things !
So - he isn't a "long term" manager, he hasn't built a side , he has never won anything
THAT is why he is not as good as Benitez and Ancelotti
I rest my case for the prosecution your honour !!!
I agree 100% with what you say about Ancelotti, he has been successful at every club he has managed, big or small. I think your spin on Hughes is the glass half empty version as opposed to half full version I would give but you are right with what you say. But Benitez? That was the happy half of the story you gave there. Extremadura? Osasuna? Tenerife? Valadolid? You edited out those chapters. And he did go a bit 'yampi' in the last year at Liverpool didn't he?
-
??????/////
I am dumb founded by this apparent "logic"
Vialli won more than Taylor, but Taylor was more suitable for Watford ? - what the hell ?
What Vialli acheived was as a player , and a player only. He took over a good Chelsea side, and won a cup as a manager fair play, but he acheived no more than the manager before or after him.
Players dont always make managers that is true, if it was, Roy Keane would be taking over from Fergie now.
But Taylor took Lincoln up, took Watford up many times, got Watford to an FA Cup final, got Watford to 2nd , got Villa up, got Villa to 2nd , took over the English National team.
Then took over at Watford again (after proving what a bloody good manager he was with all the above) and took them up again.
This arguament is getting sillier and sillier.
Good managers become good managers because they achieve , when they achieve , they become great managers - thats why people want them.
I am sick of Villa having "managers with potential". Wasn't Little, Gregory, O'Leary and O'Neill all supposed to have had potential ?.
Time to get a real manager in !
-
Ancelotti has managed
Regianna, Parma, Juve , Milan and Chelsea
Now , from reading Wiki - he had success as EVERY club. Regianna - promoted, Parma 2nd , Juve 2nd, Milan League winners, Champs league winners, Chelsea league winners cup winners, 2nd.
success at EVERY club - in fact, with Ancelotti - finishing 2nd seems to be deemed a failure. And don't tell me he was at big clubs. all the teams he took over had won BUGGER ALL - and there was a reason he got the job - coz the predessor had been sacked ! - he then got those clubs challenging, which they wasn't before he came.
Benitez
Took over a good Valencia - WON the league , finished 5th, WON the league and Uefa Cup - thus maintaining success over 3 years, which means you cant just put it down to what he inherited. He then went to Liverpool, where he took over an OKish side, and they got to 5th and a cup final (better than we have acheived for a while) , he then WON the Euro cup mainly with the side he inherited granted, but then BUILT his own side and 5 years later pushed Man U to the final two weeks of the season.
Thus - sustained success over 5 yrs - building his side.
Hughes - over last 7 yrs
Wales - didn't acheive anything before jumping ship at first opportunity for Blackburn
Blackburn - got to 7th - then jumped ship as soon as as Man City offerred him a better opportunity
Man City - sacked after underperforming (open to debate I admit) but still spent nearly 100m and acheived nowt
Fulham - quit after one year as soon as (it appeared) an opportunity came
Villa ? - well if it is - 5th job in 7 years ?
So where is this evidence that Hughes is "better suited to Villa where we are now" - he has NO credentials for building sides - he has never stayed at anywhere long enough to build a team. it seems to me we are looking at the "possibility" with Hughes. Well if thats the case,we might as well get Alex McLeish ! - he has all the hallmarks of Hughes, only he has won things !
So - he isn't a "long term" manager, he hasn't built a side , he has never won anything
THAT is why he is not as good as Benitez and Ancelotti
I rest my case for the prosecution your honour !!!
I agree 100% with what you say about Ancelotti, he has been successful at every club he has managed, big or small. I think your spin on Hughes is the glass half empty version as opposed to half full version I would give but you are right with what you say. But Benitez? That was the happy half of the story you gave there. Extremadura? Osasuna? Tenerife? Valadolid? You edited out those chapters. And he did go a bit 'yampi' in the last year at Liverpool didn't he?
And Hughes got Blackburn to 6th.
