The New, New, New Manager Thread

[SuperSAINT]

Yeah, so basically, there aren't any valid reasons for people acting idiots.

 

There doesn't need to be valid reasons on here, Clarkey

[Badger]

Worst,out of a bad lot.

Underwhelmed.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Don't worry, if he's as crap as you expect him to be he'll be gone by the end of October.

 

Then we can bring Nigel back.

[James]

Fair enough if that's how you see it. I see it as...

 

'Can't see that Southampton will be a big enough name (with high enough pay structure) to keep hold of Mane etc.'

 

I see it more as: "Southampton ambitious enough to appoint ex Real Madrid manager, maybe I'll give it another year and see how we go"

 

Now I see it as "Who have Southampton appointed? What's Klopp's number?"

 

It's about ambition and presentation, we had the chance to make a mega appointment and by all accounts MP actually wanted the job. As it is we've ended up with Puel who is, for the most part, a complete unknown. He may turn out to be decent and I hope he is but it smacks of the cheap option when we had a chance to really kick on and raise our profile.

[Saint-Armstrong]

I see it more as: "Southampton ambitious enough to appoint ex Real Madrid manager, maybe I'll give it another year and see how we go"

 

Now I see it as "Who have Southampton appointed? What's Klopp's number?"

 

It's about ambition and presentation, we had the chance to make a mega appointment and by all accounts MP actually wanted the job. As it is we've ended up with Puel who is, for the most part, a complete unknown. He may turn out to be decent and I hope he is but it smacks of the cheap option when we had a chance to really kick on and raise our profile.

 

None of us were in on the talks. If it was a choice of 'abandon the policies and philosophy and get Pellegrini in' or 'hey, this guy really suits us and would fit well here, we're on the same page and he's in it for the long-haul' - then I'd rather we went with the latter.

[S-Clarke]

Lol, I think it's hilarious that people are getting their knickers in a twist because he's not as big a name as someone else and they haven't heard of him. I didn't realise that being a ''well known'' name equaled the success of a manager. I'm glad the club have the eyes and sense to look beyond a 'name'. Seriously, if some of the utter morons on this board were put in control of our football club then we would be long gone down the leagues.

 

As I thought, not one person who is 'against' this has a valid reason as to why.

[James]

None of us were in on the talks. If it was a choice of 'abandon the policies and philosophy and get Pellegrini in' or 'hey, this guy really suits us and would fit well here, we're on the same page and he's in it for the long-haul' - then I'd rather we went with the latter.

 

Well of course we weren't. I'm only going on newspaper reports same as you are. Personally I'd rather have taken MP than some guy who hasn't managed anywhere but France. Seems to me as though we are trying to find the next Pochettino rather than appointing the best manager available. Just my view and my view is that it's a massive gamble given current levels of expectation both amongst fans and players. Hope Reed hasn't let the plaudits go to his head.

[Saint-Armstrong]

Well of course we weren't. I'm only going on newspaper reports same as you are. Personally I'd rather have taken MP than some guy who hasn't managed anywhere but France. Seems to me as though we are trying to find the next Pochettino rather than appointing the best manager available. Just my view and my view is that it's a massive gamble given current levels of expectation both amongst fans and players. Hope Reed hasn't let the plaudits go to his head.

 

Pochettino only managed in Spain and got sacked from his first and only job with his team rock-bottom in 20th.

 

Koeman went out of Holland twice, got sacked in his first season with Valencia and walked out on Benfica, and got knocked back by other PL clubs. (he wanted the Swansea job...)

 

I don't see how Pellegrini would fit the club or fit the club's long-term aims. He's not a 'coach', he's right at the end of his career.

 

Yes, he was worth speaking to because of his standing but clearly the board didn't think he was right for us.

 

I'm willing to trust that, in light of previous appointments.

[Faz]

Well of course we weren't. I'm only going on newspaper reports same as you are. Personally I'd rather have taken MP than some guy who hasn't managed anywhere but France. Seems to me as though we are trying to find the next Pochettino rather than appointing the best manager available. Just my view and my view is that it's a massive gamble given current levels of expectation both amongst fans and players. Hope Reed hasn't let the plaudits go to his head.

 

Don't worry, he'll probably be stopped at the border

[SuperSAINT]

In many ways, Puel is a typical Black-Box find. (Because he's not an obvious choice).

 

Will be good to get him on the bus & I'm looking forward to seeing what he brings.

 

Do we know if he can speak English?

