Chris Hargreaves services?

[nickbrod]

For the sake of another week or so let's see who the new owners are and what they have to say. Get it right off the pitch and we stand a chance of getting it right on the pitch.

[tomogull]

There's a lot of 'meat' in Andy's posting and Nickbrod's two-liner is spot on. New owners might well come in and decide changes of management are needed but we have to get it right off the pitch first. As on old git, I don't like change. We seem to be on a roller coaster of a manager-a-season who has to bring in his own players. We need some stability. I don't agree with Andy when he says we need a 'tough old head'. Eddie Howe, Alan Devonshire (Dover) and Hasselbank at Burton are young managers and our most successful managers have not been 'tough old heads'. Frank O'Farrell came to us from Weymouth as a young manager, and there was Kevin Hodges and Leroy Rosenior of course. Even Cyril Knowles wasn't that old ! And John Bond who should have been manager after O'Farrell was a young manager who went on to be successful at Bournemouth.

I'm all for sticking with CH for at least the first three months of the new season to see if he has learned from some of the mistakes made this season. He must know that his first season has not been successful. Looking at his photo in last Saturday's programme, he has aged about ten years in the last twelve months (unless it was because his BBC make-up was missing). He was a leader as a player and I hope he can prove that he can be a leader as a manager.

[nickbrod]

Jim White writing in yesterday's Daily Telegraph: "Restrained, undemonstrative, spending most of the match in the technical area with his arms folded..."
Remind you of anyone? CH?
No - Eddie Howe watching his Bournemouth team!

[withawhy]

I wouldn't mind CH watching from the Gull's Nest with a decent bottle of red wine to keep him company if he could achieve even half as much as Eddie Howe has achieved!!
After all, successful management is supposed to be about team selection, tactics and what they do during the week on the training ground that should have the most influence!

[Yorkieandy]

There's a lot of 'meat' in Andy's posting and Nickbrod's two-liner is spot on. New owners might well come in and decide changes of management are needed but we have to get it right off the pitch first. As on old git, I don't like change. We seem to be on a roller coaster of a manager-a-season who has to bring in his own players. We need some stability. I'm all for sticking with CH for at least the first three months of the new season to see if he has learned from some of the mistakes made this season. He must know that his first season has not been successful. Looking at his photo in last Saturday's programme, he has aged about ten years in the last twelve months (unless it was because his BBC make-up was missing). He was a leader as a player and I hope he can prove that he can be a leader as a manager.

With all due respect tommo, Hasselbaink had managed second tier Belgians Royal Antwerp for a year before accepting the Burton job and let's not forget that Burton had been on an upward curve for the last few years also and in a commanding position when Rowett left. Even Knill could have come in and got Burton up. So Hasselbaink had some experience and had been left a penalty kick for promotion near as dam it.

Eddie Howe I believe laughed in the face of a minus 17 points deduction in his first season in charge of Bournemouth under difficult circumstances also and got them safe from the drop. This was the first indicator that he had something about him as a manager for a rookie. When you compare this with Hargreaves taking over Torquay also a rookie, CH couldn't achieve the same outcome. Howe continued his remarkable rise to fame supported latterly by a solid and supportive board off the pitch and they are where they are now. Would CH be able to follow in Howe's footsteps given a fair few quid? I don't know the answer to that.

The point i'm trying to make is that yes, whilst I still think a wizened old head should be sought, there is no doubt that a rookie with the scope and potential for success could achieve it like Howe did from the very first whistle. The thing is , with Howe, the evidence was there from the beginning to back this up whilst CH has no such evidence to fall back on to suggest he will be up to the job. Money or not. So therefore to reduce the element of risk and probability of success the club should seek an experienced man at this level.

Torquay managers have not been 'tough old heads' in recent years as you rightly point out. In fact it could be argued that the most experienced of them all in Alan Knill was by far and away the worst but we're not talking about being happy in mid table in league 2 here are we? We're talking a completely different kettle of fish. We're talking to be top dog to gain automatic in a league of mostly ex-league clubs all looking to do the same thing with the same or much better resources. Or at best a play off spot.

Buckle was inexperienced but had the buying power to get out of jail. Richard Hill at Eastleigh is inexperienced as a manager but has the buying power to get them out of jail. The bloke at Brizzle likewise and Grimsby too et al. They all can't buy their way out of the conference but they sure as hell will finish above a club with nowt run by an amateur. CH doesn't have the acumen to achieve superiority over said opponents over the course of a season with peanuts to operate with, largely due to his inexperience and lack of common sense. Nor can he motivate. We've seen this.

An old hand who can organise, galvanise, grind out results and keep things simple is needed to squeeze every last ounce of value out of an average set of players is what is needed. When the conference is revamped to 3 up automatically then perhaps the argument for keeping CH would have some legs but as it is it's a no brainer. This is the conference. You either get out relatively quickly or you end up totally screwed like Stockport or permanently stuck like Lincoln if you get it wrong.

[Gullscorer]

I wouldn't mind CH watching from the Gull's Nest with a decent bottle of red wine to keep him company if he could achieve even half as much as Eddie Howe has achieved!!
After all, successful management is supposed to be about team selection, tactics and what they do during the week on the training ground that should have the most influence!

