Hargreaves

[BayGull]

Sure I saw him in Bristol yesterday afternoon - does anyone know what he is doing now, is he still carrying out gardening work?

[A Realist]

Nothing as far as I know, except getting paid a good wage for zero work.

[Dave_Pougher]

Still upset how he bigged himself up on Spotlight prior to then just become another "in it for what I can get" merchant.

[hector]

Was he an 'in it for what he could get' merchant?

He is getting paid for what he is no doubt, contractually obliged to receive. It didn't work out for him, as we all hoped, as manager here but then seeing the state the club is said to have been left in, perhaps it would have been difficult to have done better - or perhaps not. Regardless, I bear him no ill-will.

[torq2u]

His legendary status as a player is still intact. No ill feeling for trying to do what he was appointed to by a naive Board in panic mode.

(But I still hope he finds a new allotment and moves on soon).

[Gullscorer]

He should do. He did well in his time as a coach at Bournemouth, by all accounts.

[Dockers Pal]

I believed in Hargreaves - character, role model, plus coaching skills. He signed some good players, but it didn't prove enough. I couldn't see that he had developed any of the players; his selections were occasionally counter-productive, and he was tactically limited. I hope he can get another coaching role and he may get another management job sometime.

[Dutchgull]

So inept. So hope he can find another job and save the club so much money !!!

[Southampton Gull]

So inept. So hope he can find another job and save the club so much money !!!

Substitute the word hamstrung for inept and I would agree with you.

[Gullscorer]

Substitute the word hamstrung for inept and I would agree with you.

Me too. And dare I mention that Mr Cox is of course even more hamstrung..?

[PhilGull]

Me too. And dare I mention that Mr Cox is of course even more hamstrung..?

Did Hargreaves have any more money to spend? Obviously the wage budget was bigger but a huge chunk of it had already been assigned to existing rubbish. After Hargreaves had identified positions and areas he wanted to fill did he have any more money per player to spend than Cox? Or did he have even less?

[Gullscorer]

That's a good point. On the other hand, Mr Cox does not appear to have any more of a budget, ostensibly even less, even though the 'existing rubbish' has now left the club. What is more certain, though, is that Hargreaves' chances of success would have been, and Cox's would be, considerably improved with access to more workable budgets..

[Gloomy Gull]

Assuming the that Hargreaves and Cox's budgets are similar in the amount of hard cash available to spend - to discount the fact that last season's budget was hampered by the incumbent wage bill - I think the Paul Cox has shown the benefit of employing a manager with experience in those circumstances.

Hargreaves was a mistake.

[Gulliball]

Young, Bowman, Briscoe, Ajala and MacDonald were good signings. Richards was decent for a trialist. It was the top half of the wage bill that let us down, performance wise. The under performance from Hargreaves wasn't as a result of bad signings but what happened afterwards.

[yellowforever]

Yeah it's important to remember that the players we signed under Hargreaves were actually pretty good, and the calibre was certainly of a top 6 style. It was the mismanagement and lack of a good base from our players that got relegated that let us down.