Minhosa

Can you point to where it's worked in the UK? Koeman is a Manager by the way. You don't arrive at a club quickly followed by ex-players and top players from your homeland by coincidence. It's in it's infancy here really. Plenty examples of the opposite going tits skyward though. Something has to change. But no I can't really. In the prem I suppose spurs closest resemble it although not fully. So it's great when utilised properly but there's no evidence of it having been utilised properly? I'm sold.

I was actually more upbeat after reading the thing yesterday. And everyone is ruining it for me. I just want to be cheerful.

Both arrived from different leagues and created empires. Your man Charnley talked about long term yesterday so why wouldn't that be the aspiration?

Can you point to where it's worked in the UK? Koeman is a Manager by the way. You don't arrive at a club quickly followed by ex-players and top players from your homeland by coincidence.

If they didn't like the scouts, would they still have jobs? If our new head coach doesn't like them he's fucked. They don't report to him. He's bibs and cones remember.

Imagine the scenario where we've had a great start to the season. Are sitting in 5th and pushing on. Our key centre back gets injured and the manager wants an old head to steady the ship until he returns in 3-4 months. It's January and there are two options buying a young kid with a huge upside or taking on a top old boy for £3m cos he's going to be out of contract in the summer. Which do the club go for and how does the manager feel as we slip away to mid-table cos the kid can't cope with the league? Club don't give a fuck. They don't want Europe anyway. They'll stick with the kid the following season and hopefully make a few million on him. The sporting achievement is not a priority. What kind of coach would want that? And why would they stay when they could actually join a club with some ambition?

The point being that a bloke with hardly any influence, with his PR wings completely clipped and an inability to rely on support from those bellends above him means it's a role that cannot work. Can you imagine a Keegan or SBR accepting that they could only talk about x, y or z? Could you imagine either of them having to ask somebody to find them a player please? Accepting whichever player the club thought appropriate? They were the only managers in my lifetime who 'got' the club. Take engagement and influence way from them and they're no better or worse than anyone else. My point is that this whole system, which is designed for and driven by financial return, is bound for failure. Aye that's great if you find a Keegan or Robson, but not if you get a Dalglish, Souness, Allardyce, Roeder, Gullit ect. There's nowt at all wrong with the concept of a head coach as long as you go for a man who's Footballing philosophy is in line with the key people he's working with on transfers. We all know that our transfer policy has problems in that we are too focused on resale value. But you don't need to completely change the setup and bring in a traditional manager to fix that. Would Wenger have been the success he has if he came into Arsenal from Grampus Eight with a remit of stick to the bibs and cones and we'll do the rest? Same for Ferguson and all of those others who have created dynasties? How can you talk about medium/long term but only have a transitional role in the most important job in the club? They basically indicate that the role is interchangable. One in, one out. Old guy says the wrong thing, bring a new one in. Great. Do you thinks players respect/fear that? Edit - it tells you everything you should need to know about the modern day NUFC. Football second, profits first.

We're closer to the day Ashley sells the club and the characterless, soulless, cretinous, fucking beancounting bellends that hang on around him will all disappear into the sunset.

Well lets face it the average manager wouldn't be a complete fucking moron like Pardew was. And yet, the club thought he did a wonderful job. Go figure................

Kaka that scenario is flawed by the fact you're using Alan Pardew as the example. He's not developed a player for the better since the day he arrived. Use KK and see what comes back. I'll tell you. 'I want Phillipe Albert whether you fucking like him or not'.

The point being that a bloke with hardly any influence, with his PR wings completely clipped and an inability to rely on support from those bellends above him means it's a role that cannot work. Can you imagine a Keegan or SBR accepting that they could only talk about x, y or z? Could you imagine either of them having to ask somebody to find them a player please? Accepting whichever player the club thought appropriate? They were the only managers in my lifetime who 'got' the club. Take engagement and influence way from them and they're no better or worse than anyone else. My point is that this whole system, which is designed for and driven by financial return, is bound for failure.

If Wenger can get him back to his Hughton days of getting it and giving it he could be ok I reckon. He's also surrounded by hugely better players that actually move and want the ball. Not Jack Colback or Gouffran.

They overruled Pardew because his players wouldn't appreciate in value. My point is that, of the 3 cogs in the transfer wheel, the coach is the smallest and least influential. 1. Will the signing be cheap/damaged goods.......or have potential for huge upside? 2. Does he tick the box age-wise? There will be no question of do we need him (Colback/Gosling etc) nor whether the coach actually see's a use for him. If the kid can play and have the chance to make the club money, then he'll fucking play, whether the coach likes it or not. Pardews suggested signings had no value to begin with, neither financially or as players. Are you actually saying we should have signed Bent, Sidwell ect? Also your last sentence is quite clearly rubbish. How many of our new players did Pardew sit on the bench/ruin?, he was never forced to field any player we signed. If bringing in a head coach that agrees with/appreciates the kind of player we sign and plays them makes him a yes man then give me a yes man please.. You'll get one whether you want one or not tbqh. He'll also fuck off at the first sign of PR disaster or for a better offer where he has some influence. You heard it here first.

