It seemed like it was coming for a while but I was still pretty surprised to hear that he'd been sacked.
That is quite obscene. I've been watching since Grant and even then I'd forgotten half of the ones since him. Is there any big side that's had more managers over the last decade?Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
Our list since I started properly watching goes:
Keegan, Dalglish, Gullit, Sir Bobby, Souness, Roeder, Allardyce, Keegan, Kinnear, Shearer, Hughton, Pardew, Carver, McClaren. Strangely, just one more than Jimmy's list.
Howard Wilkinson, George Graham, David O'Leary, Terry Venebles, Peter Reid, Eddie Gray, Kevin Blackwell, John Carver, Dennis Wise, Gary McAllister, Simon Grayson, Neil Warnock, Brian McDermott, David Hockaday, Darko Milanic, Neil Redfearn, Uwe Rosler, Steve Evans.
Denis Smith, Malcom Crosby, Terry Butcher, Mick Buxton but I can't really remember them.
SInce then: Peter Reid, Howard Wilkinson, Mick McCarthy, Kevin Ball, Niall Quinn, Roy Keane, Ricky Sbragia, Steve Bruce, Martin O'Neill, Paolo Di Canio, Gus Poyet, Dick Advocaat, Sam Allardyce
I've bolded the ones I liked/were any good.
I love the SSN chat this morning about high profile players he's sold and how great they're doing elsewhere, as if the sale of Ryan Bertrand (it's not really pronounced ber-TRAND is it) is the cause of Jose's woes.
What's the deal with them these days? From the brief glimpses I've had (I'll gloss over the fact their shitheap of a first 11 turned us over a few weeks ago) they now appear to be struggling to balance the demands of their rise up the leagues (games moved for TV, etc) with the beliefs that caused them to start the club in the first place. Not sure if that's a fair perception or not?
I don't really agree with this. I do know oligarcs who support clubs like City and Chelsea vastly skew the financial playing field. But the beauty of the PL is that at least the [fuckin vast amounts of] TV-money are evenly distributed amongst the teams, which means all teams in England have at least a fighting chance to achieve stuff such as Everton, Southampton (and Leicester this season) have done over the last few years.
The fact that the PL is so competitive - for instance I reckon Everton or Spurs could easily be top 3 in Italy or France - is making it so tough on the CL sides to maintain a steady level of performance since even a game like Watford - Arsenal can be difficult for the latter. Coupled with the fact that there's actually some prestige attached to the FA cup (more than can be said of many other domestic cups...) - English football is looking more level and exciting than ever. Watching Stoke - Crystal Palace is a decent game to watch. Watching Real Betis - Deportivo isn't.
The main problem I think is the fucking immense gap between the Championship and the PL.
There is of course also the risk that over the coming 5-6 years, the rich teams will start having EVEN bigger squads to compensate for said competitiveness, but since you can't register infinite amounts of players (can you..?) I guess that would be sort of fine. You can't have 10 "world class" players in a squad - they won't be happy about being rotated that much.
It is horribly I TOLD YOU SO, isn't it. Jonathan Wilson mentioned the PSG game last season as a warning that should have been heeded, as if that poor performance was somehow a pre-cursor to being 16th in the league come December. Everyone wants to be the guy that predicted it and it's fucking boring. Nobody predicted this and there isn't a single reason as to why it's happened either.
By the way, if Juande Ramos even makes it to the car park at Cobham, I'm ending my support for the club.
Is it really an immense gap, though? Often when the 3 teams come up it seems like all 3 of them will go straight back down, but it's never the case. If new teams can stay up each season then the gap isn't immense at all. In fact I'd say the top 6 in the Championship are no worse than the bottom 6 in the Premier League.
I watch a lot of Championship and there's not much of a gap at all, other than in marketing.
I'm equally annoyed by Hiddink frankly. A lazy, nothing appointment. He's 69 and last managed a club three seasons ago which was a failed stint at Anzhi. Why not put Steve Holland in charge if it's just going to be an interim twat.
Yeah the gap is a myth. I've always thought that. On average one promoted team goes down. It can't be that much of a gap if most teams stay up.
That's only two fewer managers than Rangers have had in the entire history of the club, excluding caretakers. That is largely down to the fact our first three managers lasted a combined sixty eight years, but still.
There was a geezer on 5Live this morning who traced it back to Costa's stamp on Skrtel.
