Phelan - Why the negativity

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

I know we all have opinions about who we want to be the next manager and we will never get to a point where everyone is happy with the choice but I wonder why so many people instantly assume that he would be a bad manager?''

I get the points that get raised about him only being a number 2 and never managed before but isn''t that how all good managers start, Mourinho was a number 2, as was Guardiola, etc etc and all of them had to start somewhere.

As far as number 2''s go surely there can''t be much better over the last 20yrs, you can''t be that bad if you have been Number 2 to arguably the best manager that has ever been and does every manager just manage by themselves, no of course they don''t. Who''s to say that Phelan wasn''t influential at Man Utd as much as Fergie and people on here go on about how Culverhouse was the brain behind his partnership with Lambert.

As for relating him to NA, there is no comparison. NA came from a youth set up and straight into the pressured environment of being a manager, there is nowhere near as much pressure running a youth team where there is no financial gains to be had and your only expectation is to bring through a player every now and then, as a first team manager you have transfer to worry about, you have budgets to worry about, you have league positions to worry about, you have stroppy stars to worry about. Phelan would have experienced all of this day in day out at Man Utd so there is no comparison.

For me I''m in the fence and I will back any manager we get in and will judge him in the job and based on his results. He is just as likely to succeed and be a massive success as he is to fail so if he gets it then let''s get behind him all the way as I''m sure the players will do.

And as far as attracting players go, surely he has a better network than any other candidate, his relationship with Fergie must open doors that others find closed and I''m sure there must be a few up and coming stars at Man Utd that we could borrow, others seem to be able to and Steve Bruce is always helping himself.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

Because the only three outright managerial failures chosen in the Smith and Jones era had one thing in common. They were coaches who had never managed, and in Gunn''s case someone who had never even coached.

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

Third time lucky?!?

My points still stand, Gunn was an even more bizarre choice than Adams as he came from some sort of marketing/PR role and wasn''t even coaching at the time so even less relevant to compare!

How anyone can compare Adams and Gunn to Phelan is beyond me, apple and pears I''m afraid!!

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Pretty much agree Rich T: there''s numerous massive differences between Gunn/Adams and Phelan - in terms of experience alone he is surely more akin to Stringer/Brown/Walker than he is to the other two.

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="Rich T The Biscuit"]Third time lucky?!?

My points still stand, Gunn was an even more bizarre choice than Adams as he came from some sort of marketing/PR role and wasn''t even coaching at the time so even less relevant to compare!

How anyone can compare Adams and Gunn to Phelan is beyond me, apple and pears I''m afraid!![/quote]

Well, of course, if you are going to use that flawed argument why not refer to the fact that Adams came from some sort of radio commentator''s role ? Gunn took over a situation which was rotten to the core on 16th January 2009 and unremarkably we got relegated a few months later. Gunn''s big and, frankly, astonishing mistake was then playing Theoklitis and his misfortune was coming up against Lambert''s Colchester on the opening day of the season and recording a fluke result. Posters on here have talked about prospective managers who have a good eye for a player and of course it was Gunn who had the balls to invest the major part of his transfer budget on Grant Holt. The truth is that we will never know how Gunn, supported by Crook and Butterworth, would have evolved as a Manager but like everybody else I will never forget the excitement and pleasure of the Lambert era.

That having been said, my main concern regarding Phelan is that he surely is as much responsible as Adams for the no show performances against Reading and Preston. If the players were not motivated by Phelan when he was a high profile, active part of the Adams/Phelan/Holt trio why would they respond to him any differently if he steps up to the Manager''s role ? It''s still not too late to get on a run and win promotion and IMO what we need now is an impact manager. Someone with real Managerial experience and someone who has led teams to promotion from the Championship before.and it seems to me that Warnock is the only available manager that fits that profile.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Will we lose Phelan if he doesn''t get the job?

[Indy_Bones 441]

The key issue here is that there have been numerous assistant managers under some of the biggest names in football who have proven to be terrible when given the main role.Phelan''s predecessors in Kidd and Queiroz hardly set the world alight, similarly for us, Peter Grant came in with a reputation of being a fantastic coach and excellent assistant and he failed miserably instead.Steve Clarke hasn''t exactly been great, Meulensteen was a disaster at Fulham amd let''s not forget when Roeder was assistant at West Ham and got them relegated when put as caretaker despite having a pretty damn good side.There are of course success stories (such as our own Mike Walker), but it''s a massive gamble to take and this season could be crucial for where we head over the next 5-10 years, such that we simply cannot take the risk IMHO of it all going Pete Tong.By all means keep Phelan as a coach or assistant manager (hell, even as a DOF if that''s how we decide to structure things), but get a proven, experienced manager (preferably who plays good football and with an eye for getting the best out of what we have) in, even if it''s just until the summer, because we simply cannot afford to miss the chance of bouncing straight back to the prem by letting a rookie manager learn the ropes in the top job.

[mrs miggins 0]

Because there are much better candidates out there, such as managers.