[Football] West Ham to move for Chris Hughton?

[Justice]

TB’s not called the Lizard for no reason.

 

[Icy Gull]

What if that week had cost Mr Bloom GPott?

CH was gone does it really matter when?

Clearly not to most, but it did to me. I really doubt GP was being chased by other PL teams too.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

This was stated a lot in the wake of Hughton's dismissal, and it's a sentiment I simply don't understand. Given that Tony had made the decision to get rid (which I accept people may disagree with in itself), surely the ONLY appropriate day to do it was when it was done? When else would have been better? If you've made the decision he has to go, he has to go right then. Planning for the new season gets underway immediately and NOT firing him then would be unprofessional and negligent.

What is the alternative?

Before he was sacked Hughton was in meetings discussing summer transfer targets - if Bloom was intent on getting rid of him from several games before the end of the season, why let him go through this process - the more appropriate thing to do was not schedule any meetings until after the sacking. The likely reason for this was to make sure that they set up Potter as his replacement. That is not the way the club should be doing business - but it is not unusual for clubs these days.

Much has been made of the run of 3 wins in 23 games - Dyche's Burnley, playing very poor football, won 3 games out of 22 (including cup games) up to the end of December - they had 12 points from their first 19 games in the league and were in the relegation zone after losing 5-1 at home to Everton on Boxing Day. Dyche wasn't sacked - 2 months later he was rumoured to be in the running for the Leicester job - now he is being touted as a possible replacement at West Ham and is regularly praised for the remarkable job he has done at Burnley - despite the fact that he has had a lot more time to build a solid squad than Hughton was given.

When Hughton was sacked there was universal surprise given the fact that he kept Brighton in the PL for a second season running with a poor squad, little money and little say in transfer policy. Potter has big shoes to fill - and while things have gone reasonably well so far - there is still a long season to go. Hopefully he will prove he is up to the task.

 

[vagabond]

This was stated a lot in the wake of Hughton's dismissal, and it's a sentiment I simply don't understand. Given that Tony had made the decision to get rid (which I accept people may disagree with in itself), surely the ONLY appropriate day to do it was when it was done? When else would have been better? If you've made the decision he has to go, he has to go right then. Planning for the new season gets underway immediately and NOT firing him then would be unprofessional and negligent.

What is the alternative?

100% correct.

 

[drew]

Before he was sacked Hughton was in meetings discussing summer transfer targets - if Bloom was intent on getting rid of him from several games before the end of the season, why let him go through this process - the more appropriate thing to do was not schedule any meetings until after the sacking. The likely reason for this was to make sure that they set up Potter as his replacement. That is not the way the club should be doing business - but it is not unusual for clubs these days.

Much has been made of the run of 3 wins in 23 games - Dyche's Burnley, playing very poor football, won 3 games out of 22 (including cup games) up to the end of December - they had 12 points from their first 19 games in the league and were in the relegation zone after losing 5-1 at home to Everton on Boxing Day. Dyche wasn't sacked - 2 months later he was rumoured to be in the running for the Leicester job - now he is being touted as a possible replacement at West Ham and is regularly praised for the remarkable job he has done at Burnley - despite the fact that he has had a lot more time to build a solid squad than Hughton was given.

When Hughton was sacked there was universal surprise given the fact that he kept Brighton in the PL for a second season running with a poor squad, little money and little say in transfer policy. Potter has big shoes to fill - and while things have gone reasonably well so far - there is still a long season to go. Hopefully he will prove he is up to the task.

Sorry but you cannot keep spouting this made up tripe. You say he had very little say in this. Where is your evidence, he was part of the recruitment team and I'm pretty sure there were reports that he had the final say.

Your ref to Dyche, ignores the fact they were playing in Europe as early as July and upto the end of Dec, they had in fact won 6 games. You also forget that he got Burnley to Premier League twice, he then got them to 7th.

As for the process, if you aren't sure about sacking someone you maintain the normal routine. As for Potter, they had to get permission to speak to him. Now they may have had people sound him out but nothing would have been confirmed. (It wasn't quite as quick as Spurs).

You seem very good at being very selective about statistics but you claim you went to most games last year yet you cannot accept how bad we were and that there was no evidence we would improve if Hughton remained.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

TB’s not called the Lizard for no reason.

Ain't that not a double negative?

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Sorry but you cannot keep spouting this made up tripe. You say he had very little say in this. Where is your evidence, he was part of the recruitment team and I'm pretty sure there were reports that he had the final say.

Links were provided during the thread about his sacking - I am sure he had some input - but he did not have the final say on transfers.

