Chris Hughton's job security

[star_manic 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="Zak Van Legwetter"][quote user="First Wizard"]

 

However, if I''m right, there will soon come a time when his position becomes untenable

[/quote]

Right about what exactly?
[/quote]

 

Us getting relegated if CH stays.................but you already knew that.

[/quote]

Do you remember the 5 year plan, which I have heard was changed to the 7 year plan? This factored in our being relegated after one year in the EPL. We have exceeded all expectations and CH has been part of that success. Even should we be relegated, and not for one moment do I expect this to happen, bad news Wiz, CH will be in charge of our promotion push. Get used to it fella, he will remain our leader for some time yet.

[Beefy is a legend 224]

My own view is that he is nowhere near ''the chop'' at this stage. Performances have been good lately, it''s still early days and there are some winnable fixtures coming up.

It would take a really poor run of results, say losing to Cardiff, West Ham and failing to beat Palace, as well as losing the away games, to really put CH under pressure. The way we are playing I can''t see that happening.

[Row D Seat 7 0]

I don''t see him as being ''on the edge'' at all. Even if we lose the next two games, he won''t be sacked. If our poor results continue, and being 18th does point to the fact that despite spending big, we have had yet another poor start to the season, I think only after the Crystal Palace home game will the board think of getting rid, if results don''t improve. Even then, that may be too early.

McNally and Al Fayed sacked Lawrie Sanchez just before/after Christmas one year and brought in Hodgson who kept them up on the final day. It was almost too late. Just hope we don''t run it that close, if results don''t improve.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

Fair point RDS7. After the C Pal game we will be one third of the way through the season. I really do not accept that this is "too early". A new man would have to be appointed well before Xmas in order for him to be most effective in squad appraisal and sorties in the Jan window.

I''m perfectly happy to concede that a change of manager may not work. The jury is very much out on that thorny question. It would certainly be a gamble, but one the board would have to be brave enough to take.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,749]

[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]So, with respect to the feelings of the board, do people think he has a few games left and is hanging on in there, or do people think he has at least until the January transfer window? The former suggesting he is on the brink, the latter suggesting there are concerns, but no great panic at this time?[/quote]

None of us can genuinely know that, or what McNally and the board''s thoughts are as to where a "breaking point" is. All I do know is that a couple of weeks ago McNally was quoted  as being "embarrased" at us being in the relegation zone. As I mentioned earlier in this thread a defeat vs Cardiff, coupled with the following week being away at Man City ,could conceivably put us at least two wins away from hauling ourselves out of the bottom 3 , a worse situation that when McNally was quoted with that line.

with other teams down the bottom changing their managers in an attempt to improve their sitaution , whilst there is a decent number of games left this season, I''d defy our board to not at least be contemplating it and wondering about possible aternatives?

[basil brush 0]

The board are businessmen, so of course they are considering it. They are too astute to just let it ride.

The club have aimed for 10th and budgeted for 16th, which is reasonable and realistic given the previous seasons and the record money and players that have been brought it by the current manager.

The problem is, the current manager hasn''t and isn''t getting the best out of the players and as a team, so on that basis alone, he has to go because in life, you have to change things if you want change.

Pre McNally, the club were notoriously slow in sacking managers that clearly weren''t or no longer performing, but things are different now, and one would expect McNally to act if the results don''t go our way.

Cardiff will be no pushovers and Hughton needs a big performance from his players to save his neck. Question is, Do the players as a collective want his neck to be saved? I wonder...

[mel0 0]

Why is it that nearly every Hughton fan constantly calls him by his first name

[*** 0]

[quote user="basil brush"]The board are businessmen, so of course they are considering it. They are too astute to just let it ride. The club have aimed for 10th and budgeted for 16th, which is reasonable and realistic given the previous seasons and the record money and players that have been brought it by the current manager. The problem is, the current manager hasn''t and isn''t getting the best out of the players and as a team, so on that basis alone, he has to go because in life, you have to change things if you want change. Pre McNally, the club were notoriously slow in sacking managers that clearly weren''t or no longer performing, but things are different now, and one would expect McNally to act if the results don''t go our way. Cardiff will be no pushovers and Hughton needs a big performance from his players to save his neck. Question is, Do the players as a collective want his neck to be saved? I wonder...[/quote]

 

That thought had crossed my mind too basil.

