AVFC-Prideofbrum

You just know, she is honestly the most beautiful girl I've met, just about everyone fancies her. I have mixed with the idea of just going for it and then if not it's done but there is a few problems with that. For example, she's on my course, I'll see her most days at Uni, we sometimes do work together and quite frankly I enjoy both the time seeing her even and also she's good help getting work done as I'm not as close to anyone else on my course, so if I need to look at her work for ideas or like have a question, only feel comfortable really asking her... don't wanna be put in the position where it makes it a little awkward and she may feel uncomfortable spending time with me cause then i'm losing out! To be fair, although appreciate it, wasn't really looking for advice because I knew exactly what people would say. On the plus point she says she ain't even got with anyone at Uni and has only ever slept with one person, her ex BF so don't get the horrible feeling of knowing she's banging everyone at Uni. I think I just file this position as one I have to be realistic about. currently, she's one of about 5/6 person i constantly speak to at Uni, she's on my course, we do work together, we always have good laugh. I really don't want to risk losing a lot of that for the about 0.1% chance of being with her. if she wasn't on my course, I'd take the advice but not at the moment anyway. I can control my feelings quite well though and never really get upset of the position. Thanks though, VT good place to get things out. little PM for ya stevo though, just to show the uphill task. Seriously, It'd be like Emile Heskey trying to get a contract with Barca.

I absolutely adore the most beautiful girl (really isn't an exaggeration, we're talking 10/10) at my Uni, on my course. Speak to her all the time, we been bingo together twice and got some food and had nice little couple hour chat which raised hopes but clearly way above me, standards wise. It's not really worthy post of a relationship thread but needed to vent my frustration. One way love. Sucks. **** me she's hot though.

"Enda Stevens: haha yeah i was still pretty drunk doing the interview u not notice no?" Should fit nicely alongside Dunne and Collins in the back four then.

Never play offs for champions. Winning the league should be the team who finished top of the tree. A play off system for say 3rd/4th CL spot though for example i wouldn't mind between 3rd-6th.

I still don't get how you don't rate him to be fair. I can get why people would rate Pulis or wouldn't rate him ..I don't get it with O'Neill though, he's done a good job everywhere he's gone. I could see maybe why you wouldn't want him as a manager but it just cannot be denied that he's a good manager. Whatever job he's done, he's done a good job, limited funds or money to spend. all sizes of clubs.

you know he got to an FA Cup final last year as well. also comparing budgets Pulis 11th is better than MON 6th. SPL doesnt count for MON supporters as Eck outclassed him in Scotland on lesser budget Stoke have spent nearly £80 million since being in the Premiership. O'Neill finished 6th in the Premiership after he spent around £25 million overall at the club. Obviously the league is weaker but given the money Stoke have spent, you could argue they should have done better. Also like to add that you cannot compare which is the better job (even though I'd say 6th is anyway ..) because like people said O'Neill had a limit, maybe so does Pulis in terms of ever taking Stoke from mid-table to top 8. O'Neill achieved more than Pulis with Leicester....the only comparable jobs IMO.

Pulis has done wonders with Stoke. He's spent a bit but no where near as much as MON did with us. Tactically I think he's better than O'Neill (but that's not exactly hard) and as far as motivation goes I think they're on par. As I said, I don't think Pulis is great I just don't rate MON, which by the looks of things is a crime on these boards. So much for VT being anti-MON. . O'Neill did wonders with Leicester, similar job and also won a couple trophies. The money arguement would stand up if it actually meant something? :? He has finished 12th, 11th, 13th with highest points total 47. That is a good achievement for Stoke but your point makes no sense because they haven't finished around each other. If Pulis finished 7th with 60 points and O'Neill finished 6th with 62 points but Pulis spent £20 million less ...then the point becomes more meaningful. However O'Neill finished 6th 3 times, and 3 times over 60 points .. in fact, Stoke's best season, finished with 47 points ...we finished 17 points above them. Now with the money spent, you'd probably expect that but I certainly wouldn't look at those results and go 'well Pulis has done a better job' that makes no sense. Look at Pulis managerial records: Pulis: Bournemouth: 17th, 17th. (win 28.7%) Gillingham - Promotion, did a good job. (43.52) Bristol City - Pretty much hounded out, left after 6 months. (30.30) Portsmouth - sacked after 6 months. (31.43) Stoke - Avoided relegation, finished 11th and also sacked. (35.88) Plymouth - mid table Championship. (30.77) Stoke - Promotion and obviously 12th, 11th, 13th in Prem. (39.70) Also reading his buys, £5.5 million for Dave Kitson, £3 million for Olofinjana, £2 million Sonko, £2.5 Million Faye, A.Davies, £1.5 million, Beattie £3.5 million etc... in his first season he spent £25 million. second season, £18 million, Whitehead for £5 million, Collins £2.5 million, Arismendi £2.5 million etc. £10 million 3rd season. £27 million this season. So he has spent nearly £80 million on transfers since being at Stoke City and thus far best finish is 11th. He hasn't worked miracles. O'Neill: Wycombe - 5th, 2nd, promoted, promoted, just missed out on 3rd successive promotion, 2 fa trophies. (46.43) Norwich - left down differences with chairman. (45.00) Leicester - Promotion, finished 9th, 10th x2, 8th with Leicester ..won two league cups. (38.12) Celtic - not comparable, scotland isn't competitive, stupid record like 75% win rate .. Villa - obviously know what he done, record of (42.11) Sunderland - 4 wins in last 6 ...more points and wins in his first 6 games than Sunderland managed previous 14. These aren't opinions, these are their managerial records, facts ... how then people can't rate O'Neill or rate Pulis better, it just makes no sense. O'Neill hasn't failed at any of his jobs in management which is highly impressive.

