The replacement for MON...?

[west sussex villan]

http://www.oddschecker.com/football/football-specials/aston-villa-specials/next-permanent-manager

[Mazrim]

So we've all decided that K Mac is incapable of managing Villa then?

When did we decide that and based on what?

He isn't totally incapable, I just don't think he'll be very good at it. Based on the fact he has no experience and the dreadful performances in most of our games under him so far, and the fact that it's taken him til now to even decide if he wants a crack at it.

Mazrim, you cannot seriously say that after all that's happened you would be happy with Mac? Of course he would be supported by everyone but at the back of peoples minds would be that it took the board a month to decide that he was the best that they could get.

I'd be happy to give him a chance if he was decided as the best candidate, which I dont think will happen by the way. I disagree that he would be supported by everyone.
Why shouldn't the board consider him as any other candidate if he's put his name forward and gets an interview? And why shouldn't the board take the time to consider who the best candidate is, even if it ends up being MacDonald?


By the way, Jurgen Klinsmann at 45s with betfair? I think I might have some of that. He's my tip.

[PaulTheVillan]

The board should consider him as any other candidate. If he is the best candidate then I seriously worry about the other shit that have applied.

[PeterWithe]

Kmc's tenure has been patchy to say the least but I wouldn't be aghast if he were to be appointed, like many others I would think that leaving it till now said a lot about the ambition for this season though.

[Concrete John]

Kevin Mac hasn't been appointed yet I know, but if he were to be. There is absolutely no way to justify a reason for employing him over the other managers who would have applied.

Just playing Devil's Advocate, but how can we say that when we don't know who's applied?

And my other beef is this whole application/interview process.  Should we not be deciding who WE want and then going and getting him?

[Risso]

If it ends up being KM, he won't be the best option, he'll be the cheapest.

[hilts_coolerking]

No, I want Guus Hiddink. But I dont know how good or bad K Mac will be before he has a crack at it. If he does.

Doesn't it strike you though that there's a massive disparity between Hiddink and, should we appoint him, MacDonald? It's very difficult to believe that MacDonald will turn out to be of the same calibre as Hiddink. To be honest, I'd be very surprised if he turns out to be of the same calibre as O'Neill.

Your point about not knowing how bad good or bad MacDonald might be is precisely the reason why we shouldn't even be thinking about appointing him.

[Bent Neilsens Screamer]

I'd be happy to give him a chance if he was decided as the best candidate, which I dont think will happen by the way. I disagree that he would be supported by everyone.
Why shouldn't the board consider him as any other candidate if he's put his name forward and gets an interview? And why shouldn't the board take the time to consider who the best candidate is, even if it ends up being MacDonald?


By the way, Jurgen Klinsmann at 45s with betfair? I think I might have some of that. He's my tip.

I entirely agree that he should be given the same courtesy as the other candidates but he’s in the unique position of having a trial period of games, that imo he hasn’t come through with flying colours. I could stomach the Newcastle result if he learnt from his mistakes which for me he didn’t, we would still have ended up with Ireland and Petrov in the middle against Everton but for the unfortunate injury to Ireland that required NRC to come into the team.

As PTV said you would worry about the other candidates if he were to get the job. We should be able to attract a better manager.

[Mazrim]

No, I want Guus Hiddink. But I dont know how good or bad K Mac will be before he has a crack at it. If he does.

Doesn't it strike you though that there's a massive disparity between Hiddink and, should we appoint him, MacDonald? It's very difficult to believe that MacDonald will turn out to be of the same calibre as Hiddink. To be honest, I'd be very surprised if he turns out to be of the same calibre as O'Neill.

Your point about not knowing how bad good or bad MacDonald might be is precisely the reason why we shouldn't even be thinking about appointing him.

Yes, and as I've said, I'd rather appoint a top manager. But I'd rather go with MacDonald than a manager we know is shit. Because there isn't anybody, despite claiming prophecy, who knows the extent of Kevin MacDonalds ability as a manager.