Your ref to Dyche, ignores the fact they were playing in Europe as early as July and upto the end of Dec, they had in fact won 6 games. You also forget that he got Burnley to Premier League twice, he then got them to 7th.

Between 26 July and 26 December Burnley won 5 games - They beat Aberdeen in extra time (1-1 at fulltime) - and İstanbul Başakşehir 1-0 in extra time (0-0 at fulltime) - in the Europa League qualifiers in July and August - then then lost to Olympiakos in the play-off and didn't make the group stage. Teams that qualified for the group stage included two Cypriot sides, one from Kazakhstan, one from Azerbaijan, a couple of Norwegian teams, Rangers and F91 Dudelange of Luxembourg - not exactly powerhouses of football. Burnley also lost to League One Burton in the League Cup.

After that over the next 20 odd games - they beat Bournemouth, Cardiff and Brighton and drew with Southampton, Huddersfield and Leicester. 8 of their 12 points came from teams that ended in th bottom 5 of the PL. After they beat the Turks on 16 August Burnley lost 6 games (sandwiched in there was a draw against Olympiakos when Burnley scored with a couple of minutes to go). They then beat Bournemouth and Cardiff and drew with Huddersfield - before losing 9 of their next 11 games (drawing with Leicester and beating Brighton). In that stretch they scored 7 goals and conceded 29 goals - they were being torn apart by teams.

And yes - Dyche got Burnley promoted to the PL twice - that means that he also got them relegated once - in 2014 when they had 26 points with 3 games to go and were buried before they won 2 and drew 1 of their last 3 games when relegation was already confirmed. After relegation they held almost all of their squad (Ings went to Liverpool for £1m and Trippier to Spurs for £3.5m) - Burnley then spent more than £15m buying players, including Andre Gray who scored 23 goals for them and James Tarkowski.

When they came back up - despite the fact that they had most of their previous PL sqaud and the new players from the previous season, Burnley broke their transfer record 3 times signing players. At the end of January they were 9th - but then went into a tailspin, winning only 2 games out of the remaining 15 games - they also lost to Lincoln in the FA cup. It wasn't as close as Brighton last season but Sunderland, Middlesbrough and Hull were awful that season - the last two went straight back down after being promoted. In 2017 Burnley spent more than £50m including breaking their record again for Chris Wood. This was a successful season - they got 7th - but it was a bit of a weird season - in mid-December Burnley were 6th - over the following 11 games they failed to win any - they drew 6 and lost 5 - they scored 6 goals in those 11 games - yet at then end of that run they were still 7th and they stayed in 7th for the rest of the season without moving - they actually finished the season by failing to win any of their last 5 games. Last season they went out and broke their transfer fee again to sign Ben Gibson.

Effectively Dyche is in his 6th season of building a PL squad (because they held their squad when they got relegated) - 5 years to last season - and still Burnley went into this nosedive from August to December - throughout the end of November and all December Dyche openly admitted that he expected to get the sack - Burnley's board held tough and stuck with him because, despite getting relegated once, they knew he was their best chance of staying up and then them keeping them in the PL into the future.

As for the process, if you aren't sure about sacking someone you maintain the normal routine. As for Potter, they had to get permission to speak to him. Now they may have had people sound him out but nothing would have been confirmed. (It wasn't quite as quick as Spurs).

Yet people on here have repeatedly claimed that Bloom was going to sack Hughton after the Bournemouth game - 6 games before the end of the season - are you suggesting that he changed his mind again - twice - before sacking him the day after the last game?

Yes - they had to get 'permission' to speak to Potter - but do you seriously think that third parties were not in contact with Potter's agent? this 'permission' stuff in nonsense in today's football world. Furthermore - Ashworth had previous with Potter - and Bloom as good as admitted it when he said they were 'tracking' Potter and 'researching' him as a candidate.

You seem very good at being very selective about statistics

I am not being selective - I have used evidence to demonstrated several falsehoods - e.g. - Burnley between August and December were as bad as Brighton at the end of the season - yet Dyche wasn't fired - despite the fact that had previously got Burnley relegated - they knew their best chance was to keep him in the job and give him the tools to work with (Barnes, Wood, Gibson etc). That Cardiff were just as bad as Brighton at the end of the season - yet people on here claim that Cardiff blew it in one game and that is why Brighton stayed up.

The first two years are the toughest for any promoted team - it is only in the third year that you start having the basis of a squad that is capable of keeping the wolf from the door - and Brighton broke their transfer record three times for Potter this off-season. On top of that - finally some of the kids are showing some potential that they could contribute - something that did not happen over the past two years (despite claims on here).

but you claim you went to most games last year yet you cannot accept how bad we were

I never claimed I went to most games - I said I saw most games

and that there was no evidence we would improve if Hughton remained.

