I agree with keeping some money for January, but the most important signings need to be made now if we are to be competing for promotion by January. New players have to bed in.
And - apart from being grossly unfair to Adams - the problem is? Most people on here want Adams out because he doesn't, in their opinion, bring discipline and a big chance of promotion. Pulis virtually guarantees both.
Spot on. But he also guarantees a split in the supporter base because (with justification) he has a reputation for a very specific style of play which is contrary to many, many supporters view of how the game should be played (notwithstanding the fact that this style is extremely successful). I don't doubt that Pulis would get us promoted. I'd honestly give us an 80% chance of automatic promotion if he were appointed right now. But my God there would be a storm of antipathy from supporters... I think Carrabuh, for one, would implode and turn into a black hole.
I think Rob that you have just come up with the best reason for appointing Pulis!!! Only joking Carrabuh.
May I ask if you wanted Hughton gone by the time he was? Pulis is a slightly more successful Hughton. Yes, he doesn't get relegated, but his style of play is just as turgid and there is a glass ceiling - he couldn't get Stoke out of the bottom half of the Premier League - something Mark Hughes instantly rectified.
Given the choice, I'd prefer we didn't recruit Pullis, even if NA should get off to the worst possible start - including losing to Ipswich.
I'm sorry what part of that sentence implied I had a problem with it? Was just a simple statement of a possible scenario. Didn't think it warranted a bit of snippyness.
Hughton - WITH HINDSIGHT I wish he had gone in Jan but at that time we were not in deep trouble, it would have been harsh to sack him then and there was a shortage of suitable available replacements. Sack him when we did? No. Nobody was going to rescue us with that run in so might as well have left it until the end of the season. The Board had to sack him when they did because of the lynch mob mentality of the supporters. Pulis - I don't want him. To be fair you have glossed over his achievements a bit by not mentioning that he got Stoke promoted in the first place, kept them up for many years against the odds, took them to a FA Cup final and then performed a miracle with Palace which won him Manager of the Year award. All I was saying was that Pulis fitted what most people on here wanted from a Manager - discipline and results - but he would hardly unify the fans. You mention the success of Mark Hughes - I don't think fans of his previous Clubs would agree with your assessment which just goes to show that you cannot judge a Manager until he has had the chance to do the job at your Club.
Sorry Rich - I didn't intend to imply any problem or show any snippyness. I was just trying to point out that Pulis would be likely to give us the success and discipline that people on here are demanding by using the fairly modern habit of answering a statement with ' and the problem is ' No offence intended.