But without doubt, I would rather we didn't have to gamble to that extent and we appointed a top manager. If we can do that, and I think we can and will, great.

[eastie]

we should not be taking a risk on an unknown manager , we should be appointing an experienced manager who has managed at the top level and has good european contacts and a track record as a manager.

sven has that as does koeman and they both would like the job so how could kmac be better than either of those? cheaper -yes, better - no way

[hilts_coolerking]

But I'd rather go with MacDonald than a manager we know is shit. Because there isn't anybody, despite claiming prophecy, who knows the extent of Kevin MacDonalds ability as a manager.

But that's not the choice is it? And no, no-one can say whether MacDonald will be good, bad or indifferent, but it's possible to have an educated guess. There is a reason why most coaches are just coaches, as opposed to being managers. It's the same reason why most caretakers, when given the job full-time, turn out to be disasters.

Of course it's possible that MacDonald could turn out to be as good as Eriksson, Klinsmann and the rest, but is it likely?

[MattW]

I'm in agreement with Chris. If they appoint a decent long term boss, then the lack of transfer activity this summer is a legitimate casualty of the need to get the appointment right. If after all this time they appoint KM, then not only will it be the half arsed budget option, it'll also leave the unshakable feeling that they've left it this long so as not to spend any money. I'm hoping for the former option, obviously.

I agree with this too. If after sitting out the transfer window with an £18m profit and a squad in need of strengthening they then appoint the guy who has been managing the whole time, there will be a perception that they held off to save money. I think a MacDonald appointment would indicate that they wanted him the whole time. If that's the case, they should have sorted it out a while ago so he could have a crack in the transfer window.

[damon loves JT]

Jesus H Christ

[Mazrim]

But I'd rather go with MacDonald than a manager we know is shit. Because there isn't anybody, despite claiming prophecy, who knows the extent of Kevin MacDonalds ability as a manager.

But that's not the choice is it? And no, no-one can say whether MacDonald will be good, bad or indifferent, but it's possible to have an educated guess. There is a reason why most coaches are just coaches, as opposed to being managers. It's the same reason why most caretakers, when given the job full-time, turn out to be disasters.

Of course it's possible that MacDonald could turn out to be as good as Eriksson, Klinsmann and the rest, but is it likely?

Well, I'm not really arguing. I'm also wary of being considered some sort of champion of K Mac when I'm not really.
My issue is that appointing K Mac would be viewed as a cost cutting option rather than just what it would probably most likely be: a man who is already fully familiar with the squad we have having a short term crack at making the job his own. This isnt anybodys coach, its ours. And a highly repsected one at that.

And really, after the money Randy has put in to this club, claiming he'd be trying to save a few quid here and there on the difference between K Macs and say, Koemans wages is just a load of bollocks in my opinion. A complete joke.

Anyway, there you go. I'd like Hiddink, I think it will be Klinsmann (which I'd be happy with too) and I think the list will comprise of: Eriksson, Koeman, Klinsmann, MacDonald and McLaren. With Hitzfeld, Moyes, Hughes, Hiddink and Queiroz as (varyingly difficult) possibilities.
I also dont think any expense will be spared in getting the right man (Randy has shown this in American Football) and any new manager will be backed in the transfer market, even if it is MacDonald.

[RickySlade]

The main thing that concerns me about KMacs potential appointment is what has been touched on by many others before me, the fact that it seems to have taken a bloody eternity for him to decide that he even wants the job.  Combine this with what he even sees as being naive decisions - see the Newcastle debacle to boot - I really do not think he is the man for us at this point in time.  We cannot really afford to gamble on an unknown quantity such as KMac right now.  In a worse case scenario, we could have a turd season under his tenure and find ourselves next Summer with all our top performers wanting out and resigning free agent Lee Hendrie.  The last bit was a bit overkill but you see my point.