No, because he is a highly thought of coach if you speak to people who know people in football. You probably don't really know much more about him than a set of stats you've looked at. When will people realise that life ain't about the stats and what happens in one place doesn't mean it'll happen somewhere else.
Simple answer - yes. You are taking a rather too simplistic view on things. Maybe you should write to Kat, have Les sacked and tell her, with a laptop and some numbers you'll do the job for 25k a year. I don't mean to sound rude, but come on mate, don't be so daft as to think it's just about looking at the stats.
FFS - do you know what type of coach he is? Do You know his philosophy? Do you know anything other than his win%? The use of "this Claude bloke" suggests you don't really. I'd sign off for a bit, because these petulant posts are going to embarrass you. Sorry mate, but stop and think.
Or maybe im just not over complicating things. A bloke with decent win rate, respected , bla bla bla Or Take a gamble on someone who's not as well known, with a average record , which for some reason means they have potential and are a good fit for us. That's how people on here seem to view the situation, and I just don't get the logic of it! I respect peoples opinions of course, but no sorry I'm sticking to tried and tested on this one.
I'm okay with Pellegrini. I've somewhat defended Man City for sacking him. IMO, he was doing a decent job there, and the timing was certainly strange on the face of it as I think Man City could have made a challenge had they stuck with him. But tbf, they did look somewhat lackluster and unmotivated his lest few weeks. Perhaps if he'd gotten more support that could have been avoided, but the situation at that point was what it was. And the chance to hire Pep Guardiola doesn't come around too often. He's arguably the best manager in the world, and he's young. It was a step up, IMO. So that decision can be justified as not sacking Pellegrini for sucking, but rather seizing the opportunity to grab Guardiola because he is awesome. Not saying that's why Man City did it, just that it could be defended as such. I would rather have Pep Guardiola than Pellegrini at Saints. But I'm under no delusion that Guardiola is interested in the job. Pellegrini based on reputation/historical success would IMO be quite a coup for us. We won't know of course if he's actually any good until he gets here. We will just have to trust the board on that, as we would with any other hire.
Pellegrini's record with Villarreal excites me most, but also his spell with Malaga. His status would make him an absolute coup and a real message to those who think Saints are lowering their sights. Might help with impressing the dressing room from the off, too.
When was our last tried and tested manager and can you give me three names that you'd consider tried and tested for us to get?
The interesting thing about Pellegrini is that there's obviously been a change of tack from the board which Guan eluded to if we do go for him. What's caused this? It's not like he's only just become available. Could it be that we're surprised that he'd look properly at us?
As far as I understand, it was Manuel Pellegrini who approached us and not the other way round. Maybe it took us aback that he was interested?
Im not saying going for unknowns dosen't work, I'm saying what I think we should go for with this next appointment. Pellegrini - not impossible. Emerey - obviously not going to happen now though. Garcia - unlikely now. Mancini - not impossible.
Still going over your head. No one is saying we should hire Puel because he has an average record. They are saying that we should hire the best manager we can, and record is not the best and certainly not the only indicator of managerial quality. In other words, maybe we didn't settle for an average manager and "get lucky" when we hired Pochettino. Maybe we knew exactly what we were doing and recognized the skills he possessed that were not reflected in his record. Our ability to effectively scout, analyse, and develop rather than make decisions based on a 5 second glance at win-loss record is what will put us over the top. And that is true whether we are a lower half PL team or Barcelona. Yes, the stakes are higher for us as but that just means we can afford even less to be lazy and just hire based on win-loss.
He has been managing clubs with money for so long now, that it's easy to forget that he earned those jobs through his performances at Villarreal on a far more modest budget. He seemed a man tired of the job at city, but of course he had already been given the heave ho. No appointment is without risk, but perhaps coming to a club without the pressure and player egos at City, could help reinvigorate him
Guiding Nice to a Top 4 finish is pretty good, don't you think? Win percentage really doesn't mean much, as there are different circumstances for different clubs. Some suit certain clubs philosophies, others don't. That's like saying a certain player in a relegated team is rubbish because they were relegated...
Also he might have a coronary and we will have to replace him then. At least we won't be a stepping stone except from st Mary's to St. Peter's gate
Not saying you're wrong or stopping you having an opinion, just that it isn't as cut and dry as just looking at statistics.
That's a nice way to have a discussion. If you feel like that, just don't carry on posting on the topic. Posting that just shows a lack of class and reduces credibility. Shame. People disagree all the time. It's a bit spoiled and petulant to just launch your toys.
