Jump to content

Tom Fox


Cracker1234

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

 

Probably. I genuinely think they wouldn't have gone for Pulis anyway, nor am I convinced we would give him assurances on budgets either.

We didn't
Not his point is it. I agree, I don't think they would have gone for Pulis regardless even if he was available now. He doesn't fit the MO.

Yeah - I can't see TF presiding over 1 defeat in 9 - be a false narrative !

Sherwood won't be here long term he will either bomb totally, or move on if he is anything approaching moderate.

Why would he move on if he is approaching "moderate"? I don't understand.

Also don't understand you first answer really. Fox has talked a few times about the ethos he wants to create here and Pulis fits precisely none of the perimeters as we believe them to be. I personally don't understand the love affair with him either, he's a sour faced word removed and the football is dire. I've no doubt he'd have kept us up, but that wasn't the point I was making was it.

 

 

Come on ! - I don't overlly mind the appointment of sherwood - I think in the short term it may give us the boost we need. But in the longer term Pullis will be winning games at the albion - Long after the Sherwood at Villa (IMO) - What is the ethos that Sherwood is giving us - that we would miss out on had we hired Pullis? 

 

In half a season @ spurs he was very gung ho - which won him some games, but when he came up against comparable opposition he was found wanting - sure he promoted some good youngsters - but the key difference they were there to promote, at Villa I don't beleive they are, hence a whole succesion of managers haven't put them in the first team in any great numbers.

 

Surley your not taken in by the premise that we get a good youth set up - and over a period of time we will stumble on a set of youth players that can cut in the premier league.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Probably. I genuinely think they wouldn't have gone for Pulis anyway, nor am I convinced we would give him assurances on budgets either.

We didn't
Not his point is it. I agree, I don't think they would have gone for Pulis regardless even if he was available now. He doesn't fit the MO.

Yeah - I can't see TF presiding over 1 defeat in 9 - be a false narrative !

Sherwood won't be here long term he will either bomb totally, or move on if he is anything approaching moderate.

Why would he move on if he is approaching "moderate"? I don't understand.

Also don't understand you first answer really. Fox has talked a few times about the ethos he wants to create here and Pulis fits precisely none of the perimeters as we believe them to be. I personally don't understand the love affair with him either, he's a sour faced word removed and the football is dire. I've no doubt he'd have kept us up, but that wasn't the point I was making was it.

 

 

Come on ! - I don't overlly mind the appointment of sherwood - I think in the short term it may give us the boost we need. But in the longer term Pullis will be winning games at the albion - Long after the Sherwood at Villa (IMO) - What is the ethos that Sherwood is giving us - that we would miss out on had we hired Pullis? 

 

In half a season @ spurs he was very gung ho - which won him some games, but when he came up against comparable opposition he was found wanting - sure he promoted some good youngsters - but the key difference they were there to promote, at Villa I don't beleive they are, hence a whole succesion of managers haven't put them in the first team in any great numbers.

 

Surley your not taken in by the premise that we get a good youth set up - and over a period of time we will stumble on a set of youth players that can cut in the premier league.

 

At spurs he lost to the top 4 teams but generally got results against everyone else, exactly the level where Spurs operate and always will IMO. I dont mind having a go, Lambert didnt even get us to have a go against the likes of Leicester or Hull ffs !!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Probably. I genuinely think they wouldn't have gone for Pulis anyway, nor am I convinced we would give him assurances on budgets either.

We didn't
Not his point is it. I agree, I don't think they would have gone for Pulis regardless even if he was available now. He doesn't fit the MO.

Yeah - I can't see TF presiding over 1 defeat in 9 - be a false narrative !

Sherwood won't be here long term he will either bomb totally, or move on if he is anything approaching moderate.

Why would he move on if he is approaching "moderate"? I don't understand.

Also don't understand you first answer really. Fox has talked a few times about the ethos he wants to create here and Pulis fits precisely none of the perimeters as we believe them to be. I personally don't understand the love affair with him either, he's a sour faced word removed and the football is dire. I've no doubt he'd have kept us up, but that wasn't the point I was making was it.

 

 

Comie on ! - I don't overlly mind the appointment of sherwood - I think in the short term it may give us the boost we need. But in the longer term Pullis will be winning games at the albion - Long after the Sherwood at Villa (IMO) - What is the ethos that Sherwood is giving us - that we would miss out on had we hired Pullis? 

 

In half a season @ spurs he was very gung ho - which won him some games, but when he came up against comparable opposition he was found wanting - sure he promoted some good youngsters - but the key difference they were there to promote, at Villa I don't beleive they are, hence a whole succesion of managers haven't put them in the first team in any great numbers.