So you don't think the fact that Bournemouth has a Russian billionaire owner pouring heaven knows how much money into the club has just a tiny little bit to do with their success..??

[Gulliball]

Bournemouth made a £13.5m loss last year, covered by their Russian owner. That bridged the gap between their 'natural size' and their current budget.

For the Championship though, their spending is still average at best. This is a squad that came up from L1 recently and have pretty much all played at lower league level in the past.

Eddie Howe has done an incredible job for his entire reign though (both of them). No matter if they've been skint or flush with cash, he's overachieved. Even taking over midway through the season in 17th place he got them promoted in May. He's had the golden touch.

[Gullscorer]

There's no denying that Eddie Howe is an excellent manager who has done an incredible job, but there also can't be any doubt that spending £13.5m beyond their natural ability to spend, and having a very rich owner to cover the loss, has to some small extent helped Bournemouth to get where they are. By comparison, I have far greater respect for Thea Bristow and her late husband, whose somewhat smaller contribution to our club almost certainly prevented it from going out of existence, and this on crowds at Plainmoor of two or three thousand, a far cry from the support which clubs such as Bournemouth, Luton, Bristol Rovers, and Argyle can command. A small club we may be, but wear your yellow shirts with pride..

[Southampton Gull]

Give Howe the same budget as Hargreaves and see how many promotions he gets. Some of the arguments used to berate Hargreaves are truly moronic.

[Rjc70]

Give Howe the same budget as Hargreaves and see how many promotions he gets. Some of the arguments used to berate Hargreaves are truly moronic.

He did pretty well for Bournemouth when they had the points deduction for administration. Agreed, he has had money since, but as a comparison with budgets of others within the League his Club has been playing in, he has overachieved. I suspect Hargreaves hasn't.

[Yorkieandy]

He did pretty well for Bournemouth when they had the points deduction for administration. Agreed, he has had money since, but as a comparison with budgets of others within the League his Club has been playing in, he has overachieved. I suspect Hargreaves hasn't.

Spot on Rjc70. A point I was trying to make and that passed others by it seems.

When Howe took over Bournemouth in January 2009 they were doomed due to a 17 point deduction. Howe with no experience and no money (it was only later he got cash to spend ) and a squad bereft of quality and confidence managed to win 12 and draw 3 of his 21 games thus guiding them to safety. Hargreaves took over Torquay in far better shape than Bournemouth were then and made a right pigs ear of it in pretty much the same set of circumstances. That was part of my point. Hardly a moronic argument to suggest that there was and is a gulf in ability between the two managers.

[Southampton Gull]

Its more than moronic to compare the managerial ability of someone who overspent to the tune of £13 million plus with someone who has had to ask players to play for nothing. Bournemouth might have had a points deduction but lets not pretend they had no money because that's even more ridiculous.

[Southampton Gull]

Oh and as an aside Andy, I wasn't initially referring to your post as moronic, I've no interest in reading or entertaining the views of someone who can so readily switch allegiance the way you did, I'm afraid I'll never understand the mentality behind that behaviour.

[Rjc70]

Points deduction and a transfer embargo, I thought. I'm not going to compare the two managers further as its fruitless, because Howe is an obvious national success story right now and it would hardly be fair.

Although solely judging Hargreaves, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that he has underachieved to date. Although I would give him credit for some of the signings he made being amongst our better performers this season. Not that this has translated into enough decent team performances, though. Like most on here, the Club will get my support if he is still manager next season. I just hope at the moment we will be in the market for an upgrade of both Manager, tactics, players and points. Maybe Hargreaves one season on will be an upgrade. The signs aren't good in that respect, but stranger things have happened, I suppose. If he hadn't have been such a damn fine player for us, I think a fair few more would be on his back for what we've had dished up since he took the job on, compared to the situation - a 61% approval rating in this poll as I write - now.

[leetufc]

Bournemouth made a £13.5m loss last year, covered by their Russian owner. That bridged the gap between their 'natural size' and their current budget.

For the Championship though, their spending is still average at best. This is a squad that came up from L1 recently and have pretty much all played at lower league level in the past.

Eddie Howe has done an incredible job for his entire reign though (both of them). No matter if they've been skint or flush with cash, he's overachieved. Even taking over midway through the season in 17th place he got them promoted in May. He's had the golden touch.

Howe has shown throughout his career that he has been able to get the best out of his teams. In some cases he had no money to work with, in others he has been more fortunate.

He was lucky this season to have the ability to make a loss, but as mentioned this merely levels the playing field in the championship. All the relegated prem teams are likely to have got more than this is parachute payments alone. Fulham spent nearly the same amount on one player last summer.

Using Howe as a comparison to CH this season doesn't work, two completely different scenarios. However using Howe when he took over at Bournemouth the first time and CH last season is an accurate and justified comparison.

I think he should get one more season (less if it goes worse than this season) as I don't think we can afford to sack him and take a chance on someone else. He needs to learn from his mistakes though, something he has at times not shown this year.