It's not Sherwood!

[Salsa Party Animal]

I wonder where do Garry Monk come from ?

[Villa in Denmark]

Garry Monk Wiki page

There you go S.P.A.

[not3bad]

I think Rodgers is the best fit but, if not, we could surely get Pardew?

He won't leave palace for us, plus he is a massive c***

I endorse that

Good. I'd like it if Pardew came then. We need a c*nt who can manage.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

Appointing a young manager who understands the club can work see Swansea with Monk. However, Swansea have set themselves up with a very clear plan that they've been using for years now. If we had that, someone like Laursen hypothetically wouldn't be a bad shout. The fact that we don't have these things means it can't be considered until we do.

Swansea had the foresight many years ago to install and invest in a long-term system that has enabled them to change managers when required without having to rip up the whole club and start again each time.  They select managers who share the club's footballing philosophy, who buy into the plan and have the intelligence and understanding to go along with it and develop it.  Relatively inexperienced managers (Monk, Rodgers) thrive there because they have the support of the whole backroom set-up.  Garry Monk's success in his first managerial role - and Swansea's rise over the last decade -  shows how important a club's infrastructure is.  Much more important than the one man who does all the press interviews, it would seem. 

I know you weren't actually suggesting Monk, but take him out of the well-built machine that is Swansea and chuck him into Lerner's rather more "Frank Spencer" Aston Villa model and I think he'd struggle -  and that's exactly my worry with Rodgers.  I haven't seen anything to suggest that he has the skills to single-handedly turn around a club in a truly tough predicament.  I haven't seen any tactical genius from him, if anything he meddled far too much last season trying to be a smartarse.  All I've really seen in Rodgers is a gobshite, one as bad as Lambert for describing every performance as "excellent" when it was nearer "excrement".  I'm not keen on Sherwood's brash bullshittery, I've got no particular desire to swap it for a smarmier kind. 

Of those named, the only man who has proven he has the personality and the skills to sort out a messed-up big club, provide stability and build for the future is David Moyes.  It's exactly what he did with Everton, it's exactly what we need, and it's exactly why I don't think he'd come; why the hell would you want to do the same job again?

[pauliewalnuts]

Appointing a young manager who understands the club can work see Swansea with Monk. However, Swansea have set themselves up with a very clear plan that they've been using for years now. If we had that, someone like Laursen hypothetically wouldn't be a bad shout. The fact that we don't have these things means it can't be considered until we do.

Swansea had the foresight many years ago to install and invest in a long-term system that has enabled them to change managers when required without having to rip up the whole club and start again each time.  They select managers who share the club's footballing philosophy, who buy into the plan and have the intelligence and understanding to go along with it and develop it.  Relatively inexperienced managers (Monk, Rodgers) thrive there because they have the support of the whole backroom set-up.  Garry Monk's success in his first managerial role - and Swansea's rise over the last decade -  shows how important a club's infrastructure is.  Much more important than the one man who does all the press interviews, it would seem. 

I know you weren't actually suggesting Monk, but take him out of the well-built machine that is Swansea and chuck him into Lerner's rather more "Frank Spencer" Aston Villa model and I think he'd struggle -  and that's exactly my worry with Rodgers.  I haven't seen anything to suggest that he has the skills to single-handedly turn around a club in a truly tough predicament.  I haven't seen any tactical genius from him, if anything he meddled far too much last season trying to be a smartarse.  All I've really seen in Rodgers is a gobshite, one as bad as Lambert for describing every performance as "excellent" when it was nearer "excrement".  I'm not keen on Sherwood's brash bullshittery, I've got no particular desire to swap it for a smarmier kind. 

Of those named, the only man who has proven he has the personality and the skills to sort out a messed-up big club, provide stability and build for the future is David Moyes.  It's exactly what he did with Everton, it's exactly what we need, and it's exactly why I don't think he'd come; why the hell would you want to do the same job again?

Although I don't agree with parts of this post, you've put it all so clearly and well, that I am actually starting to think maybe I do agree with it all.

[Sexual Ealing]

Particularly the last point about Moyes. Why would anyone want a decade's career regression?

[OCD]

Swansea were also bottom of the football league when Huw Jenkins installed their philosophy. Whilst they had entirely different pressures, I imagine it's easier to keep things going once you've gained initial momentum than it would be when you're struggling at the foot of the Premier League and holding on for dear life.

[silhillvilla]

Particularly the last point about Moyes. Why would anyone want a decade's career regression?

£4 to £5m per annum may tempt him plus bonuses.

[Louzie0]

Particularly the last point about Moyes. Why would anyone want a decade's career regression?

He might have more money at his disposal than he had at Everton.

[Villa in Denmark]

Appointing a young manager who understands the club can work see Swansea with Monk. However, Swansea have set themselves up with a very clear plan that they've been using for years now. If we had that, someone like Laursen hypothetically wouldn't be a bad shout. The fact that we don't have these things means it can't be considered until we do.