[PurpleCanary 5,560]

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]Agree Purple, he''s not going to have access to every other Club''s budget for the season clearly. However, he can obviously estimate our position based upon the spending of other Clubs and he will have a pretty good idea from a variety of sources as to the kind of wages that other Clubs are paying, so he can make a pretty educated estimate on where we are.[/quote]

 

Beefy, I would imagine that this season, in terms of - awful word - spendability we are above Crystal Palace, and possibly Hull, and about level with Swansea and Cardiff, although the latter would be hard to guess at. But more specifically we might well be higher in the transfer spending league table than previously, but as low as before as far as wages go, even though our wages rose sharply last season.

[Zak Van Burger 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="basil brush"]Hughton needs a big performance from his players to save his neck. Question is, Do the players as a collective want his neck to be saved? I wonder...[/quote]

 

That thought had crossed my mind too basil.

[/quote]Recent performances would suggest that they do.

[TIL 1010 4,746]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

However, if I''m right, there will soon come a time when his position becomes untenable

[/quote]

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day Wiz.

 

[QHcanary 0]

" Cardiff on Saturday is absolutely critical for Hughton ,lose that, coupled with the fact that its Man City away next week ,we could be looking at being adrift in the bottom 3 after 10 games - over a quarter of the season. An no I wouldnt subscribe to the "we''ve had tough fixtures at the start of the season". By 10 games we will have played a fairly good cross section of teams from top,middle and bottom of the league. After 10 games you''re where you deserve to be."

I''m really struggling to understand comments like this. Our fixtures up to the 10 game point will include 5 of last season''s top 6. That''s a horribly skewed set of fixtures. A truly representative set of fixtures would have us playing 2 or 3 of those teams.

I also wonder if you''re worried about our last 4 games? By your logic it shouldn''t matter, but we all know it does matter. We need to be safe by then.

The ignorance (wilful or otherwise) that some people are showing when they spout stuff about the fixture list not meaning anything is unbelievable. It''s crushingly stupid to think it makes no difference.

A lot of it, I''m sure, is just another stick being used to beat the manager.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,749]

[quote user="QHcanary"]" Cardiff on Saturday is absolutely critical for Hughton ,lose that, coupled with the fact that its Man City away next week ,we could be looking at being adrift in the bottom 3 after 10 games - over a quarter of the season. An no I wouldnt subscribe to the "we''ve had tough fixtures at the start of the season". By 10 games we will have played a fairly good cross section of teams from top,middle and bottom of the league. After 10 games you''re where you deserve to be."

I''m really struggling to understand comments like this. Our fixtures up to the 10 game point will include 5 of last season''s top 6. That''s a horribly skewed set of fixtures. A truly representative set of fixtures would have us playing 2 or 3 of those teams.

I also wonder if you''re worried about our last 4 games? By your logic it shouldn''t matter, but we all know it does matter. We need to be safe by then.

The ignorance (wilful or otherwise) that some people are showing when they spout stuff about the fixture list not meaning anything is unbelievable. It''s crushingly stupid to think it makes no difference.

A lot of it, I''m sure, is just another stick being used to beat the manager.[/quote]

Whats difficult understand?.....after Saturday, we will have played 3 ,what you might call difficult fixtures (spurs,arsenal,chelsea) & 6 winnable ones (everton,hull,southapton,villa,stoke and cardiff)..so the easier fixtures outweigh the harder ones 2-1. Therefore "if" we lose to Cardiff do you think its acceptable for us to be in the bottom 3?

[QHcanary 0]

"Whats difficult understand?.....after Saturday, we will have played 3 ,what you might call difficult fixtures (spurs,arsenal,chelsea) & 6 winnable ones (everton,hull,southapton,villa,stoke and cardiff)..so the easier fixtures outweigh the harder ones 2-1. Therefore "if" we lose to Cardiff do you think its acceptable for us to be in the bottom 3?"

Lets just go the whole hog, shall we?

Arsenal are currently top of the league, so we''ve played arsenal and 7 easier fixtures.

Jeez.

There was a 12 point gap between 7th and 8th last year. There''s a huge gulf in class between the top 7 and the other 13 teams.

I like the way you discount Everton as a team who wouldn''t be expected to beat us, and include Cardiff, who we haven''t played yet. It skews the figures nicely in favour of your argument, don''t you think?

