Chris Hughton out, yes or no?

[Stig 0]

As for strengthening in January we all know we tried, but prices were inflated and it wouldn''t have been worth getting in some targets for their price. Excuse them for having the confidence in themselves and the current staff in employment to give them a second chance in the summer. [:S]

[Highland Canary 76]

I''m not sure Yellow Shirt. If RvW is to make no difference to our points count there seems little point in signing him? One more win in our post-Christmas run of home games would have seen us safe. Under such circumstances I would have hoped RvW might have scored at least a couple of goals!

[Highland Canary 76]

Stig - trouble is we had no plan B beyond Hooper. We had money, we failed to spend it. Think of it as an insurance premium, pay £5m'' or more on a striker to protect £80m. Seems like a better plan to me than do nothing.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Stig"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]If we stay up he should stay. He has fulfilled his primary objective, while signalling a desire to play more expansive football next season. He has to be trusted on that.If we go down he should be sacked, providing the board can identify someone who looks better. Poyet (always my first choice) if he could be prised away from Brighton.But if Hughton is sacked then McNally has to be as well. There have been two unnecessary relegations in my time. 1994-95 is the one always mentioned, but 1984-85 was more avoidable. A team with Woods, Bruce, Watson, Mendham, Channon and Hartford should never have gone down. But a lack of managerial drive saw us slip down the table. Sounds familiar?However a relegation this season would be the most avoidable of all. And if McNally is going to get the credit for everything that has gone well (even if it was the work of others) then he has to take the blame when it all goes belly up.That would apply even if he could not be held accountable for any specific mistake. But in this case he can - his failure in January to provide the serious (but affordable) squad strengthening (particularly up front) Hughton had plainly said was necessary.It would be quite unfair for Hughton to take all the blame when the CEO is also culpable. So either neither out, or both out.[/quote]

Bloody hell PC, that''s the most ludicrous thing I''ve ever seen you post. So what you''re saying is let''s utterly take apart the club and all the good work at the expense of one manager that didn''t do well enough. McNally has earnt his place here far more than Hughton has and I don''t see how he would need to be sacked with Hughton. Please tell me that was satirical?

[/quote]

 

Not satirical at all. McNally has - rightly - got praised here for being the driving force behind us picking Lambert as manager. So he should get the credit for the good choices but not the blame for the bad? That would be satirical.I believe McNally has done generally a good job (although there have been some serious and avoidable mistakes) but he spent the autumn saying how critical it was to stay up, this season of all seasons, because of the extra TV money. Yet the way to try to esnure safety was to provide Hughton with the extra players he''d asked for, and McNally didn''t.Do I think McNally will be sacked? No, of course not. But if we go down he has to share the blame. The idea of any kind of bonus would be laughable.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

Thats partly why I am so firmly in the Hughton out club- I think he looks a good signing for a team making chances but I don''t see a team making the kind of chance he scores. Sure he''d have bagged a handful over half a season but I''m not convinced they would have been goals we didn''t score anyway- so wouldn''t have added points ultimately.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Yellow Shirt"]Sorry Purple- I don''t see all of that. Hughton failed to get what he wanted in January despite being able to offer a club record fee. He kept chasing one man who he was clearly told was not for sale FOUR times. He had funds but no plan B.McNally must bare responsibity for Hughton being at the club but he has supported him the failings are the managers not the CEOs in this instance.That said I think McNally got a little more praise than he deserved over Lambert too.I also doubt that a striker in Jan would have made much difference, we are not creating many chances. RvW would have scored very few goals- and things will have to change a lot for him to get any next year as he is a poacher who relies heavily on service... a Lineker type in a way. He would not have made a diffrence to the points we have this season.[/quote]

 

Yellow Shirt, you have made my point for me. It was McNally who kept on trying to sign Hooper. It is the CEO who is in charge of negotiations. McNally seemingly took too long to realise Celtic were serious about either keeping Hooper or wanting the asking price. By the time the penny dropped, at lunchtime on January 31, which was apparently when we stopped making bids, it was too late to switch to a Plan B.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

Purple- you can''t have it both ways though... Either Hughton is asking the ceo who to go in for and he negotiates or McNally is doing everything and Hughton nothing. Did Hughton provide a plan B? Who decided to go for Hooper? Ultimately we don''t know the exact setup but if it''s all down to McNally what the hell IS Hughton doing?I think McNally has made mistakes but would you still blame McNally if Hughton had said "I want Ronaldo, no one else" and McNally didn''t deliver?