-
Let's compare managerial records:
Ancelotti
Trophies
Juventus
Intertoto Cup: 1 1999
Milan
Serie A: 1 2004
Coppa Italia: 1 2003
Supercoppa Italiana: 1 2004
UEFA Champions League: 2 2003, 2007
UEFA Super Cup: 2 2003, 2007
FIFA Club World Cup: 1 2007
Chelsea
Premier League: 1 2009–10
FA Cup: 1 2010
Community Shield: 1 2009
Awards
Serie A coach of the Year: 2001, 2004
Albo Panchina d'Oro: 2002–03, 2003–04
UEFA Manager of the Year: 2002–03
World Soccer Magazine Manager of the Year: 2003
The World's best Club Coach 2007
Premier League Manager of the Month : November 2009, August 2010, March 2011, April 2011[15]
UEFA Champions League Manager of the Year: 2002–03
Benitez
Trophies
Real Madrid U-19s
Spain U-19 League (1): 1993
Spain U-19 Cup (2): 1991, 1993
Extremadura
Segunda División Promotion (1): 1997–98
Tenerife
Segunda División (1): 2000–01
Valencia
La Liga (2): 2001–02, 2003–04
UEFA Cup (1): 2003–04
Liverpool
UEFA Champions League (1): 2004–05
FA Cup (1): 2005–06
FA Community Shield (1): 2006
UEFA Super Cup (1): 2005
Internazionale
Supercoppa Italiana (1): 2010
FIFA Club World Cup (1): 2010
Awards
Don Balón Award (1): 2001–02
UEFA Manager of the Year(2): 2003–04, 2004–05
FA Premier League Manager of the Month (5): November 2005, December 2005, January 2007, October 2008, March 2009
Hughes
Trophies
None
Awards
None
I'd say that there is evidence of career progression and having a good record at a lower level in Benitez' case, a consistent record from Ancelotti.
In addition, both Benitez and Ancelotti have been recognised as being the best coach/manager on a number of occasions.
I'd say it's a fact that Hughes isn't as good as the others.
It's hard to argue that Hughes could be considered to be a better manager whichever way you look at it.
Hughes could arguably have done well at Citeh given the chance.
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
-
??????/////
I am dumb founded by this apparent "logic"
No doubt: and it takes a strong man to admit it.
More power to your cider raising elbow.
-
Tim the Villain
You are right - he could hav edone - but the issue is - he didn't !
Dr Jo could have done a job at the Villa given time , Roy Hodgson could have done a job at Liverpool given time, Avram Grant could have done a job at West Ham given time.
Point is - they didn't !
-
So could Houllier at Aston Villa.
-
So could Houllier at Aston Villa.
Very true
-
Tim there are reasons coaches are not given a chance though. Hughes had 18 months and they looked like they were struggling to get top 4 after a lot of money spent, so they got in Mancini, who has had 18 months, won the FA Cup and finished 3rd. Harsh on Hughes maybe, but he was at Fulham last season for a reason. The hopping about, and doing ok with mid table sides is not taking a side further and proving yourself capable of taking a club to the next step. When looking at the 3, Ancelotti and Benitez are far more proven managers than Hughes.
-
Very doubtful.
-
??????/////
I am dumb founded by this apparent "logic"
There's at least part of that statement I wouldn't disagree with.
Vialli won more than Taylor, but Taylor was more suitable for Watford ? - what the hell ?
What Vialli acheived was as a player , and a player only. He took over a good Chelsea side, and won a cup as a manager fair play...
Contradict yourself, much?
But Taylor took Lincoln up, took Watford up many times, got Watford to an FA Cup final, got Watford to 2nd , got Villa up, got Villa to 2nd , took over the English National team.
Then took over at Watford again (after proving what a bloody good manager he was with all the above) and took them up again.
So there is more to being a good manager than trophies won elsewhere?
This arguament is getting sillier and sillier.
Agreed. But if you will tie yourself in knots...
-
Anyhow.... away from this debate, Hughes' detestable agent Joooorabaabbachian has been on Sky saying he wants a club that are going to win trophies. Erm... Mark... you had one and drew too many games mate... they sacked you. Doesn't care if it is here or abroad, but want a club challenging for titles. He has a seriously over inflated opinion of his achievements thus far if he thinks he is going to walk into that kind of job anywhere other than Chelsea, who may take him with Hiddink as DOF to step in if he is screwing it up.
