Managerial choice in the Championship

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="whoareyou"]We can argue about DS and MWJ for ever but my

opinion is they have only made two successful managerial appointments during

their tenure in Worthington and Lambert.[/quote]

 

That''s such a narrow view point. Hughton achieved the highest league position of their tenure but ultimately couldn''t make it last. That doesn''t make him a bad appointment. All managers eventually fail. But if they achieve something first they surely have been successful.

 

Rioch helped bring about the whole ne sports science age at Colney. He also had success on the pitch where only injury prevented a probable play-off place. Roeder was sucessful in keeping us up. I''m sure after Grant you would have settled for that and called it as success at the time.

 

 

So that''s Hamilton, Grant and Gunn that were poor appointments. Now go and look through the appointments at other clubs.....

 

 

[/quote]As i said i don''t believe avoiding relegation is yardstick on which to judge how succesful a manager has been especially if during their following season we are relegated and they are sacked.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="Jim Smith"] I''m not commenting on their other managerial

appointments Nutty merely this one. It is of course not possible to prove

whether we would have done better or worse than Lennon but can you hand on heart

say that you don''t think he would have been a better bet than Adams given his

experience not just in the Scottish league (don''t buy the argument that makes

him a risk, managing players is the same whatever country although I accept it

makes his domestic "success" less pressure given he managed the only decent

team) but also in Europe against some very good sides? Any manager may be a risk

but the boards job this summer was to take the smallest risk possible and give

us the best chance to bounce back. With the appointment if Adams they appear to

me to have done the opposite. Our league position and Boltons performance under

Lennon are persuasive indicators.[/quote]

 

Well that''s a shame really Jim because Purple, as usual has gone to the trouble of fuelling a decent debate with some facts but in true pink un style you''re only interested in what''s being discussed on what seems every other thread since August.........

 

 

No I cannot say hand on heart Lennon would have been a better bet than the team we chose. I can also not say hand on heart he wouldn''t. Those who made the decision surely think hand on heart that Adams was the man to give us the best chance. So it''ll come down to me believing you, or believing them, or watching events unfold.

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,535]

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

[quote user="whoareyou"]We can argue about DS and MWJ for ever but my

opinion is they have only made two successful managerial appointments during

their tenure in Worthington and Lambert.[/quote]

 

That''s such a narrow view point. Hughton achieved the highest league position of their tenure but ultimately couldn''t make it last. That doesn''t make him a bad appointment. All managers eventually fail. But if they achieve something first they surely have been successful.

 

Rioch helped bring about the whole ne sports science age at Colney. He also had success on the pitch where only injury prevented a probable play-off place. Roeder was sucessful in keeping us up. I''m sure after Grant you would have settled for that and called it as success at the time.

 

 

So that''s Hamilton, Grant and Gunn that were poor appointments. Now go and look through the appointments at other clubs.....

 

 

[/quote]As i said i don''t believe avoiding relegation is yardstick on which to judge how succesful a manager has been especially if during their following season we are relegated and they are sacked.[/quote]

 

So Pulis wasn''t successful at Palace. Glad we''ve cleared that up. I''m sure you''re the only poster on here who expected more than avoiding relegation after Grant. Or is it with hindsight you feel he should have made play-offs at least?

 

 

 

 

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

Well that''s a shame really Jim because Purple, as usual has gone to the trouble of fuelling a decent debate with some facts but in true pink un style you''re only interested in what''s being discussed on what seems every other thread since August.........

 

 

 

[/quote]Well that at least proves that it''s not just me who comes in for a Christmas pudding -sliced size of you patronising stuff, Nige. Obviously Jim qualifies for that dubious honour too.....You really do need to realise that just because people post on here voicing things that do not fit in with your agenda, NN, it does not make them any less valid.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

Well that''s a shame really Jim because Purple, as usual has gone to the trouble of fuelling a decent debate with some facts but in true pink un style you''re only interested in what''s being discussed on what seems every other thread since August.........

