Mark Hughes Quits Fulham

[PeterWithesShin]

Weren't Newton Heath also in Europe as cup winners?

[PeterWithesShin]

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?

[hilts_coolerking]

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? 

[Rigadon]

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.

[IRISHPHIL]

i know this is long shot , but what about simon grayson as manager

[Rigadon]

i know this is long shot , but what about simon grayson as manager

See Roberto Matinez.

Not yet, thanks.

[Chris Smith]

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.

[hilts_coolerking]

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.

[DeKuip]

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.

[Drummond]

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.

[villa for life]

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?

[hilts_coolerking]

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.

[Chris Smith]

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.

[pauliewalnuts]

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.

[villa for life]

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