[InvictaSaint]

Lol, I think it's hilarious that people are getting their knickers in a twist because he's not as big a name as someone else and they haven't heard of him. I didn't realise that being a ''well known'' name equaled the success of a manager. I'm glad the club have the eyes and sense to look beyond a 'name'. Seriously, if some of the utter morons on this board were put in control of our football club then we would be long gone down the leagues.

 

As I thought, not one person who is 'against' this has a valid reason as to why.

 

Come on S-Clarke; you know rational, considered thought has no place here. We wouldn't have had Brexit otherwise [emoji6][emoji6]

[View From The Top]

The tw_ats moaning about this appointment will be the same ones who were weeping about MP leaving despite moaning about us appointing him as an unknown.

 

Anyone who wanted "a name", any name it would appear, is, quite frankly, a retard.

[Pamplemousse]

Of course, a manager who got a team to the semi finals of the Champions League is no good for us

[saintjimbo83]

Appointing a big name manager like Pellegrini is not out style and I think if people did a bit of research into Puel they would be impressed and fits the Southampton model perfectly.

 

My understanding a week or so ago was that Puel was first choice.

 

For Nice to finish just off 2nd in the French league and to reach the semi final of the champions league is very impressive.

 

I sometimes think Saints fans think we can appoint a Guardiola style manager. Short term memories we have.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wade Garrett]

Can I put this question out there, what are the reasons people are disappointed? I've not seen anyone state a valid reason for being underwhelmed or disappointed, so I'd be interested to know why people feel this way as I'm a bit confused.

 

Disappointed because I think there were plenty of better candidates. My initial reaction is that this is a manager who will not makes waves about Mane being sold.

 

Mind you, I'm not going to get out of my pram about it. Good luck to the bloke, hope he does well.

[James]

The tw_ats moaning about this appointment will be the same ones who were weeping about MP leaving despite moaning about us appointing him as an unknown.

 

Anyone who wanted "a name", any name it would appear, is, quite frankly, a retard.

 

I presume you realise that a manager usually only becomes a "name" once they've enjoyed a degree of success? Unknown managers tend to be unknown because they have either a) not achieved any success or b) have not achieved it on a grand stage.

 

My personal concern with appointing Puel is that, bar a fourth place finish with Nice (which I agree is impressive), his record isn't great and he's been sacked by both Lyon and Monaco. I'm willing to put the sackings aside as we don't know the circumstances but there is a track record for managers who have only managed on the continent not doing well in the Premier League (see Pepe Mel, Jacques Santini, Jean Tigana etc.)

 

 

I'll obviously support Puel when appointed but I can't pretend I think that it's the best appointment we could have made.

[westmidlandsaint]

As like a few on here if Puel is appointed I will get behind him and support him, however, I do feel we will have missed an opportunity to push on to the next level with a globally well known name like Pellegrini who would have helped raise our profile and made us an even more attractive option for players.

 

I think Puel is more of a black box gamble

[Wade Garrett]

Is he the best choice for the club? Or the most malleable for Les Reed?

 

Only time will tell. Hope it's the former.

[Sour Mash]

I presume you realise that a manager usually only becomes a "name" once they've enjoyed a degree of success? Unknown managers tend to be unknown because they have either a) not achieved any success or b) have not achieved it on a grand stage.

 

My personal concern with appointing Puel is that, bar a fourth place finish with Nice (which I agree is impressive), his record isn't great and he's been sacked by both Lyon and Monaco. I'm willing to put the sackings aside as we don't know the circumstances but there is a track record for managers who have only managed on the continent not doing well in the Premier League (see Pepe Mel, Jacques Santini, Jean Tigana etc.)

 

 

I'll obviously support Puel when appointed but I can't pretend I think that it's the best appointment we could have made.

He's won the league with Monaco.

[Cartman]

Of course, a manager who got a team to the semi finals of the Champions League is no good for us

 

Knocking out Pellegrini's Real Madrid in the last 16.

[Saint-Armstrong]

He's won the league with Monaco.

 

And took Lyon to the Champions League semi-final stage and managed Lille in the Champions League.

[Convict Colony]

1/9 on paddy power now just to continue the betting theme, glad i got him at 4/1 last week.

[James]

And took Lyon to the Champions League semi-final stage and managed Lille in the Champions League.

 

Alain Perrin also won a league and cup double with Lyon back in the early 2000s.....