Yep, you've said you rate Pulis more but unless I've missed it, you haven't said why or explained why despite the facts you still believe Pulis is better? Again, O'Neill has achieved everything Pulis has and a lot more.

06-07 - 24 points. 07-08 - 33 points. 08-09 - 38 points. 09-10 - 35 points.

Seems a few people will have shoes in their mouths after reading this post. I suspect they won't shut the **** up though, they're still pissed we got an ex Scum manager. Can't be happy with a win at Chelsea eh? Two mistakes at home to Swansea and we're a club fighting relegation. **** fickle fans make me sick. Could you do us a favor and compare our current points to the seasons previous to the 2010/11? I'm sure we aren't better off than when we under MON but we definitely aren't going backwards. People need to just calm down and breath. We'll be fine. We're AVFC. Annoyed because we have a shit manager. oh and stats coming up points wise.

But it's just bizzare why not. He has been successful everywhere he's gone, he was successful at Villa, itt's not luck, he's a good manager. How can you not rate him? He has flaws like every manager but he gets results everywhere he goes. His record is there to look at? :? You don't understand why he doesn't rate MON? How about the fact he's left us with a terrible squad. I mean look at it. It's rotten to the core. The players he bought in were signed for massive wages (Randy is to blame for that as well) and were overpriced. Then later on they were sold for peanuts, if that. What about their horrible attitude as well. Thinking they're better than they are when in reality they would look out of place in a pub team. He's wasted alot of money basically. He's a good manager. Let's not kid ourselves. I would take him back right now over the current manager. But overall he hasn't adapted to the modern game so he's extremely limited. I would also like to know as well why you thought he was successful here. Top 6 back then wasn't anything to brag about. Moyes managed to finish above him twice with a shoestring budget comparison to the millions MON spent and wasn't far off when he did finish below him in the final season under here. Since his depature, the top 6 has gotten stronger when it's become the new top 4 back in the days. And finally, what on earth did he win? Nothing. He wasn't successful here and the fact you think that is actually painful to see. He failed to reach the Champions League or win any worthwhile silverware. Oh wow, he got 2 wembley trips that he lost in and Europa spots that he couldn't be arsed with after wasting millions of reaching there. Like I said, painful to see. Despite all those points you raise you still admit he's a good manager. When it comes to 'what has he won' always a pointless arguement IMO, unless you're very lucky, you don't win things unless you've got one of the best teams in the division. David Moyes is a very good manager and he's won nothing. Of course he failed to reach the Champions League, we didn't have the funds both in transfers and wages to do it. 09/10, we finished above Liverpool, an excellent achievement really. Why was he successful? The first two seasons he finished 6th, we had the 8th highest wage bill, so were punching above our weight. 6th highest wage bill in the 09-10 season, finished 6th but also above a huge club like Liverpool. First time we finished top 6 3 times in a row in a long while, our best points tally in a 20 game season wasn't it in the Premiership as well? We finished with 60+ points 3 times in a row. i think that's an excellent achievement. We also didn't spend the sort of sums where you'd expect more to be achieved, he also started with a poor squad and his first set of signings weren't upto scratch to be competitive for our overall ambitions, so really when you're talking £90 million net spend or whatever ...that isn't to reach the top 4/6 ...that's to try and get to a top 6/8 position. For example, we finished 11th his first season in charge, big players aren't going to come, of course he could have done much better in the market, make no mistake but we were also never going to sign players at that stage who would be good enough to break the top 4 IMO. those players were the quality who could push top half of the table and then you build once again from there. As said, at our absolute peak of spending wages, we were spending 6th highest in the league. We didn't even come close to have the finances in transfer fee's to break the top 4, so he did the best really available to him, therefore it's a success. If I was given the tools to only make a bed and I made a bed, i'd call it a success, not a failure because I couldn't build a house. You only have to look at Man City, it took them £200+ million and nearly double wage bill to reach the top 4. It's a massive ask. He was successful. there's nothing more really he could have done, he had his failures but he bought the best results this club was going to get for where we were as a club. the last line, quoted from you. so why doesn't Mantis rate him?

But it's just bizzare why not. He has been successful everywhere he's gone, he was successful at Villa, itt's not luck, he's a good manager. How can you not rate him? He has flaws like every manager but he gets results everywhere he goes. His record is there to look at? :?

Compared to Stoke, they play like Barcelona. I don't see how he's better myself, at the very worst, I may be able to see why people would put him in the same bracket. O'Neill has done what Pulis has done and more.

Tony Pulis much better manager, Haha. No chance. Football is horrific as well. Well, i'm being kind calling it football.

We had to sell Young, could have kept onto Milner and Downing though now looking back for at least one more season. That said, it's made worse by the fact we haven't re-invested the money. I'm sure had we sold those players but then spent it all on players and improving maybe various areas of the squad, it wouldn't be so bad. We have just sold players and not replaced them or replaced them weakily.

13 points from 6 games. Didn't they have 11 from their previous 14 games? He's been successful everywhere he's gone and he'll again take an average Sunderland side and put them at 7th-10th which considering they way they started and quality in squad, is impressive.

Yay go Jimmy!

Remember people on here moaning about O'Neill and wanting him gone. Deary me. Guarenteed results.

Spot on. Yes.

:oops: :? I'm talking overall, you know, he's been here for 6 months now. Or because I haven't watched 1 game I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the season? **** shit.

Please get him out, admittedly I haven't even watched the game today, luckily but 5 wins in 20 games, another home loss. No results now, I certainly don't see results in the future and any progression. **** sake, I hate where we are as a club right now. **** shit, boring football.

Darts is not and never will be an amazing sport. Load of shite.

Richard, positive predictions as ever I see! We finished 6th.

The angle at which he passed it was weird but I guess it worked so yay!