Swansea had the foresight many years ago to install and invest in a long-term system that has enabled them to change managers when required without having to rip up the whole club and start again each time.  They select managers who share the club's footballing philosophy, who buy into the plan and have the intelligence and understanding to go along with it and develop it.  Relatively inexperienced managers (Monk, Rodgers) thrive there because they have the support of the whole backroom set-up.  Garry Monk's success in his first managerial role - and Swansea's rise over the last decade -  shows how important a club's infrastructure is.  Much more important than the one man who does all the press interviews, it would seem. 

I know you weren't actually suggesting Monk, but take him out of the well-built machine that is Swansea and chuck him into Lerner's rather more "Frank Spencer" Aston Villa model and I think he'd struggle -  and that's exactly my worry with Rodgers.  I haven't seen anything to suggest that he has the skills to single-handedly turn around a club in a truly tough predicament.  I haven't seen any tactical genius from him, if anything he meddled far too much last season trying to be a smartarse.  All I've really seen in Rodgers is a gobshite, one as bad as Lambert for describing every performance as "excellent" when it was nearer "excrement".  I'm not keen on Sherwood's brash bullshittery, I've got no particular desire to swap it for a smarmier kind. 

Of those named, the only man who has proven he has the personality and the skills to sort out a messed-up big club, provide stability and build for the future is David Moyes.  It's exactly what he did with Everton, it's exactly what we need, and it's exactly why I don't think he'd come; why the hell would you want to do the same job again?

Although I don't agree with parts of this post, you've put it all so clearly and well, that I am actually starting to think maybe I do agree with it all.

Yes, a far more eloquent and well formulated argument as to why Monk has looked so comfortable at Swansea, than I managed with my ramblings a couple of pages ago.

Also highlighted my one nagging concern with Rodgers.  The only place where he's exceeded sensible expectations has been Swansea in that environment. He bombed at Reading, but first job so you could argue to give him some slack for that.
Liverpool I can't quite decide what to think. He deserves credit for turning 7th into 2nd by working out how to get the most out of Suarez and Sturridge, but he's looked completely lost since. Even allowing for losing both of them for most of last season with Sturridge's injuries didn't play well for great chunks of the season, then they buy Benteke and he hasn't got a clue how to use him. Even Sherwood worked that one out.

[Sexual Ealing]

Particularly the last point about Moyes. Why would anyone want a decade's career regression?

He might have more money at his disposal than he had at Everton.

I doubt it. He made some comparatively big buys for them if I recall correctly: Fellaini, Lescott, all the strikers that didn't work out (Johnson, Saha, Yakubu), Distin, Baines, Rodwell, Bilyaletdinov (sp.). I can't see Randolph forking out for similar equivalents nowadays.

[Louzie0]

Particularly the last point about Moyes. Why would anyone want a decade's career regression?

He might have more money at his disposal than he had at Everton.

I doubt it. He made some comparatively big buys for them if I recall correctly: Fellaini, Lescott, all the strikers that didn't work out (Johnson, Saha, Yakubu), Distin, Baines, Rodwell, Bilyaletdinov (sp.). I can't see Randolph forking out for similar equivalents nowadays.

I'd forgotten them.  I just remember Bill Kenwright going on about having to watch the pennies every time he was interviewed, when Moyes fans in the media wanted him to be able to buy whoever he wanted to 'get Everton to the next level'. I suppose it's a matter of perception that he was kept short, rather than reality. A bit like MON's mates when he was here.

[Dave]

Particularly the last point about Moyes. Why would anyone want a decade's career regression?

He might have more money at his disposal than he had at Everton.

I doubt it. He made some comparatively big buys for them if I recall correctly: Fellaini, Lescott, all the strikers that didn't work out (Johnson, Saha, Yakubu), Distin, Baines, Rodwell, Bilyaletdinov (sp.). I can't see Randolph forking out for similar equivalents nowadays.

I don't think it's fair to describe Rodwell as an expensive purchase considering he joined them when he was seven!

[SoccerHQ]

Yes Rodgers did fail at Reading, he followed the successful Steve Coppell era of Reading play 4-4-2 in the prem so he couldn't impose his own system as the players were drill in that.

Last few years we must be one of the few prem clubs that don't really have a playing identity in that our performances are so poor on a consistant basis so I really don't see that being an issue.

One thing I don't get is why managers get written off when people magnify their CV and find a bad spell at a club 5-6 years ago. If a manager on average manages 8 clubs during his career he will at some point find a club where it just dosen't work.

It's different abroad, Wenger, Klopp and Benitez all have relegations on their CVs but they still got appointments. It's like when Martinez went down and people said he was no good...yes but it's Wigan, back in league one their natural home.

[silhillvilla]

We need to be pragmatic with the next appointment . If we go down we stick with them and allow them to build us back up.
David Moyes ticks the box in that respect.