Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, The_godfather said:

People talking about win percentage as a reasonable indicator of whether a manager is suitable or not - it doesn't make a big difference to be honest. 

Football managers nearly always get sacked, because they've gone on a bad run, which in turn affects their win %. When they are winning it improves, when they are losing, it decreases. Anything above 40% is pretty decent, over a career - that's 18 wins in a 46 game season - throw in a few draws and you are top half every time. There's not much difference between 35 and 40% win ratios.

Carol has her criteria - she will decide at the end of the day if she thinks the new man (I assume it's a man!) meets it!

 

Agreed. Carol will make the decision & we have to trust her judgement. She has put the remit into the public domain & people will have to form their own judgements on whether they think the new guy ticks the boxes.

We will back whoever she chooses, whether it's somebody people fancy or not. UTV

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advert:


  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Some interesting responses on here to the latest development. I'd like to add some context. In the past TWENTY YEARS we have only achieved a top 7 finish in the league... ONCE. This was under MA

Check out wiki.  He's run the family business with his brother and father for 15 years and has his own football academy.  He's not been "just" a player and manager.  In view of the amount of crit

The meltdown on here is laughable.  Please can someone tell me the success we have had in appointing a manager since Micky left? None. Flitcroft being appointed DoF shows our long term visio

Posted Images

Surely this is all pointless, as Carol explicitly said Pugh didn't want it?

In that case, under no circumstances should it be Pugh. Why on earth would we appoint a manager who doesn't even want to apply for the job, who himself doesn't feel he is ready?

You can forgive the fans for having misgivings, considering Pugh himself isn't even behind Pugh.

Edited by Joe B
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Surely this is all pointless, as Carol explicitly said Pugh didn't want it?

In that case, under no circumstances should it be Pugh. Why on earth would we appoint a manager who doesn't even want to apply for the job, who himself doesn't feel he is ready?

You can forgive the fans for having misgivings, considering Pugh himself isn't even behind Pugh.

Did she say explicity he didn't want it or that he hadnt applied ?

I agree with you though why appoint him if he thinks hes not ready ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mario said:

Did she say explicity he didn't want it or that he hadnt applied ?

I agree with you though why appoint him if he thinks hes not ready ?

Think it was both. He doesn't think he's ready and therefore he hasn't applied.

On that basis, surely there's no possibility of him being in position more than the next few weeks? We can't entrust the club to a man who himself doesn't think he's ready. It would be lunacy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advert:


6 hours ago, Iron Curtain said:

I’m not asking about the cup run in isolation.

I get you don’t want him... that’s fine.

But if the vale had a 40% win rate, made the playoffs and made the league cup quarter final next season... you wouldn’t call that a success? 

 

He doesn't have a 40% win rate i think its around 37%

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Joe B said:

Think it was both. He doesn't think he's ready and therefore he hasn't applied.

On that basis, surely there's no possibility of him being in position more than the next few weeks? We can't entrust the club to a man who himself doesn't think he's ready. It would be lunacy.

I have worked with lots of people who didn't think they were ready but it turned out that they were. Nothing wrong with a bit of self doubt, better than arrogance and delusion.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure Pugh said he wasn’t ready but would do what the club wanted? I don’t see it as lunacy especially with his win ratio whilst on the Bench. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advert:


8 hours ago, Walka003 said:

If it is $130K he's after, that's $2.5k a week roughly. Were probably throwing away that much on Cullen/Robinson. 

So just under £100k, that's not too bad

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last Thursday she said they hadn't started the interview process and it would be done with speed not haste. Yet by Friday people were saying it's Flitcroft. What's more likely to of happend is they interviewed him on Friday and people have found out and assumed it's done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CAVALIER said:

Pretty sure Pugh said he wasn’t ready but would do what the club wanted? I don’t see it as lunacy especially with his win ratio whilst on the Bench. 

3 games, 2 against the bottom 2, is not a good enough sample size to judge a manager on. 

I struggle with the concept that we get promised a successful, experienced manager, and Pugh doesn't want the job himself, and we still end up with Pugh. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, Carol explicitly promised an experienced and successful manager, and Pugh himself has said he's not ready.

Based on this, under no circumstances should it be Danny Pugh. It's a non-discussion.

If it does end up being Pugh, I don't think you can begrudge fans being disappointed and confused, as it contradicts everything being said by the club. 

Edited by Joe B
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone I know suggested that the 'experienced and successful' line was merely a way to placate the fanbase, buying Pugh more time to win games so that he could be given the job.

I told that person that they were talking utter rubbish. I hope I was right.

Edited by Joe B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advert:


3 games, 2 against the bottom 2, is not a good enough sample size to judge a manager on. 
I struggle with the concept that we get promised a successful, experienced manager, and Pugh doesn't want the job himself, and we still end up with Pugh. 
I think I've missed something joe has it been said he's getting the job because if so I completely agree with you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, “Promise “ is a strong word. I’ve just checked and the Sentinel quite is that “the manager has to have a proven record of success.” Now I know that you’re a bit of a wordsmith but it doesn’t promise that, nor is there a definition of success. 
I’m pretty sure that we were promised that we wouldn’t finish 8th but I think it was just a statement.

Nothing would surprise me now but in that article there’s reasoning why we need a manager now and not later so that in itself should rule Danny Pugh out unless he applies and the “promise “isn’t as it says

Unless Flitcroft changes his mind it looks like sloppy seconds. Anyway , back to work.

Edited by CAVALIER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No income , no guarantee when there will be and some think 130k is reasonable , when if you include other benefits NIC etc will be closer to 160k !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Moderators don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking (e.g. personal abuse) - use the orange report button above a post to alert them.

    If you can't get on with another forum user you can select the "ignore" option. Simply click on the link below, type in their username and save - Click here




×
×
  • Create New...