Oliver Kay in the National media putting us down now (Times)
He says that it would be hard to undestand why Hughes would swap Fulham for Villa and that our ambition wouldn't match his.
When did we turn into Bolton?
Don't think he suggests its hard to understand why he would swap fulham for villa, he does actually say " we have a greater upside", copy of article below......
Oliver Kay Football Correspondent
Last updated June 2 2011 9:00PM
The ink had barely dried on Mark Hughes’s contract at Fulham last summer when an opening unexpectedly arose at Aston Villa. His interest had been piqued when Martin O’Neill resigned at Villa Park, but, having been at Craven Cottage for just ten days, Hughes eventually distanced himself from the vacancy.
Fulham was always a stepping stone for Hughes, itching to get another crack at a bigger club after his experience with Manchester City left him with a feeling of unfinished business. Fulham acknowledged as much by allowing his contract to include a break clause, which permitted him to speak to other clubs after June 1.
Walking out on Fulham after ten months looks ruthless, but ruthless is what Hughes has been over the course of his managerial career. He surprised the Football Association of Wales by leaving to take over at Blackburn Rovers, who were in turn surprised when he left for City before the club was taken over by Sheikh Mansour.
Had a bigger job come up while he was at City, he would quite happily have taken it, but instead he was sacked within 18 months and so accepted Fulham’s offer, regarding the West London club as a springboard back to the big time.
Those were always the terms of Hughes’s engagement and indeed his contract at Fulham, so Mohamed Al Fayed, a chairman who accused Roy Hodgson of “taking advantage” by leaving for Liverpool last summer, can hardly complain.
A sense of grievance is more understandable among Fulham’s players and of course their supporters, but they too seemed to recognise that this was a marriage of convenience, particularly after it emerged in the past few days that there was a one-sided prenuptial agreement.
The obvious question is “where next?” If the answer is Villa, Fulham supporters might wonder why he would trade a club who finished eighth in the Barclays Premier League this season for the one that came ninth. But the same arguments were made when he left Blackburn, who had just finished seventh, for City, who had just finished ninth, in June 2008.
Managers do not look at where a club has just finished. They look at the potential and, without question, Villa have a greater upside than Fulham.
But perhaps Hughes is setting his sights higher than Villa. Perhaps he believes there is a chance of succeeding Carlo Ancelotti at Chelsea — in which case his prospects would certainly not be harmed by his association with Kia Joorabchian, one of the most influential agents in world football.
Roman Abramovich, the Chelsea owner, is determined to bring Guus Hiddink back to Stamford Bridge, but there remains a possibility, however slight, that the Turkey coach will return as director of football with a younger manager working under him.
Villa look the better bet, despite denials from both sides last night, but even then there would be the possibility that Hughes would regard the West Midlands club as a stage on which to demonstrate his suitability for an even bigger job — Manchester United, perhaps, or Chelsea.
That thought might sit uncomfortably with Villa’s supporters and indeed with Randy Lerner, the owner, but the same would apply to any big-name candidate, such as David Moyes, Ancelotti or Rafael Benítez.
Does Hughes have the same pedigree as those three? Perhaps not — he certainly cannot match Benítez’s Champions League triumph with Liverpool, let alone Ancelotti’s two with AC Milan — but, like Moyes, he would represent an authoritative appointment for a club with ambitions to punch above their weight and try to compete with the Premier League’s elite. Like Moyes does with Everton. Like Hughes did with Blackburn and Fulham and maintains he would have done with City had the job description not been changed dramatically by the Sheikh Mansour takeover.
Ever since the City experience, Hughes has been yearning to return to a club whose ambitions match his own.
It is questionable whether even Villa can do that, now that Lerner has talked of moving towards self-sufficiency rather than the extravagant spending that would be needed to take them into the Premier League’s top six, but no doubt Hughes would fancy his chances. The in-demand managers always do.