Actually - not the case - in fact there is zero evidence that things would not have improved under Hughton this season (they improved dramatically after his first season at the club) - with more than £60m spent on players and several more coming through - there is every likelihood that things would have improved.

The promoted teams that have been most successful tend to be the teams that do not sack the manager who got them promoted and kept them in the PL - Dyche at Burnley - Howe at Bournemouth - Leicester to a degree (but the money from the CL has helped a lot) - Palace since Hodgson. The teams that mess around with managers tend to struggle around the bottom or yoyo up and down (even after a period when they appeared consolidated) - Newcastle - WBA - Swansea - West ham - Everton - Southampton - Palace in the Pulis/Pardew era - now Watford. There is no way Newcastle (except for Ashley), Everton or West Ham really should be bouncing around in relegation trouble - these are traditionally big clubs with a long pedigree in the top division. When you have a manager who works and can consolidate the club in the PL you keep him - making changes when you are not one of the big 6/7 usually ends in a bit of a mess. Time will tell how it will pan out for Birghton.

 

[Justice]

Links were provided during the thread about his sacking - I am sure he had some input - but he did not have the final say on transfers.


Between 26 July and 26 December Burnley won 5 games - They beat Aberdeen in extra time (1-1 at fulltime) - and İstanbul Başakşehir 1-0 in extra time (0-0 at fulltime) - in the Europa League qualifiers in July and August - then then lost to Olympiakos in the play-off and didn't make the group stage. Teams that qualified for the group stage included two Cypriot sides, one from Kazakhstan, one from Azerbaijan, a couple of Norwegian teams, Rangers and F91 Dudelange of Luxembourg - not exactly powerhouses of football. Burnley also lost to League One Burton in the League Cup.

After that over the next 20 odd games - they beat Bournemouth, Cardiff and Brighton and drew with Southampton, Huddersfield and Leicester. 8 of their 12 points came from teams that ended in th bottom 5 of the PL. After they beat the Turks on 16 August Burnley lost 6 games (sandwiched in there was a draw against Olympiakos when Burnley scored with a couple of minutes to go). They then beat Bournemouth and Cardiff and drew with Huddersfield - before losing 9 of their next 11 games (drawing with Leicester and beating Brighton). In that stretch they scored 7 goals and conceded 29 goals - they were being torn apart by teams.

And yes - Dyche got Burnley promoted to the PL twice - that means that he also got them relegated once - in 2014 when they had 26 points with 3 games to go and were buried before they won 2 and drew 1 of their last 3 games when relegation was already confirmed. After relegation they held almost all of their squad (Ings went to Liverpool for £1m and Trippier to Spurs for £3.5m) - Burnley then spent more than £15m buying players, including Andre Gray who scored 23 goals for them and James Tarkowski.

When they came back up - despite the fact that they had most of their previous PL sqaud and the new players from the previous season, Burnley broke their transfer record 3 times signing players. At the end of January they were 9th - but then went into a tailspin, winning only 2 games out of the remaining 15 games - they also lost to Lincoln in the FA cup. It wasn't as close as Brighton last season but Sunderland, Middlesbrough and Hull were awful that season - the last two went straight back down after being promoted. In 2017 Burnley spent more than £50m including breaking their record again for Chris Wood. This was a successful season - they got 7th - but it was a bit of a weird season - in mid-December Burnley were 6th - over the following 11 games they failed to win any - they drew 6 and lost 5 - they scored 6 goals in those 11 games - yet at then end of that run they were still 7th and they stayed in 7th for the rest of the season without moving - they actually finished the season by failing to win any of their last 5 games. Last season they went out and broke their transfer fee again to sign Ben Gibson.

Effectively Dyche is in his 6th season of building a PL squad (because they held their squad when they got relegated) - 5 years to last season - and still Burnley went into this nosedive from August to December - throughout the end of November and all December Dyche openly admitted that he expected to get the sack - Burnley's board held tough and stuck with him because, despite getting relegated once, they knew he was their best chance of staying up and then them keeping them in the PL into the future.


Yet people on here have repeatedly claimed that Bloom was going to sack Hughton after the Bournemouth game - 6 games before the end of the season - are you suggesting that he changed his mind again - twice - before sacking him the day after the last game?

Yes - they had to get 'permission' to speak to Potter - but do you seriously think that third parties were not in contact with Potter's agent? this 'permission' stuff in nonsense in today's football world. Furthermore - Ashworth had previous with Potter - and Bloom as good as admitted it when he said they were 'tracking' Potter and 'researching' him as a candidate.


