Next Villa manager (Poll added)

[Villan4Life]

I know its never gonna happen but If Ged did move to DOF someone like Eddie Howe (33 same age as Villas-Boas) as first team coach could work, heard he has such good relationship with his players at Bournemouth and now Burnley and like Villas-Boas he likes to play attacking football.

Or even Brendan Rogers (38) who was tutored like Villas-Boas under Mourinho, he always plays attacking football, Swansea very good side.

Like see someone younger as could build something special over the years.

[villan_007]

I know its never gonna happen but If Ged did move to DOF someone like Eddie Howe (33 same age as Villas-Boas) as first team coach could work, heard he has such good relationship with his players at Bournemouth and now Burnley and like Villas-Boas he likes to play attacking football.

Or even Brendan Rogers (38) who was tutored like Villas-Boas under Mourinho, he always plays attacking football, Swansea very good side.

Like see someone younger as could build something special over the years.

Personally I think appointing someone like that would be madness. They must have prem experience or experience of managing at the very top.

Otherwise I think they'd crumble under the pressure.

[Villastine]

Sorry to be sounding dumb, but who does the “he who should not be named” refer to?

I assume Stephen Ireland.

Hopefully he will be well gone....

Sorry I was referring to Warnock!

Anyway back to Hughes, if we are being REALISTIC, can you honestly think of a better available manager at the moment?!

[villabromsgrove]

Sorry to be sounding dumb, but who does the “he who should not be named” refer to?

I assume Stephen Ireland.

Hopefully he will be well gone....

Sorry I was referring to Warnock!

Anyway back to Hughes, if we are being REALISTIC, can you honestly think of a better available manager at the moment?!

Reasonable but uninspiring choice and probably a safe pair of hands. I keep thinking back with some trepidation to that seemingly endless run of draws in his last season at city.

[thetrees]

Hughes was given a chance at City - failed

Interesting.

He lost a couple of games I think, so that kind of 'failure' would do for me.

Even though he's a red, I would welcome him as our manager.

[Maradona10]

I'd also think he'd welcome the chance at Villa.

[Gillz]

I read on the bbc sport website that his (Hughes) contract with Fulham runs out on June 1st and new contract talks have stumbled.

Wouldn't mind Hughes at all, think it would be a 'safe' option but also with potential to push on if given the right support by randy.

[Alec]

Mark Hughes would be a good, solid appointment. He's highly respected within the game by all accounts and reports over the last few years have suggested players like playing for him (Tevez being probably the most high-profile). As a player, he was a winner, and although that doesn't necessarily always translate to coaching and management, he knows what it takes to perform under pressure in this league. His appointment would likely have more of a quietly unifying effect than one that perhaps galvanises optimism that a Champions League challenge will all of a sudden be back on the agenda - but then that is probably as it should be. Restoring much-needed stability and a tougher backbone to the team in order to get comfortably back among the top six or seven is the realistic aim for next season and I think Hughes would provide that.

His teams generally tend to play good football - one of the reasons he got the sack at City was the number of high-scoring matches took their toll after a while, resulting in inconsistent results. I can remember their 4-2 home win against Arsenal and the famous 4-3 defeat at Old Trafford against Utd early in the 09-10 season being good examples of the intent to always take the game to the opposition but inevitably results weren't always going to go in their favour. The City players - and fans if I recall correctly - felt he was harshly treated, even if the success Mancini has since had may ultimately prove that their board was right. But it has to be acknowledged that their agenda is different to ours at present and their managers will get graded on a much harsher scale. Hughes' level - which I would probably rate as being good but not quite good enough to break up the established order - is a pretty accurate reflection of our own level, one that we've allowed to slip this season. So after twelve months of poor performances, player unrest, public relations disasters and a relegation battle, Hughes would act quickly to put many of these basic problems to rest and set about taking us back to where we were before O'Neill departed. Right now, I would be happy with that. Whether he - and we - could kick on from there I don't know, but I would suggest that would probably take the appointment of a manager that is unlikely to take on the job at present.

It's also worth considering his transfer record. It's difficult to draw too many conclusions from what he did at Man City as there were a lot of peripheral reasons why players like Barry, Bellamy, Adebayor, Toure, Given, Tevez, Robinho et al. elected to go there and I don't think for one minute that Mark Hughes was the chief motivating factor. But it demonstrates someone who can balance the ambition to secure the more glamourous, continental headliners with the pragmatism of establishing a core of British (or at the very least Premier League) experience, and this perhaps strikes a happier balance than what we saw in O'Neill's more myopic recruitment policy. We may not be shopping in quite such exclusive outlets but fundamentally this can still apply.

Like David Moyes, he also has a good record when it comes to getting the most from what resources he has available. Players as otherwise erratic, troublesome or inconsistent as Craig Bellamy, Stephen Ireland, David Bentley, Roque Santa Cruz and Bobby Zamora to name but a few have all played arguably their best football under him, and one need only look at how much more influential our own departee Steve Sidwell looks at Fulham in comparison to the anonymous figure who coasted invisibly through so many games for Villa. After a patchy first half of the season, he has ensured Fulham have been nowhere near the relegation zone by the time the business end of the season has come around, and done so with a squad considerably inferior to ours.

