Next Permanent St Mirren Manager

[RandomGuy.]

9 hours ago, Ludo*1 said:

As daft as it sounds, the best bet would be to go for some dull, uninspiring option at the moment to steady the ship 

Why?

Our last two appointments had never managed or played in Scottish football before, and we've never finished below 7th with them in charge. Good managers should be able to get the best out players regardless. "Doesn't know the league"/"Team are still gelling" chat is just excuses being made for a clueless manager.

[Coventry Saint]

I'd rather go down having made a brave, left-field appointment than go down having taken Gus McPherson back. 

I get good vibes from this guy. He talks well (and at a normal speed - eh Stubbsy?) and will be arriving with confidence.

I'm all for it. Now here's hoping he accepts the job 

[monthelie']

12 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said:

I'd rather go down having made a brave, left-field appointment than go down having taken Gus McPherson back. 

I get good vibes from this guy. He talks well (and at a normal speed - eh Stubbsy?) and will be arriving with confidence.

I'm all for it. Now here's hoping he accepts the job 

Well on Monday night his team were pretty decent, marshalled by 2 'kick the f**k out of everything' centre halfs.

Might need to install a nasty streak into the defence

[Ludo*1]

57 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Why?

Our last two appointments had never managed or played in Scottish football before, and we've never finished below 7th with them in charge. Good managers should be able to get the best out players regardless. "Doesn't know the league"/"Team are still gelling" chat is just excuses being made for a clueless manager.

You mean Tommy Wright who was assistant for a good few years before he was appointed and Lomas, who despite his success, was by and large detested? Not exactly going against my point tbh.

[Buddist Monk]

10 hours ago, Ludo*1 said:

That's a massive fucking gamble going for Kearney at this stage.

Who would have thought Stubbs would be a "massive fucking gamble"? Pretty much nobody. Sure, I don't think many thought he'd have us in the top 6 but nobody expected him to bomb so dreadfully - well except for Rotherham fans.

While you have a point regarding a squad that he didn't bring together, that's pretty much par for the course in managerial changes, I think calling it a "massive fucking gamble" is way off.

Out of interest, wasn't hiring a completely inexperienced manager not once but twice a "massive fucking gamble"? Because that's what Dundee did with McCann.

[RandomGuy.]

47 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

You mean Tommy Wright who was assistant for a good few years before he was appointed and Lomas, who despite his success, was by and large detested? Not exactly going against my point tbh.

Wright was assistant for about 18 months at most, Lomas was a manager with no experience of Scottish football who'd failed in non LEAGUE English football, yet took us to third. 

[Ludo*1]

17 minutes ago, Buddist Monk said:

Who would have thought Stubbs would be a "massive fucking gamble"? Pretty much nobody. Sure, I don't think many thought he'd have us in the top 6 but nobody expected him to bomb so dreadfully - well except for Rotherham fans.

While you have a point regarding a squad that he didn't bring together, that's pretty much par for the course in managerial changes, I think calling it a "massive fucking gamble" is way off.

Out of interest, wasn't hiring a completely inexperienced manager not once but twice a "massive fucking gamble"? Because that's what Dundee did with McCann.

Yes. Yes it was and I was against it from the start. 

This is a bigger gamble than even that.

[Coventry Saint]

1 minute ago, RandomGuy. said:

Wright was assistant for about 18 months at most, Lomas was a manager with no experience of Scottish football who'd failed in non LEAGUE English football, yet took us to third. 

Proves there's no rhyme or reason to this stuff, and you can't make assumptions about one person based on another. What I'm saying is, we using that as a reason to disregard Stubbs' failings at Rotherham - pointing at McInnes and Clarke as examples of managers who'd failed south of the border and yet were doing well up here. 

[Buddist Monk]

1 minute ago, Ludo*1 said:

This is a bigger gamble than even that.

You are normally a fairly decent poster, and easily the most sensible Dundee fan on P&B, but your patter is rotten here.

[Ludo*1]

3 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Wright was assistant for about 18 months at most, Lomas was a manager with no experience of Scottish football who'd failed in non LEAGUE English football, yet took us to third. 

So your point that your clubs last two appointments had no experience of Scottish football is nonsense then? 

Would you not say it was a massive gamble at the time to have appointed Lomas? 

Again, your backing up my point more than disproving it. I'm not saying Kearney won't work out, I'm saying it's a huge risk to take.

[Coventry Saint]

4 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

This is a bigger gamble than even that.

I actually agree, but it's important to note that the size of the gamble has little to do with the outcome or actual success down the line [edit - just seen your last post in which you make this same point]. Danny Lennon was a bigger gamble for us than Ian Murray; one signed Stevie Thompson and won us a trophy, the other was hopelessly out of his depth and got binned very quickly.

Alan Stubbs was seen as less of a gamble that OK in the summer, but maybe we should have taken the bigger gamble.