I am not being selective - I have used evidence to demonstrated several falsehoods - e.g. - Burnley between August and December were as bad as Brighton at the end of the season - yet Dyche wasn't fired - despite the fact that had previously got Burnley relegated - they knew their best chance was to keep him in the job and give him the tools to work with (Barnes, Wood, Gibson etc). That Cardiff were just as bad as Brighton at the end of the season - yet people on here claim that Cardiff blew it in one game and that is why Brighton stayed up.

The first two years are the toughest for any promoted team - it is only in the third year that you start having the basis of a squad that is capable of keeping the wolf from the door - and Brighton broke their transfer record three times for Potter this off-season. On top of that - finally some of the kids are showing some potential that they could contribute - something that did not happen over the past two years (despite claims on here).


I never claimed I went to most games - I said I saw most games


Actually - not the case - in fact there is zero evidence that things would not have improved under Hughton this season (they improved dramatically after his first season at the club) - with more than £60m spent on players and several more coming through - there is every likelihood that things would have improved.

The promoted teams that have been most successful tend to be the teams that do not sack the manager who got them promoted and kept them in the PL - Dyche at Burnley - Howe at Bournemouth - Leicester to a degree (but the money from the CL has helped a lot) - Palace since Hodgson. The teams that mess around with managers tend to struggle around the bottom or yoyo up and down (even after a period when they appeared consolidated) - Newcastle - WBA - Swansea - West ham - Everton - Southampton - Palace in the Pulis/Pardew era - now Watford. There is no way Newcastle (except for Ashley), Everton or West Ham really should be bouncing around in relegation trouble - these are traditionally big clubs with a long pedigree in the top division. When you have a manager who works and can consolidate the club in the PL you keep him - making changes when you are not one of the big 6/7 usually ends in a bit of a mess. Time will tell how it will pan out for Birghton.

Trossard and Maupay two of our better signings this season both said they wouldn’t of signed for the previous manager. The existing players weren’t playing for him, we would never of seen the likes of Connelly or Alzate anywhere near the first 11. Last season we made Cardiff & Bournemouth look like Barcelona at home. Tottenham away was an embarrassment played like a pub team. Wolves away we played a championship 11 well except for our best championship player from that season in Knockhaert. Newcastle at home he clearly lost the plot despite scrapping a draw. If Fulham hadn’t have done the business against Cardiff we would be in the Championship (fact).

 

[LowKarate]

TB’s not called the Lizard for no reason.

Indeed.

It is because he has a rounded torso, elevated head on short neck, dry skin formed by overlapping scales made of keratin, four legs, clawed feet, a long tail and long tongue which can be extended outside his mouth.

 

[B.W.]

Before he was sacked Hughton was in meetings discussing summer transfer targets - if Bloom was intent on getting rid of him from several games before the end of the season, why let him go through this process - the more appropriate thing to do was not schedule any meetings until after the sacking. The likely reason for this was to make sure that they set up Potter as his replacement. That is not the way the club should be doing business - but it is not unusual for clubs these days.

Much has been made of the run of 3 wins in 23 games - Dyche's Burnley, playing very poor football, won 3 games out of 22 (including cup games) up to the end of December - they had 12 points from their first 19 games in the league and were in the relegation zone after losing 5-1 at home to Everton on Boxing Day. Dyche wasn't sacked - 2 months later he was rumoured to be in the running for the Leicester job - now he is being touted as a possible replacement at West Ham and is regularly praised for the remarkable job he has done at Burnley - despite the fact that he has had a lot more time to build a solid squad than Hughton was given.

When Hughton was sacked there was universal surprise given the fact that he kept Brighton in the PL for a second season running with a poor squad, little money and little say in transfer policy. Potter has big shoes to fill - and while things have gone reasonably well so far - there is still a long season to go. Hopefully he will prove he is up to the task.

Not universal surprise. I wan't at all surprised, and nor were many others who actually watch games without CH bias.
He made the squad look poor.
He spent about £50M per season, so not 'little money'.
He had the ultimate say in all transfers.
Potter does not have 'big shoes to fill'. This would be the case only if we hadn't limped to survival, but rather had hit mid-table or higher.

Other than that, I agree 100%...

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Not universal surprise. I wan't at all surprised, and nor were many others who actually watch games without CH bias.

Most 'pundits' had the view that Hughton had done a remarkable job keeping Brighton up - that was where the surprise came from - when you have a manager capable of doing it you keep him.

He made the squad look poor.

No - the squad was poor - as demonstrated by the fact that several of the players were shipped out when replacements were found.