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Yellow Shirt"]Purple- you can''t have it both ways though... Either Hughton is asking the ceo who to go in for and he negotiates or McNally is doing everything and Hughton nothing. Did Hughton provide a plan B? Who decided to go for Hooper? Ultimately we don''t know the exact setup but if it''s all down to McNally what the hell IS Hughton doing?I think McNally has made mistakes but would you still blame McNally if Hughton had said "I want Ronaldo, no one else" and McNally didn''t deliver?[/quote]

Your Ronaldo example is absurd. Of course McNally would have told Hughton he was out of our price range. And presumably when Sporting asked €20m for RVW Mcnally told Hughton we couldn''t afford that. Hence the bid - rejected - of only £7m.The way it works normally is that the manager provides a list of players he wants and then it is the CEO who assesses who is affordable and then negotiates. It is up to the CEO to work out, from the negotiations, what are the chances of getting Player A at an affordable price.

 

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Highland Canary"]Agree with most of that Purple: 84-85 taught us that teams can fall apart very quickly; 94-95 was a more gradual decline. In my opionion, there are more parallels with the latter but, clearly, there are lessons to be learnt from both. I also agree that should we go down McN, for the reasons you advocate, should also be held accountable. Where I part company is that next season the team would be st up to play ''more expansive'' football. Agree with Poyet btw.[/quote]

 

Highland, the signing of RVW was the signal I was talking about. But who knows? I have to say that Hughton quote from yesterday which is the subject of a thread about looking good for a draw at half-time is worrying. It does seem to indicate a very passive frame of mind.

[ZLF 271]

[quote user="Stig"]As for strengthening in January we all know we tried, but prices were inflated and it wouldn''t have been worth getting in some targets for their price. Excuse them for having the confidence in themselves and the current staff in employment to give them a second chance in the summer. [:S][/quote]

 

 

no

[Yellow Shirt 17]

It is meant to be absurd of course... my point is that we don''t know how much was on Hughton''s list and Hooper was no more available than Ronaldo... were the other players on that list even less realistic?We don''t know... so we don''t know how badly or well McNally did on that- we do know that Hughton wont achieve any more than (hopefully) achieve minimum requirements and that more through luck than judgement.I take your point that McNally has a large role in the transfer side of things and should bare some responsibility, I just reject that that has been the difference between a good season and the one we are muddling through.I feel the best way for McN to atone is to find a better fit for manager of NCFC.[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="Yellow Shirt"]Purple- you can''t have it both ways though... Either Hughton is asking the ceo who to go in for and he negotiates or McNally is doing everything and Hughton nothing. Did Hughton provide a plan B? Who decided to go for Hooper? Ultimately we don''t know the exact setup but if it''s all down to McNally what the hell IS Hughton doing?I think McNally has made mistakes but would you still blame McNally if Hughton had said "I want Ronaldo, no one else" and McNally didn''t deliver?[/quote]

Your Ronaldo example is absurd. Of course McNally would have told Hughton he was out of our price range. And presumably when Sporting asked €20m for RVW Mcnally told Hughton we couldn''t afford that. Hence the bid - rejected - of only £7m.The way it works normally is that the manager provides a list of players he wants and then it is the CEO who assesses who is affordable and then negotiates. It is up to the CEO to work out, from the negotiations, what are the chances of getting Player A at an affordable price.

 

[/quote]

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

I think people put too much on to managers. Was it Pardew''s fault that Newcastle lost 6-0 to Liverpool. No, it was the players. The same was true for City yesterday. They simply didn''t play well enough. CH made 3 attacking substitutions and changed to a 4-4-2 formation, but the performance didn''t improve. They''re not bad players, they just played badly yesterday. CH should stay, IMO.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Yellow Shirt"]It is meant to be absurd of course... my point is that we don''t know how much was on Hughton''s list and Hooper was no more available than Ronaldo... were the other players on that list even less realistic?We don''t know... so we don''t know how badly or well McNally did on that- we do know that Hughton wont achieve any more than (hopefully) achieve minimum requirements and that more through luck than judgement.I take your point that McNally has a large role in the transfer side of things and should bare some responsibility, I just reject that that has been the difference between a good season and the one we are muddling through.I feel the best way for McN to atone is to find a better fit for manager of NCFC.[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="Yellow Shirt"]Purple- you can''t have it both ways though... Either Hughton is asking the ceo who to go in for and he negotiates or McNally is doing everything and Hughton nothing. Did Hughton provide a plan B? Who decided to go for Hooper? Ultimately we don''t know the exact setup but if it''s all down to McNally what the hell IS Hughton doing?I think McNally has made mistakes but would you still blame McNally if Hughton had said "I want Ronaldo, no one else" and McNally didn''t deliver?[/quote]

Your Ronaldo example is absurd. Of course McNally would have told Hughton he was out of our price range. And presumably when Sporting asked €20m for RVW Mcnally told Hughton we couldn''t afford that. Hence the bid - rejected - of only £7m.The way it works normally is that the manager provides a list of players he wants and then it is the CEO who assesses who is affordable and then negotiates. It is up to the CEO to work out, from the negotiations, what are the chances of getting Player A at an affordable price.

