A Look at the Managerial Candidates

[city-faithful]

I'd like to see managers rated on their humourous nick names. Mad Dog and Negative Meg, albeit transitory managers, certainly had good names.

 

[WALSHIESTACKLE]

I'd like to see managers rated on their humorous nick names. Mad Dog and Negative Meg, albeit transitory managers, certainly had good names.

I thought Megson was hailed as 'Ginger Mourinho' in his long illustrious tenure here. That was a great nickname and we should have him back on that nickname alone. :icon_bigg

 

[Cate Fox]

So how do you come to a conclusion as to who you think the manager is that is more likely to do a better job.

The stats can be quite revealing, we aren't saying judgement is on stats alone, but they are a good monitor of past achievements (or lack of them)

I dont come to a conclusion about who should be Manager, I leave that job to the Chairman of the club. Who I would like has no bearing on it whatsoever.

 

[FryattFox]

It's fantastic that the Trust believe we should be looking at a manager with a win ratio of above 40% and a not lost ration of 70%, which not only do none of the mentioned candidates meet, O'Neil wouldn't have met at the point when he left us.

Talk about ****ing deluded.

It's absolutely brilliant that the FT posted that as a serious post for discussion.