He spent about £50M per season, so not 'little money'.

When you are trying to build a squad in the PL £50million is not a lot - Fulham spent more than £100million and got relegated - this year Villa are over £125million and could still go straight back down.

He had the ultimate say in all transfers.

Not according to reports that were previously linked to in the other thread.

A lot of fans think that it is easy to find and sign players - it isn't - and it isn't particularly for teams in the first or second season after promotion. Players don't want to join such teams because their contract usually has a clause about cutting their wages if relegated and / or they have to go through the process of upping sticks again.

Potter does not have 'big shoes to fill'. This would be the case only if we hadn't limped to survival, but rather had hit mid-table or higher.

Seriously - Hughton has managed three teams for five seasons in the PL - he has won two promotions and brought another club to the play-offs - Potter took a team from 3rd to 1st division in Sweden on the back of a chairman engaged in fraud and corruption to fund the team (a team that is now effectively bankrupt and are being demoted two divisions) and then one season with a mediocre 10th place in the Championship.

Potter has a long way to go before he is even fit to carry Hughton's boots, never mind wear them.

Other than that, I agree 100%...

 

[drew]

Most 'pundits' had the view that Hughton had done a remarkable job keeping Brighton up - that was where the surprise came from - when you have a manager capable of doing it you keep him.

Pretty much to a man, they continually berated our style of play, particularly at Wolves and Spurs. They all liked Hughton because of the type of person he is. However, what are they all saying now about how we play?

No - the squad was poor - as demonstrated by the fact that several of the players were shipped out when replacements were found.

Some would argue that those signings were never given a run in the team or played out of position


When you are trying to build a squad in the PL £50million is not a lot - Fulham spent more than £100million and got relegated - this year Villa are over £125million and could still go straight back down.

Not too bothered about the amounts, it more about the quality. Take Andone, we could have spent a fortune on him had we got him when we originally tried but got a much lower price because of his clubs relegation.

Not according to reports that were previously linked to in the other thread.

A lot of fans think that it is easy to find and sign players - it isn't - and it isn't particularly for teams in the first or second season after promotion. Players don't want to join such teams because their contract usually has a clause about cutting their wages if relegated and / or they have to go through the process of upping sticks again.

Really, most players will have a release clause and the good players will look to move on if a club gets relegated. Throw in the fact that the prem wages at a lower prem club are probably considerably more than most can get elsewhere and your comments about them not coming fall flat.


Seriously - Hughton has managed three teams for five seasons in the PL - he has won two promotions and brought another club to the play-offs - Potter took a team from 3rd to 1st division in Sweden on the back of a chairman engaged in fraud and corruption to fund the team (a team that is now effectively bankrupt and are being demoted two divisions) and then one season with a mediocre 10th place in the Championship.

Potter has a long way to go before he is even fit to carry Hughton's boots, never mind wear them.

We get it, you love CH and can't stand anyone that replaces him.

If you saw the game today, you will understand why watching Potter's team lose to Liverpool is far more palatable than watching Hughtons team/tactics

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

If you saw the game today, you will understand why watching Potter's team lose to Liverpool is far more palatable than watching Hughtons team/tactics

Losing can become a bit of a habit - three on the bounce now - it starts to taste a bit sour after a while.

 

[crookie]

Losing can become a bit of a habit - three on the bounce now - it starts to taste a bit sour after a while.

certainly did the second half of last season, and there was no entertainment value to soften the blow

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[osgood]

Losing can become a bit of a habit - three on the bounce now - it starts to taste a bit sour after a while.


F 0FF troll

 

[blockhseagull]

Losing can become a bit of a habit - three on the bounce now - it starts to taste a bit sour after a while.

It does ... that’s why 3 wins in 24 was good enough for one thing

The sack.

 

[Palacefinder General]

Losing can become a bit of a habit - three on the bounce now - it starts to taste a bit sour after a while.

To quote AmexRuislip ‘Why dont you just fvck off?’ Sad individual.

 

[b.w.2.]

Losing can become a bit of a habit - three on the bounce now - it starts to taste a bit sour after a while.

We have just played Man U away (poor performance, but how many points did your beloved get at Old Trafford?), Leicester at home (THE form team in the Prem), and Liverpool away (European champs, league leaders and unbeaten at home for donkeys). No, not really turning sour for me TBH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

It does ... that’s why 3 wins in 24 was good enough for one thing

The sack.

Didn't happen to Dyche

 

[blockhseagull]

Didn't happen to Dyche

What’s that got to do with it ?

I couldn’t give a toss about Dyche or Burnley.

If that’s the best argument you’ve got then it’s a bit thin.