Is managing Norwich a poisoned chalice?

[lake district canary 4,531]

We had Hughton. A decent, thorough and organised manager who has proved himself a decent manager everywhere else he''s been. We have AN who in his short career has proved himself a decent manager, two promotions against the odds at two different clubs and as with Hughton, loved at his previous club. Even Lambert left under a cloud, due to some conflict with the club, even though he was successful.  Does AN really have to go elsewhere to prove how good a manager he is, or do we look at it and say, you know what, perhaps it''s something else. Maybe the unrealistic expectations?   The board insisting on promotion, promotion, promotion, when consolidaton and rebuilding is what is needed?  Maybe fans expecting too much from a club that cannot compete fnancially with a lot of clubs, even in this division ?  Maybe players spoiled by being in the premier league and unable to cope with the championship again?  Maybe players that are punch drunk from too many beatings in the premier League over several seasons?  Whatever, I think if we lose this manager, we will find ourselves a few seasons down the line with several managers coming and going and progress stilted and stalled time and time again.  Fans will hope for another saviour in the form of a Lambert (unlikely lightning strikes twice) and we will be worse off.   We should have stuck with Lambert, despite whatever dispute caused him to leave, we should have stuck with Hughton - he would have transformed the club like he has done Brighton, given a season or two in the championship.  We should stick with AN.  He has proved himself at championship level already and will again, even if it''s not with us. It''s not a poisoned chalice yet, but lose another good man in the form of AN and it may well become that.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

No, but it is the nature of a results driven business, did what has happened at leads stop Gary Monk taking that job ? no, and the reason is for the need to be involved wherever possible for some, and of course the nice salary helps! truth is football is a drug for some, and Norwich is no different.

I spoke to a respected manager once who said "first year at a club, you have the squad you are given, by the second year you have the squad you deserve.

[king canary 7,562]

No. It''s like every other job at this level. Do well and you''ll get poached, do badly and you''ll get sacked. It''s pretty simple. Right now Neil is performing badly as did Hughton. It''s bollocks to suggest if we''d have stuck with Hughton he''d have ''transformed'' us- there is zero evidence for it.

The basic premise you seem to have is that Neil is a good manager who is in a bad run and that we should stick etch him through it. Quite a few of us differ on the idea that he is actually a good manager.

[king canary 7,562]

Oh and just a couple of points -

1- The longest serving manager in this division is Mccarthy at the binners. Sticking with him though it all has got them to lower midtable and a half empty stadium.

2- Hughton has been at Brighton for two years, about the same amount of time he sent at Norwich. If he has transformed them then why was it taking so much longer with Norwich? All he''d transformed us into was a turgid team heading for relegation.

[morty 0]

No.

[The Bristol Nest 513]

I''d drink the poison in a jiffy. Great job, great club.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Don''t you ever stop waffling on lakey. So many words but so little actually said. And the short answer to your question is "no". Alex Neil has proved recently that he''s poor tactically, plays a rigid and predictable system and isn''t great at subs. And by our performances, motivation doesn''t seem to be his strong suit either. These faults are no one''s fault but his.

[The Bristol Nest 513]

Sums it up Hoola.

[Van wink 2,994]

Has Hughton become better at making subs now?

[BroadstairsR 2,137]

Surely you only make subs when losing.

Brighton are winning. Look at the table.

[Chesney Hawkes 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Maybe the unrealistic expectations?   The board insisting on promotion, promotion, promotion, when consolidaton and rebuilding is what is needed?[/quote]

Oh for God''s sake man.

The target of promotion is reasonable given the quality of our players.

The club needs the finances the Premiership offers.  Everyone understands that.

Consolidation and rebuilding should not be required as a manager should ensure continuity and evolution, not the "revolution" of rebuilding.

The expectations are NOT unrealistic, and were not unrealistic when we were top of the league.  But 2 wins in 8 shows Alex Neil and his management team have lost their way.  The club''s management have actually been very patient with AN considering recent results, but if they continue then the question is when the axe will fall, not if.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Maybe the unrealistic expectations? - Whats unrealistic about expecting a relegated team to challenge for promotion?

The board insisting on promotion, promotion, promotion, when consolidaton and rebuilding is what is needed? - We kept our squad from the Premier League. Why is rebuilding & consolidation needed

Maybe fans expecting too much from a club that cannot compete fnancially with a lot of clubs, even in this division ? - we can compete, but Neil has wasted 25million plus arguable in the 2 windows

Maybe players spoiled by being in the premier league and unable to cope with the championship again? Maybe players that are punch drunk from too many beatings in the premier League over several seasons? - then its up to the manager to iron that out & get them ready for it

Just take a second to think LDC - is it really the fans to blame for the mess we are in?

Or do you have serious attention craving issues?

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

[quote user="Phil Collins"]

Consolidation and rebuilding should not be required as a manager should ensure continuity and evolution, not the "revolution" of rebuilding.

[/quote]

Just how do you envisage a manger ensures continuity and evolution when they mostly only get a couple of years in the job, less if the fans had any say??

[Chesney Hawkes 0]

Because our current manager has been in charge during three seasons, apparently still has Board backing, and is therefore well placed to evolve the squad.

[komakino 272]

Norwich City is a club you can make a name for yourself if you have the talent and you will get a much easier ride if things don''t quite work out, as they have always been at best, a reactive board.

If you''ve got talent and prepared to work with well meaning amateurs, then the club is for you.

It''s a good gig, or at least should be.

[TIL 1010 4,718]

Three minutes to midnight so having been out all afternoon and evening i am just wondering what tomorrow''s lecture will be.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]Three minutes to midnight so having been out all afternoon and evening i am just wondering what tomorrow''s lecture will be.[/quote]Nine minutes to one here. I''ll be working on it all night. [;)]

[Making Plans 936]

[quote user="lake district canary"]We had Hughton. A decent, thorough and organised manager who has proved himself a decent manager everywhere else he''s been. We have AN who in his short career has proved himself a decent manager, two promotions against the odds at two different clubs and as with Hughton, loved at his previous club. Even Lambert left under a cloud, due to some conflict with the club, even though he was successful.  [/quote]It''s not about what they did before they came here, what they do after they''ve left here or how much they were loved at their previous Clubs.It''s about what they do while they are here - Hughton failed & AN is doing the same.It was right to get rid of Hughton & it won''t be long before the same decision is made about AN.