I'm pretty sure Hoddle said openly that he'd have done the job for 6 months.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
What will Daniel Levy's End of Season Open Letter say??
- Thread starter Alex
- Start date
I'm pretty sure Hoddle said openly that he'd have done the job for 6 months.
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
I would guess that it was to attempt to:
a) get some sort of continuity
b) have somebody taking over who already knew the capabilities of the players in both the first team squad and development squad.
b) have somebody taking over who already knew the capabilities of the players in both the first team squad and development squad.
Additionally we all have no idea of the penalty clauses (on either side) if Sherwood's contract is ended prior to completion of the 18 months. It wouldn't surprise me if Sherwood's wages for 6 months, plus early termination payout equates to less than what (say) Hoddle wanted for those same six months.
I'll quote this in the Sherwood thread as I think it's better we continue there.
chancer
Gudni Bergsson
Don't get me wrong, he'd have been a horrible choice. He'd have been a far better choice than the one that was made though.
chancer
Gudni Bergsson
That is no more than an opinion. You cannot say it with any degree of certainty whatsoever. None.
In fact, it is significantly more likely that any objective view of the thing is that someone in Sherwood's position was more likely to work than bringing in an external person who was sacked from 3 of his last 4 jobs, walked out on the other, has a record of alienating people, and who hasn't worked in professional football for 7 years.
As for the vast array of other available candidates, I keep hearing that being said but never see any actual names being put forward.
If we're talking history then Sherwood must have been one of the worst possible choices. I'm sure you remember his behaviour as a Spurs player, have you read about his behaviour at Blackburn? I'm not talking from hindsight here, I (along with GB) warned everyone that his attitude/demeanour would be a problem.
Sometime appointments don't work out and it's just bad luck, sometimes the evidence is there to be seen and gets ignored - Levy needs to take a large slice of blame for that.
chancer
Gudni Bergsson
I can't comment on that because I have absolutely no idea who these other possible choices were. We have Glenn...who else?
Well let's take Glenn - he's someone we all know a lot about. He's someone in whose hands (despite his apparent inability to get results) I would happily trust our team. He won't damage the team for his own personal gain and he won't introduce a lack of thinking culture in order to get more 'heart' or 'effort' into the team.
All IMO of course, but I would happily trust Hoddle - he's someone who has the club's best interests at heart. Sherwood has wilfully damaged the environment at two of his clubs to further his own advancement/back up his own incredibly high opinion of himself.
It's only a caretaker role - results are secondary to keeping the transition smooth and not doing any damage for when the real manager gets here.
Wonder what this quote actually means:
"Our focus therefore is to continue to invest in and develop the squad [but] we shall not look to a summer of major upheaval, rather to strengthen in key positions - to play the style of football for which we are famous."
1 - We are not selling any players - and not changing the manager?
2 - We are not selling any players only - but up for changing everything else?
What does upheaval mean?
"Our focus therefore is to continue to invest in and develop the squad [but] we shall not look to a summer of major upheaval, rather to strengthen in key positions - to play the style of football for which we are famous."
1 - We are not selling any players - and not changing the manager?
2 - We are not selling any players only - but up for changing everything else?
What does upheaval mean?
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
I think you are trying to read between the lines when the message seems fairly clear IMO. When I read that sentence I thought a few key additions/departures to the playing staff (LB hopefully) and a mandate to play more entertaining football to the manager (new or old). This seems reasonable to me and is a policy that most on here would endorse. Let's face it, we have 3-4 new players that have only played a smattering of games between them this season and we have no real idea what to expect from them.
You could argue that LB and possibly a new GK are the only real positions that need upgrading. Yes I would like a tasty flavour of the month buy too but I'd much rather see the manager mould a system around the playing staff we have got, and I think Levy's message implies this.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
Exactly Hoddle is as much, if not more, of a car crash waiting to happen. But if you have a complete hate of Sherwood, well then Hoddle or anyone is better. In reality Sherwood has done as well as would have been expected, and probably done a lot better with games like the Southampton turnaround than many others would have. But don't let logic interfere with hate! Keep it pure.
appointing someone with experience > appointing someone with none > appointing someone in a coma > appointing Dim Tim
I
indianspur
Guest
an intelligent successful cnut is far more appealing than a brainless done fcuk all cnut
I
indianspur
Guest
:lol: