The old Chris Hughton discussion thread

[Ronaldo]

 

Bollocks.

 

Hughton's achieved more in his career as a manager anyway! 

 

Than who?

[ohmelads]

I voted yes. I think he was predictably given little money to strengthen but did his best in the transfer market. He's basically been restricted to signing freebies or bargain buys. Williamson was a very good signing, Tiote looks a steal and Routledge at the time was a good signing. Lovenkrands was free and we desperately needed pace, for all his limitations. Simpson was cheap and Ben Arfa looked a bargain. Campbell and Gosling both frees.

 

His only errors of judgement were Perch and Best, two players we didn't need and frankly strange signings. Still don't know why he wasted precious coin bringing them in. But both were cheap once again.

 

Really, he's had very little to spend but has galvanized the squad. We were always in for a struggle. I'm not sure another manager could have done much better with those resources. I agree with others who say that stability is the one thing we have going for us at the moment. I think we look capable of playing decent stuff but lack firepower and that will only be fixed by either getting Ben Arfa fit (impossible) or signing a good forward and they are often the most expensive players. I just don't see Ashley releasing the funds.

 

His only forwards are an unproven but promising kid, Ameobi and a guy with a broken leg. I don't think many managers would fancy their chances with that kind of strikeforce.

[Guest MrBrown]

He was keen on getting in a decent striker this summer, too, which just goes to show, again, that he's aware of our shortcomings.

[merlin]

Eight games.

 

That's actually more than 20% of the season....

[merlin]

When there was a poll are the beginning of the season, all but a few expected a big struggle this season.  And now that we are struggling as everyone expected, the campaign to have another manager sacking has started.  After 8 bloody games.  Ridiculous. 

 

What did you think a difficult season looked like?  Comfortable victories at home and the odd battering against the top 4?  That is mid table form.

 

And if he does get sacked for failing to get us comfortably mid table after 8 games, then who are we replacing him with?

 

What people DIDN'T expect was sub-standard performances at home against mediocre sides, or that the sides who were promoted behind us would be playing better and more effective football...

The only part of your post I agree with is the last bit.

[JH]

The last championship winner to hold their own in the top flight at the first attempt was Keegan. So that doesn't prove anything really.

 

Not that I'm saying sack him, but we'll deserve to go down just as much by hanging on to someone out of their depth because they got us up.

 

err Sunderland? Man City? Bolton? Fulham? - there's quite a few that have come up and 'held their own' since Keegan

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think we're forgetting how much better this is than the last time we were in the Premiership. A lot of improvements have been made, even if all our weaknesses haven't been addressed.

[ujpest doza]

I voted yes. I think he was predictably given little money to strengthen but did his best in the transfer market. He's basically been restricted to signing freebies or bargain buys. Williamson was a very good signing, Tiote looks a steal and Routledge at the time was a good signing. Lovenkrands was free and we desperately needed pace, for all his limitations. Simpson was cheap and Ben Arfa looked a bargain. Campbell and Gosling both frees.

 

His only errors of judgement were Perch and Best, two players we didn't need and frankly strange signings. Still don't know why he wasted precious coin bringing them in. But both were cheap once again.

 

Really, he's had very little to spend but has galvanized the squad. We were always in for a struggle. I'm not sure another manager could have done much better with those resources. I agree with others who say that stability is the one thing we have going for us at the moment. I think we look capable of playing decent stuff but lack firepower and that will only be fixed by either getting Ben Arfa fit (impossible) or signing a good forward and they are often the most expensive players. I just don't see Ashley releasing the funds.

 

His only forwards are an unproven but promising kid, Ameobi and a guy with a broken leg. I don't think many managers would fancy their chances with that kind of strikeforce.

In view of the Gonzalez thing re agents, were Best and Perch perhaps favours to agents?

[Cajun]

I think best and perch were signed because we needed a forward and a right back. Unfortunately with shirt buttons (definitely in best's case) and missing out on your first choices you have to get what you can. Neither look up to it but good players normally cost a fair bit, if you don't have a fair bit you have to gamble.

[Cajun]

"Definitely in best's case" was on relation to missing out on first choices btw, worded that badly.

[Guest neesy111]

Wonder how he'll deal with Carroll issue, to me he has to take the moral stance on this.

[David Icke - Son of God]

Best was signed because we needed a forward and our first choices (Beckford & Moses) had turned us down or went elsewhere. Perch was signed because Colin Calderwood is a total fuckwit.

[SEMTEX]

Hughton's stance on this will be to say fuck all, as per usual.

[Dave]

Beat me to it.

 

'It's very much an issue that will stay in-house.'

[Guest neesy111]

So how many chances will Carroll get, he's already had quite a few

[David Icke - Son of God]

Beat me to it.

 

'It's very much an issue that will stay in-house.'

 

Complete opposite of JFK, who was practically begging Sky to put on a pay-per-view when Carroll and N'Zogbia had a set to.

[Disco]

Is this the same Daily Mail who are currently banned from SJP?

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/newcastle-ban-daily-mail-over-triesman-story-1984848.html

[ujpest doza]

Is this the same Daily Mail who are currently banned from SJP?

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/newcastle-ban-daily-mail-over-triesman-story-1984848.html

It is but their info is somehow spot on still.

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Wonder how he'll deal with Carroll issue, to me he has to take the moral stance on this.

 

Do we actually know what happened?

 

Sorry if I missed it.

[JH]

Wonder how he'll deal with Carroll issue, to me he has to take the moral stance on this.

 

Do we actually know what happened?

 

Sorry if I missed it.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-11563332

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Yeah, I know he's been charged, I mean we don't actually know the details of the incident (or whether he's going to be found guilty) so it's a bit early to say Hughton should be "taking the moral stance" on it.

[Guest gggg]

The last championship winner to hold their own in the top flight at the first attempt was Keegan. So that doesn't prove anything really.

 

Not that I'm saying sack him, but we'll deserve to go down just as much by hanging on to someone out of their depth because they got us up.

 

err Sunderland? Man City? Bolton? Fulham? - there's quite a few that have come up and 'held their own' since Keegan

 

Managers. All those had experienced top flight managers apart from Bolton who didn't win the league. Mowbray, Keane, Mccarthy MK1, Worthington, Robson were all out of their depth and did or were taking their teams back down.

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

"If we're to believe what we read, Coloccini's goal saved Chris Hughton's job at the weekend" - MNF. The self created media pressure begins

[jdckelly]

"If we're to believe what we read, Coloccini's goal saved Chris Hughton's job at the weekend" - MNF. The self created media pressure begins

daily fail said it but the media are sharpering their knives as they typically do

[Guest]

Richard Keys 'if we believe what we read, Coloccini's goal might have saved Hughton his job'. Really don't remember seeing that anywhere.