Shock and Horror - Gunny has a new job

[Mello Yello 2,279]

[quote user="Barclayman"]This makes him getting the Norwich job all the more laughable.

Just proves how completely inept and unqualified he was to be Norwich City Manager. Have you ever heard in the history of professional football of a manager getting sacked and then turning up working for a high street shop? Its ridiculous, and even more ridiculous that he was ever given the manager''s job in the first place.
[/quote]

Strange world isn''t it? Whereas I thought our previous CE, was a quite less than average CE.....and now he''s a venerable ''Head Honcho'' mixing it, with Scottish Football''s elite.

 

 

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Mook"]Is it just me that finds it INCREDIBLY depressing that our previous manager''s next job is in marketing for a telecoms company???

On two levels really:

1) that our board appointed a marketing/PR man as the manager of an important football club, and
2) that Bryan Gunn, after saying how much he can do for us as a manager, doesn''t even stay "in" the game of football. If marketing was all he ever wanted to do, then why tell us he was the man for manager''s job??? And why risk OUR relegation and future non-promotion for something he''s not that arsed about??

I''m more than slightly annoyed with this news.
[/quote]

You have raised some interesting points. Good post.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Barclayman"]This makes him getting the Norwich job all the more laughable.

Just proves how completely inept and unqualified he was to be Norwich City Manager. Have you ever heard in the history of professional football of a manager getting sacked and then turning up working for a high street shop? Its ridiculous, and even more ridiculous that he was ever given the manager''s job in the first place.
[/quote]

Over to the Stowmarket Two.........

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Mook"]Is it just me that finds it INCREDIBLY depressing that our previous manager''s next job is in marketing for a telecoms company???

On two levels really:

1) that our board appointed a marketing/PR man as the manager of an important football club, and
2) that Bryan Gunn, after saying how much he can do for us as a manager, doesn''t even stay "in" the game of football. If marketing was all he ever wanted to do, then why tell us he was the man for manager''s job??? And why risk OUR relegation and future non-promotion for something he''s not that arsed about??

I''m more than slightly annoyed with this news.
[/quote]

You have raised some interesting points. Good post.

[/quote]

They are good points Tangie. And I doubt there''s many would argue. I can understand Gunny being caretaker after Roeder was sacked. I can just about see the logic in giving him, with Crook and Butterworth, ''til the end of last season. The other two are experienced football manager/coaches. And also the playerswere apparently in favour. But to be reappointed after managing an awful and mostly toothless relegation defied belief.

I often wonder why these obvious football mistakes rarely get a mention when the board are attacked. I daresay that come the AGM folk will be falling over themselves to ask pointless questions about investment based on rumour and supposition. I may well work out a question asking the reasons for Gunns appointment after relegation. Although I agree that we finally seem to have the right manager for where we are now I would love to know the thinking behind the decision to appoint Gunny in May.

 

[Mister Chops 7]

I hope he gets a decent reception.

[Mello Yello 2,279]

Whatever poor Bryan does.....He''s going to have his Nokia''s....

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[ron obvious 1,499]

You kill me, Chopsie!

[Mook 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

They are good points Tangie. And I doubt there''s many would argue. I can understand Gunny being caretaker after Roeder was sacked. I can just about see the logic in giving him, with Crook and Butterworth, ''til the end of last season. The other two are experienced football manager/coaches. And also the playerswere apparently in favour. But to be reappointed after managing an awful and mostly toothless relegation defied belief.

I often wonder why these obvious football mistakes rarely get a mention when the board are attacked. I daresay that come the AGM folk will be falling over themselves to ask pointless questions about investment based on rumour and supposition. I may well work out a question asking the reasons for Gunns appointment after relegation. Although I agree that we finally seem to have the right manager for where we are now I would love to know the thinking behind the decision to appoint Gunny in May.

