Jump to content

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Rogers said:

Some odds.....I'm hoping for Jol now. Managed some big clubs, has loads of contacts, is likeable, and can be a hard arese as well. 

 

Chris Hughton – 1/1

Gianfranco Zola – 9/2

Martin Jol – 8/1

Daniel Stendel – 8/1

Garry Monk – 10/1

David Moyes – 12/1

Gary Rowett – 12/1

Lee Bullen – 12/1

Nigel Pearson – 12/1

Aitor Karanka – 16/1

Tony Pulis – 16/1

Claude Puel – 16/1

Nigel Adkins – 18/1

Giovanni van Bronckhorst – 18/1

Alan Pardew – 18/1

 

     Highest
odds
Lowest
odds
Chris Hughton 3.25 2.50
Gianfranco Zola 5.00 5.00
Daniel Stendel 10.00 9.00
Martin Jol 10.00 10.00
Garry Monk 11.00 10.00
Lee Bullen 13.00 12.00
Aitor Karanka 15.00 15.00
Gary Rowett 15.00 15.00
Tony Pulis 17.00 15.00
Alan Pardew 17.00 17.00
Claude Puel 17.00 17.00
Nigel Pearson 21.00 10.00
Giovanni Van Bronckhorst 21.00 19.00
Nigel Adkins 21.00 19.00
Domenico Tedesco 21.00 21.00
David Moyes 26.00 12.00
Mark Hughes 26.00 21.00
Carlos Carvalhal 26.00 26.00
Danny Cowley 26.00 26.00
Gary Megson 26.00 26.00
Ian Holloway 26.00 26.00
Paul Cook 26.00 26.00
Steve Mc Claren 26.00 26.00
Martin O'neill 34.00 21.00
Gareth Ainsworth 34.00 34.00
Lee Bowyer 34.00 34.00
Michael Flynn 34.00 34.00
Paolo Di Canio 34.00 34.00
Paul Warne 34.00 34.00
Roy Keane 34.00 34.00
Sam Allardyce 34.00 34.00
Verified (CET)
Changed (CET)
   
 

 

Never just settle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

Nail on the head. If we go for an employed manager we are no better than Newcastle, and whoever comes is no more morally flawed than Bruce.

 

The Bruce haters won’t quite understand that though. After all we are Sheffield Wednesday and we do what we want etc etc 

 

Why have a problem with Newcastle wanting to fill the job with an employed or unemployed manager? it happens all the time...

 

This one is firmly in Bruce’s court.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, bigsheff said:

 

Why have a problem with Newcastle wanting to fill the job with an employed or unemployed manager? it happens all the time...

 

This one is firmly in Bruce’s court.

 

I have no problem with it, it’s football. I’m just saying people were quick to call Newcastle and Bruce everything under the sun for this move. But if we employed Stendel, what makes us any different?

 

This is why I don’t get all the abuse for Bruce. This happens all the time in football. We are just not used to it because we are not a selling club. 

Edited by SallyCinnamon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wish Zola’s name would disappear from the betting

 

and Monk and Rowett and Pulis and Bullen and Karanka and Puel and Adkins and Pardew. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, wellbeaten-the-owl said:

Obvious choice for me would be Gary Rowett.  Did great job at Burton with no money, a fantastic job at Birmingham with no money (disgrace when he was sacked by them for Zola) good job at Derby as well.  

 

Zola would be a disaster waiting to happen, would have been happy with Gary Monk before recent stories.

 

 

No thank you, don't think he did a fantastic job at Birmingham, just ok. Crap at Derby and Stoke

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

I have no problem with it, it’s football. I’m just saying people were quick to call Newcastle and Bruce everything under the sun for this move. But if we employed Stendel, what makes us any different?

 

This is why I don’t get all the abuse for Bruce. This happens all the time in football. We are just not used to it because we are not a selling club. 

 

When it happens at other clubs fans are just as critical and abusive towards the manager. I don't think we are unique. So why does it matter? In fact I think fans of other clubs can be much more offensive than Wednesday fans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tripod said:

Seems strange this board is in melt down because Bruce has resigned to get his move to Newcastle but then we are going to steal another clubs manager 3 weeks before the start of the season and that’s perfectly fine, surely it would make Strendel no better than Bruce.

To hold the moral high ground our next manager should be unemployed.

 

11 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

Nail on the head. If we go for an employed manager we are no better than Newcastle, and whoever comes is no more morally flawed than Bruce.

 

The Bruce haters won’t quite understand that though. After all we are Sheffield Wednesday and we do what we want etc etc 

The moral high ground?

 

This is football.