 

[/quote][/quote]

 

It seems our disagreement is over a matter of degree rather than absolutes, so fine. And atonement by way of finding a better manager sounds good to me. But it would also be absurd, if relegated, for McNally to get rewarded by way of another massive bonus. His pay package should revert to the basic salary.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Yellow Shirt"]It is meant to be absurd of course... my point is that we don''t know how much was on Hughton''s list and Hooper was no more available than Ronaldo... were the other players on that list even less realistic?We don''t know... so we don''t know how badly or well McNally did on that- we do know that Hughton wont achieve any more than (hopefully) achieve minimum requirements and that more through luck than judgement.I take your point that McNally has a large role in the transfer side of things and should bare some responsibility, I just reject that that has been the difference between a good season and the one we are muddling through.I feel the best way for McN to atone is to find a better fit for manager of NCFC.[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="Yellow Shirt"]Purple- you can''t have it both ways though... Either Hughton is asking the ceo who to go in for and he negotiates or McNally is doing everything and Hughton nothing. Did Hughton provide a plan B? Who decided to go for Hooper? Ultimately we don''t know the exact setup but if it''s all down to McNally what the hell IS Hughton doing?I think McNally has made mistakes but would you still blame McNally if Hughton had said "I want Ronaldo, no one else" and McNally didn''t deliver?[/quote]

Your Ronaldo example is absurd. Of course McNally would have told Hughton he was out of our price range. And presumably when Sporting asked €20m for RVW Mcnally told Hughton we couldn''t afford that. Hence the bid - rejected - of only £7m.The way it works normally is that the manager provides a list of players he wants and then it is the CEO who assesses who is affordable and then negotiates. It is up to the CEO to work out, from the negotiations, what are the chances of getting Player A at an affordable price.

 

[/quote][/quote]

 

It seems our disagreement is over a matter of degree rather than absolutes, so fine. And atonement by way of finding a better manager sounds good to me. But it would also be absurd, if relegated, for McNally to get rewarded by way of another massive bonus. His pay package should revert to the basic salary.

[/quote]Absolutely agree on that PC. I am still working on the basis that we are going to survive despite how the season has gone and thanks to other teams also suffering woeful seasons. I suspect had this QPR, Reading and Villa been around in 95 Worthingtons side would have done just fine!

[Devils Advocate. 0]

Of course , we''ll never know what Chris Hughton wanted in January, but why did he sign Luc Becchio only to leave him in the twilight zone and hardly give him a chance ?. Is it possible that Chris Hughton is really the "Chief Coach" and that someone else buys and sells players ?

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]But it would also be absurd, if relegated, for McNally to get rewarded by way of another massive bonus. His pay package should revert to the basic salary.[/quote]Perhaps it''s time for the PinkUn''s official contract inspector to arrange another meeting with Mr Bowkett and to re-examine McNally''s contract to see if it includes a relegation bonus. [+o(]

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]But it would also be absurd, if relegated, for McNally to get rewarded by way of another massive bonus. His pay package should revert to the basic salary.[/quote]Perhaps it''s time for the PinkUn''s official contract inspector to arrange another meeting with Mr Bowkett and to re-examine McNally''s contract to see if it includes a relegation bonus. [+o(][/quote]I somehow think permission wouldn''t be granted...[;)]

[sonyc 5,484]

Purple Canary...I always like to read your posts and like your thinking. But I feel on one of your points I think the opposite ! If we stay up we must show ambition and bring in a new manager. We need new thinking from a management team. It will cost but we will have funds. But if we are relegated we keep CH, as he may represent best choice to bring us up?

Anyway it may not happen but I wouldn''t be amazed if it did.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="sonyc"]Purple Canary...I always like to read your posts and like your thinking. But I feel on one of your points I think the opposite ! If we stay up we must show ambition and bring in a new manager. We need new thinking from a management team. It will cost but we will have funds. But if we are relegated we keep CH, as he may represent best choice to bring us up?