-
To be honest, all I'm really worried about is the fact that McLaren is still hovering around the favourites positions with the bookies. That means that a fair number of people are actually putting money on him getting the job. Bluenoses, got to be, surely?
-
I'll sleep a lot better if/when McLaren takes the Fulham job (or any other vacancy outside of B6) that's for sure.
-
I'll sleep a lot better if/when McLaren takes the Fulham job (or any other vacancy outside of B6) that's for sure.
You are not alone .
-
??????/////
I am dumb founded by this apparent "logic"
Vialli won more than Taylor, but Taylor was more suitable for Watford ? - what the hell ?
What Vialli acheived was as a player , and a player only. He took over a good Chelsea side, and won a cup as a manager fair play, but he acheived no more than the manager before or after him.
Players dont always make managers that is true, if it was, Roy Keane would be taking over from Fergie now.
But Taylor took Lincoln up, took Watford up many times, got Watford to an FA Cup final, got Watford to 2nd , got Villa up, got Villa to 2nd , took over the English National team.
Then took over at Watford again (after proving what a bloody good manager he was with all the above) and took them up again.
This arguament is getting sillier and sillier.
Good managers become good managers because they achieve , when they achieve , they become great managers - thats why people want them.
I am sick of Villa having "managers with potential". Wasn't Little, Gregory, O'Leary and O'Neill all supposed to have had potential ?.
Time to get a real manager in !
Taking nothing away from you point about Ancelotti or indeed Taylor, your point about managers and the potential they have or not is weird, as is the implication that just because a manager has a brilliant track record that it will guarantee any success, because actually it guarantees nothing.
You highlight certain managers namely O'Leary and O'Niell as all supposed to have had potential, they had more than potential they came up with the goods time and again, O'Niell crapped wonders throughout his career at Wycombe and Leicester, got Celtic back on track and into regular Champions league football building one of there best ever squads as most Celtic fans will tell you. Even in the case of David O'Leary, what he achieved at Leeds Utd was nothing short of a miracle, OK, i except he spent loads which then was outrageous, now a mere drop in the ocean.
The record will show years from now That O'Niell was one of Villa's best managers, you could also level your point about track record at Houllier, his track record, what he's achieved etc and yet some of the tactical decisions and method he used in handling players at Villa, his awareness of priorities such as the Liverpool game at Anfield made him look to me like a complete novice, and yet some people would say Gerrard Houllier was world class.
For any manager Villa is a difficult job to take on, IMO that's why we have always experienced problems in attracting the right bloke.
There is no guarantee whatsoever if Ancelloti came to Villa he wouldn't fall flat on his face regardless of his success Villa could blow his track record out in bubbles, although i do except your point that track record is the only thing to gauge the quality of the next manager by.
The reason I think Van Gaal would be ideal is because he don't give a f*** about what people think and that's what Villa need IMO.
-
Kia Joorabchian has dipped his golden cock into the affair:
'Hughes left Fulham to manage a top four side'
Kia Joorabchian has claimed that Mark Hughes has left Fulham to fulfil his ambition of managing a top side.
After just one season in charge at Craven Cottage, in which Hughes led the Cottagers to an eighth placed finish and a Europa League spot next season, he has left at the end of his contract with speculation mounting that he did it to take over at Aston Villa or Chelsea.
But his adviser Joorabchian told talkSPORT that he has no job lined up and he has only left Fulham with the aim of getting a job managing a Champions League side.
“I know that there is a lot of speculation about Villa but it is just pure speculation. I have never spoken to anyone at Villa.”Kia Joorabchian
Joorabchian told Kick Off: “He feels that the time has come for him to sit aside and see out his ambition. He would like to have a go at the top four.
“At some point in time maybe he’ll get a club either in this country or abroad that will give him the opportunity to have a go.”
Joorabchian added that reports linking Hughes with another job are just coincidental, and that there has not even been contact between them and Aston Villa.
“All his career as a player and a manager he is a very sincere man and he definitely, definitely does not have anything else lined up,” he said. “We’ve not spoken to anyone.