 

 

 

[/quote]Well that at least proves that it''s not just me who comes in for a Christmas pudding -sliced size of you patronising stuff, Nige. Obviously Jim qualifies for that dubious honour too.....You really do need to realise that just because people post on here voicing things that do not fit in with your agenda, NN, it does not make them any less valid.[/quote]

 

The difference between you and Jim is that he''s a balanced poster who it can be a pleasure to disagree with. You however.........

 

 

[whoareyou? 0]

Pulis was successful in so much as he avoided relegation and got the club well away from the bottom of the table but he won nothing and i still say the board should be looking for a lot more than just avoiding relegation year on year even in the Premier League.A truly successful manager is someone who wins some silverware. Whilst I appreciate we cannot do that year on year, its surely the only thing we as supporters want to be aiming for?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

Well that''s a shame really Jim because Purple, as usual has gone to the trouble of fuelling a decent debate with some facts but in true pink un style you''re only interested in what''s being discussed on what seems every other thread since August.........

 

 

 

[/quote]Well that at least proves that it''s not just me who comes in for a Christmas pudding -sliced size of you patronising stuff, Nige. Obviously Jim qualifies for that dubious honour too.....You really do need to realise that just because people post on here voicing things that do not fit in with your agenda, NN, it does not make them any less valid.[/quote]

 

The difference between you and Jim is that he''s a balanced poster who it can be a pleasure to disagree with. You however.........

 

 

[/quote]Perhaps if you would define a ''balanced poster'', then I might be able to comment on that little gem......Or maybe you''ll sidestep that request, as you''ve done with others before ?

[nutty nigel 7,535]

How many successful managers are there in the country then? Certaibly not enough to go round even the PL?

 

 

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

Well that''s a shame really Jim because Purple, as usual has gone to the trouble of fuelling a decent debate with some facts but in true pink un style you''re only interested in what''s being discussed on what seems every other thread since August.........

 

 

 

[/quote]Well that at least proves that it''s not just me who comes in for a Christmas pudding -sliced size of you patronising stuff, Nige. Obviously Jim qualifies for that dubious honour too.....You really do need to realise that just because people post on here voicing things that do not fit in with your agenda, NN, it does not make them any less valid.[/quote]

 

The difference between you and Jim is that he''s a balanced poster who it can be a pleasure to disagree with. You however.........

 

 

[/quote]Perhaps if you would define a ''balanced poster'', then I might be able to comment on that little gem......Or maybe you''ll sidestep that request, as you''ve done with others before ?[/quote]

 

A balanced poster would come here equally during successful and unsuccessful periods. Not flit in and out like the old woman with a brolly on my weather house...

[Mr Jenkins 0]

It''s a great post Purple and thanks for your efforts here. It''s so good to see an injection of reality and evidence based comment into so much of the ill based hyperbole that is generated by so many posters at the moment.

The myth that an experienced (high cost) manager seems to so obviously equal promotion is one that I have rejected but been unable to articulate in the same way as you.

My feelings about Adams, based on a bit of personal knowledge of the man and his performance with the youth team, gave me a perception that he would be an excellent manager for us, he is yet to prove that but I sincerly hope he will.

The development of a succesful dynasty within our management structure is something I can only dream of, but it''s certainly a dream worth persuing.

[Jim Smith 2,318]

[quote user="Jenkins"]It''s a great post Purple and thanks for your efforts here. It''s so good to see an injection of reality and evidence based comment into so much of the ill based hyperbole that is generated by so many posters at the moment.

The myth that an experienced (high cost) manager seems to so obviously equal promotion is one that I have rejected but been unable to articulate in the same way as you.

My feelings about Adams, based on a bit of personal knowledge of the man and his performance with the youth team, gave me a perception that he would be an excellent manager for us, he is yet to prove that but I sincerly hope he will.

