Alex Neil off to Stoke....

Scrug said:
I don’t know for sure, but I’m guessing they’ve been in and around the top flight a lot longer than Stoke have? Before Pulis, I don’t remember anything about Stoke.
Click to expand...
They spent big chunks of the 60s, 70s & 80s in the top division I think.
 
Sunderland are a bigger club. They've spent more seasons in the top flight, won more trophies and avagered much higher crowds over the years. They also have a bigger stadium.

Stoke are very similar to ourselves in terms of size in my opinion. We're decent sized clubs and would probably both be roughly placed around 20th position if somebody bothered to position each club in terms of size.
 
Has anyone considered the ownership of the 2 clubs. Sunderland’s board is a mess, the Dreyfuss guy doesn’t own the majority of the shares and the other major shareholders appear to be shisters. Stoke have probably the wealthiest owners in the Championship and are very stable.

Perhaps he’s looking at the bigger picture?

Perhaps Stoke have offered to double or triple his salary and he figured he’ll be in either job for 3 years if he’s lucky.

Who knows ?
 
Frozen Horse said:
It's the only basis on which players and managers choose which club to join.
Everyone knows that.
Therefore, if Neil chooses to join Stoke, Stoke must be the larger club.

Or maybe size of club and past achievements aren't important at all?

Either way, Sunderland fans are going to have to swallow a truth they won't like.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that almost everyone would agree that there are things you can use to judge how big a football club is. Average historical position, average historical attendance, leagues and trophies won, stadium size, club infrastructure, youth academy, potential for growth. I think Sunderland would rank higher than Stoke on all of those things TBH. As would Boro. I'm not saying it's important or even really means anything, I'm just saying that if you're going to be chucking those sorts of terms around it'd be good or interesting to know what you're basing it on. But, as I say, it isn't really important.

Stoke can presumably offer Alex Neil a permanent contract and a more secure and stable working environment. Stoke may have more scope in the transfer market. But I'm not really sure how anyone could describe them as a bigger club than Sunderland. Presumably those people would be happy to accept that Bournemouth, Brentford and Brighton are bigger clubs than Boro?
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
I'm sure that almost everyone would agree that there are things you can use to judge how big a football club is. Average historical position, average historical attendance, leagues and trophies won, stadium size, club infrastructure, youth academy, potential for growth. I think Sunderland would rank higher than Stoke on all of those things TBH.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I actually agree with that.

My point was that it doesn't matter. It's a pointless conceit for fans to bicker about. It is of no more relevance to players and managers when deciding who to work for than the quality of the pies on sale at the club

Fans might respond by saying players should care about the size of the club, to which I'd have to reply "why"? Fans convince themselves it's important because it makes them feel important, particularly with regard to crowd size, but they're only fooling themselves.
 
BoroMart said:
not only does he have 6 days to sort the Stoke squad out if he goes, but, they've already used all their loan signings and can't go splashing the cash without serious FFP risk. Seems a mad time to go and join them.

When I look at the Stoke squad, I don't see that they are under performing either. They've got some decent enough options at the top end of the pitch, but they look defensively poor to me. It's a very heavy youth based squad as well, half the squad is 22 or under. Think they will lack resilience away from home and consistency overall
Click to expand...
The FL72 podcast had a Stoke Sentinel journo on this week who was saying O'Neill basically had to keep the club up and then rebuild a squad whilst dismantling the existing one. He said most of the players they've sold off under him have had to be paid off to leave. It definitely reminded me of the Mowbray tenure for us. Someone doing the really hard work but not really reaping the benefits on the pitch. The next Stoke manager inherits a very young squad with some quality in it; Bursik, Souttar, Brown and Thompson.

You'd think they could push for the playoffs with some sensible additions and some new ideas, much like Aitor with the team Mowbray built.
 
Frozen Horse said:
For what it's worth, I actually agree with that.

My point was that it doesn't matter. It's a pointless conceit for fans to bicker about. It is of no more relevance to players and managers when deciding who to work for than the quality of the pies on sale at the club
Click to expand...
I agree with you TBF!

I just see these debates crop up from time to time and wonder what metrics some people use. There's definitely a sense - well to my mind at least - that some Boro supporters really struggle to admit that Sunderland and Newcastle are big football clubs. To me it's just a fact, which can actually make their struggles even more enjoyable at times.
 
Mfc79 said:
View attachment 43520
Click to expand...
The criticism of this lads time at Sunderland is grossly unfair I think, he was a just a symptom of their financial mismanagement, not the cause.

And one thing that the lady day out do has revealed is that they still seem to be as idiosyncratic currently.

Whoever is appointed has a very difficult job in their hands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top