For the record, I won''t think it particarly acceptable if we lose to Cardiff and find ourselves still in the relegation zone. We''ll have lost to two games to newly promoted teams. It won''t be as disastrous as some would have you believe, but it''s not a position I''d expected to find us in.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

I can understand that we shouldn''t lose at Hull and Villa at home is a winnable fixture. Although not with Paul Lambert in charge it seems! But I didn''t and never would expect an away win anywhere. Let alone Stoke! And have we become such Billy Big Bollix''s that we should be beating Everton at home???

 

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,749]

[quote user="QHcanary"]"Whats difficult understand?.....after Saturday, we will have played 3 ,what you might call difficult fixtures (spurs,arsenal,chelsea) & 6 winnable ones (everton,hull,southapton,villa,stoke and cardiff)..so the easier fixtures outweigh the harder ones 2-1. Therefore "if" we lose to Cardiff do you think its acceptable for us to be in the bottom 3?" Lets just go the whole hog, shall we? Arsenal are currently top of the league, so we''ve played arsenal and 7 easier fixtures. Jeez. There was a 12 point gap between 7th and 8th last year. There''s a huge gulf in class between the top 7 and the other 13 teams. I like the way you discount Everton as a team who wouldn''t be expected to beat us, and include Cardiff, who we haven''t played yet. It skews the figures nicely in favour of your argument, don''t you think? For the record, I won''t think it particarly acceptable if we lose to Cardiff and find ourselves still in the relegation zone. We''ll have lost to two games to newly promoted teams. It won''t be as disastrous as some would have you believe, but it''s not a position I''d expected to find us in.[/quote]

Scews my argument?.....not really,given that my argument throughout this thread is that if we lose to Cardiff, Hughton should be sacked...thats the very point!

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,431]

If we lose on Saturday, and note the IF, I predict that Hughton will then have two, maybe three games left to save himself. Not interested in the Hughton outers or the All-will-be-well-ers , this is the practical sense of reality in a £90m t/o business.  

 

If CH loses the next three he is gone. Bearing in mind one is away to Man City (yes,  I know, I was there last May) it puts into perspective the importance of the Cardiff and West Ham games.

 

However, beat Cardiff and West Ham...and that really is what it is all about.

 

Whoever said Football is a results based industry should take a bow....

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

That would be me GPB , and ,to be fair, I think there were others.

Like you I really cannot believe the naiveté of some of the happy clapper posters who seriously think that the board will just sit on their hands and let it ride if the current form continues beyond mid Nov. This is a multu million pound global industry we''re in, and if the staff don''t deliver, the board will get someone in who will. Harsh, but that''s the way it is.

As I also said yesterday, let''s all hope that threads like this are all academic ; we win a healthy proportion of our next few games, and all this is navel-gazing is consigned to history

OTBC.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

A key point for me is who the club would bring in to replace CH.  I''ve yet to see anyone mention a candidate who makes me feel anything other than "meh".  Or makes me think "please God no".

[Beefy is a legend 224]

My feeling is that it is more a question of performances than points for the board at this early stage of the season. We are playing some decent stuff and that gives encouragement and, importantly, shows that the players are working to the manager''s plan.

If we get humped 4-1 at home by Cardiff, like Palace just did against Fulham, and look woeful, then that is the time to think about whether the management team is working, but at the moment you feel that we are playing well enough that points will come.

That''s why I feel that the board won''t be seriously considering change at this stage. As I said earlier, if we fail to win any of the next three home games then things will really begin to come to a head, but I really don''t think that is going to happen because we are playing well enough to win games.

[*** 0]

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]My feeling is that it is more a question of performances than points for the board at this early stage of the season. We are playing some decent stuff and that gives encouragement and, importantly, shows that the players are working to the manager''s plan. If we get humped 4-1 at home by Cardiff, like Palace just did against Fulham, and look woeful, then that is the time to think about whether the management team is working, but at the moment you feel that we are playing well enough that points will come. That''s why I feel that the board won''t be seriously considering change at this stage. As I said earlier, if we fail to win any of the next three home games then things will really begin to come to a head, but I really don''t think that is going to happen because we are playing well enough to win games.[/quote]

 

I''m sorry Beefy but footy is a result driven game, it always has been.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

But when we were getting results the same posters were complaining about performances.

 

 

[The Great Mass Debater 1,090]

We havent really got results though. The football last season was very ineffective. The attrition football meant we lost and drew a lot of games with seemingly no idea how to score goals. The unbeaten run was very much a blip. Performances directly correlate with the likelihood of points. Create lots of chances, likelihood you might win a game. The attrition football approach changed with the Stoke win, and we''ve kept that up ever since, so I am hopeful we will do well against Cardiff. if the performance is good but the result goes against us - thats bad luck. if the performance is bad and the result goes against us - thats bad manager! 