[/quote]Unlike your usual posts NN, you''re focussing on the board''s role in this, the latest NCFC embarrassment.I started a post last night speculating that Mr Gunn used his "gift of the gab" for evil rather than good, which I then scrapped thinking it was over-dramatic. Well, in the cold light of day, I genuinely believe that Gunny used as ammunition the years he served the club, and his standing as a playing legend to exploit the board''s sentimentality and bag himself the manager''s job. I''m as aware as the next person that the board should NEVER have appointed him, and have gone on record as saying so BUT this does not leave Mr Gunn as whiter-than-white. If someone "loves" the club, then they would sacrifice their ego, and not to mention their bank balance, to give the best chance of success to said club. Therefore, I put it to you m''lud that Mr Gunn likes to be the big fish in the small pond, likes to play Bertie Big-Balls and doesn''t really give a crap about football management. Otherwise he would have been desperate to prove his credentials, maybe start again in lower leagues, and show the football community that he is a good manager. Not take the next available cushty job that falls into his lap.

[First Wizard 0]

Doesn''t it say it all that no one involved with football has offered him a job, even in non league![:|]

[Bury Yellow 2]

Mook, both your posts have been absolutely spot on. In particular the reasons for him going for the job etc.

It is what we Bury lot have been saying since the day he got the job after the Barnsley game.

To me this is a complete embarrassment to Delia MWJ and, if he had anything to do with it, Michael Foulger. Even worse, once again it shows just what a mess of a club it was.

Is Bob Franklin part of Digital Phone Company?

At least this has drawn a line under it all and we are now looking and sounding like a proper football club again.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Mook"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

They are good points Tangie. And I doubt there''s many would argue. I can understand Gunny being caretaker after Roeder was sacked. I can just about see the logic in giving him, with Crook and Butterworth, ''til the end of last season. The other two are experienced football manager/coaches. And also the playerswere apparently in favour. But to be reappointed after managing an awful and mostly toothless relegation defied belief.

I often wonder why these obvious football mistakes rarely get a mention when the board are attacked. I daresay that come the AGM folk will be falling over themselves to ask pointless questions about investment based on rumour and supposition. I may well work out a question asking the reasons for Gunns appointment after relegation. Although I agree that we finally seem to have the right manager for where we are now I would love to know the thinking behind the decision to appoint Gunny in May.

[/quote]

Unlike your usual posts NN, you''re focussing on the board''s role in this, the latest NCFC embarrassment.

I started a post last night speculating that Mr Gunn used his "gift of the gab" for evil rather than good, which I then scrapped thinking it was over-dramatic. Well, in the cold light of day, I genuinely believe that Gunny used as ammunition the years he served the club, and his standing as a playing legend to exploit the board''s sentimentality and bag himself the manager''s job. I''m as aware as the next person that the board should NEVER have appointed him, and have gone on record as saying so BUT this does not leave Mr Gunn as whiter-than-white.

If someone "loves" the club, then they would sacrifice their ego, and not to mention their bank balance, to give the best chance of success to said club. Therefore, I put it to you m''lud that Mr Gunn likes to be the big fish in the small pond, likes to play Bertie Big-Balls and doesn''t really give a crap about football management. Otherwise he would have been desperate to prove his credentials, maybe start again in lower leagues, and show the football community that he is a good manager. Not take the next available cushty job that falls into his lap.
[/quote]

Indeed I am Mook. And the reason I''m doing that is because I hold them responsible. The initial decision was fair enough. We beat Barnsley 4-0 and by all accounts senior players lobbied the board to give Gunn the job. I think most people felt that with the feel good factor back at the club we''d then pick up enough points to survive. I felt bringing in Crook, Butterworth and Deehan would take care of the inexperience issues and if they were succesfull I fully expected (as I think many did) Crook or Butterworth to take over moving Gunn to a more suitable role. It was the decision in May to appoint him that beggared belief. While I can see the point that Gunn should not of taken the job if he loved the club maybe he doesn''t see it that way. There''s plenty of fans who claim to love the club who would quite happily see us in administration. If you accuse them of not loving the club you quickly find yourself neck deep in hot water. I would still like to know what was the thinking behind giving Gunn the job so soon after we were relegated.