I'm happy taking a punt - we're financially able to deal with relegation if it comes, so we might as well go out all guns blazing.

[Buddist Monk]

39 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said:

I actually agree...

Wait, what?

You think that hiring an already successful manager who has led his team to the top of the league is in some way the equivalent to hiring a pundit who had never managed a single day in his life?

Stop that, or you'll get one of my red dots too!

[Demented Zebra]

13 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

So your point that your clubs last two appointments had no experience of Scottish football is nonsense then? 

Would you not say it was a massive gamble at the time to have appointed Lomas? 

Again, your backing up my point more than disproving it. I'm not saying Kearney won't work out, I'm saying it's a huge risk to take.

Anyone would be a gamble, I'm hoping Rice gets kept on as his number two  plenty experience of the Scottish game, Jackson should be out would imagine.  

[Guest Moomintroll]

Proves there's no rhyme or reason to this stuff, and you can't make assumptions about one person based on another. What I'm saying is, we using that as a reason to disregard Stubbs' failings at Rotherham - pointing at McInnes and Clarke as examples of managers who'd failed south of the border and yet were doing well up here. 

Looking at where WBA are now compared to where SSC took them, I would argue that the idiot who sacked him failed a bit more than our lord and messiah.

[Coventry Saint]

2 minutes ago, Moomintroll said:

33 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said:

Proves there's no rhyme or reason to this stuff, and you can't make assumptions about one person based on another. What I'm saying is, we using that as a reason to disregard Stubbs' failings at Rotherham - pointing at McInnes and Clarke as examples of managers who'd failed south of the border and yet were doing well up here. 

Looking at where WBA are now compared to where SSC took them, I would argue that the idiot who sacked him failed a bit more than our lord and messiah.

Fair point.

[Turkmenbashi]

Outside of appointing proven failures like Hartley or Locke, going for guys with mixed records like (McIntyre or Neilson) is just as risky as going for someone inexperienced like Kearney or Goodwin. There is enough examples out there of supposed safe appointments doing dreadfully (Terry Butcher at Hibs or Owen Coyle) and inexperienced guys doing well to know that there is no obvious formula. There is no Scottish equivalent of Tony Pulis or Sam Allardyce who clubs can rely on if things go wrong.

[Miguel Sanchez]

48 minutes ago, Buddist Monk said:

You are normally a fairly decent poster, and easily the most sensible Dundee fan on P&B, but your patter is rotten here.

Been a while since you were in a league with Dundee, hasn't it?

[Buddist Monk]

See the thing with Kearney it's about positivity and momentum, not about signings - at least not now. I have no idea whether the board will appoint him or not, but we were flying when we came up, confidence at an all time high and a real desire within the squad to have a go at the Premiership under Ross. Obviously that wasn't to be, but the emphasis of moving forward was still there even after Ross left. What Stubbs has done is come in, absolutely shatter that, select formations that didn't suit the players available and (if rumours are true) made himself unapproachable as the manager. While that might work at larger clubs that attitude was always doomed to failure with us.

As the window is now shut, the good thing is Stubbs didn't completely dismantle the squad; we still have Samson, McGinn, Magennis, Smith, etc. Sure we lost Morgan, Reilly and Davis (for differing reasons) but the nucleus is there, the bonds between them are strong as you can see from the way McGinn reacted to Smith's dropping then subsequent introduction.

First and foremost we need to get a motivator and organiser in, and someone who has led their team to the top of the league after a previously good season would seem like a good choice. Far more so than someone who had been out of work for a long time after being sacked in just a matter of months from his last position because he ripped apart a team and caused massive disharmony while failing to win more than one game during that time.

I don't blame the board going for Stubbs, it was a gamble and it didn't pay off. However Kearney, whether he gets the job or not, would seem a much better fit for a club our size and he will be coming in on an absolute high of winning games. Is he a "gamble"? Sure of course he is, everyone is, even if we brought in the managerial partnership of Sir Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho it could still be classed as a "gamble". Every manager is.

[Buddist Monk]

4 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Been a while since you were in a league with Dundee, hasn't it?

Heh.. not sure if you are having a dig at him or me, but I'll be honest he's always come across as a decent poster. Which makes the suggestion that hiring an already successful manager is a "fucking massive gamble" all the more obvious as trolling.

 

[RandomGuy.]

1 hour ago, Ludo*1 said:

So your point that your clubs last two appointments had no experience of Scottish football is nonsense then? 

Would you not say it was a massive gamble at the time to have appointed Lomas? 

Again, your backing up my point more than disproving it. I'm not saying Kearney won't work out, I'm saying it's a huge risk to take.

You claimed their "best bet" would be an experienced manager who knows Scottish football. I've merely pointed out two examples of the opposite. 

Their best bet is appointing the best manager available. I'm sure a Scottish club rejected Graham Potter a year or so back as he's "unproven in Scottish football". 

Will St Mirren really be better off hiring Jim McIntyre instead of Kearney?