Tim Sherwood to take over from Harry as manager ?

[whitelightwhiteheat]

Jurgen Klopp's a great shout. Done a tremendous job at Dortmund. Still young, just 44, will perhaps be looking to move on from Dortmund to manage in different cultures/countries.

I'd also like to know the name(s) of the scouts who discovered all their young talent. Now THAT guy (or people) knows how to spot talent.

 

[johno]

we could have our pick of the majority of managers so why on earth would we pick in essence a rookie?

there's nothing to suggest sherwood is and ever will be a decent manager. The whole notion makes no sense whatsoever.

I could semi understand if he was a 'legend' or a liked figure at the club, but he's someone who was never very popular as a player and whom no-one has any real affinity with.

why gamble when we can reduce the odds of failure by signing someone with a proven track record?

 

[mattyspurs]

we could have our pick of the majority of managers so why on earth would we pick in essence a rookie?

there's nothing to suggest sherwood is and ever will be a decent manager. The whole notion makes no sense whatsoever.

I could semi understand if he was a 'legend' or a liked figure at the club, but he's someone who was never very popular as a player and whom no-one has any real affinity with.

why gamble when we can reduce the odds of failure by signing someone with a proven track record?

On the flip side there is also nothing to suggest that we wouldn't make a decent manager

It works both ways this doesn't it?

 

[johno]

On the flip side there is also nothing to suggest that we wouldn't make a decent manager

It works both ways this doesn't it?

of course, but why take the risk?

 

[chrissivad]

On the flip side there is also nothing to suggest that we wouldn't make a decent manager

It works both ways this doesn't it?

dont think it works both ways, you need to show that you can do the job before getting it IMO.

But then just because we haven't seen it doesn't mean the club haven't. They could have seen the job he has been doing with the youngsters and seen that he does have the capability.

 

[Stavrogin]

of course, but why take the risk?

Yeah but he's manoeuvring (being manoeuvred) into an important position - so in a lot of respects it's probably less of a risk than having someone brought in from outside.

 

[johno]

Yeah but he's manoeuvring (being manoeuvred) into an important position - so in a lot of respects it's probably less of a risk than having someone brought in from outside.

firstly there's no evidence to suggest he's being manoeuvred and secondly I don't buy that it's less risk

if Arry left tomorrow then we'd have the 'realistic' chance of getting someone like Ancelotti in for instance. I think anyone who'd prefer Sherwood over Ancelotti is :duh:

 

[mattyspurs]

dont think it works both ways, you need to show that you can do the job before getting it IMO.

But then just because we haven't seen it doesn't mean the club haven't. They could have seen the job he has been doing with the youngsters and seen that he does have the capability.

That's Yhe point I'm trying to make Chris, we don't know, but perhaps the club do, we are all quick to assume he would be shit. When he might actually be perfect for us.

 

[StartingPrice]

Levy has done a lot of good for the club, and, whoever he chooses as manager, we have progressed on the field, but...his record at choosing managers ain't great. Maybe letting Redknapp advise on his successor wouldn't be a bad idea. He let Arnesen choose Jol, more or less, and that worked out better than any of Levy's prior choices.

Before anyone starts, I'm not saying this is how it should be, just an angle to look at the situation from.

 

[seneca]

a change of manager always carries a big risk. success elsewhere doesn't guarentee anything (juande ramos? big phil?) there are advantages from developing from within a successful system (keeping the same coaches, relationships and understanding with players already developed etc) as well as the danger of inexperience within that role.

 

[tototoner]

any appointment is a risk whether they have a track record or not

Levy will not go down the foreign route again after being burnt twice and Sherwood is already at the club therefore will cost nothing

only other option I can see Levy seriously looking at is Mark Hughes

also I would argue its better not to sign a former legend player as manager, we tried that with Ardiles and Hoddle and some fans even want Klinsmann - I have no idea why.

 

[johno]

a change of manager always carries a big risk. success elsewhere doesn't guarentee anything (juande ramos? big phil?) there are advantages from developing from within a successful system (keeping the same coaches, relationships and understanding with players already developed etc) as well as the danger of inexperience within that role.

Scolari was always a big gamble given he'd only managed at International level and in Brazil

Ramos was also a risk given the fact his only successful job was with Sevilla and he'd never managed in England

Completely appreciate what you're saying however I think we should go for someone proven in England

 

[chrissivad]

I dont think it matters if they are a proven manager in England or not, just that they have spent time in the English game.

Jol was unproven manager, but had spent time playing across here so knew a bit about the game.

 

[Stavrogin]

firstly there's no evidence to suggest he's being manoeuvred and secondly I don't buy that it's less risk

if Arry left tomorrow then we'd have the 'realistic' chance of getting someone like Ancelotti in for instance. I think anyone who'd prefer Sherwood over Ancelotti is :duh:

He is operating in an important position - that's his job, so his influence is only growing.

And people aren't saying it's less risk or that they'd prefer Sherwood, just that any manager coming into a club brings risk. In the case of Ancelotti, he may clash with our better players, he may have a certain way of operating that somehow clashes with the club in general etc.

 

[mattyspurs]

He is operating in an important position - that's his job, so his influence is only growing.

And people aren't saying it's less risk or that they'd prefer Sherwood, just that any manager coming into a club brings risk. In the case of Ancelotti, he may clash with our better players, he may have a certain way of operating that somehow clashes with the club in general etc.

...and as Double Pivot has stated on numerous occasions, he wasnt exactly enamoured by the Milan fans during the end of his tenure, he wouldn't bring the youth through and favoured the old guard, something tha Harry gets lambasted for on this board.

 

[Spurs_Q8]

doubt this would happen, it's also romoured that Poyet would take over from Juande Ramos when he finish his bounes, but since we were in dark, we sack them both and Comolli followed them as well.

I think both of Sherwood and Poyet are up for it.

 

[seneca]

Scolari was always a big gamble given he'd only managed at International level and in Brazil

Ramos was also a risk given the fact his only successful job was with Sevilla and he'd never managed in England

Completely appreciate what you're saying however I think we should go for someone proven in England

it would be ideal but then who other than ferguson, wenger and mourinho has enjoyed any kind of success in england in the last decade?

 

[Kalim]

doubt this would happen, it's also romoured that Poyet would take over from Juande Ramos when he finish his bounes, but since we were in dark, we sack them both and Comolli followed them as well.

I think both of Sherwood and Poyet are up for it.

Rather Gus than Tim, Poyet took Brighton up last season and is putting a good footballing team together, watched Brighton v Leeds on the box last night and was impressed, came back from 2 down first half and nearly held on for a win.

 

[tototoner]

linked again today - along with Ancelotti

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/new...ngland-want-Harry-Redknapp-article804069.html

 

[SpurSince57]

we could have our pick of the majority of managers so why on earth would we pick in essence a rookie?

Nicholson was a rookie. So was Anderson, so was Burkinshaw, so was Shreeve; Rowe came from Chelmsford City, Jol's experience was with weak Dutch sides. Redknapp's previous hardly screams out.

Nevertheless, there you have our seven of our best managers ever.

Rijkaard had a season with Sparta and got them relegated, then went to Barça and was rather successful. Guardiola's had a whole shitload of experience, hasn't he?

We had this starstruck tosh four years ago, and look what happened.