Who was the last manager we took who was already in a job

I’d say Steve McClaren all be it he was an assistant manager at the time.

Who was the last manager we took on who was already a manager at a club before coming to us? Must be going back decades I bet?
 
Is it that important though? Does anybody really care that Bryan Robson hadn't been a manager before? McClaren was our most successful manager ever. Southgate was our captain and you can see why the chairman did it. Look at an older, more experienced Southgate now for example. The German managers rumoured to be the favourite when Southgate got the job only for the chairman to allegedly change his mind, were they in work at the time? Strachan wasn't working but was experienced. Mowbray wasn't working but was still fairly 'hot' after his work with Hibs and West Brom. Karanka hadn't managed before but took us into the play-offs and then took us up. Monk had just had a decent spell at Leeds and was still relatively highly thought of at the time Boro went for him. Pulis was an old head, probably seen as a safe pair of hands. I hated it under Pulis at the end but you can say he got us into the play-offs and then would've got us in again if Derby hadn't been cheating. We should've been higher up the league probably but there you go. Is it the chairman's fault another club were cheating and taking his manager's play-off place off him?

Woodgate hadn't managed before and was a disaster but does that automatically mean we shouldn't appoint first-time managers ever again? Of course not. Warnock is about as experienced as you can get and has done a good job up until the past few months. Does that mean we shouldn't appoint another experienced manager in future? Of course not.

What is the fascination with appointing a manager currently in a job? Allegri was unemployed for two years, Zidane isn't working at the moment. There are good, bad and indifferent managers in and out of work all over the world. If the chairman wants to look for someone who isn't running a senior side at the time he wants to make an appointment then so what, it's worked in the past and will work again IMO.

People are no doubt going to slate Gibson for the Warnock appointment and where we are at the moment but to my mind he did the right thing by acknowledging Woodgate was probably going to take us down. He changed it and brought in a man who galvanised the team and the supporter base. We had a decent season of consolidation in the grand scheme of things, although obviously there were disappointments and annoyances along the way. Warnock deserved a crack this season. You have to give them time and I'm glad our chairman gives them that.
 
Last edited:
zorro_mfc said:
What ruling out every manager currently in the game and only picking from has beens and novices.

yes I’d say that was pretty significant.

given that we are the only club I can think of that has this insane attitude
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? Our most successful manager ever was a ‘novice’. The last bloke to take us up was a ‘novice’. Robson was a ‘novice’. Mowbray was out of work, does that make him as a ‘has been’? What is his Blackburn team up to at the moment? Was Venables a ‘has been’?

Presumably you’d be against us appointing Eddie Howe, Chris Wilder, Zinedine Zidane?
 
This has infuriated me for years. Yes, there are some good managers not currently attached, but why artificially limit yourself to that pool when every other team does not limit themselves that way.

Puts us automatically at a disadvantage and is archaic thinking.
 
changingman said:
This has infuriated me for years. Yes, there are some good managers not currently attached, but why artificially limit yourself to that pool when every other team does not limit themselves that way.

Puts us automatically at a disadvantage and is archaic thinking.
Click to expand...
This 100%
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
Is it that important though? Does anybody really care that Bryan Robson hadn't been a manager before? McClaren was our most successful manager ever. Southgate was our captain and you can see why the chairman did it. Look at an older, more experienced Southgate now for example. The German managers rumoured to be the favourite when Southgate got the job only for the chairman to allegedly change his mind, were they in work at the time? Strachan wasn't working but was experienced. Mowbray wasn't working but was still fairly 'hot' after his work with Hibs and West Brom. Karanka hadn't managed before but took us into the play-offs and then took us up. Monk had just had a decent spell at Leeds and was still relatively highly thought of at the time Boro went for him. Pulis was an old head, probably seen as a safe pair of hands. I hated it under Pulis at the end but you can say he got us into the play-offs and then would've got us in again if Derby hadn't been cheating. We should've been higher up the league probably but there you go. Is it the chairman's fault another club were cheating and taking his manager's play-off place off him?

Woodgate hadn't managed before and was a disaster but does that automatically mean we shouldn't appoint first-time managers ever again? Of course not. Warnock is about as experienced as you can get and has done a good job up until the past few months. Does that mean we shouldn't appoint another experienced manager in future? Of course not.

What is the fascination with appointing a manager currently in a job? Allegri was unemployed for two years, Zidane isn't working at the moment. There are good, bad and indifferent managers in and out of work all over the world. If the chairman wants to look for someone who isn't running a senior side at the time he wants to make an appointment then so what, it's worked in the past and will work again IMO.

People are no doubt going to slate Gibson for the Warnock appointment and where we are at the moment but to my mind he did the right thing by acknowledging Woodgate was probably going to take us down. He changed it and brought in a man who galvanised the team and the supporter base. We had a decent season of consolidation in the grand scheme of things, although obviously there were disappointments and annoyances along the way. Warnock deserved a crack this season. You have to give them time and I'm glad our chairman gives them that.
Click to expand...

He shouldn't be slated for the Warnock appointment. He kept us up but things just haven't worked out really. He's a successful championship manager who was low risk. Unimaginative, yes, but he steadied the ship and it looked promising for a short period. Since then, there's just been no consistency and no signs of improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top