The development of a succesful dynasty within our management structure is something I can only dream of, but it''s certainly a dream worth persuing.[/quote]

Not this season and at the cost of undoing all of the good work of the last 5 years it isn''t (in my opinion anyway).

Returning to the subject of the original post the key thing really is the context and circumstances surrounding the appointments. Forest have admittedly appointed some poor managers but they''ve also been at a pretty low ebb for much of the time and one could also argue that because they''ve not appointed great managers that is one if the reason they''ve not got back up. They also seem to be continuing with their habit of poor appointments with Pearce who is wasting a decent squad in a similar way to Adams.

The really key thing for me this summer is that we must have been a hugely attractive proposition to managers. We had a premiership squad and the ability to retain most of them. We are financially stable (for now) and had parachute payments. whilst at championship level we have never been better placed to attract a decent, experienced manager and yet we went for a complete novice whose tenure as caretaker raised as many questions as answered them. For be, it is completely inexplicable that in these circumstances the board concluded Adams should get the job.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

LOL Jim. You just brought it straight back to the appointment of Adams.

 

Cardiff changed last season. And then changed again this season. Both times they appointed an experienced manager albeit from different backgrounds. Adams is still outperforming them. How would you have felt if we''d appointed either of them instead?

 

Don''t forget you have a very important job with Rays Funds for the Bournemouth game next weekend[Y]

 

 

[Jim Smith 2,318]

In my view we had/ have a much stronger squad than Cardiff Nutty. I would have been a bit indifferent to Slade because he''s been around at the lower levels a long time without any significant success and I''ve never advocated appointing a manager just because they are experienced rather that any manager should have some experience to go witj ability given how crucial this season is. There are many poor managers out there with plenty of experience but our job was sufficiently attractive to mean we should have been able to select from some good experienced candidates or even ip snd voming managers like Lennon or Sherwood who at least have some track record of winning professional matches as managers. Unless that is the rumours are true and several were unwilling to work with certain people at the club!

[Jim Smith 2,318]

Ps when do I need to select the bet? Some point next week?

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Ps when do I need to select the bet? Some point next week?[/quote]

 

I''ll put the thread up on Wednesday evening and introduce you to the PUPs. Over then next couple of days they will make some suggestions for you to consider. Later on Friday you post the selections. You have £6 to spend on a single selection of up to six different ones. And can choose your own suggestion or something suggested on the thread or a combination.

 

I hope that makes sense. I know sometimes when I try to explain something I complicate it further.....

 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Returning to the subject of the original post the key thing really is the context and circumstances surrounding the appointments. Forest have admittedly appointed some poor managers but they''ve also been at a pretty low ebb for much of the time and one could also argue that because they''ve not appointed great managers that is one if the reason they''ve not got back up. They also seem to be continuing with their habit of poor appointments with Pearce who is wasting a decent squad in a similar way to Adams.

The really key thing for me this summer is that we must have been a hugely attractive proposition to managers. We had a premiership squad and the ability to retain most of them. We are financially stable (for now) and had parachute payments. whilst at championship level we have never been better placed to attract a decent, experienced manager and yet we went for a complete novice whose tenure as caretaker raised as many questions as answered them. For be, it is completely inexplicable that in these circumstances the board concluded Adams should get the job.[/quote]But who particularly, Jim? If we put on one side Lennon, clearly ignored by other Championship clubs, who would you suggest out of those available? This was the point of me itemising all those appointments in the Championship this season, because that is the pool from which we have to pick. We have various advantages, as you suggest, but we do not have the biggest, which is being in the Premier League.And that list is pretty nondescript. A matter of opinion, but I don''t think there is one name there who really fits the bill of an experienced manager from whom a top six finish would be the minimum expected. Truthfully, are there many managers there, if any, that you would have confidently advocated in the summer?To be clear, I too wanted an experienced manager, and advocated Mackay. If Rosler or Howe had been available I would have advocated them ahead of Mackay, and all of them ahead of Adams. And if I was in the boardroom I would now vote for Rosler, assuming he and Phelan could work together. But none of those was available then, and the choice then came down to a big gamble on Adams or a gamble almost as big on Lennon (and the jury is still very much out on both their achievements), a leap into the unknown by going abroad, or plumping for a safe but mediocre choice.

