Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:


What like relying on advisers/consultants to the most important role at the football club rather than a CEO who works for and for the club only? 
 

Doesn’t sound like there’s anything  wrong with that to me. Certainly won’t be a conflict of interests which makes the decision progress take longer than it should. 


*to help appoint the

 

Bad English 

 

lol

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SallyCinnamon said:


Problem with advisers is - do they have the clubs best interests at heart? Or do they put forward candidates who they have ties too? 
 

Why a CEO or DOF football is needed. Until it happens and a proper football structure is put in place, we will go from manager to manager with different ideas, philosophies and the club will continue to struggle.

Or they know they're going to get a pay day from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

A cynic might think that DC is holding back on appointing a manager until the transfer window closes. Especially after Pullis told him what was required and then sacked 2days later.

This is my thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

A cynic might think that DC is holding back on appointing a manager until the transfer window closes. Especially after Pullis told him what was required and then sacked 2days later.


agree with that. We are desperate for players yet with no manager that isn’t so easy. Absolute shambles of a club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cook reportedly wants the job. I don't see any other rumoured candidate more suitable for the job. Considering the clubs he's worked at, his nous for unearthing lower league bargains and getting the most out of a difficult hand, Cook would be a sensible appointment. Especially if by how it appears, that finances are tightly constrained and we have to rely on youth and loanees.

 

Therein lies the issue, Chansiri's rarely done anything sensible during his entire reign and fears that he'll go leftfield and appoint someone like Coleman or some journeyman, could recklessly happen. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, daleblue said:

Having read most posts,

it seems the majority don't want Cook.

Honestly don’t understand the fascination, it’s bonkers. A good lower league record at a few clubs and it’s like the second coming of Klopp.

 

Look, I get in our predicament he may not be a bad choice. He has vast experience managing poor players and teams and doing well with them, so will probably be able to rally this lot up. 
 

I’d still prefer a manager whose managed at a higher level and is tactically stronger with better contacts 

 

That’s just personal preference 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/01/2021 at 14:54, theowlsman said:

But more importantly......

 

HE IS POSITIVE

HE IS LIVELY

HE PREFERS ATTACKING FOOTBALL

HE HAS A SENSE OF HUMOUR

HE WILL BE A BREATH OF FRESH AIR

 

So, just like Ollie but with a lesser CV.

Sounds good to me.... 

Would sound even better if we ca get the sound man to change / hide his squeeky scouse accent in interviews and conferences lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, FreshOwl said:

Honestly don’t understand the fascination, it’s bonkers. A good lower league record at a few clubs and it’s like the second coming of Klopp.

 

Look, I get in our predicament he may not be a bad choice. He has vast experience managing poor players and teams and doing well with them, so will probably be able to rally this lot up. 
 

I’d still prefer a manager whose managed at a higher level and is tactically stronger with better contacts 

 

That’s just personal preference 

I could get behind the contacts point if it were not for the fact that cook had gotten hold of some really good loans at Wigan.

 

The "tactically stronger" argument is a disrespectful comment, no reason why managers who have worked their way up through the Leagues successfully cannot be very strong tactically.

 

In fact you could argue when you are managing a club like wigan competing at a lever where your resources are less than your competitors then you need to be tactically better than your peers to complete/survive. 

 

I don't bey for a minute that a manager like Scott Parker is a tactical genius but he got Fulham promotion by having a much better squad with more resources than other teams.

 

What wilder achieved at the blades getting them up and staying up was every bit as impressive tactically and coaching wise than the "tactical god" that bielsa is made out to be at Leeds and wilder like cook worked his was up having sucess at Every level and knew league inside and out.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, FreshOwl said:

Honestly don’t understand the fascination, it’s bonkers. A good lower league record at a few clubs and it’s like the second coming of Klopp.

 

Look, I get in our predicament he may not be a bad choice. He has vast experience managing poor players and teams and doing well with them, so will probably be able to rally this lot up. 
 

I’d still prefer a manager whose managed at a higher level and is tactically stronger with better contacts 

 

That’s just personal preference 

Anyone who has managed at a higher level, isn’t necessarily tactically stronger, than someone from the lower leagues. They’re just working with better players and spending more money. Aiden O’Brien couldn’t get more out of the donkeys on Filey beach than the old lass who owns them. Get someone in who knows how to polish turds

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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...