 

[Yella Fella 0]

Some fans on here are really quite nasty!!

I see no need to slate Bryan Gunn as a person having worked with him for the last month he is genuinly a great person and has nothing bad to say about Norwich fans, and does not deserve the stick he is getting!!

remember he gave the club over 20 years of service and was part of the most succesful Norwich team we ever had, his management stint was not the best but i dont think anybody can argue the fact that the team that is doing so well now is full of players gunn brought to the club and dont forget how much work he does for local charities.

The man had to have a lot of courage to take over the reigns with a team full of loanies, give him a break and wish him well in his new career!!

Good luck Gunny!!! 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="First Wizard"]Doesn''t it say it all that no one involved with football has offered him a job, even in non league![:|][/quote]

It does if you know that to be true. If you made it up then it says nothing[:O]

What could say it all would be if he hadn''t applied for another job in football but that would be speculation too.

 

[Lurd 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="First Wizard"]Doesn''t it say it all that no one involved with football has offered him a job, even in non league![:|][/quote]

It does if you know that to be true. If you made it up then it says nothing[:O]

What could say it all would be if he hadn''t applied for another job in football but that would be speculation too.

 

[/quote]A business development director in most professions would pay a lot more than most average football jobs IMO.

[CanaryPurple 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I would still like to know what was the thinking behind giving Gunn the job so soon after we were relegated.

 

[/quote]Nutty, I suspect if you ask you will just get "We thought it was the

right decision at the time". But I can think of a few possible reasons.

The first three particular to Gunn and Norwich, the last one more

general.

1. Simple sentimentality. Being unable to look him in the eye and sack him.A

barking mad reason, and unforgiveable IF it played a part. Delia''s

public reaction after the 1-7 MIGHT (but only might) suggest this was a

factor.

2. We think/hope he has learned from his mistakes. Plus he will be able

to put together HIS squad in the summer. Essentially the Bob Franklin

argument.

And if he has no aptitude for the job, as seemed the case, and has learned nothing?

3. Sack him and it is all change again at Carrow Road and Colney. For

the umpteenth time. New manager, new coaches, new players. We have

twice now had managers coming in mid-season (Grant and Roeder) and

having to do a hurried rescue act. If we keep Gunn and it works out

then at last we will have some stability and continuity. This

is a strong argument. IF it works out. If it doesn''t then we have all

the upheaval again, but once the season has started. Again. As

happened. The worst of all worlds.4. More generally now. If

you''re a second or third tier club and you''re contemplating sacking the

manager, who''s the replacement going to be? There is no point in change

for change''s sake. The new man has to be better. And at this (our)

level you will always have to choose either someone who has possibly

been successful in his first (and so far only) job down the League, but

is unproven higher up. Or someone with more experience who has managed

at our level but who then pretty much by definition has at least one

failure on their record. If they didn''t they''d be in the Premiership.

This LOOKS like a half-decent argument. In the summer various

names were banded about in cyberspace. Was there consensus? Hell no!

I''ve always thought Boothroyd would have been good for us, but many

fans hated the idea. Who''s right? The choice of Lambert was not

universally welcomed.

However it is an argument that falls apart the moment you look at it

seriously. It is true that some failures are worrying - Jewell''s at

Derby in the Championship, for example. But others are explicable and

forgiveable - Billy Davies''s at Derby in the Premiership. But better

someone with a failure but with successes as well (Boothroyd, or

Davies, again, who saved Forest and is now aiming for the Premiership

again) than someone with only failure. And who cares what the fans

think?  

[Mello Yello 2,279]

[quote user="CanaryPurple"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

I would still like to know what was the thinking behind giving Gunn the job so soon after we were relegated.

