The future of Houllier and McAllister?

[pablopicasso_10]

i want jol, moyes or kinky flowers to be manager...

[ozzjim]

Agree - Moyes might get a crack at Spurs or Arsenal at some point, but I reckon City becoming bigger has hardened Fergie into wanting to put United beyond reach in terms of success. 3 Champions league finals in 4 years is a phenomenal achievement given the age of their squad, or best players. They are slowly building yet another side that will win a lot of trophies, and I can see them signing 3-4 players this summer to strengthen again, then Fergie giving it another 4 years or so.

For Villa, Rijkaard I am not convinced by - did ok for Barca but that is Barca, and they have phenomenal players, pull and resources. I really don't want Hughes. Moyes would be the safe option but so mundane it is untrue. Rafa - at least there would be intrigue and players would be keen to come. We need someone like Lambert if we don't go for a glamour name.

[Mazrim]

If we're after a Glamour name, how about Chest Rockwell?

[ozzjim]

Good name. More of a striker than a manager though surely?

[Mazrim]

Dirk Diggler?

[Concrete John]

For Villa, Rijkaard I am not convinced by - did ok for Barca but that is Barca, and they have phenomenal players, pull and resources. I really don't want Hughes. Moyes would be the safe option but so mundane it is untrue. Rafa - at least there would be intrigue and players would be keen to come. We need someone like Lambert if we don't go for a glamour name.

I think Rijkaard has that sort of excitement about him more than Benitez.  Big name and we really wouldn't know what to expect - would create a real buzz around the place.

[Mazrim]

With Rijkaard you could at least expect attractive, attacking football. He's not my first choice but he has top pedigree. Yes, he managed and was very successful with Barca, not Osasuna or whoever, but there's still some heavyweight competition for La Liga and the Champions League.
Especially when they won it.

Also, how much of the current Barcelona side and their success is down to him? (I dont know the exact answer, I just thought it was worth asking).

[Risso]

You could argue that Liverpool sacked their manager and got a new bloke in at just about the right time, and look how they've done, so maybe we should have done the same.

However, Liverpool had the advantage of someone who has been associated with the club for 40 years, is loved by the fans, knows the club inside out, and was already actually working there when they brought him back.

We would not have had such an obvious candidate to turn to, so it wouldn't necessarily have been as smooth for us.

Yes but if it hadn't worked out, people would have said that he hadn't managed for ten years, and was a relative failure at both Newcastle and Celtic. 

[FatSam]

My sense is that Randy won't be looking for a manager who is currently employed at another club, it doesn't seem to be his style. Houllier was in work, but not for another club, and MON (although technically appointed by Douglas) was out of work. I can't see us trying to coax someone like Hughes out of their current employment. There seems to be a code of ethics at play with Randy - the reactions to Newcastle/ Milner and Sunderland/ Bent transfers (and non-transfers) spring to mind - and I don't think he wants to be seen to be doing the dirty on another club. Therefore I think we are more likely to go for Benitez or similar.

[DB]

After last summers fiasco (long wait etc.) and the way this season has turned out, I think Randy will have to concede looking at employed managers. There is a reason why some managers are not in a job or working in other areas of the game. I don't think he'll want a repeat of this season.

[Concrete John]

You could argue that Liverpool sacked their manager and got a new bloke in at just about the right time, and look how they've done, so maybe we should have done the same.

However, Liverpool had the advantage of someone who has been associated with the club for 40 years, is loved by the fans, knows the club inside out, and was already actually working there when they brought him back.

We would not have had such an obvious candidate to turn to, so it wouldn't necessarily have been as smooth for us.

Yes but if it hadn't worked out, people would have said that he hadn't managed for ten years, and was a relative failure at both Newcastle and Celtic.

True, but whether a success or failiure we didn't have that logical and fan favourite choice waiting in the wings if Randy pulled the trigger.  Which is why I think we were right to stick with Gezza and then look at it again in the summer.   

[Concrete John]

After last summers fiasco (long wait etc.) and the way this season has turned out, I think Randy will have to concede looking at employed managers. There is a reason why some managers are not in a job or working in other areas of the game. I don't think he'll want a repeat of this season.

I certainly hope so.

Going for a manager already in a job doesn't have to be a nasty affair as long as it's done in the right way, which I would trust Randy to do. 

[Nev]

Above anything else, we will need a manager who is hungry, who feels he has something to prove, who can transfer his desire to the players and one who doesn't have to be asked more than once to manage Aston Villa.

Although Dalgleish has returned to Anfield for a second spell, he has gone on record that he feels that he still has a lot to prove and it's this that fuels his desire for the job.

[ozzjim]

Spot on Nev. With MON I always felt he thought we should be grateful for having the great MON as our manager. I want someone to have that sort of desire to make us great, not themselves.

[dave.woodhall]

I'd love to know why anyone would think Rijkaard's not good enough for us. Not that I think for a second he'd come here but a former manager of the most glamorous if not the biggest club in the world? It would be our Gullit moment - the whole of football would take note.