Jump to content

Next Gaffer?


Infamous Wee Grafter
 Share

Recommended Posts

It seems that interest from former English Premiership players and some of our old club favourites always generates excitement on these boards when our managerial hot seat is up for grabs. Personally I couldn't care less about these groups in general. What we need is managerial ability end of. Some have it and some don't. Its the same with many other occupational groups for example teachers. Those who know the most (or play the best) don't necessarily put it across well in the classroom. Just because a player has played at the highest level doesn't necessarily translate well into good management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that interest from former English Premiership players and some of our old club favourites always generates excitement on these boards when our managerial hot seat is up for grabs. Personally I couldn't care less about these groups in general.

Especially given that the same agents are just sticking the same 30 or 40 names forward every time a managerial vacancy comes up... it's not like any of them have any special desire to manage Motherwell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say for example, we've got two options; one experienced guy with a decent track record and one bright, blue sky thinking up and comer who talks a good game and says he's going to develop our youth team. In this circumstance which guy are we going to go for?

 

An interesting question, and one that I think has a few possible answers.

 

It's blatantly obvious that bringing in a young manager with limited experience is a risky move. It hasn't worked thus far, and there's a good chance it won't next time either.

 

I'd rather we didn't just jump into such a set-up. Why not hire an experienced head, and place someone like Craigan or whoever the board see as an "up & comer" with him as an assistant? The assistant can then be primed to take over within a year or so?

 

I also think that the ideas Les has for the club are sound, but unfortunately to make it work he may have to look at paying some decent coin for a director of football, someone who can actually implement these ideas. As much as I respect the job Alan Burrows has done I'm not sure he's got the experience required for that kind of job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gadgey mentioned Billy Davies. He was in the stand before El Baro was installed, glad-handing old pals and generally looking keen. He didn't leave the club on good terms, of course, but I can't imagine the Wee Napoleon would tolerate any dressing-room mutiny.

 

I think he's still between clubs.

 

Too incendiary? Or should we just let Crags hoist us to second place by Easter?

 

Gosh, this medication's kicking in rather well.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think brining in a manager who says he will develop youths is useless because Youth Development is a two way street. It won't work if the promising youths aren't up to scratch. Obvious examples being Luke Watt (apparently) and the likes of Paul Slane. Compare them to other Youth Dev players such as Stephen Pearson and James McFadden. Attitude wise there are miles between the pairs.

 

The manager saying "I'll develop youths" is pretty much like saying "I'll win the league". He can do everything right, but the players won't necessarily be up for the challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

An interesting question, and one that I think has a few possible answers.

 

It's blatantly obvious that bringing in a young manager with limited experience is a risky move. It hasn't worked thus far, and there's a good chance it won't next time either.

 

I'd rather we didn't just jump into such a set-up. Why not hire an experienced head, and place someone like Craigan or whoever the board see as an "up & comer" with him as an assistant? The assistant can then be primed to take over within a year or so?

 

I also think that the ideas Les has for the club are sound, but unfortunately to make it work he may have to look at paying some decent coin for a director of football, someone who can actually implement these ideas. As much as I respect the job Alan Burrows has done I'm not sure he's got the experience required for that kind of job.

 

I agree. On the whole the plans for the club are definitely sound and though you could argue that it's possibly a bit idealistic the logic behind what they're trying to do is clear but I think they've obviously made a mistake on the playing/football side of things and they need to acknowledge and recognise that (sacking Bara as early as they have was a pretty good starting point). On a basic level they need to work out exactly what sort they're looking for in a manager and whether those expectations are realistic (for the budget we have).

 

Hearing Les say quite emphatically that their strategy hasn't changed did make me wonder, which is what prompted that question the other day. Their strategy (on the managerial/playing side) does need to change, they've just had to sack a guy that they took long enough to appoint 9 months into his job so clearly their appointment and the criteria for that appointment was flawed. It's far to reductive to just bring it down to "Baraclough's a shite manager", "the players downed tools" or "results didn't go his way" there's more to it than that and the idea of an identikit Bara turning up and us going through the same motions doesn't exactly appeal.

 

They really need to sit down and appraise what their criteria were for his appointment and look at why it didn't work. For me on the outside looking in it's down to the fact that on the face of it they appointed a guy who ticked a lot of their boxes that should probably be deemed desirable but of secondary importance but failed when it came to the coaching/playing side of things which is clearly the most important element.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I respect the job Alan Burrows has done I'm not sure he's got the experience required for that kind of job.

 

Based on what? Your own expertise or qualifications in the field? Burrows was shot down on here by quite a few when he was promoted as a glorified tea boy, now few can argue he's not delivered. He proved many wrong so why couldn't he continue to do so?

 

 

I agree. On the whole the plans for the club are definitely sound and though you could argue that it's possibly a bit idealistic the logic behind what they're trying to do is clear but I think they've obviously made a mistake on the playing/football side of things and they need to acknowledge and recognise that (sacking Bara as early as they have was a pretty good starting point). On a basic level they need to work out exactly what sort they're looking for in a manager and whether those expectations are realistic (for the budget we have).

 

Hearing Les say quite emphatically that their strategy hasn't changed did make me wonder, which is what prompted that question the other day. Their strategy (on the managerial/playing side) does need to change, they've just had to sack a guy that they took long enough to appoint 9 months into his job so clearly their appointment and the criteria for that appointment was flawed. It's far to reductive to just bring it down to "Baraclough's a shite manager", "the players downed tools" or "results didn't go his way" there's more to it than that and the idea of an identikit Bara turning up and us going through the same motions doesn't exactly appeal.

 

They really need to sit down and appraise what their criteria were for his appointment and look at why it didn't work. For me on the outside looking in it's down to the fact that on the face of it they appointed a guy who ticked a lot of their boxes that should probably be deemed desirable but of secondary importance but failed when it came to the coaching/playing side of things which is clearly the most important element.

 

The criteria was getting success with a limited budget, he achieved that in Sligo in the coaching/playing side surely. I am concerned that for the second time in recent memory a player revolt/downing of tools was instrumental in getting the manager his jotters (Gannon was batshit crazy though, Baraclough didn't seem to be strong enough to stand up to a few strong characters ..... a certain Australian perhaps).

 

It was reported Ainsworth/Robinson in the rammy.

 

At each other or toe to toe with Baraclough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a bit of Craigan speaking on BBC scotland radio tonight. Basically said Bara was a friend as well as a colleague; was preparing g for tomorrow, no time to think long term but job had crossed his mind of course .....Did anyone catch the whole interview?

Yes it's on the MFC YouTube channel

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to Craigan, I wouldn't be unhappy if he were to get the job. He came across extremely well in his interview

All that BT media work has paid off. The one thing that slightly concerned me was him saying our formation was okay. I like Crags, but we can do without a 'Baraclone'*

 

*Might as well jump on the Baraclown bandwagon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do people have any issues if Craigan does his BT Sport thing at the Morton game on Sunday. As it stands he has only been asked to look after the team on Saturday, so no conflict?

 

i.e. His BT Sport contract may have more life in it than his Motherwell one so why burn his bridges?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...