 

[/quote]

Nutty, I suspect if you ask you will just get "We thought it was the right decision at the time". But I can think of a few possible reasons. The first three particular to Gunn and Norwich, the last one more general.

1. Simple sentimentality. Being unable to look him in the eye and sack him.

A barking mad reason, and unforgiveable IF it played a part. Delia''s public reaction after the 1-7 MIGHT (but only might) suggest this was a factor.

2. We think/hope he has learned from his mistakes. Plus he will be able to put together HIS squad in the summer. Essentially the Bob Franklin argument.

And if he has no aptitude for the job, as seemed the case, and has learned nothing?

3. Sack him and it is all change again at Carrow Road and Colney. For the umpteenth time. New manager, new coaches, new players. We have twice now had managers coming in mid-season (Grant and Roeder) and having to do a hurried rescue act. If we keep Gunn and it works out then at last we will have some stability and continuity.

This is a strong argument. IF it works out. If it doesn''t then we have all the upheaval again, but once the season has started. Again. As happened. The worst of all worlds.

4. More generally now. If you''re a second or third tier club and you''re contemplating sacking the manager, who''s the replacement going to be? There is no point in change for change''s sake. The new man has to be better. And at this (our) level you will always have to choose either someone who has possibly been successful in his first (and so far only) job down the League, but is unproven higher up. Or someone with more experience who has managed at our level but who then pretty much by definition has at least one failure on their record. If they didn''t they''d be in the Premiership.

This LOOKS like a half-decent argument. In the summer various names were banded about in cyberspace. Was there consensus? Hell no! I''ve always thought Boothroyd would have been good for us, but many fans hated the idea. Who''s right? The choice of Lambert was not universally welcomed.

However it is an argument that falls apart the moment you look at it seriously. It is true that some failures are worrying - Jewell''s at Derby in the Championship, for example. But others are explicable and forgiveable - Billy Davies''s at Derby in the Premiership. But better someone with a failure but with successes as well (Boothroyd, or Davies, again, who saved Forest and is now aiming for the Premiership again) than someone with only failure. And who cares what the fans think?
 [/quote]

Because he was the cheapest option.....

[CanaryPurple 0]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

Because he was the cheapest option.....

[/quote]Mello has been kind enough to add a possible reason I hadn''t mentioned. There are indeed financial implications to changing managers, especially if it involves a battle over compensation.

[Mook 0]

[quote user="Yella Fella"]

Some fans on here are really quite nasty!!

I see no need to slate Bryan Gunn as a person having worked with him for the last month he is genuinly a great person and has nothing bad to say about Norwich fans, and does not deserve the stick he is getting!!

remember he gave the club over 20 years of service and was part of the most succesful Norwich team we ever had, his management stint was not the best but i dont think anybody can argue the fact that the team that is doing so well now is full of players gunn brought to the club and dont forget how much work he does for local charities.

The man had to have a lot of courage to take over the reigns with a team full of loanies, give him a break and wish him well in his new career!!

Good luck Gunny!!! 

[/quote]I''m sorry, but that doesn''t wash with me. I''m a nice person with nothing bad to say about Norwich fans, I''m also a gobsh*te that can talk my way into any job I want. Should I tell the board that I tried, and failed, in my attempt to keep us up and, as perhaps my motivation to be a football manager is not what it should be, I''m not going to stay on as manager? Or should I just take the job, take the salary, swan around like I own the place, off on my golf jollys, blarney to the media, upgrade my car to something nicer - oooh, and do that football management thingy every so often too?If he never wanted to be a football manager anywhere else, then he shouldn''t have done it here either. We''re not a guinea pig for Bryan Gunn''s ego. I have no problem with him as a player. I have no problem with his attempt at keeping us up, apart from the Charlton game which was an embarrassment. He SHOULD have walked away after failing, and should not have exploited the sentimentality of the board to keep the job that he said he didn''t want full time.As for the board''s part in this, well, that''s simple. I was angry at the time of his initial appointment, I was livid after he was given the job post-relegation. They should NOT make decisions with their heart, but they should not have been put into a position where they had to - particularly not by someone who probably knew how they would react.

