tommyg wrote:So because John Hughes sounds 'too good to be true' that means we should rule him out? Or because he's applied for the Torquay job 'there must be something wrong with him'? Can people not see the clear contradiciton in comments like these to those posted on the 'Little club syndrome' thread. We want to rid ourselves of this 'little old Torquay' tagline, but when a manager with SPL experience sends in a CV in that blows his competitors into the water, we assume that there must be something not quite right, and instead we drool over a guy that has had a three-month caretaker stint at Brentford.
John Hughes is not to good to be true. Hibs and Hearts are just like Bristol Rovers and Bristol c*ty, Edinburgh is of similar size to Bristol, and like the 2 Bristol clubs they consistently underachieve. They should be finishing 3-4 every season.
I would say the Torquay squad is probably better than Hibs. You just have to look at the players they have/had to see that. Clayton Donaldson was Hibs star striker, He moves to Crewe. Daryl Duffy was a useless League one striker for us, we couldn't wait to get rid of him, yet joins Hibs on loan.
I would honestly say Torquay would be a step up for him. If Hibs played in England with that squad they would be in League 2.
Lomas has potential, he was an uncompromising player who wasn't afraid to put his foot in. Despite that he could actually play as well. His experience with West Ham reserves and his contacts could actually prove to be key in what could be a difficult eason for us. Still like the idea of Forster, but certainly would not be upset if Lomas was picked
Fonda wrote:So because he's the most high-profile, he's obviously the right choice? He wouldn't be applying for our job if anyone higher in the pyramid was interested in him. The others are applying because their inexperience means they wouldn't get a better job at this time. Hughes has some experience, so there is something else lacking which means he's inetersted in TUFC.
Not at all. He's my personal preference, but that doesn't mean he's the right choice. My point was that when we are presented with a high-profile name with a decent-looking CV, some fans feel there must be something wrong with him just because he's applied for the job. Maybe, for whatever reason, he sees Torquay as the ideal place to get back on the managerial ladder.
Whereas, being a cynic, i assume that if someone with his relative pedigree is interested in our job, it's beacuse it's the only one he can get. I'd rather we opt for someone with inexperience and potential (though not a complete novice), than someone who has previously proven to have managerial flaws.
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something."
tommyg - the reason I'm not keen on Hughes is not because it's a case of him being 'too good to be true' at all. In fact I would feel exactly the same about Lee Bullen. We need the right man to take us forward, and in my opinion that's someone who has football league experience as a player and as a manager/coach. Sure, Forster only had a few months in charge of Brentford but I don't think you would have found too many disappointed Bees fans had he been given the job on a permanent basis? The fact is NF will get a job around our level sooner rather than later and I would rather that was with ourselves instead of someone else.
I'm not doubting Hughes' credentials at all, he has a very impressive CV - especially for someone applying for a job at this level but remember, that was in Scotland not here. The SPL and English football are two very different beasts and I think it's potentially dangerous to think success in Scotland means success in league 2. John Hughes' only experience of English football was a season spent playing with Swansea in 1989. If he got the job, and it turned out he had an encyclopedic knowledge of the football league and English players, of course as supporters we would back him 100%. However, given that nearly all his playing and managing experience comes from Scotland I think it's likely he will draw on that in the form of Scottish players and I don't necessarily feel that would work.
At the end of the day being Torquay United we are bound to have a wide range of candidates all with their own strengths and weaknesses. It's about looking at who we think will could do the job well and take us forward working under difficult budgetary conditions. Forster would be a 'punt' to a certain extent as many candidates are but I get the feeling he could do well here. I think in some ways he would be a similar appointment to what PB was at the time, and for all his faults we can't deny the fact that results wise he performed very well. Time will tell, hopefully by this time tomorrow we will have an answer!
No matter who is appointed as boss i would personally love to see Alex Russell along side him as a player/coach. Whatever it takes to get him back on this turf. I think he could definitely still pull some strings from midfield from pinging the ball across the park.
If Aggy was to retake residence in our midfield, Eunan would have to play wide, because a combination of Russell and O'Kane is unthinkable. Is it worth putting barriers in his way at this stage of his development?
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something."
Fonda wrote:If Aggy was to retake residence in our midfield, Eunan would have to play wide, because a combination of Russell and O'Kane is unthinkable. Is it worth putting barriers in his way at this stage of his development?
Oastler and Russell. O'Kane free role behind the lone striker. Zebs and a Tomlin-play-a-like on the wings would work. That said, I would be surprised if the Board foisted an assistant on whoever gets the gig.
It seems that Alex Russell never made it onto the shortlist.
According to tomorrow's WMN, the "final" shortlist appears to be:
Baraclough (now added to the list)
Butterworth (it appears he is a genuine candidate!)
Forster
Hargreaves (thought unlikely to get it - and his latest blog seems to back that up)
Holdsworth
Hughes (might prove popular with Brano it seems!)
It all points to a decision being made tomorrow it seems
Rjc70 wrote:
Oastler and Russell. O'Kane free role behind the lone striker. Zebs and a Tomlin-play-a-like on the wings would work. That said, I would be surprised if the Board foisted an assistant on whoever gets the gig.
Think i'd go for Manse and Russell. The rest sounds good though.
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something."
CP Gull wrote:It seems that Alex Russell never made it onto the shortlist.
According to tomorrow's WMN, the "final" shortlist appears to be:
Baraclough (now added to the list)
Butterworth (it appears he is a genuine candidate!)
Forster
Hargreaves (thought unlikely to get it - and his latest blog seems to back that up)
Holdsworth
Hughes (might prove popular with Brano it seems!)
It all points to a decision being made tomorrow it seems
Spoke to a friend in Edinburgh who knows a lot about Scottish football
John Hughes is a hard worker but not exactly charismatic and not an articulate man
I think the Board would be taking a gamble on a Scottish Manager. Now is not the time for a gamble. Forster my choice but admit Barraclough has more experience. The Board will go for the guy they think they they can work with best. Very important decision. Lets hope they get it right!
What I find interesting is quite a few people are quick to denegrate John Hughes and his record, when he has achieved promotion and kept an unfashionable club like Falkirk in the SPL for four years, plus get Hibs to 4th...even if that went a bit pear shaped afterwards....yet would prefer Baraclough who did disastorously as manager of Scunny.
My feeling is that it will be Forster and yet part of me wants Hughes...it is a hard one to call but for me it should be between those two.