[Saint-Armstrong]

Alain Perrin also won a league and cup double with Lyon back in the early 2000s.....

 

Good job we're not appointing Alain Perrin then.

[Saint_Ash]

I presume you realise that a manager usually only becomes a "name" once they've enjoyed a degree of success? Unknown managers tend to be unknown because they have either a) not achieved any success or b) have not achieved it on a grand stage.

 

My personal concern with appointing Puel is that, bar a fourth place finish with Nice (which I agree is impressive), his record isn't great and he's been sacked by both Lyon and Monaco. I'm willing to put the sackings aside as we don't know the circumstances but there is a track record for managers who have only managed on the continent not doing well in the Premier League (see Pepe Mel, Jacques Santini, Jean Tigana etc.)

 

 

I'll obviously support Puel when appointed but I can't pretend I think that it's the best appointment we could have made.

 

I'm afraid just because you are not knowledgeable he's Not a poor appointment. That goes for a lot of people on this forum. No doubt hindsight will be cried later when he does well.

[Appy]

Good of Sky to catch up, nine day after The Telegraph reported 'further interviews' with him.

 

'Sky Sources' and 'Breaking' though, obviously...

 

Lol, so bitter.

[JakkoUK]

Pellegrini doesn't fit the style of how our club is run and played on the pitch. This fascination with a 'big name' is ridiculous, raising the clubs profile with a well known name gets you no where. The reason a club like ourselves has done so well in recent years is due to having a set system which the manager has to fit within. In my opinion we have one of best run clubs in the league, therefore I have full faith in there decision for Puel.

[SuperSAINT]

Disappointed because I think there were plenty of better candidates. My initial reaction is that this is a manager who will not makes waves about Mane being sold.

 

Mind you, I'm not going to get out of my pram about it. Good luck to the bloke, hope he does well.

 

Truth be told, we're probably selling Mane to give the new coach a transfer budget.

[Pamplemousse]

Lol, so bitter.

 

He's right though. Sky are very rarely the first for any breaking news.

[James]

Good job we're not appointing Alain Perrin then.

 

Tell me this, if Puel did so well with Monaco and Lyon then how come he was sacked?

 

Many managers from the French league with ostensibly better records have tried and failed in the Premier League. That's the concern I'm trying to present.

 

It's basically pointless posting on this forum because, unless you say what a genius Les Reed is, you are just mocked for not having 100% faith in anything the club does.

[Saint-Armstrong]

Tell me this, if Puel did so well with Monaco and Lyon then how come he was sacked?

 

Many managers from the French league with ostensibly better records have tried and failed in the Premier League. That's the concern I'm trying to present.

 

It's basically pointless posting on this forum because, unless you say what a genius Les Reed is, you are just mocked for not having 100% faith in anything the club does.

 

Not mocking you. I replied and discussed with you earlier. Time will tell, I can see why people are disappointed after some names linked.

 

Equally, he wasn't my choice. But to suggest he's a disaster/awful/Gray/Wigley this early on is a bit daft.

 

We'll see what happens but I think trust is deserved when it comes to managerial appointments.

 

If he's crap, then I'll cede that he's crap and might have to change that stance.

[James]

I'm afraid just because you are not knowledgeable he's Not a poor appointment. That goes for a lot of people on this forum. No doubt hindsight will be cried later when he does well.

 

On what basis are you suggesting that I'm not knowledgeable? I've read all there is to read about Puel and I'm still not convinced. He appears to have done a good job with Nice but I've also read a number of things which suggest that it was the form of Ben Afra that made sure they had a wonderful season. I've also read that he was sacked by Lyon for barely mounting a title challenge in a poor league with by far the most expensively assembled squad (PSG were nowhere at this point).

 

I've read the facts and I've got a concern, don't just make blind insults because someone doesn't agree with you.

[positivepete]

Puel may be unknown to most of us on here, but it has been reported that he was on our shortlist when we appointed Koeman. If so then clearly the club think he is a suitable candidate, and have no doubt been tracking him as they are with other managers such as Gary Rowett. Have faith, we may make a mistake one day but our track record is pretty good in this era, and at least we have a system in place.

[Pamplemousse]

Tell me this, if Puel did so well with Monaco and Lyon then how come he was sacked?

 

Many managers from the French league with ostensibly better records have tried and failed in the Premier League. That's the concern I'm trying to present.

 

It's basically pointless posting on this forum because, unless you say what a genius Les Reed is, you are just mocked for not having 100% faith in anything the club does.