 

Surley your not taken in by the premise that we get a good youth set up - and over a period of time we will stumble on a set of youth players that can cut in the premier league.

 

 

My post wasn't really about Sherwood, it was about Pulis and him being a sour faced autocrat with a penchant for shit football. That does not fit the ethos that Fox has outlined going forward. If we had appointed Pulis 9 games ago we'd have stayed up, but we've just as much chance now under Sherwood as we would under either manager because what they really need more than anything else is a bit of confidence and self belief instilled within them. We have the man for that job. Going forward, no matter what you or I think of him, Pulis does not fit the identity that the club wish to display, nor is it one I would like to see. We've had enough dour anti-football to last us a **** lifetime don't you think? 

 

You didn't answer question 1. 

 

Taken in? Are you asking me whether I believe that he will help to build a good youth set up? Truthful answer is I don't know. But then I don't really understand your point. Again. You're just waffling and not sticking to the topic at hand. 

Edited by dont_do_it_doug.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Probably. I genuinely think they wouldn't have gone for Pulis anyway, nor am I convinced we would give him assurances on budgets either.

We didn't
Not his point is it. I agree, I don't think they would have gone for Pulis regardless even if he was available now. He doesn't fit the MO.

Yeah - I can't see TF presiding over 1 defeat in 9 - be a false narrative !

Sherwood won't be here long term he will either bomb totally, or move on if he is anything approaching moderate.

Why would he move on if he is approaching "moderate"? I don't understand.

Also don't understand you first answer really. Fox has talked a few times about the ethos he wants to create here and Pulis fits precisely none of the perimeters as we believe them to be. I personally don't understand the love affair with him either, he's a sour faced word removed and the football is dire. I've no doubt he'd have kept us up, but that wasn't the point I was making was it.

 

 

Comie on ! - I don't overlly mind the appointment of sherwood - I think in the short term it may give us the boost we need. But in the longer term Pullis will be winning games at the albion - Long after the Sherwood at Villa (IMO) - What is the ethos that Sherwood is giving us - that we would miss out on had we hired Pullis? 

 

In half a season @ spurs he was very gung ho - which won him some games, but when he came up against comparable opposition he was found wanting - sure he promoted some good youngsters - but the key difference they were there to promote, at Villa I don't beleive they are, hence a whole succesion of managers haven't put them in the first team in any great numbers.

 

Surley your not taken in by the premise that we get a good youth set up - and over a period of time we will stumble on a set of youth players that can cut in the premier league.

 

 

My post wasn't really about Sherwood, it was about Pulis and him being a sour faced autocrat with a penchant for shit football. That does not fit the ethos that Fox has outlined going forward. If we had appointed Pulis 9 games ago we'd have stayed up, but we've just as much chance now under Sherwood as we would under either manager because what they really need more than anything else is a bit of confidence and self belief instilled within them. We have the man for that job. Going forward, no matter what you or I think of him, Pulis does not fit the identity that the club wish to display, nor is it one I would like to see. We've had enough dour anti-football to last us a **** lifetime don't you think? 

 

You didn't answer question 1. 

 

Taken in? Are you asking me whether I believe that he will help to build a good youth set up? Truthful answer is I don't know. But then I don't really understand your point. Again. You're just waffling and not sticking to the topic at hand. 

 

 

Theres really no need for the angst

 

Sherwoods a well connected guy - I beleive if he is nominally succesful at villa - a meduim sized london club will quickly come calling, he will quickly get fustrated with the lack of funds here - thats why I don't him here long term.

 

Im sure the confidence and self  beleif will come from  Sherwood - how far it will take us Im not sure. If TF sees him as some long term startegist, and he is then thats stroke of brilliance on behalf of TF. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My angst is down to my post not being read and taken at face value, you assumed I was saying something I wasn't. Likely because I'm cautiously optimistic about the manager you thought I was being defensive of him, I was not. I was talking about Pulis and Aston Villa and how they don't fit. How pleased I am Fox didn't buckle earlier and get that miserable bastard in.  

 

Medium sized London club? Which are those? Why London? You don't want him here because he might get frustrated because of lack of funds (supposition), where would that leave Pulis? Didn't he just walk out on Crystal Palace a few days for the season for that very reason or did I misunderstand? 

 

As for Fox seeing something in Sherwood, information that we don't have access to - That's hardly a stroke of brilliance. That's just him doing his job to a decent level. He will be rightly applauded for it, but you make it sound as though it's a wild notion. 

Edited by dont_do_it_doug.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Probably. I genuinely think they wouldn't have gone for Pulis anyway, nor am I convinced we would give him assurances on budgets either.

We didn't
Not his point is it. I agree, I don't think they would have gone for Pulis regardless even if he was available now. He doesn't fit the MO.