“I know that there is a lot of speculation about Villa but it is just pure speculation. I have never spoken to anyone at Villa. Villa have never attempted to contact us and we’re perfectly comfortable with that situation.
“Mark’s sincerity is one of his greatest attributes and if he carried on into this year and signed a contract with Fulham and was looking over his shoulder that a top four club come up then it wouldn’t be fair on Fulham.”
I know he is his adviser, but sincere? After 12 months?
Are we sure we want this man at our club?
-
Anyone linked to that Kia chap has got "avoid" written all over them. He is dodgier than one of uncle arfurs used cars.
-
I may be repeating others, apologies if that is the case.
Spurs is my guess at where Hughes is looking. Redknapp's court case the beginning of July, he could be out of service for a while.
-
I quite like the fact that Hughes insisted on this clause. I actually think it makes him a more genuine bloke rather than the rascal he is being portrayed. Both parties signed the contract so Fulham can't really complain too much. The easy option for Hughes would have been to sign a four year deal and then now be trying to agree some form of pay-off.
Kia Joorabchian on the other hand will always be looking to engineer something, either a payrise or another club.
-
well if he left for a top4 side its not us. yipee etc... could be a long wait though.
-
There is no way Randy can wait until June 30th for Hughes thank god. And he will be looking for someone who has loyalty written all over them. Hughes certainly has not displayed that. Ancellotti is my first choice but would not be disappointed if it was Van Gaal. Got a good feeling about him from what i have read .......
-
There is no way Randy can wait until June 30th for Hughes thank god. And he will be looking for someone who has loyalty written all over them. Hughes certainly has not displayed that. Ancellotti is my first choice but would not be disappointed if it was Van Gaal. Got a good feeling about him from what i have read .......
He's in the wrong sport entirely, in that case.
-
Has anybody made the point that another of Hughes' old clubs, Bayern Munich, need a manager?
Would it be inconceivable that he wants to try his hand abroad? It would also fit in with the story the we've had no contact with him.
-
Has anybody made the point that another of Hughes' old clubs, Bayern Munich, need a manager?
Jupp Heynckes got the Bayern job.
-
I didn't realise that. Cheers Ian. Another theory gone.
-
I've just read the thread and I know Percy was right ;-)
-
It's all getting very worrying ( do i hear an old friend returning) Hughes is a no no for Randy, after whats been quoted he's not the type to go back. Moyes seems disinterested,Ancelotti has told us to do one (apparently) the field is thinning out. I only hope Randy has got an ace up his sleeve because some of the lesser names mentioned are starting to affect my sleeping pattern.
-
It's all getting very worrying ( do i hear an old friend returning) Hughes is a no no for Randy, after whats been quoted he's not the type to go back. Moyes seems disinterested,Ancelotti has told us to do one (apparently) the field is thinning out. I only hope Randy has got an ace up his sleeve because some of the lesser names mentioned are starting to affect my sleeping pattern.
I wouldn't start fretting just yet, Robbo. It's early days and most of what is written in the press is guesswork. Just remind yourself that you didn't see the Bent signing coming.
-
Anyone linked to that Kia chap has got "avoid" written all over them. He is dodgier than one of uncle arfurs used cars.
Absolutely. I would hate to have this f in parasite linked to our wholesome club.
-
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
I wonder why?
-
Just heard the tail end of an interview with someone on Radio 5 who it sounds like is Mark Hughes's agent. The Villa job was mentioned, and how honourable Mark Hughes is, he didn't want to leave Fulham part way through a contract. The agent was saying a lot without making any firm commitments, which was exactly what I'd expect him to say.
-
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
I wonder why?
Partly because it is unfashionable to appoint British managers.
-
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
I wonder why?
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
I wonder why?
Partly because it is unfashionable to appoint British managers.
Partly because it is unfashionable to appoint British managers.
Not that unfashionable - 15 in the premier league at the moment.
-
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
I wonder why?
He hasn't exactly had the same opportunities as Ancelloti has he ?
I wonder why?
Partly because it is unfashionable to appoint British managers.
Partly because it is unfashionable to appoint British managers.
Not that unfashionable - 15 in the premier league at the moment.