 

Morality flew out the window a long time ago. Bruce marked his card by clearly engineering his exit weeks in advance. Him resigning was the last throw of the dice to ensure he got his dream move.

 

If we approached an opposition club and asked to speak with their manager and things were all done through the correct channels (not played out in the media like the whole Bruce fiasco was), then I don't think we could be subject to too much criticism.

 

It would also give Sally an excuse to start a new thread about how we are no better than Newcastle, Chansiri is a Thai version of Mike Ashley and so forth. 

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, defo going for Stendel.

 

Just be worth it to see Sally have a meltdown (again). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TheEnchanter said:

 

When it happens at other clubs fans are just as critical and abusive towards the manager. I don't think we are unique. So why does it matter? In fact I think fans of other clubs can be much more offensive than Wednesday fans. 

 

Not sure about that to be honest, just a scroll through Twitter and some of the vitriol towards Bruce and his family is way over the top and quite nasty.

 

I can understand disappointment and frustration, but personal abuse is just crazy - I will never understand it. 

 

And people who are on some moral crusade saying ‘oh but we gave him time off in January after the difficult year he’s had’ just make me laugh.

1) Bruce didn’t force us to wait for him. That was the clubs decision for letting it happen. 

2) Where were all these people last season moaning about this? Not long ago Bruce was an honourable person for fulfilling a family commitment and Danny Murphy was heartless and out of order for suggesting otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sally - do you actually like anything about SWFC?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been informed that zola is a very real possibility! I am seriously not itk but just passing on some info I was given. Could be complete bs as it’s from a friend of a friend 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SiJ said:

Yep, defo going for Stendel.

 

Just be worth it to see Sally have a meltdown (again). 

 

I think it would be the best appointment and i’d have no problem with it. I’m not the one throwing my toys out the pram because Steve Bruce has left us. Like you say, it’s football. 

 

Also you’re naive to think what Bruce has done is not standard practice in football. Carlos had his agent talking to Swansea whilst with us. Every football manager does it. Wrong yes, but Bruce certainly isn’t unique in doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

I have no problem with it, it’s football. I’m just saying people were quick to call Newcastle and Bruce everything under the sun for this move. But if we employed Stendel, what makes us any different?

 

This is why I don’t get all the abuse for Bruce. This happens all the time in football. We are just not used to it because we are not a selling club. 

I think the abuse for Bruce (aboot this hoose) has been as a result of his conduct. The pretence that this has ‘come out of the blue’ and he ‘will be leaving it to the clubs’ before doing the exact opposite is what has annoyed people, totally legitimately imo.

 

As for abuse of Newcastle, I again think that’s specific to the horrible asset stripper Mike Ashley, rather than the club, as well as the fact Bruce has clearly been tapped up. 

 

If we make an official approach for an employed manager and conduct ourselves properly, I don’t have a problem with it.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SallyCinnamon said:

Also you’re naive to think what Bruce has done is not standard practice in football. Carlos had his agent talking to Swansea whilst with us. Every football manager does it. Wrong yes, but Bruce certainly isn’t unique in doing it.

I'm fully aware of how football works. Stop trying to patronise people.

 

Just because it happens, doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

Two completely different things. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SiJ said:

I'm fully aware of how football works. Stop trying to patronise people.

 

Just because it happens, doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

Two completely different things. 

 

SiJ telling people not to be patronising. Oh the irony.

 

lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Philb125 said:

Only two on the list you’ve captured that I’d be keen on. That’s a sorry state of affairs. 

TWO!, who's the other one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

I have no problem with it, it’s football. I’m just saying people were quick to call Newcastle and Bruce everything under the sun for this move. But if we employed Stendel, what makes us any different?

 

This is why I don’t get all the abuse for Bruce. This happens all the time in football. We are just not used to it because we are not a selling club. 

 

It would be very very different if we approached the club, ascertained the contractual requirement for compensation, agreed to pay it, were granted permission to speak to the manager and agreed the terms of his new contract.

 

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sonny said:

 

It would be very very different if we approached the club, ascertained the contractual requirement for compensation, agreed to pay it, were granted permission to speak to the manager and agreed the terms of his new contract.

 

 

 

Newcastle did approach us. Chansiri gave Bruce permission to speak to Newcastle. According to Nixon have agreed to pay the compensation (most clubs haggle over compensation for managers).

 

Am I missing something here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

Newcastle did approach us. Chansiri gave Bruce permission to speak to Newcastle. According to Nixon have agreed to pay the compensation (most clubs haggle over compensation for managers).

 

Am I missing something here?

The part where Bruce and his staff resigned is quite important. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read it that we did not agree compo until after Bruce resigned and brought it all to a head. For some reason this seems to have put a bit of urgency into Ashley. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...