Yeah - I can't see TF presiding over 1 defeat in 9 - be a false narrative !

Sherwood won't be here long term he will either bomb totally, or move on if he is anything approaching moderate.

Why would he move on if he is approaching "moderate"? I don't understand.

Also don't understand you first answer really. Fox has talked a few times about the ethos he wants to create here and Pulis fits precisely none of the perimeters as we believe them to be. I personally don't understand the love affair with him either, he's a sour faced word removed and the football is dire. I've no doubt he'd have kept us up, but that wasn't the point I was making was it.

 

 

Comie on ! - I don't overlly mind the appointment of sherwood - I think in the short term it may give us the boost we need. But in the longer term Pullis will be winning games at the albion - Long after the Sherwood at Villa (IMO) - What is the ethos that Sherwood is giving us - that we would miss out on had we hired Pullis? 

 

In half a season @ spurs he was very gung ho - which won him some games, but when he came up against comparable opposition he was found wanting - sure he promoted some good youngsters - but the key difference they were there to promote, at Villa I don't beleive they are, hence a whole succesion of managers haven't put them in the first team in any great numbers.

 

Surley your not taken in by the premise that we get a good youth set up - and over a period of time we will stumble on a set of youth players that can cut in the premier league.

 

 

My post wasn't really about Sherwood, it was about Pulis and him being a sour faced autocrat with a penchant for shit football. That does not fit the ethos that Fox has outlined going forward. If we had appointed Pulis 9 games ago we'd have stayed up, but we've just as much chance now under Sherwood as we would under either manager because what they really need more than anything else is a bit of confidence and self belief instilled within them. We have the man for that job. Going forward, no matter what you or I think of him, Pulis does not fit the identity that the club wish to display, nor is it one I would like to see. We've had enough dour anti-football to last us a **** lifetime don't you think? 

 

You didn't answer question 1. 

 

Taken in? Are you asking me whether I believe that he will help to build a good youth set up? Truthful answer is I don't know. But then I don't really understand your point. Again. You're just waffling and not sticking to the topic at hand. 

 

 

Theres really no need for the angst

 

Sherwoods a well connected guy - I beleive if he is nominally succesful at villa - a meduim sized london club will quickly come calling, he will quickly get fustrated with the lack of funds here - thats why I don't him here long term.

 

Im sure the confidence and self  beleif will come from  Sherwood - how far it will take us Im not sure. If TF sees him as some long term startegist, and he is then thats stroke of brilliance on behalf of TF. 

 

I think you'll find there have been vacancies at two medium sized London clubs recently, neither of which Sherwood was interested in. The next step up in London from  QPR/Palace is Spurs/West Ham. He's been at one and the other well? Not sure they'd fancy a former Spurs man.

 

I also get the feeling Sherwood is the first part of a larger puzzle. He's the coach we have needed - but I wouldn't be surprised to see a DOF type role following as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Probably. I genuinely think they wouldn't have gone for Pulis anyway, nor am I convinced we would give him assurances on budgets either.

We didn't

Not his point is it. I agree, I don't think they would have gone for Pulis regardless even if he was available now. He doesn't fit the MO.

 

 

Yeah - I can't see TF presiding over 1 defeat in 9  - be a false narrative !

 

Sherwood won't be here long term he will either bomb totally, or move on if he is anything approaching moderate.

 

 

and you expect Pulis be long term at WBA? He **** off out of Palace like MON did.

 

IM sure we dont want another gutless spineless word removed managing Villa

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i loved foxs high five, beats seeing faulkner just looking all glum and awkward

 

wonder if lerner would come to cup semi if we got there?

 

The biggest moment Faulkner had in one of our games was almost getting his head taken off by Lerner when Clark scored the equaliser at stamford bridge :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

i loved foxs high five, beats seeing faulkner just looking all glum and awkward

 

wonder if lerner would come to cup semi if we got there?

 

The biggest moment Faulkner had in one of our games was almost getting his head taken off by Lerner when Clark scored the equaliser at stamford bridge :D

 

That was epic, that was lerners only highlight as a fan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Sounds unanimously positive

 

Fox seems so much more qualified than Faulkner was. I think we are in good hands

 

I wonder if he stays if we are relegated, a fear somewhat mitigated by the Sherwood hiring, but clearly still possible....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A baggies season ticket holder at work hates him and the anti football they play. He said he feels like the club have sold their soul in order to stay in a league they will never have an impact on.

I guess there are different ways to look at it. For us, we need to stay in the league in the hope that some multi billionaire buys us and takes us back to the big time. In which case, Pulis is usually a safe option.

Tom Fox seems to be a much more enthusiastic CEO and it feels like he'll be good for us and our future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â