For all of these reasons - plus the added prospect of seeing what one of British football's all-time great goalscorers can do working with Darren Bent - he would not only be a sensible, realistic choice but one that would suit us. He will know Villa's potential, the size and history of the club and demonstrate a visible understanding of what the job entails and the fans expect a lot better than the management team have shown this season. There may possibly be better choices but not that many as far as I can see (Moyes would still be the preference on balance), so I'd be happy to see him in the dug-out come August and could see him doing a very respectable job here.

[Gillz]

Mark Hughes would be a good, solid appointment. He's highly respected within the game by all accounts and reports over the last few years have suggested players like playing for him (Tevez being probably the most high-profile). As a player, he was a winner, and although that doesn't necessarily always translate to coaching and management, he knows what it takes to perform under pressure in this league. His appointment would likely have more of a quietly unifying effect than one that perhaps galvanises optimism that a Champions League challenge will all of a sudden be back on the agenda - but then that is probably as it should be. Restoring much-needed stability and a tougher backbone to the team in order to get comfortably back among the top six or seven is the realistic aim for next season and I think Hughes would provide that.

His teams generally tend to play good football - one of the reasons he got the sack at City was the number of high-scoring matches took their toll after a while, resulting in inconsistent results. I can remember their 4-2 home win against Arsenal and the famous 4-3 defeat at Old Trafford against Utd early in the 09-10 season being good examples of the intent to always take the game to the opposition but inevitably results weren't always going to go in their favour. The City players - and fans if I recall correctly - felt he was harshly treated, even if the success Mancini has since had may ultimately prove that their board was right. But it has to be acknowledged that their agenda is different to ours at present and their managers will get graded on a much harsher scale. Hughes' level - which I would probably rate as being good but not quite good enough to break up the established order - is a pretty accurate reflection of our own level, one that we've allowed to slip this season. So after twelve months of poor performances, player unrest, public relations disasters and a relegation battle, Hughes would act quickly to put many of these basic problems to rest and set about taking us back to where we were before O'Neill departed. Right now, I would be happy with that. Whether he - and we - could kick on from there I don't know, but I would suggest that would probably take the appointment of a manager that is unlikely to take on the job at present.

It's also worth considering his transfer record. It's difficult to draw too many conclusions from what he did at Man City as there were a lot of peripheral reasons why players like Barry, Bellamy, Adebayor, Toure, Given, Tevez, Robinho et al. elected to go there and I don't think for one minute that Mark Hughes was the chief motivating factor. But it demonstrates someone who can balance the ambition to secure the more glamourous, continental headliners with the pragmatism of establishing a core of British (or at the very least Premier League) experience, and this perhaps strikes a happier balance than what we saw in O'Neill's more myopic recruitment policy. We may not be shopping in quite such exclusive outlets but fundamentally this can still apply.

Like David Moyes, he also has a good record when it comes to getting the most from what resources he has available. Players as otherwise erratic, troublesome or inconsistent as Craig Bellamy, Stephen Ireland, David Bentley, Roque Santa Cruz and Bobby Zamora to name but a few have all played arguably their best football under him, and one need only look at how much more influential our own departee Steve Sidwell looks at Fulham in comparison to the anonymous figure who coasted invisibly through so many games for Villa. After a patchy first half of the season, he has ensured Fulham have been nowhere near the relegation zone by the time the business end of the season has come around, and done so with a squad considerably inferior to ours.

For all of these reasons - plus the added prospect of seeing what one of British football's all-time great goalscorers can do working with Darren Bent - he would not only be a sensible, realistic choice but one that would suit us. He will know Villa's potential, the size and history of the club and demonstrate a visible understanding of what the job entails and the fans expect a lot better than the management team have shown this season. There may possibly be better choices but not that many as far as I can see (Moyes would still be the preference on balance), so I'd be happy to see him in the dug-out come August and could see him doing a very respectable job here.

I'm sold. Someone email that off to Randy...

[avfc89]

Excellent post on Hughes, he is worth the gamble IMO.

[avfc89]

If you look at his modest signings for City (Zabaleta and Kompany), they have established themselves amongst the big signatures at MCFC.

[AshVilla]

Hughes would be a meh midtable manager for me.

Good if were looking to consolidate after a poor season and finish 7th to 10th but cant see him getting anything better.

[GREAT_BEARD_OF_ZEUS]

Bloody hell Gillz, that's made me think twice too. Well argued.

Sign him up.

[Villastine]

I see Lawro's “predictions” includes Hughes to Villa!! Prob won’t happen so!

Fulham v Arsenal

The noises I'm hearing from inside the club are that Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger won't be making major personnel changes this summer, which I have to say strikes me as particularly strange.

The world and his wife knows what needs to change there and what Wenger's problems are.

They're in danger of finishing fourth now - and considering their collapse in form since late March, I think that's exactly where they'll end up.

Fulham, so impressive last week at Birmingham, don't lose many at home and they have been very good in the second half of the season.

There was a spell, would you believe, that Mark Hughes' position was said to be under threat - which is utterly ridiculous when you consider he was without strikers Bobby Zamora and Andy Johnson.

