Manager of the season

Kimbo wrote:

L-r d wrote:

Kimbo wrote:It makes no difference what the top 4 do, or how many trophies they win, none of them will be manager of the season in my eyes. Neither will O'Neill with the massive resources he has.

The only possibles for me are Hodgson, Zola, and Moyes - in that order.

I don't know why Redknapp is being discussed. Awful manager.

What about if they win every game 10-0 except two draws v newcastle

What if an elephant eats Ferguson on the morning of the CL final, does Fergie get credit if Man U win?

Riviera wrote:Hodgson Next year will be even better, me thinks, before he'll eventually manage England national team

Tweedle wrote:How has Mclaren done at FC Twente Axes?

Tweedle wrote:Is that what we call in England percentage play?

kas wrote:But let's not forget Redknapp spent 30m on just 2 players in January, and more on others like Chimbonda who have hardly played since. That's a luxury other managers in the "exceeded expectations" group didn't have, Hodgson and Zola being the best examples.

Kimbo wrote:It makes no difference what the top 4 do, or how many trophies they win, none of them will be manager of the season in my eyes. Neither will O'Neill with the massive resources he has.

The only possibles for me are Hodgson, Zola, and Moyes - in that order.

I don't know why Redknapp is being discussed. Awful manager.

The Tupac Twitch wrote: Silly Kimboner,

an awful manager is clearly one who is unable to get their side to win matches, or play decent football (usually both)

Redknapp clearly knows how to get a team playing decent football (as shown by his time at West Ham, Portsmouth and now Spurs) and win games (as shown by his time at Portsmouth and now Spurs).

so he clearly isn't an AWFUL manager.

An awful manager would be someone like Alan Shearer, or Tony Adams, or Sam "anti-football" Allardyce.

Redknapp's only awful because you're a grumpy Geordie b*stard who hasn't a decent word to say about Spurs, now or ever

Sheffield gunner wrote:Is Pulis an awful manager? No doubt that Stoke play horrendous football, but he turned around a team at the lower end of the Championship. He made astute loan signings to propel them up the league and now looks like keeping a small team, with an inexpensive squad in the top flight when most people would have predicted them to go down. If everything goes well for them, they could finish this season comfortably in the top half of the table, which is an impressive achievement. He's not a great manager, and I can't imagine him managing a 'big' club, or even a mid-size Premier League club, but for Stoke he does a fine job.

And being an unpleasant person has no bearing on management skills. There are some very good managers who come across as extremely unpleasant people to me. Redknapp is a prick, but he's a pretty decent manager.

GianDeano Zola wrote:I think Pulis is a good manager, as he has done what's needed for Stoke to survive...

Brown is an example of a poor manager, once the luck dried up, Hull had no answers. Pulis might have Stoke playing unattractive football...but they battle and have earned their place in the Premier League.

Kimbo wrote:

The Tupac Twitch wrote: Silly Kimboner,

an awful manager is clearly one who is unable to get their side to win matches, or play decent football (usually both)

Redknapp clearly knows how to get a team playing decent football (as shown by his time at West Ham, Portsmouth and now Spurs) and win games (as shown by his time at Portsmouth and now Spurs).

so he clearly isn't an AWFUL manager.

An awful manager would be someone like Alan Shearer, or Tony Adams, or Sam "anti-football" Allardyce.

Redknapp's only awful because you're a grumpy Geordie b*stard who hasn't a decent word to say about Spurs, now or ever

He's not just a poor shithouse manager, he is a terrible human being. He looks like satans eunuch, he has horrible character - devious and in bed with the tabloids, and i would guess is nasty to his children. He's corrupt and should be kicked out of the sport.

Now onto his managerial abilities, or lack thereof!! This is a person who has managed for close to 30 years, won 1 trophy, and thinks he's the shit because of it. Terribly arrogant creature, aswell as stupid. In all this time he has never risen above mediocre in this league. Yet for some reason he is rated, partly because he keeps in with the tabloids by feeding them rumours in a very underhand way, and partly because he represents the dim bosseyed cockney that everyone seems to love, like Jim from Eastenders, but an evil version. I don't think his football is decent at all, you've pointed out Pompey as an example of this, why? At Pompey he packed the midfield with the likes of Diop, Mvemba, Davis, Hughes, it was an awful team that relied on being bigger and stronger than the opposition.

Maybe AWFUL is taking it a bit far when it comes to his competence, perhaps stunningly average would be more acceptable. I admit there are worse managers in the league, Brown, Pulis, Allardyce, Sbragia, and Megson. That's the best i can do for you, i've tried to look at him in a positive light there.

GianDeano Zola wrote:I think Pulis is a good manager, as he has done what's needed for Stoke to survive...

Brown is an example of a poor manager, once the luck dried up, Hull had no answers. Pulis might have Stoke playing unattractive football...but they battlerun and foul their balls off and have earned their place in the Premier League.

Stimulus Package wrote:

GianDeano Zola wrote:I think Pulis is a good manager, as he has done what's needed for Stoke to survive...

Brown is an example of a poor manager, once the luck dried up, Hull had no answers. Pulis might have Stoke playing unattractive football...but they battlerun and foul their balls off and score annoying last minute goals and have earned their place in the Premier League.

Sgoater1 wrote:Its a tough one between Hodgson and Pulis.

Kimbo wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:Its a tough one between Hodgson and Pulis.

Wash your mouth out.

Sgoater1 wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:Its a tough one between Hodgson and Pulis.

Wash your mouth out.

I think he has done a great job, when can you rmember a team being promoted to the EPL and being in mid table safe from relegation without spending loads of money. You have to give him credit, they didnt even win the championship last season and everyone wrote them off before the season had started. They dont play pretty football but they are effective and he has done a good job with them.

Kimbo wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:Its a tough one between Hodgson and Pulis.

Wash your mouth out.

I think he has done a great job, when can you rmember a team being promoted to the EPL and being in mid table safe from relegation without spending loads of money. You have to give him credit, they didnt even win the championship last season and everyone wrote them off before the season had started. They dont play pretty football but they are effective and he has done a good job with them.

But they're cheaters goater.

Sgoater1 wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:Its a tough one between Hodgson and Pulis.

Wash your mouth out.

I think he has done a great job, when can you rmember a team being promoted to the EPL and being in mid table safe from relegation without spending loads of money.

debaser wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:

Kimbo wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:Its a tough one between Hodgson and Pulis.

Wash your mouth out.

I think he has done a great job, when can you rmember a team being promoted to the EPL and being in mid table safe from relegation without spending loads of money.

Wigan, Reading?