[Mello Yello 2,279]

[quote user="CanaryPurple"][quote user="Mello Yello"]

Because he was the cheapest option.....

[/quote]

Mello has been kind enough to add a possible reason I hadn''t mentioned. There are indeed financial implications to changing managers, especially if it involves a battle over compensation.[/quote]

I thang you....

[Devils Advocate. 0]

If Gunny was the "Cheapest" option, how much did we save by appointing him ? I would love to know the real cost of relegation  by taking the cheapest option as opposed to appointing a "Real" manager and actually fighting Relegation. Would Paul Lambert have been an option in January ? Would it have been cheaper to have kept Glen Roeder till the end of the season and then taken stock ? Obviously we will never know the truth, unless Neil Doncaster writes a book!

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Mook"]Is it just me that finds it INCREDIBLY depressing that our previous manager''s next job is in marketing for a telecoms company???

On two levels really:

1) that our board appointed a marketing/PR man as the manager of an important football club, and
2) that Bryan Gunn, after saying how much he can do for us as a manager, doesn''t even stay "in" the game of football. If marketing was all he ever wanted to do, then why tell us he was the man for manager''s job??? And why risk OUR relegation and future non-promotion for something he''s not that arsed about??

I''m more than slightly annoyed with this news.
[/quote]

You have raised some interesting points. Good post.

[/quote]

They are good points Tangie. And I doubt there''s many would argue. I can understand Gunny being caretaker after Roeder was sacked. I can just about see the logic in giving him, with Crook and Butterworth, ''til the end of last season. The other two are experienced football manager/coaches. And also the playerswere apparently in favour. But to be reappointed after managing an awful and mostly toothless relegation defied belief.

I often wonder why these obvious football mistakes rarely get a mention when the board are attacked. I daresay that come the AGM folk will be falling over themselves to ask pointless questions about investment based on rumour and supposition. I may well work out a question asking the reasons for Gunns appointment after relegation. Although I agree that we finally seem to have the right manager for where we are now I would love to know the thinking behind the decision to appoint Gunny in May.

 

[/quote]

All this debate seems, this end, to emanate from something that appears to be rarely discussed : the actual wisdom of sacking Roeder in the first place.  Why this has fallen off the radar is beyond me.

History can tell you that appointing Gunny was a mistake but it might equally tell you that sacking Roeder falls into the same category except that no one can do a rewind with Roeder.

Jury out I think.  Fired after a meaningless FA Cup game with no one waiting in the wings to take over, no one lined up, no one approached.  Fired when the transfer door was sliding shut at a rate of knots (and PS no one rang from Norwich rang Boothroyd).

Cut to a WTF do we do now situation.  Well, ring up the Northern Ireland manager in downtown North Norfolk and suggests he does a job share between an international job and Norwich City.  No go?  Or as Nigel so eloquently put it: "What a ridiculous idea."

Common sense would tell you H v Charlton to mark the Manager''s card and if he took you into relegation then it is goodbye.  Roeder claims - as he would - that he would have kept you in the Championship but as you did not persist until the end of last season that, also, will never be known.

You are doing very well in League One but Roeder''s argument is that you would still be in the Championship and not bothered about the FA Cup until Round Three.  Personally I think the biggest risk was in firing Roeder, not in hiring Gunn - again no one will ever know but I certainly don''t think it as straightforward as some would claim.

[Lurd 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Mook"]Is it just me that finds it INCREDIBLY depressing that our previous manager''s next job is in marketing for a telecoms company???On two levels really: 1) that our board appointed a marketing/PR man as the manager of an important football club, and 2) that Bryan Gunn, after saying how much he can do for us as a manager, doesn''t even stay "in" the game of football. If marketing was all he ever wanted to do, then why tell us he was the man for manager''s job??? And why risk OUR relegation and future non-promotion for something he''s not that arsed about??I''m more than slightly annoyed with this news.[/quote]

You have raised some interesting points. Good post.

