The replacement for MON...?

[citizenDJ]

I've decided all this interviewing mularkey is just bollocks. I don't see why we can't go for someone already in a job unless Randy is trying to avoid compensation.  Hodgson was in a job when Liverpool took him, Fulham tried to get Jol who was in a job, Bolton got Coyle off Burnely etc.  everyone does it.  Whether it's down to some kind of "integrity" or tight fistedness I think we are limiting our options unnecessarilly and shooting and ourselves in the foot massively.   And making ourselves look a bit daft and amatuerish into the bargain. Identify the man you want and bust a gut to get him.  If it doesn't work, go on to second choice - simples.

Sadly, I really don't think it is that simple. I honestly don't think you can underestimate the impact of the timing of O'Neill's walkout. No club is going to want to let their manager leave at the very start of the season, and if they could be persuaded it would be by incredible, astronomical compensation. It's bad enough O'Neill leaving as he did; imagine he did so to take up a job at a divisional rival! That's exactly what we would be trying to persuade a club and manager to allow to happen.

It's not impossible, and perhaps the goings on over at Blues might open another door (although I doubt it, and am not too keen on McLeish anyway), but as things stand I think the appointment of a currently serving manager is virtually impossible - and for that, I don't blame the Board.

[Toronto Villa]

The thoughts of Houllier make me wince.

All the complaints people made about MON e.g. bad football, bad signings, falling out with players...you can multiply, no square and you get Houllier.

And that's without all the qualities that i think are universally accepted MON brought.

In summary:

(MON - all the good things) X (MON - all the good things) = Houllier.

What knowledge do you have of his time at Lyon, or are you only using his time at Liverpool to judge Houllier? Big difference and quite unfair. I'm also guessing if he came here and won a League Cup, FA Cup and UEFA Cup in the same season you'd jumping off a nearby bridge?

[jonzy85]

The thoughts of Houllier make me wince.

All the complaints people made about MON e.g. bad football, bad signings, falling out with players...you can multiply, no square and you get Houllier.

And that's without all the qualities that i think are universally accepted MON brought.

In summary:

(MON - all the good things) X (MON - all the good things) = Houllier.

How about trophies won - trophes won?

With the money Houllier spent (and this was pre-Abramovich era, so not really comparable to what is spent these days) their little mini treble, was hardly a good return.
A good few of my mates are Liverpool fans and they dont look fondly on the Houllier years.
The way he chased Fowler out of the club was a disgrace. Imagine he did that to Gabby!

Besides, I'm pretty sure MON won a lot more with Celtic....and yes, it's only Scotland and Strachan did too...but you have to remember when MON went up there Celtic had been in the wilderness for best part of a decade and he established them as top dogs in a short period.

Houllier never looked like threatening Man Utd and Arsenal's stranglehold on the title (I know they finished 2nd once, but that was cos either Man U or Arsneal fell away and the other one the title quite comfortably.

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

[pauliewalnuts]

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

Those three have barely any credentials to suggest they could do the job.

Ideally we'd be looking beyond doing good stuff with Shamrock Rovers as proof of quality to be our manager.

[jonzy85]

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

Those three have barely any credentials to suggest they could do the job.

Ideally we'd be looking beyond doing good stuff with Shamrock Rovers as proof of quality to be our manager.

I agree entirely....not actually suggesting we give it to them.

Im just trying to convey my despair at the thoughts of Houllier.

[pauliewalnuts]

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

Those three have barely any credentials to suggest they could do the job.

Ideally we'd be looking beyond doing good stuff with Shamrock Rovers as proof of quality to be our manager.

I agree entirely....not actually suggesting we give it to them.

Im just trying to convey my despair at the thoughts of Houllier.

I think it is all dependent on context.

Twelve months ago, suggest Houllier = WTF?

Twelve days ago, suggest Houller = indifference.

Twelve hours ago (ie post Curbishley), suggest Houllier = more appealling.

[Percy McCarthy]

I think Houllier will be alright for a year. We're having a gap year anyway, until Hughes or Moyes comes.

[dave.woodhall]

With the money Houllier spent (and this was pre-Abramovich era, so not really comparable to what is spent these days) their little mini treble, was hardly a good return.
A good few of my mates are Liverpool fans and they dont look fondly on the Houllier years.
The way he chased Fowler out of the club was a disgrace. Imagine he did that to Gabby!

Besides, I'm pretty sure MON won a lot more with Celtic....and yes, it's only Scotland and Strachan did too...but you have to remember when MON went up there Celtic had been in the wilderness for best part of a decade and he established them as top dogs in a short period.

Houllier never looked like threatening Man Utd and Arsenal's stranglehold on the title (I know they finished 2nd once, but that was cos either Man U or Arsneal fell away and the other one the title quite comfortably.

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

I couldn't care less what a few gloryhunting Liverpool supporters think of an ex-manager. He won more trophies in England than Martin O'Neill did but that doesn't count because, and he finished higher than Martin O'Neill did but that doesn't count because and he supposedly did to one player who went on to do nothing elsewhere than O'Neill has done to plenty at Villa but that doesn't count because.....

Yes, let's have the manager of Shamrock Rovers instead.

[jonzy85]

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

Those three have barely any credentials to suggest they could do the job.

Ideally we'd be looking beyond doing good stuff with Shamrock Rovers as proof of quality to be our manager.

I agree entirely....not actually suggesting we give it to them.

Im just trying to convey my despair at the thoughts of Houllier.

