Short term or longevity ?

Just wondering what you guys are wanting with the next manager ?

Short term
Do we look at appointing Micky has gaffer until end of season and hopefully he can work with the players we currently have and add 2 or 3 loan signings in January and hopefully keep us up and then we sort out the permanent manager in the summer ?

Longevity
Or do we look at appointing a manager now and offer him a 2-and-a-half-year deal and set out a future plan ? We then have a manager who knows he has a job for the next few seasons and knows what is expected of him. We need to be looking at a manager who has the qualities and ability to keep us in the Championship but if we get relegated, then we have that someone who knows the lower leagues well and knows what is needed to get us back up.

My choice is longevity and that man is Danny Wilson. I didn't watch the reds until the season after the premier league so I can't comment on DW's former reign in charge but what I do know since then is that DW has built up a good reputation as a manager and has a very respectable 40% win record. I don't expect DW to get us promoted to the prem but what I will see is a team playing the right way, the fans being united behind a club legend and also less requirements on loan signings and more of a chance for the youngsters to be given a chance in the first team squad.

Apologies if I'm talking rubbish it's just my opinion on the managerial situation at my beloved Barnsley FC. Thoughts ?

 

Part of this season's problems were a result of Flitcroft not signing his contract until after the season was over and from then on we were playing catch up. Another short term appointment would give us exactly the same problems in the next pre-season especially if we're also looking for a new manager.

Wilson would be my choice and rather than the usual 12 month rolling contract I'd offer him a five year contract with a remit to come up with a five year plan to rebuild the club on the playing side.

 

I agree. A short term fix is Mellon. If he gets the job, of which i think he will do, he will be gone by the summer as i think we'll go down this season.

Wilson is a long term fix. Whether we go down or stay up with him, he got the ability to help us move on another level. If we go down, he's the man to help us challenge for promotion.

Either way, it will definitely be one of these two, no point in putting any other names in the mix.

 

Longevity for me. We've had short termism since we got promoted and it's not been pretty to see. We need a plan. Develop and play young players. Play reasonable football. Be a community club in the truest sense of the word.

 

Weak management at Board room level if they cave in to fans demands so soon. Davey/Robins/Hill/Flitcroft - 4 managers in 4 years - fours years compensation paid out already and we're no further forward as a club.

 

I think Mellon should be given job until after Christmas and see how we pan out. A new manager will not know the players like Mellon

 

I think the fans were just, in wanting shut of Davey. Nothing weak about them or the board in that instance.
Robins fell out with the board and left. No fan that I know wanted him gone.
Keith oversaw an appalling 12 months and the supporters only called for his head (online etc, never at a game) a couple of weeks before the board pulled the trigger.
As for Flicker, there were a few of us on here who thought he needed to go, but no chants at the matches. So again, am not having that.
.
The fact is, we keep appointing managers who are blind to the obvious, stubborn, and ultimately out of their depth. I think the blind faith some of us showed in Keith, and the huge support for Flicker, shows us in a good light, if owt.
.
I'd love us to appoint someone and state that rain or shine, he's here for the duration. Make that clear from the get go, set out the plan and what it entails, and then stick to it.
Of course there'll be dissenting voices if we're failing. But perhaps that manager won't fail, because he won't feel pressured to achieve miracles as the last few may have felt, under our current short term strategy.

 

Is there any club our size that can plan long term with a manager?

If you are successful then other clubs approach you and eventually get their man, if things go pear shape you make a change.

Just plump for you choice and cross your fingers!

 

Crewe manage to have a long term plan. I'd like us to be a better supported version. We are in a better financial position than in the 80s after the strike and there was sone level of continuity then.

 

3 week contract then, blimey you're harsh.

 

Ask Mellon, do you want the job? If he does, tell him he's on trial till the Brum game and that he's expected to deliver a min of 10 points.

We'll find out if he can work under pressure/deadlines. If he fails...Wilson will still be available, lets face it no one's been busting a gut to give him a job...

 

Are you talking the Gradi years?

How many loyal Managers are there out there?

Can they afford to be loyal?

 

I'm talking more about the ethos of the club developing and playing their young players and playing attractive football. Doesn't always bring on field success but says this is how we are set up and this is where we are going. Steve Davis is following this vision. In the past Watford seemed to follow a version of this blueprint and to a lesser extent Palace. Southampton on a grander scale certainly do. It's not about individual managers or players more about a long term vision of the club.

 

I agree the strategy sounds great but at present isn't possible in the Championship. If you can attract top quality Championship players for the young players to develop with I'd go along with the plan but we have players trying to develop themselves as Championship players making it more difficult to blend in the young players. You eventually start to develop a player 20 games down the line he's snapped up by a Premiership team your back to square one I suppose investing your profits Wisely is the key.

 

It's difficult I agree but to an extent others have managed it. Watford before the Italian cash. Swansea clearly had a game plan that reaped success. It would mean potentially that you accepted limited success on the pitch and set managers different goals. Would also mean that in all likelihood a decent percentage of players would be sold on quickly and that a decent percentage of any money raised would be spent on the academy rather than the first team. Would involve investment in a proper scouting system.

 

Without being too boring, you can draft a liquidated damages clause to limit damages to say 12 months.