[/quote]

They are good points Tangie. And I doubt there''s many would argue. I can understand Gunny being caretaker after Roeder was sacked. I can just about see the logic in giving him, with Crook and Butterworth, ''til the end of last season. The other two are experienced football manager/coaches. And also the playerswere apparently in favour. But to be reappointed after managing an awful and mostly toothless relegation defied belief.

I often wonder why these obvious football mistakes rarely get a mention when the board are attacked. I daresay that come the AGM folk will be falling over themselves to ask pointless questions about investment based on rumour and supposition. I may well work out a question asking the reasons for Gunns appointment after relegation. Although I agree that we finally seem to have the right manager for where we are now I would love to know the thinking behind the decision to appoint Gunny in May.

 

[/quote]

All this debate seems, this end, to emanate from something that appears to be rarely discussed : the actual wisdom of sacking Roeder in the first place.  Why this has fallen off the radar is beyond me.

History can tell you that appointing Gunny was a mistake but it might equally tell you that sacking Roeder falls into the same category except that no one can do a rewind with Roeder.

Jury out I think.  Fired after a meaningless FA Cup game with no one waiting in the wings to take over, no one lined up, no one approached.  Fired when the transfer door was sliding shut at a rate of knots (and PS no one rang from Norwich rang Boothroyd).

Cut to a WTF do we do now situation.  Well, ring up the Northern Ireland manager in downtown North Norfolk and suggests he does a job share between an international job and Norwich City.  No go?  Or as Nigel so eloquently put it: "What a ridiculous idea."

Common sense would tell you H v Charlton to mark the Manager''s card and if he took you into relegation then it is goodbye.  Roeder claims - as he would - that he would have kept you in the Championship but as you did not persist until the end of last season that, also, will never be known.

You are doing very well in League One but Roeder''s argument is that you would still be in the Championship and not bothered about the FA Cup until Round Three.  Personally I think the biggest risk was in firing Roeder, not in hiring Gunn - again no one will ever know but I certainly don''t think it as straightforward as some would claim.

[/quote]All interesting points but as a neutral, you will never understand the negativity towards Glenn Roeder. Had he have stayed much longer, season tickets would have been down by 5000 IMO.

[HazzaJet 252]

Personally I would blame Roeder more for the relegation not Gunn. When Gunn came in he had no experience and was faced with a pretty much impossible task that Roeder had left him. For us to stay up, we required an experienced manager with a good history. I think they employed Gunn as he had a lot of experience with Norwich as both a player and a worker. When they were choosing who to employ they should thought about their history as a football club manager.

[Mister Chops 7]

Good luck to him.  People deserve second chances, don''t they?

[First Wizard 0]

Roeder damn near destroyed City, left unchecked, he would have succeeded!

[andy cousins 9]

good luck gunny

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

Roeder damn near destroyed City, left unchecked, he would have succeeded!

[/quote]Yes, thank goodness we didn''t get all giddy about his appointment and start to worry that Premiership clubs might come knocking for him!

[Lurd 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="First Wizard"]

Roeder damn near destroyed City, left unchecked, he would have succeeded!

[/quote]Yes, thank goodness we didn''t get all giddy about his appointment and start to worry that Premiership clubs might come knocking for him!

[/quote]Scary to think that was only last year..

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="First Wizard"]

Roeder damn near destroyed City, left unchecked, he would have succeeded!

[/quote]Yes, thank goodness we didn''t get all giddy about his appointment and start to worry that Premiership clubs might come knocking for him!

[/quote]If you put that into context of time.  This was at the time when Roeder did his quick fix work.  Before he screwed it up long term.