 

My concern is the idea that a change of manager guarantees a change of fortune. Sometimes it can be a massive step backwards - just look at Sunderland. Hughton has slowly built up a cohesive team which is showing promise, things have definitely changed for the better since Stoke. To get rid means all that work ends up being undone, and you have to gamble that against the likelihood that the lift or the new ideas brought in by the new guy counter-acts this.

 

With regard to the Sunderland example, employing Di Canio was probably a masterstroke for the clubs short-term fortunes. He brought the winds of change which often bring a sudden bounce, which was just enough to push their heads up out of the water. Long-term going forward, he was the wrong choice and theyre probably in a worse position at the start of this season than they were at this point last season.

 

Too many people seem to think ditching the manager leads to an automatic improvement in fortune. Remember our own lessons (Peter Grant), remember Redknapp at QPR. Replacing Hughton would have to be done with absolute confidence that the new guy would be better. Else its better to nurture what you already have

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,749]

[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]

We havent really got results though. The football last season was very ineffective. The attrition football meant we lost and drew a lot of games with seemingly no idea how to score goals. The unbeaten run was very much a blip. Performances directly correlate with the likelihood of points. Create lots of chances, likelihood you might win a game. The attrition football approach changed with the Stoke win, and we''ve kept that up ever since, so I am hopeful we will do well against Cardiff. if the performance is good but the result goes against us - thats bad luck. if the performance is bad and the result goes against us - thats bad manager! 

 

My concern is the idea that a change of manager guarantees a change of fortune. Sometimes it can be a massive step backwards - just look at Sunderland. Hughton has slowly built up a cohesive team which is showing promise, things have definitely changed for the better since Stoke. To get rid means all that work ends up being undone, and you have to gamble that against the likelihood that the lift or the new ideas brought in by the new guy counter-acts this.

 

With regard to the Sunderland example, employing Di Canio was probably a masterstroke for the clubs short-term fortunes. He brought the winds of change which often bring a sudden bounce, which was just enough to push their heads up out of the water. Long-term going forward, he was the wrong choice and theyre probably in a worse position at the start of this season than they were at this point last season.

 

Too many people seem to think ditching the manager leads to an automatic improvement in fortune. Remember our own lessons (Peter Grant), remember Redknapp at QPR. Replacing Hughton would have to be done with absolute confidence that the new guy would be better. Else its better to nurture what you already have

[/quote]

Redknapp never really had a chance at QPR because they left the sacking of Hughes a month, probably 2 months too late..........let us not fall into the same trap, swift action required if the worst happens tomorrow.

[Row D Seat 7 0]

"We have played well enough to win games" - Yet we have won only 2 out of 8 in the league this season. 6 out of 27 or however many, in the league this year. Says it all.

[TCCANARY 263]

 

Redknapp had 26 games to save QPR, thats plenty.

 

 

[Row D Seat 7 0]

I agree. Redknapp did have enough time, but I think the job was a lot harder than he thought it would be. The players didn''t train well at all and a lot of them didn''t care enough. I respect him for not walking out. I think he will get them promoted and keep them up next season.

Would take him here in a heartbeat.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="Row D Seat 7"]"We have played well enough to win games" - Yet we have won only 2 out of 8 in the league this season. 6 out of 27 or however many, in the league this year. Says it all.[/quote]But we''ve won 4 of our last 10!! 40% win rate![;)]

[Row D Seat 7 0]

Well 18th position says more than any other stat I suppose. Only Palace and Sunderland have had worse starts than us and they have both been awful at times. Us - not much better.

Snodgrass said yesterday that we''d done enough against Chelsea and Arsenal to get something from each game. Maybe he''s right when talking about the Chelsea game, but we didn''t deserve anything from Arsenal. Fact is we lost both and we''re currently in the bottom 3 because we deserve to be there.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I agree. Redknapp did have enough time, but I think the job was a lot harder than he thought it would be. The players didn''t train well at all and a lot of them didn''t care enough. I respect him for not walking out. I think he will get them promoted and keep them up next season. Would take him here in a heartbeat.[/quote]

 

You''re not making any sense,

Hughton: 6 wins in 27 = not good enough.

Redknap: 26 games to keep QPR up but failed = have him here in a heartbeat.