Now, though, everyone can see that Hughes is a very good Premier League manager - sought after, I wouldn't mind guessing, by the likes of Aston Villa this summer - and he's led them on a fantastic run.

I'm backing them to end the season on a high.

Prediction: 2-1

[Maradona10]

If you look at his modest signings for City (Zabaleta and Kompany), they have established themselves amongst the big signatures at MCFC.

I'd say his signings of Tevez, De Jong and Kompany have built the spine of Man City.

[avfc89]

If you look at his modest signings for City (Zabaleta and Kompany), they have established themselves amongst the big signatures at MCFC.

I'd say his signings of Tevez, De Jong and Kompany have built the spine of Man City.

Agreed.

[Alec]

If you look at his modest signings for City (Zabaleta and Kompany), they have established themselves amongst the big signatures at MCFC.

I'd say his signings of Tevez, De Jong and Kompany have built the spine of Man City.

Very much agree.

One has to wonder if it would've been unrealistic for Villa to have signed De Jong and Kompany back in 2009. We were arguably still looking a better bet at the time as far as challenging the top four was concerned but seemed to become increasingly less ambitious in our transfer plans. Those two have been invaluable to City ever since.

[Maradona10]

De Jong was an expensive purchase think it was 16Million odd, however Kompany was a superb buy for 8Million or so.

[Alec]

Looks like De Jong went for £18m - but considering we had £12m in the coffers from the sale of Barry, it shouldn't have been beyond us. Kompany cost £6m the year before, which has turned out to be an absolute steal - I think we spent £7m on Warnock! On a side note, those players are only now 26 and 25 respectively. Certainly puts our transfer policy during those years in perspective.

[TRS-T]

Mark Hughes would be a good, solid appointment. He's highly respected within the game by all accounts and reports over the last few years have suggested players like playing for him (Tevez being probably the most high-profile). As a player, he was a winner, and although that doesn't necessarily always translate to coaching and management, he knows what it takes to perform under pressure in this league. His appointment would likely have more of a quietly unifying effect than one that perhaps galvanises optimism that a Champions League challenge will all of a sudden be back on the agenda - but then that is probably as it should be. Restoring much-needed stability and a tougher backbone to the team in order to get comfortably back among the top six or seven is the realistic aim for next season and I think Hughes would provide that.

His teams generally tend to play good football - one of the reasons he got the sack at City was the number of high-scoring matches took their toll after a while, resulting in inconsistent results. I can remember their 4-2 home win against Arsenal and the famous 4-3 defeat at Old Trafford against Utd early in the 09-10 season being good examples of the intent to always take the game to the opposition but inevitably results weren't always going to go in their favour. The City players - and fans if I recall correctly - felt he was harshly treated, even if the success Mancini has since had may ultimately prove that their board was right. But it has to be acknowledged that their agenda is different to ours at present and their managers will get graded on a much harsher scale. Hughes' level - which I would probably rate as being good but not quite good enough to break up the established order - is a pretty accurate reflection of our own level, one that we've allowed to slip this season. So after twelve months of poor performances, player unrest, public relations disasters and a relegation battle, Hughes would act quickly to put many of these basic problems to rest and set about taking us back to where we were before O'Neill departed. Right now, I would be happy with that. Whether he - and we - could kick on from there I don't know, but I would suggest that would probably take the appointment of a manager that is unlikely to take on the job at present.

It's also worth considering his transfer record. It's difficult to draw too many conclusions from what he did at Man City as there were a lot of peripheral reasons why players like Barry, Bellamy, Adebayor, Toure, Given, Tevez, Robinho et al. elected to go there and I don't think for one minute that Mark Hughes was the chief motivating factor. But it demonstrates someone who can balance the ambition to secure the more glamourous, continental headliners with the pragmatism of establishing a core of British (or at the very least Premier League) experience, and this perhaps strikes a happier balance than what we saw in O'Neill's more myopic recruitment policy. We may not be shopping in quite such exclusive outlets but fundamentally this can still apply.

Like David Moyes, he also has a good record when it comes to getting the most from what resources he has available. Players as otherwise erratic, troublesome or inconsistent as Craig Bellamy, Stephen Ireland, David Bentley, Roque Santa Cruz and Bobby Zamora to name but a few have all played arguably their best football under him, and one need only look at how much more influential our own departee Steve Sidwell looks at Fulham in comparison to the anonymous figure who coasted invisibly through so many games for Villa. After a patchy first half of the season, he has ensured Fulham have been nowhere near the relegation zone by the time the business end of the season has come around, and done so with a squad considerably inferior to ours.

For all of these reasons - plus the added prospect of seeing what one of British football's all-time great goalscorers can do working with Darren Bent - he would not only be a sensible, realistic choice but one that would suit us. He will know Villa's potential, the size and history of the club and demonstrate a visible understanding of what the job entails and the fans expect a lot better than the management team have shown this season. There may possibly be better choices but not that many as far as I can see (Moyes would still be the preference on balance), so I'd be happy to see him in the dug-out come August and could see him doing a very respectable job here.

Excellent post.

Houllier out.

Hughes in.