There is no long term plan involving Carr traipsing his arse all over Europe looking for damaged/knocked off goods on behalf of Ashley. Charnley talked of medium/long term planning in last nights article and yet they didn't even have a replacement in mind for AP. They make it up as they go along. Anything to numb the masses.

Pinning your hopes on a 70 year old bloke, what could go wrong? The systemic advantage of having the suits make the signings only works when you have a succession plan for the plum sticking the cones out. They've admitted they didn't have that. The same 70 year old that brought some of the best player we've had in the millennium.... I'll trust him in a heartbeat, his record speaks for itself. The same bloke who won't be able to brush his own teeth if a few f***ing years. It's not a question of trust man. Yeah you're right let's get Wise back in then. Yeah. Because that's what I inferred.

Great. Bottom 5 here we come. I'd actually love for us to go down just to fuck these heinous arseholes in charge of our once fine establishment. See how fucking smug they are then about when to buy and when not to.

They overruled Pardew because his players wouldn't appreciate in value. My point is that, of the 3 cogs in the transfer wheel, the coach is the smallest and least influential. 1. Will the signing be cheap/damaged goods.......or have potential for huge upside? 2. Does he tick the box age-wise? There will be no question of do we need him (Colback/Gosling etc) nor whether the coach actually see's a use for him. If the kid can play and have the chance to make the club money, then he'll fucking play, whether the coach likes it or not.

Pinning your hopes on a 70 year old bloke, what could go wrong? The systemic advantage of having the suits make the signings only works when you have a succession plan for the plum sticking the cones out. They've admitted they didn't have that. The same 70 year old that brought some of the best player we've had in the millennium.... I'll trust him in a heartbeat, his record speaks for itself. The same bloke who won't be able to brush his own teeth if a few fucking years. It's not a question of trust man.

Alan Pardew would've done anything Ashley wanted. If a cup run was anywhere near the club agenda there is now way AP would've put out Mickey Mouse sides every time. No doubt in my mind that the directive was from Ashley. If there's no money in them, there's no point in them.

WAT. Koeman has the exact same "constraints" as any incoming head coach would do as did Pochettino did before him, the only difference being as they actually are good coaches so they were able to develop the players they had. This may be foreign to you but not every manager is Redknapp, for example Ancelotti has very little say at Madrid. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2915933/Ronald-Koeman-s-smart-Southampton-signings-help-Saints-fly-says-Jose-Fonte.html Are you suggesting Koeman didn't have a huge influence in many of these signings?

Pinning your hopes on a 70 year old bloke, what could go wrong? The systemic advantage of having the suits make the signings only works when you have a succession plan for the plum sticking the cones out. They've admitted they didn't have that.

WAT. Koeman has the exact same "constraints" as any incoming head coach would do as did Pochettino did before him, the only difference being as they actually are good coaches so they were able to develop the players they had. This may be foreign to you but not every manager is Redknapp, for example Ancelotti has very little say at Madrid. Koeman has very obviously told Saints who to sign. He's worked with some of them before or knows them from Holland. Elia being the example. He's told them and they've supported him by buying who he wants. As a result it'd be safe to assume he's got a degree of comfort that his opinion is valued and he's got an influence on personnel. Our new patsy will be told who he's having. In the same way Pardew was. There is a fundamental difference. And, imho, they're a 'Yes Man' because they don't have the freedom/empowerment to decide what they need and to make it happen. I don't think for a minute that happens at every Premiership club regardless of what our fucknuggets would like you to believe. Did you think Poyet didn't want/choose Defoe, Redknapp doesn't choose his has-beens like he's done at every club, Allardyce doesn't pick big lumps to play up front like he has done at every club? These managers decide what they want and the club make it happen. We tell a 'Coach' what he needs and then tell him who he's having. It's a glorified bibs and cones job. Might as well give it Terry MacDermott to keep the boys entertained whilst the suits do the important jobs.

Ashley. 100% Ashley.

Didn't Pulis have Shola at Stoke on loan?

Even if the new Head Coach comes in and immediately improves the first team in a Koeman-esque run, why would they stay at NUFC when they will have offers from other clubs almost immediately? They would move everytime so that they can buy their own players............ By the very definition of having key decisions taken out of his hands, the head coach is a yes man. He's basically putting himself out there to be rimmed like fuck.