 

Puel fell out with the board at Lyon, due to an unspecified reason

[Badger]

The tw_ats moaning about this appointment will be the same ones who were weeping about MP leaving despite moaning about us appointing him as an unknown.

 

Anyone who wanted "a name", any name it would appear, is, quite frankly, a retard.

 

 

Very few "names" fit the bill unfortunately. Of the names touted only Pelligrini leapt off the page, and as many have questioned, his age, ambition and track record of player development rather than being a cheque book manager would not have helped his cause.

 

At the moment, on here anway, the two being discussed are Puel with some record in France of looking like he mihght fit us, and Silva an unknown quantity much younger and less experienced. Some just see him as a Poch II, but in truth none of us know.

 

I keep reading conflicting things about Puel's style of play, from 'fast attacking exciting' to 'boring and defensive'. Perhaps some people have a downer on him because his name is too similar to Pulis.

 

On other idle thought, wouldn't he have worked with Prost at some stage at Lyon ?

[James]

Not mocking you. I replied and discussed with you earlier. Time will tell, I can see why people are disappointed after some names linked.

 

Equally, he wasn't my choice. But to suggest he's a disaster/awful/Gray/Wigley this early on is a bit daft.

 

We'll see what happens but I think trust is deserved when it comes to managerial appointments.

 

If he's crap, then I'll cede that he's crap and might have to change that stance.

 

No problem, not suggesting he's a Gray or a Wigley or indeed that he will be a terrible appointment. I just don't think he was the best we could have appointed and he smacks of a Black Box gamble.

 

I am merely saying that, given where we found ourselves at the end of last season, we could have taken the opportunity to appoint an experienced, blue chip manager who would likely have raised our profile in the transfer market and convinced our big players to stay.

 

I hope I'm wrong but I'm not sure Puel is who we need at the present moment.

 

Anyway, what is done is done so best to see what happens and I wish Claude the very best of luck.

[Pamplemousse]

Very few "names" fit the bill unfortunately. Of the names touted only Pelligrini leapt off the page, and as many have questioned, his age, ambition and track record of player development rather than being a cheque book manager would not have helped his cause.

 

At the moment, on here anway, the two being discussed are Puel with some record in France of looking like he mihght fit us, and Silva an unknown quantity much younger and less experienced. Some just see him as a Poch II, but in truth none of us know.

 

I keep reading conflicting things about Puel's style of play, from 'fast attacking exciting' to 'boring and defensive'. Perhaps some people have a downer on him because his name is too similar to Pulis.

 

On other idle thought, wouldn't he have worked with Prost at some stage at Lyon ?

 

Yes, Prost left Lyon in 2010 and Puel was there from 2008-11.

 

Another man he worked with was Remi Garde, the director of the training complex, who ended up succeeded him after he was sacked.

[Saint In Exile]

I presume you realise that a manager usually only becomes a "name" once they've enjoyed a degree of success? Unknown managers tend to be unknown because they have either a) not achieved any success or b) have not achieved it on a grand stage.

 

My personal concern with appointing Puel is that, bar a fourth place finish with Nice (which I agree is impressive), his record isn't great and he's been sacked by both Lyon and Monaco. I'm willing to put the sackings aside as we don't know the circumstances but there is a track record for managers who have only managed on the continent not doing well in the Premier League (see Pepe Mel, Jacques Santini, Jean Tigana etc.)

 

I'll obviously support Puel when appointed but I can't pretend I think that it's the best appointment we could have made.

 

Utter ********... Mourinho, Wenger, Manchini, Pellegrini, Ancelotti, Bilic, Pochettino, Koeman have all been "successful" Premier League managers despite only having managed on the continent previously!!!

[scotty]

Don't worry, he'll probably be stopped at the border

 

[sammysaint]

I think whoever comes in will struggle for top 6 next season, if he can get us 9th-7th a good cup run and promote more youth I will be happy.

 

It maybe a case of taking a step back this season (league position wise) to go forward again.

[Batman]

I think whoever comes in will struggle for top 6 next season, if he can get us 9th-7th a good cup run and promote more youth I will be happy.

 

It maybe a case of taking a step back this season (league position wise) to go forward again.

 

top 10 would be a good season IMO

10-13th OK

14th and below -

[CB Fry]

Top 10 and a good Europa run (last 16) would be a good season.

[stevy777_x]

How does finishing 17th, then 11th, then 4th* (and just two points off 2nd) suggest he blows hot and cold?