[whoareyou? 0]

Sherwood should have been given serious consideration. His win record at Spurs was second to none and he also got the best out of some difficult but very talented players and was not adverse to giving youngsters a chance.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

Is that why Tim Sherwood turned down WBA in the summer? Was he just holding out to be offered the Norwich job? We can only catch fish in the pond our line is in...

[Cerberus 0]

Who knows whether Sherwood turned down WBA or not? My hunch would be that Peace viewed his erratic behavious whilst at Spurs as too much of a gamble. Even so, I would take some persuading that our Board ever had any intention of appointing either McKay or Adams as manager. Once the smell surrounding McKay became known, this probably only left one option. Of course, pure speculation, but then our Board does have form in this area of sentimentality.

[Newton 0]

This thread is ludicrous - the board has a duty to select the best manager available what ever the circumstances - u cannot compare us to Notts Forrest

Last summer we had a premiership squad - no pressure to sell anyone and prepared to invest in automatic promotion (£14/17M spend over the summer)

If the post had been advertised correctly we would have been rammed with applicants - success and the premiership awaited

Yet Delia reverted to type and merely appointed some one with strong connections with the club with no senior management experience (history repeating its self)

We have Purple trying to justify Adams appointment by stating :-. And if I was in the boardroom I would now vote for Rosler, assuming he and Phelan could work together. But none of those was available then, and the choice then came down to a big gamble on Adams or a gamble almost as big on Lennon

Adams or a gamble on Lennon - get real Purple what has Adams achieved compared to Lennon ?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="Newton"]This thread is ludicrous - the board has a duty to select the best manager available what ever the circumstances - u cannot compare us to Notts Forrest

Last summer we had a premiership squad - no pressure to sell anyone and prepared to invest in automatic promotion (£14/17M spend over the summer)

If the post had been advertised correctly we would have been rammed with applicants - success and the premiership awaited

Yet Delia reverted to type and merely appointed some one with strong connections with the club with no senior management experience (history repeating its self)

We have Purple trying to justify Adams appointment by stating :-. And if I was in the boardroom I would now vote for Rosler, assuming he and Phelan could work together. But none of those was available then, and the choice then came down to a big gamble on Adams or a gamble almost as big on Lennon

Adams or a gamble on Lennon - get real Purple what has Adams achieved compared to Lennon ?[/quote]Rather agree with this. Last summer lots of us(myself included) suggested lots of names re the managerial appointment ; Sherwood, Mackay,Pulis Lennon, Slade, to name but 5. Plus all sorts of names from continental Europe who had clearly been successful in their respective leagues. So to suggest that there were no stand out candidates is rubbish. As I said at the time, if the post had been advertised properly and open to all comers there would have been an absolute deluge of applicants , as NCFC was (and still is) a very attractive proposition to a wide range of potential managers/coaches.If the circumstances had been different, ie we''d been floundering around the lower reaches of the Champ, after relegation , for a couple of seasons, having tried maybe two ''experienced'' managers, then perhaps that would have been the time to appoint Adams or similar. But, on the basis that the stated number one priority was to get straight back into the Prem, then the circumstances were entirely different, and the appointment of someone totally without experience was , in my opinion, ridiculous, and at odds with the stated aim.And Nige, by the way, your defintion of a ''balanced poster'' is bizarrely arrogant, even by your own lamentable standards . I did not realise that it was obligatory to post every day with the same monotonous regularity as you do. By your definition, then people (and there are many of us) who have other pressing committments and only post when a new issue has cropped up that demands comment are ''unbalanced''. And I notice that  you have yet again sidestepped the perfectly simple ''acceptabilty'' question I posed to you (and Bor) yesterday .We can only  deduce that this failure is so as not to incriminate yourself . and it''s no good trying to wriggle out of it by saying that you ''don''t understand'' the concept of acceptability. Surely a man like you who seems to have an opinion on pretty much everything must have one on whether, thus far, you''ve found the club''s progress satisfactory ?

