Liverpool are unlikely to go for Bertrand in the summer because the LB problem has been solved. I do not know of other clubs though
I would offer him a contract, then perhaps we can keep a potentially great manager, for more than one season!
Yeah, that's one way of looking at it. Another would be that when fortune challenged Hughes, he didn't hesitate to roll the dice. And we all know who fortune favours.
Hope we sign him up. The best we’ve played since Koeman and people are doubting the man. To pick up a team that has had no confidence since the league cup final, and turn them from certain relegation to surviving is a superb achievement. Some people expect the moon on a stick.
Anyone would have done the same. It was a nothing-left-to-lose situation. Swansea was going for it as well. TBF, when I say it was "luck," I don't mean to imply Hughes did something wrong and got away with it. He did what needed to do. I'm just against any notion that Hughes did anything special there. The bar for tactical nous needs to be way, way higher than "Throws on an extra attacker midway through the second half when anything other than a win means relegation." We were owed a bit of good fortune after the last game, and on the balance of the season. Four points from the last two games is deserved given the way the matches went. At the same time, we really didn't play that well in either match although given the circumstances it's somewhat understandable. But in a good side should have been able to win both those matches easily considering how Swansea and Everton played. I think everyone wants this to be a tale of a very talented team dragged down by one bad manager, who has now been replaced by a good manager and the sky's the limit. But IMO, that's not the case. This club needs a new vision and significant changes. We were a bad team, but there were a lot of bad teams this year. We could have finished anywhere between 11-19 and really not had too much cause to celebrate or complain. In the end we will finish roughly where we should have. Hughes "rolled the dice" because what else was there to do? Our season was left way too much up to chance. Behind the scenes it's quite possible Hughes kept spirits up and had the team working hard. If that's the case, he deserves credit for that. But those things can often be ephemeral... as they were with Swansea. I'm happy to give Hughes at least some amount of credit for keeping us up, and I'm grateful for that. But I don't see anything that recommends him for a long term contract. Let's not forget what a total ****show Stoke's transfer policy has been and how awful they were this year. Blame the roster on the board if you want, but I also think Stoke played much better after sacking Hughes although given their talent and the hole there was not much hope.
I don't think we've found a great manager. But I think we have found someone who gets us and knows what to do. If that doesn't excite you please re watch the 2016/17 & 2017/18 review DVD's.
You really must disregard QPR when trying to assess Hughes. Watch The Four Year Plan on YouTube if you haven't already. They were an absolute laughing stock of an outfit at the time. They made Del Boy look like Richard Branson. Anyway, how on earth can you not want the man on a permanent deal after the turnaround he has performed?! It's like a lottery winner complaining that the last winner won a few million more.
Yeah, because everyone was super excited about the team's performance in 2016/17. There was not a single post complaining about Puel all season.
I don't overly care whether Hughes' past record is comparable to Mourinho or Dowie. It is all about getting the right fit for us. Ron's record was hardly anything to shout about, but he was the perfect fit for us. Usually I would say that I would go with whatever the board decide. But given how horrendously they've done with our last two permanent appointments, that mantra no longer applies. What I would say is that, whether it's Hughes or someone else, it's important to go back to removing the manager from the recruitment process (and actually having a recruitment process, that's pretty vital too). I know he's not been given much game time, but the brutal reality is that Carrillio is a contender for our worst ever signing, given his price (and presumably wages). So if Hughes demands that X amount of money is available to spend on new players (and that Y amount will represent his salary) then fine, but just make it clear that it's not for him to spend. I'd rather not recruit Wimmer or Berahino, thanks.
I think they were in the relegation zone and tied with us on points. But they were playing even worse, as hard as it is to imagine. They lost to Coventry. Hughes had totally lost that squad.
The point I think Archers and some of us is trying to make is that not everyone would have. MP2 definitely wouldn't. He would have defended the 0-0 draw. It's not the euphoria of last night, but I feel Hughes just fits here. Some managers do, others don't. Look at Koeman after he left.
Yeah, I'm down with this. I agree that it is about fit and not hipster formations or beautiful attacking play or an exciting hotshot young manager. I was one who generally defended Puel's style of "boring" football because I think it fit our level of talent. We had hardworking players but a weak attack. So yeah, pass that ball around safely make the other team chase or sit back and let us have possession for long stretches. Don't take too many risks, and be positionally solid and we had a strong defense and spine. We weren't pretty to watch, but generally it was the right game plan. But my question is how do we know that Hughes is the right fit for us when we are hopefully going to be making some massive changes both on and off the pitch? Assume that indeed he got the most out of the players we had this year. I don't want many of those same players on the starting XI next year. So if we're not going to let Hughes recruit the players (which I agree is a good idea), then how can we know if the players we do recruit fit with his tactics and motivational style?
Yes, and my point is that is comically incorrect. Everyone would have made that same move, including Pellegrino. He's not THAT incompetent. No one is. Even going beyond the obvious tactical importance, even crap football managers at least have some sense of self-awareness. If we lose that game, Hughes is almost certainly not going to be our manager next year nor would he likely have much interest in managing us next year. If we win that game, then Hughes figures he just got himself a payday, because he will get credit for keeping us up, leading to interest in signing him from us but also other struggling PL sides. It was at that point a no-lose situation not just for the club but for Hughes.
To keep us up is/would be (just in case fate is reading this) a great achievement as you say. A few people have said how well we’ve played, but I’m not convinced we’ve been that good. He has got the results we needed, mostly, but I have a niggle in the back of my mind that what he’s actually done is kick some Arse and get some people fired up. This is good and what was needed. Keeps us up; job done. However, I don’t think we’ve been as good as some see to have seen. I’m not moaning about it and I am delighted that we are where we are, I just think we’ve played some very poor stuff in those games too. That might be the players. I do think he deserves the job, I’m just not jumping up and down yet though and remaining cautious. He gets the job, he gets my support.