The majority of those are at clubs that don't offer the opportunities referred to. Hughes himself suffered for that attitude at Man City.
-
But the majority of clubs don't have those opportunities to offer in the first place.
Of the current top six, three have British managers. Throw in the next two and it is five.
I think you've a point in that some managers get more positive press because they're foreign (Martinez as you quoted the other day, for example), but I don't think the evidence stacks up on this point.
-
Am I right in thinking that if are to be blessed/cursed with Hughes then it cannot be until the end of the month, meaning over 3 weeks of endless speculation?
-
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
Thank you.
Bollocks! Randy read this thread and was obviously swayed by the 'more achievements' argument from ozz and hilts. Ah well, I tried to expose it as the crock of shit that it is, but should have tried harder. Sorry everyone.
Prepare for the sale of Bent and the purchase of that bloke who scored loads for Peterborough.
-
Why have we not gonna after Mark Hughes?
He is the stand-out candidate. :'(
-
Why have we not gonna after Mark Hughes?
He is the stand-out candidate. :'(
Because McLeish has more achievements.
-
Uh oh, I can sense this embedding intself in Percy's psyche next to the 'zonal marking' matter.... ;)
-
Uh oh, I can sense this embedding intself in Percy's psyche next to the 'zonal marking' matter.... ;)
What do you think Risso? Is a manager's record of achievement an absolute measure of his ability? Bear in mind that this translates as 'McLeish is better than Hughes and Moyes'.
-
Uh oh, I can sense this embedding intself in Percy's psyche next to the 'zonal marking' matter.... ;)
What do you think Risso? Is a manager's record of achievement an absolute measure of his ability? Bear in mind that this translates as 'McLeish is better than Hughes and Moyes'.
I still don't get the Hughes love-in for some people. He's won a total of sweet fuck-all as a manager. Has he got potential? Sure. But in my opinon he's got away with his name being Mark Hughes. He's done ok at Blackburn and Fulham, and with money being thrown all over the place at Man City he was on the right track.
-
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
Thank you.
Bollocks! Randy read this thread and was obviously swayed by the 'more achievements' argument from ozz and hilts. Ah well, I tried to expose it as the crock of shit that it is, but should have tried harder. Sorry everyone.
Prepare for the sale of Bent and the purchase of that bloke who scored loads for Peterborough.
The achievements do have to be looked at in context though Percy. If the only relevant achievement was in the midst of getting relegated twice, then obviously it is somewhat devalued. If it is winning the European cup and never finishing lower than 6th, it is better than having won not a jot.
-
The argument of whether Hughes may be better for Villa in certain circumstances is totally valid, but to judge a guy on how good he is you look at his achievements. Just like you look at a forward and see goal ratios.
Thank you.
Bollocks! Randy read this thread and was obviously swayed by the 'more achievements' argument from ozz and hilts. Ah well, I tried to expose it as the crock of shit that it is, but should have tried harder. Sorry everyone.
Prepare for the sale of Bent and the purchase of that bloke who scored loads for Peterborough.
The achievements do have to be looked at in context though Percy.
Big of you to change your mind mate.
-
I guess it comes down to how they used whatever resources at their disposal. Did they deliver in excess of what they should have or par? Did they overachieve or underachieve?
Hughes has improved all the sides he has managed and left them in a better state than he found them. Whether that's been on minimal resources (Blackburn/Fulham) or mental Man Citeh finance. Admittedly he doesn't yet have a few Mickey Mouse Scottish cups on his CV or a hallowed LC. But I'll wager that he'll finish his management career with at least a few more medals added to the ones he secured as player. For a club such as ours, if you wait until such times as they've actually achieved, they are either out of reach or you're getting them on the way down, when they've already peaked. The key -if at all possible- is to catch them on the way up.
McLeish took over a yo yo club and was there at a time when they've had more finance available than they've ever had previously. They've easily outspent the majority of the teams in the lower half of the Prem. And yet they've still ended up relegated. Whilst playing dismal football to boot.
-
Why have we not gonna after Mark Hughes?
He is the stand-out candidate. :'(
I thought he can't be approached until 1st July. I like to believe there's no way McLeish will be appointed until we've no hope of getting Hughes.