Anyway it may not happen but I wouldn''t be amazed if it did.[/quote]

 

sonyc, I sort of get the logic! I confess I feel a bit of a fraud commenting on Hughton, because I get to see so few games. I largely have to rely on what other posters (particular admiration for those who keep on going to away games - the triumph of hope over experience writ large) are saying. But there does seem to be a consensus that the second half of the season has been painful to watch. How much of that is Hughton and how much a weak squad? Even if the latter, how effective would Hughton be in the Championship at motivating a squad likely to have lost some (all???) of its best players?

[sonyc 5,484]

Yes agree about CH being in the Champs. It wouldn''t be easy and players would leave. I was trying to think like a board though Purple. Continuity and all that. Maybe there is an argument too for him staying for the same reason. But is a whole season long enough to take a view on your managerial appointment? For me now and what I have seen it is.

[morty 0]

A board member has told me he will have until at least this Christmas.

[T 190]

Stay. Hughton is the second most effective manger in the Premier League given the financial resources. If we stay up it will be an outstanding achievement given our financial contraints over the last 2 years. We should finish 19th by rights as 70 to 80pc of results are driven by available financial resources. That so many people have such a poor grasp of the impact of the financial reality on our position does suggest that the perception that Norfolk people are not the brightest due to lower genetic diversity and poor education standards really may have some validity if some of the comments on this board are anything to go by. While fully excepting as CH also does that this season has not been the most exciting after 3 extraordiary seasons the sad truth is that people are making comments without any understanding of finance, probabilities, reality  and have no professional football experience or professional football qualifications to make an informed assessment.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="morty"]A board member has told me he will have until at least this Christmas.[/quote]As you are the only womaniser in the Inner Circle, it''s not too difficult to guess where you got this information. [;)][:D]

[morty 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="morty"]A board member has told me he will have until at least this Christmas.[/quote]As you are the only womaniser in the Inner Circle, it''s not too difficult to guess where you got this information. [;)][:D][/quote]I cannot reveal my sources.However there is a fair chance I completely made my statement up.[;)]

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="morty"]A board member has told me he will have until at least this Christmas.[/quote]As you are the only womaniser in the Inner Circle, it''s not too difficult to guess where you got this information. [;)][:D][/quote]I cannot reveal my sources.However there is a fair chance I completely made my statement up.[;)][/quote]Careful Morty, people have been expelled from the Inner Circle for much less. [;)]

[......and Smith must score. 1,331]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]No, he should stay. If in October we are still playing this way then out.[/quote]Agree with this. Survival is the key this time but the natives will be getting very restless if we don''t start enjoy watching City play better football sooner rather than later next season.

[Baracouda 47]

I am firmly in CH stays camp, any change in management is difficult and our campaign has been full of ups and downs.

However, I don''t think the current squad is suited to his tactics, but nevertheless we''re going to have top flight football next season.

With the likes of RvW coming in, and hopefully a couple more quality players. I believe the slower paced and more controlled tactics need better quality players. The up and get them style under Lambert relied more on stamina, and determination.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="T"]Stay. Hughton is the second most effective manger in the Premier League given the financial resources. If we stay up it will be an outstanding achievement given our financial contraints over the last 2 years. We should finish 19th by rights as 70 to 80pc of results are driven by available financial resources. That so many people have such a poor grasp of the impact of the financial reality on our position does suggest that the perception that Norfolk people are not the brightest due to lower genetic diversity and poor education standards really may have some validity if some of the comments on this board are anything to go by. While fully excepting as CH also does that this season has not been the most exciting after 3 extraordiary seasons the sad truth is that people are making comments without any understanding of finance, probabilities, reality  and have no professional football experience or professional football qualifications to make an informed assessment.[/quote]

 

T, only an idiot would deny that there is, in general terms, a serious correlation between money (particularly what is spent on wages) and league performance. The charts prove that. But there is a danger of being too dogmatic about this. There are other factors, and particularly the ability - or otherwise - of the executive management and the football management.I don''t have the figures to hand but presumably on wages alone Swansea and ourselves should have been relegated last season instead of finishing 11th and 12th, and Man City should have had the title wrapped up by mid-March instead of in injury time in the last game. And should be the team that are 13 points clear this season.Now (based on last season''s financials or an estimate of this season''s?) you say we should be 19th. I take it we should only have Reading propping us up? But given the train wreck that has been QPR we would have needed Bryan Gunn as manager to finish below them.I am the last person to ignore the constraints on Hughton (and Lambert before him) but not everything in  football is entirely down to finance, and posters have a genuine concern about how good our manager is.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

If everything were down to finance then QPR wouldn''t just have been relegated.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Baracouda, you say that you don''t think that the current squad is suited to his tactics, but wouldn''t your tactics be determined by the players you have available?

Square pegs in round holes doesn''t work, as England have demonstrated so well for the past 15 years.