[Herman 9,767]

"As I said at the time, if the post had been advertised properly and open

to all comers there would have been an absolute deluge of applicants ,

as NCFC was (and still is) a very attractive proposition to a wide range

of potential managers/coaches." Reggie.How can the club advertise the job anymore than it being in all of the media? How do you know they didn''t get a deluge of applicants? We must have an absolutely massive boardroom with all these posters that sat in on the process.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

That''s just silly, Herman. Of course no-one was there sitting in on the interviews.But we all know how the media works on this, and I can only remember Mackay''s name being mentioned as in the frame (plus, in a half-hearted way, Lennon) . Are you seriously suggesting that , if there had, as you suggest, been a deluge of applicants, that at least one or two names would not have spilt out into the combined might of the local and national media.The overriding impression is that The Smiths'' heart was set, for some reason , on Adams from the start. Unless , of course you can supply some evidence to the contrary........

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]That''s just silly, Herman. Of course no-one was there sitting in on the interviews.But we all know how the media works on this, and I can only remember Mackay''s name being mentioned as in the frame (plus, in a half-hearted way, Lennon) . Are you seriously suggesting that , if there had, as you suggest, been a deluge of applicants, that at least one or two names would not have spilt out into the combined might of the local and national media.The overriding impression is that The Smiths'' heart was set, for some reason , on Adams from the start. Unless , of course you can supply some evidence to the contrary........[/quote]

You want ''evidence'' that your ''impression'' of an event that you were not present at is correct.................now that''s ''just silly''.

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Is that why Tim Sherwood turned down WBA in the summer? Was he just holding out to be offered the Norwich job? We can only catch fish in the pond our line is in...[/quote]

You have a very defeatist attitude, NN. And very little ambition.Its a similar sort of vision from the board at the time that saw us end up in League One, IMHO.

[Herman 9,767]

I wasn''t there when they went through the decision making process, so I have no evidence to pass off as spurious fact..By some accounts Mackay was the top runner and I can only presume someone had a chat with the Cardiff board. Now you provide some evidence that their heart was set on Adams.

[Katie Borkins 1]

I''m still waiting for Reggie to put forward his "minimum acceptable standard" for club performance. Maybe he could follow that with a Supporter''s Charter, or a Magna Carta for Bedwetters.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Herman wrote the following post at 02/01/2015 9:01 AM:

"Now you provide some evidence that their heart was set on Adams."

I heard there was a valentine card and a gift of some rather dubious underwear involved.

[Herman 9,767]

 [:D]That image will haunt me today. But then again I have a family party today so it''s slightly more preferable.

[Jim Smith 2,318]

Purple - but why should we "leave aside" Lennon when he was clearly the obvious candidate. Indeed I know via some "friend of a friend" stuff (which others on here would no doubt pour scorn upon but which I trust) that Lennon was expecting to get the Norwich job but then had no further contact from us. He had publicallyinficated he wanted it and had quit Celtic. He was also linked with our job heavily when Hughton got it so someone we perhaps had sniffed around previously.

Of the other managers I can''t recall the timing of Pulis''s departure from Palace but he was available around the time. Presumably Warnock was also available. Off the top of my head others available were Sherwood, Steve Clarke, Malky and maybe Glen Hoddle and that''s before you look at those in work at the time and who we could well have attracted had we seriously tried. I don''t believe Adams was set for the job from the outset. I think the delay and then very sudden announcement indicates something else perhaps fell through but then there was still plenty of time to find a decent manager rather than immediately put Adams in charge on a three year contract. The clarity of decision making and the announcements at the time frankly suggested to me that the board (and certain individuals thereon) had lost the plot. I''m not sure they have found it again since.