 

It suggests that he rebuilt the side he inherited and turned them into a top four side over a two-year period, and used youth and built an exciting style.

 

I'm confused how you've said 'hot and cold'...

 

 

 

* - with the youngest squad and with an exciting style of play

** - his oldest outfield is 33 year old Bodmer, next oldest is 28 - most of the squad is 18-25

 

 

Blows hot and cold meaning he had some good seasons playing good football and other seasons where Nice werent very good.

Some years the quality of his squad wasn't exactly great.

Even last year when you take out Ben Arfa (he had a period at the start of of 2016 whole of february if i remember well where he was injured), Nice struggled offensively

 

It doesn't mean he is a bad manager, it's very difficult to judge because he has had mixed success.

 

At lyon he got sacked because lyon ended up playing too conservative defensive football.

 

I'd like to think he has evolved his management style over the years and learned from his mistakes but only time will tell.

 

What i can say is that Nice last year earned a lot of plaudits for their style of play (swift attaking football, played out of the back and on the deck quite a bit and were not afraid to spread the ball wide and put some crosses in. Ben Arfa also scored some wonderful goals beating 4-5 players a lot of the time. They also had a poacher as a striker named Valere Germain (very small in size) who funnily enough got on the end of a lot of crosses by heading it in and finishing them.

I wouldn t say they played extremelly high pressing like MP does at Spurs but they did try to play a relatively high line.

They were also defensively solid.

 

In midfield, you had Nempalys Mendy who played the role of DM, again relatively small but quick and physical. A bit like Kante but I wouldn't say he is at his level as he doesn't run as much as Kante.

Vincent Koziello was brought in my Puel from the academy and is a huge talent. Good range of passing and put in some nice forward balls.

A bit raw physically for me but that will come in time as he puts on some muscle (only 20 and looks like a 15 year old).

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Not mocking you. I replied and discussed with you earlier. Time will tell, I can see why people are disappointed after some names linked.

 

Equally, he wasn't my choice. But to suggest he's a disaster/awful/Gray/Wigley this early on is a bit daft.

 

We'll see what happens but I think trust is deserved when it comes to managerial appointments.

 

If he's crap, then I'll cede that he's crap and might have to change that stance.

 

This seems a sensible stance, there is bound to be doubts but the club have earnt the right to give them the benefit of doubt.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Top 10 and a good Europa run (last 16) would be a good season.

 

That will satisfy me

[SO16_Saint]

Can't please 100% of the people 100% of the time

[Dalek2003]

Hope he can keep us up.

[Spoonman]

While it would be nice to appoint a big name, and all the high profile coverage associated, i believe that the board need to get in who they feel is the best fit. As has been espoused on here many times recently, maybe koeman was not helping the development of our academy kids (harry reed a prime example). On that basis, I'm ok with us going for someone slightly leftfield if it fits in with our long term goals. Without sounding pompous, long term planning is what sets us apart from many of our PL rivals.

We have enjoyed a marvellous six or seven years, certainly the most exciting since i started following Saints in the early 80s, so on my book I'm backing the board.

[Yorkshire Saint]

Of course, I will support my team, but if this is true I do feel underwhelmed.

[verlaine1979]

The fact that his greatest achievement in management was 16 years ago is a bit of a worry, but I suppose he's no more or less likely to fail than Koeman was when we appointed him.

 

Doesn't have the benefit of RK's reputation as a player, but perhaps has a slightly better managerial record overall. RK wasn't an appointment to make other clubs envious two years ago, and neither is Claude Puel now, but that's just where we are as a club.

[thefuriousb]

I presume you realise that a manager usually only becomes a "name" once they've enjoyed a degree of success? Unknown managers tend to be unknown because they have either a) not achieved any success or b) have not achieved it on a grand stage.

 

My personal concern with appointing Puel is that, bar a fourth place finish with Nice (which I agree is impressive), his record isn't great and he's been sacked by both Lyon and Monaco. I'm willing to put the sackings aside as we don't know the circumstances but there is a track record for managers who have only managed on the continent not doing well in the Premier League (see Pepe Mel, Jacques Santini, Jean Tigana etc.)

 

 

I'll obviously support Puel when appointed but I can't pretend I think that it's the best appointment we could have made.

 

He won the league with Monaco!! He took Lyon to semi finals of Champions League!! He took an unfashionable Lille side into the Champions League, winding up Fergie in the process.