How about stability. If Holt goes we will have replaced the Manager and both Coaches since the beginning of the season and Phelan has only been here a month. Hardly a recipe to ' hit the ground running'
That is precisely my concern 1950. As for what Holt brings, continuity for one and his reputation as a good first-team coach strong on fitness and discipline, so a good match with Neil's attributes. His being a Scot could also be an advantage and make the transition easier for Neil.
Altogether now...Arrgghhh! After the Mcnasty involved in the wrangles with ColWho over Lambert, this McNicey side of our CEO is not the one he's best known for. But hey, let's avoid acrimony and finger pointing and get on with things - both sides of the border Good luck to the new boss of Hamilton if / when this move goes through.
Holt's role is nothing special. Take him or leave him, really not important. Neither is continuity at the moment because a fresh set of eyes is EXACTLY what is required. The continuity takes shape from the footballing board. Coaching staff are not important for continuity. If anything a clean sweep (bar Phelan as he's new) would be beneficial.
This tweet just now from Paddy Davitt makes for interesting conjecture. Clearly this whole manoeuvre has been planned well before Adams resigned - hell's teeth, if this is gospel truth, maybe before he was even appointed
Spot on - this just came up on Newsnow http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/alex-neil-tells-hamilton-players-4939443?
In other news (not quite sure where to put this as it doesn't merit a new thread) I see Eddie Howe has "ruled himself out" of the Newcastle job. I'm not convinced that is quite what he said... And of course you can't always trust these statements. But it seems that puts paid to the idea there might be two managerless teams on Saturday
Agree with this- the football club doesn't stop running when replacements are made- really not a big issue, and why would you want to keep the old guard, they hardly fecking helped this year
It's an interesting and bold move. I don't know too much about him but what I hear and read fits well with me. We've been crying out for someone with 'balls' since Lambert left and this guy seems to have serious cojones! We needed a change of mentality. These players are good enough to win promotion but they weren't playing as a team, there was no togetherness and they lacked a leader. If he can make them play as a team we'll run the top two close, even with a significant deficit in points. If he also brings his attacking, passing football with him then we'll all be satisfied. I felt initially the best way to get this team firing would be an old hand but actually, it just needs someone - anyone - who knows what they are doing! I think this guy does but we shall see.
I just cant get excited about this.MASSIVE gamble by the club. How long as he got? Will McNally sack him if we dont get up? Im totally baffled.I mean both Adams and Niel are/were risky so why not keep Adams in,for a rookie manager Adams did ok in my eyes.Alright I know he was naive at times but 3 points of a play off spot in his first proper season .BAFFLED.
Fair Comments mate Makes me even more pleased that we snapped up Mick McCarthy when he was available at the time. I never would have imagined that we could attract anyone of his quality especially the mess we were in at the time that Jewell left! You know what you're getting with Mick, there are no nasty surprises and he has transformed our club these past couple of years by good old common sense methods.
Perhaps it was clear to McNally that Adams was never going to be of the required standard and thinks this guy already is? The two aren't even remotely comparable. Adams showed no intention of being a manager at any point until last season. This guy, according to reports, has had the 'manager mentality' through his playing career and is cut out for the role. Basically, one is a football manager, the other isn't.
Reminds me of when Pardew ruled himself out of the England job without even being asked Though I don't see why they wouldn't be interested in him.
It's basic management. That's what Mick does, that's what he's good at. That's why he hits his limit the higher up the game he progresses. But getting the basics of management right is fundamental. Not everyone is born to lead. Some never possess the ability, others learn it, but a few find it comes naturally to them - they're generally the ones people run through brick walls for. Would you run through s wall for Paul Lambert? I would have! Neil Adams? No chance.
Then my question is why make him manager in the first place and also spout a load of bs that he was the best out there.