I think it is all dependent on context.

Twelve months ago, suggest Houllier = WTF?

Twelve days ago, suggest Houller = indifference.

Twelve hours ago (ie post Curbishley), suggest Houllier = more appealling.

In the words of Det. Bunk Moreland:

Makes me sick, motherfucker, how far we done fell.

[TimTheVillain]

Re. Houllier, at least he's got Prem. experience.

I can see why the board want it - it's risky enough as it is taking on a new Manager under these circumstances, but to take one on who'd never managed in the Prem. is a risk too far as it stands.

Liverpool are a very big club; he's used to managing a very big club and even though we managed to get Carew for Baros from Houllier ( i think we got the better deal there!), all managers can make these types of errors.

At least Houllier will go for some foreign input - and I think has a lot of respect in Europe.

Not the ultimate manager, but we aren't spoilt for choice.

[Fingers]

I think Houllier will be alright for a year. We're having a gap year anyway, until Hughes or Moyes comes.

This is how I see it, with Houllier taking a back seat in 12/18 months.

[ktvillan]

I've decided all this interviewing mularkey is just bollocks. I don't see why we can't go for someone already in a job unless Randy is trying to avoid compensation.  Hodgson was in a job when Liverpool took him, Fulham tried to get Jol who was in a job, Bolton got Coyle off Burnely etc.  everyone does it.  Whether it's down to some kind of "integrity" or tight fistedness I think we are limiting our options unnecessarilly and shooting and ourselves in the foot massively.   And making ourselves look a bit daft and amatuerish into the bargain. Identify the man you want and bust a gut to get him.  If it doesn't work, go on to second choice - simples.

Sadly, I really don't think it is that simple. I honestly don't think you can underestimate the impact of the timing of O'Neill's walkout. No club is going to want to let their manager leave at the very start of the season, and if they could be persuaded it would be by incredible, astronomical compensation. It's bad enough O'Neill leaving as he did; imagine he did so to take up a job at a divisional rival! That's exactly what we would be trying to persuade a club and manager to allow to happen.

It's not impossible, and perhaps the goings on over at Blues might open another door (although I doubt it, and am not too keen on McLeish anyway), but as things stand I think the appointment of a currently serving manager is virtually impossible - and for that, I don't blame the Board.

I take the point about timing, and it has made things extra difficult,  but if we are genuinely ambitious and serious about getting who we think is the right man for the job I think we should go all guns blazing for him and stop pussyfooting around.  It might not work but at least we would have tried. 

[ktvillan]

I think Houllier will be alright for a year. We're having a gap year anyway, until Hughes or Moyes comes.

This is how I see it, with Houllier taking a back seat in 12/18 months.

That's how I would see it too.  At 63 years old Houllier could perhaps be a stop-gap to keep the ship steady until there is a more favourable environment for a longer term solution.

[jonzy85]

With the money Houllier spent (and this was pre-Abramovich era, so not really comparable to what is spent these days) their little mini treble, was hardly a good return.
A good few of my mates are Liverpool fans and they dont look fondly on the Houllier years.
The way he chased Fowler out of the club was a disgrace. Imagine he did that to Gabby!

Besides, I'm pretty sure MON won a lot more with Celtic....and yes, it's only Scotland and Strachan did too...but you have to remember when MON went up there Celtic had been in the wilderness for best part of a decade and he established them as top dogs in a short period.

Houllier never looked like threatening Man Utd and Arsenal's stranglehold on the title (I know they finished 2nd once, but that was cos either Man U or Arsneal fell away and the other one the title quite comfortably.

Either way, Houllier is down near the bottom of the managers I would want. I'd prefer to give it to some new up and coming manager than him. Simon Grayson, Nigel Clough or Micheal O'Neill....done wonders with Shamrock Rovers in Ireland.

I couldn't care less what a few gloryhunting Liverpool supporters think of an ex-manager. He won more trophies in England than Martin O'Neill did but that doesn't count because, and he finished higher than Martin O'Neill did but that doesn't count because and he supposedly did to one player who went on to do nothing elsewhere than O'Neill has done to plenty at Villa but that doesn't count because.....

Yes, let's have the manager of Shamrock Rovers instead.

Nice twisting of what I was saying.....

Firstly, the temerity of Liverpool fans to be glory-hunting, that renders their opinions meaningless does it?? Surely the fans of the only club in England he managed for 5 years has some siginificance.

Im sure you realise that the PL is completely different now than it was when Houllier was managing Liverpool. No mega bucks Chelsea, City even Spurs were struggling. Granted you had Leeds for a couple of years splashing the cash. He came into manage Liverpool who had been knocking on the door of a title challenge for years, never mounted a serious challenge, alienated top players. He won that treble of cups when Liverpool should have been (a) challenging for the title (b) in the Champions League not the UEFA Cup. If he could do it with Villa I'd be delighted, but doing it with Liverpool, at that time was not achieving what he was brought in to do.

I can't actually believe I'm having to debate that Houllier is not the right man. I thought there would be universal uproar at this.

[Bosco81]

Twelve months ago, suggest Houllier = WTF?

Twelve days ago, suggest Houller = indifference.

Twelve hours ago (ie post Curbishley), suggest Houllier = more appealling.

That's exactly my issue with Houllier, if he replicates what he achieved at Liverpool we'd all be happy, but he's hardly the messiah we were looking for, more of a stop gap.

He might well be the best of the bunch who replied to our advert in Managers Weekly but that doesn't mean he's the best we could have got.