Jump to content

Hearts at Tynecastle


elevenone
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, potty trained said:

That's the boards job, is a cop out of complete shitebaggery proportions. 

Although certainly more respectable than suggestions like Owen Coyle or Bobby Williamson, the last time such a question was asked. 

Why is saying that's the boards job a cop out? Nobody else but the board can sack him,also they are they only ones who can decide on the new manager if that is the way they decide to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, potty trained said:

People want Archie sacked if we get relegated? 

People want Archie sacked to get us out the play off place?

Who could we get in who has experience of either getting a team out the second tier or getting a team to finish above second bottom?

 

 

Archie fits the bill.

 

 

 

Archie  had no experience when he got the job, and got us up, the last 9 months he’s been going backwards rapidly, another manager with or without experience could get us up or keep us up, that’s the gamble you take.

 

my gut says Archie will get Maxi’s job because he’s so involved with the training ground and development side, with Patterson taking Archie’s job, but that’s just my gut feeling 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting thought, and one that wiil appeal to many fans and possibly the Club too.  The big question would therefore be whether Patterson has a sufficiently different perspective to Archie that would mean a meaningful change in selection and tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

Why is saying that's the boards job a cop out? Nobody else but the board can sack him,also they are they only ones who can decide on the new manager if that is the way they decide to go.

Because it's clearly a cop out. If you want Archie sacked (boards decision) but can't name one appointment you'd approve of (boards decision) then it's a cop out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

my gut says Archie will get Maxi’s job because he’s so involved with the training ground and development side, with Patterson taking Archie’s job, but that’s just my gut feeling 

That would be a strange move, Norge. Akin to Jackie going upstairs at York. I feel Archie has more to show & prove a manager first. 

But if was to move or leave, I’d like to see Shaggy being given a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Paterson knew what to do to turn us round why has it not happened by now? As assistant he should be doing exactly that already. We need to freshen things up as there does seem to be a staleness that surrounds us. I just cant for the life of me see how promoting big Scott would help us at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine we went down, and it turned out it wasn't some dystopian wasteland some folk on here would have you believe. 

Imagine we cut our cloth, got rid of the deadwood and built a team utilising our youth structure. Players not good enough to maybe break through in a top tier team, who we'd normally have sent out on loan. 

Imagine we kept our manager because we know he's more than capable of winning the league and doing so playing great attacking football.

Imagine we then came straight back up. It's almost like the bleeting would be for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, potty trained said:

Because it's clearly a cop out. If you want Archie sacked (boards decision) but can't name one appointment you'd approve of (boards decision) then it's a cop out. 

It Is not a cop out to say sacking and hiring of a manager is the boards decision it is fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

It Is not a cop out to say sacking and hiring of a manager is the boards decision it is fact.

No one said it was. Why you twisting it?

 

Plenty folk called for him to get sacked. But couldn't name a single person we could attract or want. When questioned they copped out by saying that's the board decision not theirs. Even though they are quite happy to decide for the board, that the manager should be sacked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, potty trained said:

Imagine we went down, and it turned out it wasn't some dystopian wasteland some folk on here would have you believe. 

Imagine we cut our cloth, got rid of the deadwood and built a team utilising our youth structure. Players not good enough to maybe break through in a top tier team, who we'd normally have sent out on loan. 

Imagine we kept our manager because we know he's more than capable of winning the league and doing so playing great attacking football.

Imagine we then came straight back up. It's almost like the bleeting would be for nothing.

I don't know how long you have followed Thistle but since the Premier league set up has been in place we have never bounced straight back up in one season.Anytime we have been relegated it has taken us 10years,6years and 9years to get back to the top league.You talk about the deadwood this is all players that Archie has signed,which he himself has said is the best squad since we came back up.You also talk about utilising the youth structure Archie is not exactly known for doing that is he?Imo relegation is never good.both Dundee Utd and ICT have reported £1m losses or more since going down.This is not imagining,this is fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, potty trained said:

Because it's clearly a cop out. If you want Archie sacked (boards decision) but can't name one appointment you'd approve of (boards decision) then it's a cop out. 

 

2 hours ago, potty trained said:

No one said it was. Why you twisting it?

 

Plenty folk called for him to get sacked. But couldn't name a single person we could attract or want. When questioned they copped out by saying that's the board decision not theirs. Even though they are quite happy to decide for the board, that the manager should be sacked. 

You clearly say cop out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

I don't know how long you have followed Thistle but since the Premier league set up has been in place we have never bounced straight back up in one season.Anytime we have been relegated it has taken us 10years,6years and 9years to get back to the top league.You talk about the deadwood this is all players that Archie has signed,which he himself has said is the best squad since we came back up.You also talk about utilising the youth structure Archie is not exactly known for doing that is he?Imo relegation is never good.both Dundee Utd and ICT have reported £1m losses or more since going down.This is not imagining,this is fact.

We've never bounced straight back up, so we never will?

No one has a perfect signing record. Every team clears out players and gets in new ones every season. Sometimes signings don't work out.

I already covered your point regards youths in my original post. It's difficult to break through into a top tier team. Much easier to break into a second tier team. Unless you are suggesting that Archie would discard youths that he'd normally farm out on loan to the second tier?

What's a fact is you are trying to compare ours and Dundee United's financial model. From here on, none of your points are valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, potty trained said:

We've never bounced straight back up, so we never will?

No one has a perfect signing record. Every team clears out players and gets in new ones every season. Sometimes signings don't work out.

I already covered your point regards youths in my original post. It's difficult to break through into a top tier team. Much easier to break into a second tier team. Unless you are suggesting that Archie would discard youths that he'd normally farm out on loan to the second tier?

What's a fact is you are trying to compare ours and Dundee United's financial model. From here on, none of your points are valid.

All of my points are valid because they are facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

 

You clearly say cop out.

So you're again twisting it. Or strughl8ng to understand.

 

Let me spell it out for a third time.

 

If you think the manager should be sacked (whilst acknowledging this is a board decision) but can't name a single person you want because that's a board decision. Then using the board as an excuse not to name a successor is a cop out.

 

But you already know what I meant.

Edited by potty trained
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, potty trained said:

So you're again twisting it. Or strughl8ng to understand.

 

Let me spell it out for a third time.

 

If you think the manager should be sacked (whilst acknowledging this is a board decision) but can't name a single person you want because that's a board decision. Then not using the board as an excuse not to name a successor is a cop out.

 

But you already know what I meant.

I don't think you know what you mean yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, potty trained said:

And if your opinion is that you won't name a successor because that's the boards decision, then that's a cop out. 

I haven't  actually said we should sack the manager.But the fact no matter how you try and twist it everything rests with the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

My point is no matter who we as fans want as manager it is not our decision but the boards.

And just because it's the boards decision doesn't mean folk can't share their opinion. Refusing to share your opinion, because that's a board decision is a cop out. I can't believe you're disputing this! 

 

And for accuracy. Just because you don't want Archie sacked today, doesn't mean you haven't previously wanted him sacked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, potty trained said:

Imagine we went down, and it turned out it wasn't some dystopian wasteland some folk on here would have you believe. 

Imagine we cut our cloth, got rid of the deadwood and built a team utilising our youth structure. Players not good enough to maybe break through in a top tier team, who we'd normally have sent out on loan. 

Imagine we kept our manager because we know he's more than capable of winning the league and doing so playing great attacking football.

Imagine we then came straight back up. It's almost like the bleeting would be for nothing.

Debatable if that would happen , biggest thing is the turnover would go from £4 million a year to probably just under a million , think that’s where the problem lies and beggars belief why we didn’t strengthen in January.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...