Hooray, someone gets it and spells it out. It's also not only about retaining players though. It gets the club's name about places. It does the introductions for the club. People don't say Southampton who.? They say, Southampton wow.! High profile managers open doors to bigger things. You can actually flirt around lower mid-table with one in charge and still have bags of potential and status. Do that with the likes of Eddie Howe and suddenly you're considered relegation fodder. And that is not intended to be a slur on Eddie Howe even though it is one.
He's an Established champions league manager who's managed in the PL before (took spurs to their highest ever league total) and has just become a free agent, so minimal contract wrangling - and you'd turn him down? Seriously? I'd take AVB in a heartbeat. Sure, he's no Simone or Emery, but he's the most desirable target out of the realistic rumours around IMO
To me it's not about status or being thought of as a "big" club, it's about the product on the pitch and playing the right way. What Howe has done with Bournemouth is nothing short of miraculous and he has a good reputation and public persona and is obviously a winner. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one TSS.
We can only do that at a high level if we can attract players - I like Howe, but I'm not sure he'd keep Sadio (for example) whereas a bigger name would be more attractive to potential players.
We'll continue to unearth gems whoever is in charge and it's not as if Howe hasn't signed a £10m player before and that was for Bournemouth!.
I find it positive that the board stick to their vision. Youth is key. Ron was only gonna leave anyway so **** him. I'll bet a few of our youth could have made the step up last season but instead they stagnate in the youth teams. Reed could have been just as effective as Clasie, and McCarthy as good as Cuco/Cedric.
I'm sort of torn on Howe. On the one hand I feel like yeah, we need a big name to bring in players, and why are we small-timing it on the cheap to get a relatively unproven guy. On the other hand, I feel like that's kind of plastic-y big club fan attitude to have. I mean, isn't this exactly how this club has succeeded? By not worrying about names and reputations and over paying for "proven" guys but instead digging up diamonds in the rough who just need a chance? Howe seems like he fits in perfectly with some of the things I like about the club and it's recent history. Maybe my view is a bit romanticized, but it's still appealing and thus hiring him would be kind of a cool move. As an added bonus, I remember the Bournemouth fans being absolute douchebags back in the day on 606 when both clubs were in League One. All about how they weren't smaller than Saints and trying to play up the rivalry etc. So it would make me happy to hear Howe give a nice speech about how when a major club like Southampton comes calling you can't turn it down. Howe wouldn't be my first choice from a objective sort of perspective, but as a fan I think he's maybe the most exciting choice. I think fans would be strongly divided, and there would be a higher risk/reward factor than maybe some other candidates. He could actually be a genius. Or he could fail spectacularly. That interests me.
Do you really believe that's what happened here? That Koeman wanted the extension, and it was the board that effectively turned him down? No way. And if it was Koeman that left, and the board were trying to sign him despite the supposed lack of youth opportunities being given, then how are they sticking to their vision?
Our youth policy has reportedly caused a rift between the board and Ron before. So it would be understandable if they are not pushing out all the stops to get him to stay. Obviously its not as black and white as what you say I'm assuming. That's why we call it contract 'negotiations'.
Well, exactly. What makes you assume the board held their ground in terms of youth policy and that was the sticking point? Maybe it was Everton doubling Koeman's wages or offering him a 165m budget, or the promise of a new stadium that made him go. None of us can know for sure. But I have to say that it looks to me like Saints thought they had a deal. Probably Koeman thought they had a deal. And then Everton blew him away with an offer that was beyond anything we could do on many fronts. This is like, post-relationship justification. Maybe Koeman wasn't the right one and it turns out for the best. But anyone objective observer I think will see this as he broke up with us, not the reverse.
We'll just have to wait and see. I do think if the board were convinced Koeman was their man they could have persuaded him. We can afford to match Everton's salary, and give him a big budget (50 mill), but the board won't because they put the club first over individuals (ie: stick to their values).
Anyone know when this deal will finally get over the line? Then we can move on and get the new man in.
The crazy thing is that it isn't all that rare. Chelsea's longest-serving manager in the past twenty years? Claudio Ranieri, who survived for 3 years and 8 months before getting sacked. Manchester City's leader in tenure from 1980 on? Kevin Keegan: 3 years and almost 10 months. Players are pretty transient these days, but managers might as well not unpack the suitcases. Edit: at 1 year, 354 days, Koeman was fifth in longevity among current managers of the teams that competed in the Premier League this season. Only Wenger, Howe, Hughes, Pellegrini (who is effectively out) and Poch have more time in the seat.
I don't think this should be the be-all and end-all of manager recruitment. Last season demonstrated that there are plenty of bargains to be had out there, and that careful man-management can be superior to having a big name who attracts superstars (and their super-egos). And anyway, we finished 6th in the Premier League and now have European football for the second season in a row. We are a 'big club' in the eyes of 90% of footballers out there.