The stamp on Can was one of the points mentioned by Jonathan Wilson in that article I posted. That and the incident with Carneiro were seen as major points in the players possibly turning on him. It's a point he and others made well before the sacking: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...iggest-problem
If the players can't deal with the sexy doctor being sacked because she shagged John Terry then they should all get life bans.
Pretty laughable in any case. Reminiscent of the rebellion under AVB.
Wheeling out Hiddink
Test.
Is it really an immense gap, though? Often when the 3 teams come up it seems like all 3 of them will go straight back down, but it's never the case. If new teams can stay up each season then the gap isn't immense at all. In fact I'd say the top 6 in the Championship are no worse than the bottom 6 in the Premier League.That's encouraging. But I mean mainly financially, which I think long term will make it harder and harder for teams to actually stay up when they are promoted, because the financial hit will be bigger and bigger. But I guess so long as you invest relatively wisely when you do have cash (build up youth academy, etc), you should manage.
The money is probably reaching saturation point anyway, and teams stockpiling overpaid shitheads probably give the plucky underdog 'play like a team' minnows a better chance.
Man embarrasses family on live television.
Fucking hell.
That's excruciating.
What's happening is messy and I wouldn't be able to give it justice if I tried. The gist is vast governance, too much power in one man (who is now fergie like unquestionable) and a complete load of muppets trying to turn the club into being a vehicle for football change rather than a form of affordable football for the fans.
Oh no.
The biggest Chelsea fan twitter account had a big moan about Emenalo not using Mourinho's name.
Like others have said, this definitely isn't true. Watch our game tomorrow v Middlesborough and then watch Newcastle v Villa later.
Hey, don't accurately use us like that.
That Time Vine letter is quite good, although I don't agree with him about the significance of the doctor thing.
Emenalo absolutely fascinates me. You have one of the most successful managers in history who gets sacked and the bloke they wheel out to defend the decision is some Nigerian chap with a few national caps from the 90s, and almost no qualifications to do the job that he does. And yet he's seen off quite a few world class managers now.
The worrying thing is that they don't in fact look embarrassed at all.
Howay, its the lower classes on a day out at Ascot. They're made up.
Jose as Manchester United manager and Pep as Manchester City manager would be utterly fascinating to watch.
What is he doing at the Brighton game? Is Unlucky Chris for the bullet?
I think he's mates with Karanka. He looks miserable as fuck.
It's hard to see a decent job coming up for him soon unless he fancies PSG. He's clearly absolutely seething, and rightly so.
PSG obviously will come along for him. Or back to Real.
PSG would be such a boring job. Ligue 1 is terrible. Why are Monaco still shit? I thought they were loaded? It should be an attractive place to players as well, although the ground is shit I suppose. If they picked it up at least the league would be a bit more competitive.
Monaco is proper shit club no fans. Get where they are thanks to tax exemptions.
That said, PSG itself is only 45 years old. French football is just shit and the French dislike the sport/all sport.
He will go to United.
I've had this on repeat since 7am. Wooooah-ah-ooooooooaaah.
I've said this a million times but he absolutely won't ever go to United (unless they clear out the boardroom or have a massive rethink from the last 20 years). I'm no expert on wrestling terminology, so perhaps someone can correct the words here, but Mourinho is the world's number one 'heel' and United don't want any of that stuff around their brand. He also doesn't play his football The United Way.
United will go hard for Guardiola but if City get him (as I imagine they will) I would think they'll go for Continuity Giggs with perhaps a load of top, top coaches dragged in around him.
Why would Guardiola choose City over Utd?
Doesn't he have mates there? And they have more money. Personally think he'd go for United given the choice though. They're up there amongst the very biggest names in the world in terms of prestige, something City will never have.
He's always been a man for a challenge . . .
Mourinho turns down Roma who are expected to sack Garcia.
http://www.skysports.com/football/ne...urns-down-roma
Has Totti got any badges?
Totti is busy chasing the Serie A goals record, isn't he?
He'll need to start playing and scoring goals.
Why are they so against the players, and so for Mourinho?
Can Mourinho do nothing wrong? They're treating him like some holy man.
Players do normally tend to get off lightly in these situations. Aside from how shit most of them have been on the pitch all season, the suggestion that they basically decided to stop playing for the cunt is bound to wind up the fans.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote