What if it's not Mark Hughes?

you can't compare united of the 90s and blackburn just because they both use crosses ffs. blackburn's 'wingers' rarely get deep before they cross anyway, and most of the time pump the ball in from short of the 18 yard line. ugly, ugly, ugly.

Originally Posted by borsuk

you can't compare united of the 90s and blackburn just because they both use crosses ffs. blackburn's 'wingers' rarely get deep before they cross anyway, and most of the time pump the ball in from short of the 18 yard line. ugly, ugly, ugly.

You're starting to read what you want to read. I was replying to a post about a team crossing the ball. I'm not doubting there are more attractive sides around, i might research Madrid 03/04 eh borsuk? I just think he's got the right characteristics, the right fight, the right mentality to become a successful United manager.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

I have certainly missed this great football they've been playing. So far I've generally seen crosses headed in by Santa Cruz or McCarthy. They've scored the least goals of all the sides in the top ten (joint 13th overall) with only eight scored in six home games so far.

To be honest, I think Redknapp's exciting brand of football and high position at a smaller club is more impressive than Hughes' achievments at Blackburn.

Not sure anyone is saying Blackburn play great football are they? (I'll check in a min - well maybe!) but anyway............

Blackburn have played some decent football over the last year or so and at times before that too. They don't always just lump it otherwise that's all I would've seen (I hardly ever watch football on tele that hasn't got United in it.) When I've seen Hughesey's Blackburn at United they really haven't just booted it up the park or anything like it. They've booted United up in the air a bit, but as I said earlier, it goes with the territory - they are no worse than Fabregas, there's just more of 'em!

As for Portsmouth being smaller than Blackburn? Not sure about that one tbh Blackburn are surrounded by football giants; Portsmouth's nearest real rivals are Southampton. Blackburn have far greater competition for players than Portsmouth, and they both tend to go for a similar standard of player I'd say.

A lot of this image of Blackburn is generated purely and simply by the cry-babies in the London press, bleating about how Arsenal yet again came up short against the grim northern beast. In reality it's %@#$&!s, and I reckon at United Hughes would have far more chance to play the beautiful game. The fun bit would be watching us earn the right to play

have a look at the odds list on betfair. some are laughable, like Joe Royle amongst others

Can't see fergie moving on 'til he's seen off arsene personally

He'll go once he's got another CL, surely?

Originally Posted by Fatboy Shrek

I'm not doubting there are more attractive sides around, i might research Madrid 03/04 eh borsuk?

Is this an insinuation that Madrid under Queiroz played bad football? If so, I think that’s a myth. There were issues raised about his training methods and ability to motive the players during the run-in, but as far as I remember the quality of football wasn’t a major problem.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

Not sure anyone is saying Blackburn play great football are they? (I'll check in a min - well maybe!) but anyway............

Blackburn have played some decent football over the last year or so and at times before that too. They don't always just lump it otherwise that's all I would've seen (I hardly ever watch football on tele that hasn't got United in it.) When I've seen Hughesey's Blackburn at United they really haven't just booted it up the park or anything like it. They've booted United up in the air a bit, but as I said earlier, it goes with the territory - they are no worse than Fabregas, there's just more of 'em!

As for Portsmouth being smaller than Blackburn? Not sure about that one tbh Blackburn are surrounded by football giants; Portsmouth's nearest real rivals are Southampton. Blackburn have far greater competition for players than Portsmouth, and they both tend to go for a similar standard of player I'd say.

A lot of this image of Blackburn is generated purely and simply by the cry-babies in the London press, bleating about how Arsenal yet again came up short against the grim northern beast. In reality it's %@#$&!s, and I reckon at United Hughes would have far more chance to play the beautiful game. The fun bit would be watching us earn the right to play

Well, I can remember a few rather overly aggressive challenges in recent years against ourselves, Arsenal and Chelsea that I don't think were synonymous with the rest of the league. I also don't buy this idea that his club and budget dictate the football he plays. That's a copout and too many English managers get away with it. You don't have to manage a big club to play good football.

Either way, the point I'm making is that Hughes, as well as he's done, really hasn't yet shown enough to be considered for the position at the moment. If he continues to improve Blackburn and the football gets better then maybe, but surely if Fergie were to leave next summer there would be better managers around if we appoint from outside the club.

Weren't they a shambles under him though. I mean A SHAMBLES. Conceded over 45 in the league and lost 10+. There is a medium between good attacking football and just having high scoring games. Carlos should stick to being a coach. He'd make a fine number 2 for Hughes. He could even try and impress some of his attacking football on Hughes whilst Hughes sorts out the 'Ferguson side' of management, which Quieroz is clearly not so good at.

I can't see hughes getting the job or keane, how much european football experience do that have? they are unproven at the highest level. United, as a business cant afford to take chances just for the romance of bringing in an ex-player.

More than likely it will be a foreign manager, someone that has at least 10 years ahead of him in the game but that has vast proven experience. Your hughesys and keanos have no chance imo.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Well, I can remember a few rather overly aggressive challenges in recent years against ourselves, Arsenal and Chelsea that I don't think were synonymous with the rest of the league. I also don't buy this idea that his club and budget dictate the football he plays. That's a copout and too many English managers get away with it. You don't have to manage a big club to play good football.

Either way, the point I'm making is that Hughes, as well as he's done, really hasn't yet shown enough to be considered for the position at the moment. If he continues to improve Blackburn and the football gets better then maybe, but surely if Fergie were to leave next summer there would be better managers around if we appoint from outside the club.

A lot of the football I've seen from them was pretty decent is what I'm saying - though the total of what I've seen doesn't amount to very much.

A club certainly dictates the football they play, and that the fans expect to see - silly not to see this I'd say. What are the traditions of football at Blackburn? What do their fans want to pay to go and watch? The answer is almost certainly a top flight team playing in some cracking matches and competing around the top of the division. What a TV audience thinks of a club like Blackburn is almost completely irrelevant; they will never be a big pull unless they are somehow pushing for the title, and even then it will only last as long as a passing interest as has been proved in recent times.

As I said, United could do a lot worse than Hughesey, who I reckon would be in with a shout of doing well at the highest level. And would he really need to be urging average players, both technically and physically speaking, to charge round flying into 60 40s to mask their short-comings in other aspects? No he wouldn't, he would be dealing with the highest quality of footballing athletes with the highest levels of skill and nous to match - a completely different ball game, in fact. Whether he'd actually have the tactical brain to give these players the edge they need is the question, as you know. Therefore, having said all that, I agree that Quieroz would be the ideal candidate right now. But you didn't ask

Originally Posted by Fatboy Shrek

Weren't they a shambles under him though. I mean A SHAMBLES.

Not for the most part. The problem, for me, was that in signing Beckham the club allowed seven or eight decent squad players to leave. The policy was that they’d blend the Galacticos with academy produced players, so they flogged a load of first team players and pretty much told him to make up the number with some players from the B team.

They were top goalscorers in Spain that year and I remember them playing some nice stuff in the first half of the season, especially in Europe. By around March they were looking good for the treble. I remember them being about six points clear at the top of La Liga, in the final of the Copa del Rey and, having knocked out Bayern Munich in the last 16, beat Monaco 3-1 in the first leg of the Champions League quarter final.

Unfortunately for Queiroz, the kids he had available were utter shite. There was even one game, a 4-1 defeat at Sevilla, where one of them went off crying after being substituted. As expected, they badly ran out of steam (and players) and fell apart in the last two months of the season. They ended up losing their last five or six league games – the worst run in the history of the club.

He was sacked and took the blame from the president, but I think he way the season panned out suggested that the lack of squad depth was the main reason for their problems. He literally had about fourteen first team players, then a bunch of useless academy players, all of which are probably now playing in the lower divisions.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

A club certainly dictates the football they play, and that the fans expect to see - silly not to see this I'd say. What are the traditions of football at Blackburn? What do their fans want to pay to go and watch? The answer is almost certainly a top flight team playing in some cracking matches and competing around the top of the division. What a TV audience thinks of a club like Blackburn is almost completely irrelevant; they will never be a big pull unless they are somehow pushing for the title, and even then it will only last as long as a passing interest as has been proved in recent times.

I meant it more as a response to the belief that because these guys aren't at big clubs it's an excuse for them to adopt the pragmatic approach. It often seems that managers in England get away with using their budget as justification for their poor football.

Fair enough, you know a lot more about it than me, i can't argue with that. Would you want him as our next manager?

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Not for the most part. The problem, for me, was that in signing Beckham the club allowed seven or eight decent squad players to leave. The policy was that they’d blend the Galacticos with academy produced players, so they flogged a load of first team players and pretty much told him to make up the number with some players from the B team.

They were top goalscorers in Spain that year and I remember them playing some nice stuff in the first half of the season, especially in Europe. By around March they were looking good for the treble. I remember them being about six points clear at the top of La Liga, in the final of the Copa del Rey and, having knocked out Bayern Munich in the last 16, beat Monaco 3-1 in the first leg of the Champions League quarter final.

Unfortunately for Queiroz, the kids he had available were utter shite. There was even one game, a 4-1 defeat at Sevilla, where one of them went off crying after being substituted. As expected, they badly ran out of steam (and players) and fell apart in the last two months of the season. They ended up losing their last five or six league games – the worst run in the history of the club.

He was sacked and took the blame from the president, but I think he way the season panned out suggested that the lack of squad depth was the main reason for their problems. He literally had about fourteen first team players, then a bunch of useless academy players, all of which are probably now playing in the lower divisions.

That's a fair assessment. I saw Madrid quite a bit that season, a joy to watch in the first half of the season. But they really did become quite shit towards the end, especially after being knocked out of Europe.

However, Carlos was practically running United for 18 months (late 2004 to early 2006) and we were £#%&!ing awful to watch. Really shit. Don't ever want to see him become the Manager, but I suspect he will when Fergie eventually steps down.

Originally Posted by The Watcher

That's a fair assessment. I saw Madrid quite a bit that season, a joy to watch in the first half of the season. But they really did become quite shit towards the end, especially after being knocked out of Europe.

However, Carlos was practically running United for 18 months (late 2004 to early 2006) and we were £#%&!ing awful to watch. Really shit. Don't ever want to see him become the Manager, but I suspect he will when Fergie eventually steps down.

I needed some back up, quite badly, thanks.

Come on borsuk

Originally Posted by Fatboy Shrek

Fair enough, you know a lot more about it than me, i can't argue with that. Would you want him as our next manager?

As a manager I'm not really sure about him. I reckon he was always on to a loser at Madrid, but some (including a couple of the players) said they struggled at the end of the season because of his fitness schedule. Plus, his other jobs have been well below the top level, so it's hard to assess.

If Fergie had only been in the United job a few years I'd probably want to go for someone else. It's just that when he leaves it will be such a huge change for the club. If we hire Queiroz, I'd imagine little would change in terms of the backroom staff, training methods, squad management etc. Also, it would be easier to keep what we hope will be a top side playing great football together. It may not work, but I think it's probably the right way to go in order to make the transition into the post-Fergie era as easy as possible.

Originally Posted by King Schlong

I don't think pure is online, so you can speak your own mind for once.

Originally Posted by borsuk

hughes' team plays terrible football .

Utter %@#$&!s, you obviously haven't watched them since last season.


Blackburn have been one of the better footballing sides in the League so far this season.


I think Queiroz deserves his chance but Hughes shouldn't be discounted. I've particularly been impressed with his shrewdness in the transfer market. He bought Nelson, Samba and McCarthy for less than 3 million and when he was given a bit of money more recently he made two excellent signings in Warnock and Cruz. Obviously they are not United standard but they've been instrumental in Blackburn's recent form.

nothing i've read so far has excused the tactics hughes used and still uses at blackburn. it's very limited football and quite cynical. and i really don't agree with this excuse of low budgets, small club, necessary evil. let's put aside the fact that blackburn have spent quite a lot over the last few years and look at what he has really achieved.

blackburn, last three seasons: 6th, 10th, 6th (so far). not exactly setting the world alight, is it? and add to that the style of play and it's not particularly impressive, judged objectively. i'd love nothing more than for hughes to succeed, i really would. but i don't think he'd be getting anything like so much praise if he wasn't so fondly remembered as a player.

when fergie came to united he already had an outstanding record:
[SIZE="1"]

Aberdeen 1978–1986

Domestic competition
* Scottish League: (3) 1979-80, 1983-84, 1984-85
o Runners-Up: (2) 1980-81, 1981-82
* Scottish Cup: (4) 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84, 1985-86
* Scottish League Cup: (1) 1985-86
o Runners-Up: (2) 1978-79, 1979-80

European competition
* European Cup Winners Cup: (1) 1982-83
* UEFA Super Cup: (1) 1983-84

now that's the kind of record we'll be looking for. to get himself in the frame, hughes would need to start picking up some cups, impress in european competition and break into the top four, at least intermittently. so far he hasn't shown anything more than an ability to manage an effective, if ugly, top half premiership side. that's nowhere near enough.

I really hope its not Hughesy.

Originally Posted by borsuk

nothing i've read so far has excused the tactics hughes used and still uses at blackburn. it's very limited football and quite cynical. and i really don't agree with this excuse of low budgets, small club, necessary evil. let's put aside the fact that blackburn have spent quite a lot over the last few years and look at what he has really achieved.

blackburn, last three seasons: 6th, 10th, 6th (so far). not exactly setting the world alight, is it? and add to that the style of play and it's not particularly impressive, judged objectively. i'd love nothing more than for hughes to succeed, i really would. but i don't think he's get anything like so much praise if he wasn't so fondly remembered as a player.

when fergie came to united he already had an outstanding record:


now that's the kind of record we'll be looking for. to get himself in the frame, hughes would need to start picking up some cups, impress in european competition and break into the top four, at least intermittently. so far he hasn't shown anything more than an ability to manage an effective, if ugly, top half premiership side. that's nowhere near enough.

Fergie was pretty unique in that respect, there's a reason no one has done that with clubs like Aberdeen/Dunfermline since, he is/was very very very good. Is there anyone else like that around?

You suggested Carlos, what's his managerial CV?