Sheridan to Barnsley

Gary Johnson how long till his name pops up?

Angry wrote:

I would rather Sheridan stayed till the end of the season then leave the club if that's what he wants to do. One things for sure Wotton taking over will happen sadly

I'd rather have a joint team of you, Freathy and IJN.

Iggy wrote:

Hitch wrote:

I can't say that I've ever warmed to Wotton as a person - an arrogant bully. But he just might have the qualities to be a decent manager at Argyle. It's his club and has a far greater affinity to it than possibly anybody else. He knows the lower leagues well and he would rule the dressing room. With some good coaching assistants I think he certainly deserves a shot at it at some point.

I'd agree in principle but think that he should cut his teeth elsewhere to prove himself Hargreaves style. I think Hargreaves may be a good manager for Argyle in the future but I don't think he's there yet but having said that he's a couple of years ahead of Wotton in the experience level.

I wouldn't be totally against someone like Hargreaves coming to Argyle.
He is working with relative peanuts at Torquay you have to remember and if he can get them up challenging near the top then all the more reason.

Decent player for Argyle, articulate and one who would get us playing in an attractive style.

tigertony wrote:

Angry wrote:

I would rather Sheridan stayed till the end of the season then leave the club if that's what he wants to do. One things for sure Wotton taking over will happen sadly

I'd rather have a joint team of you, Freathy and IJN.

i dont like pork so working with nool will never happen

Punchdrunk wrote:

Iggy wrote:

Hitch wrote:

I can't say that I've ever warmed to Wotton as a person - an arrogant bully. But he just might have the qualities to be a decent manager at Argyle. It's his club and has a far greater affinity to it than possibly anybody else. He knows the lower leagues well and he would rule the dressing room. With some good coaching assistants I think he certainly deserves a shot at it at some point.

I'd agree in principle but think that he should cut his teeth elsewhere to prove himself Hargreaves style. I think Hargreaves may be a good manager for Argyle in the future but I don't think he's there yet but having said that he's a couple of years ahead of Wotton in the experience level.

I wouldn't be totally against someone like Hargreaves coming to Argyle.
He is working with relative peanuts at Torquay you have to remember and if he can get them up challenging near the top then all the more reason.

Decent player for Argyle, articulate and one who would get us playing in an attractive style.

Yeah but......Hodges was a better player and far more successful at Torquay than Hargreaves-look what happened when he came back to manage Argyle. The ex player/promote from within model never seems to work for Argyle and Hargreaves wouldn't fill me with confidence that he could buck the trend. Much rather see someone like Adkins brought in if Shez did decide to up sticks but then I suppose the question of money demands would come into it. The whole thing's probably a load of old horse shit anyway.

Sheridan potentially leaving would be no big loss. Plenty of better managers out there. Any of you really think Warnock is going to struggle to get this team playing in (League Two) with players like McCormick, Nelson, Hartley, Cox, Bobby Reid, Reuben etc.? Full credit to She's for signing them, would be interesting to see someone else manage them.

As for Wotton, I do not understand his credentials for the management job at this time. He is currently a rookie defensive coach not even a year into the job. Managing is a whole different kettle of fish. I agree Wottsy needs to look at doing the Truro job or something similar first. If he does well I doubt he'd get picked up by a club bigger than Argyle - and it would be a case of us waiting until we are ready to hire him.

ejh wrote:

Sheridan potentially leaving would be no big loss. Plenty of better managers out there. Any of you really think Warnock is going to struggle to get this team playing in (League Two) with players like McCormick, Nelson, Hartley, Cox, Bobby Reid, Reuben etc.?

Oh dear!

ejh wrote:

Sheridan potentially leaving would be no big loss. Plenty of better managers out there. Any of you really think Warnock is going to struggle to get this team playing in (League Two) with players like McCormick, Nelson, Hartley, Cox, Bobby Reid, Reuben etc.?

Has Warnock ever got a team playing well without a high influx of players first?

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

.If you believed the Mirror this nearly happen two years ago

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Angry wrote:

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

I don't understand your point really. Isn't a manager allowed/supposed to bring in the players they want to achieve an ambition agreed with the board of directors at the club?

As long as he delivers improved league finishes I doubt he would lose too much sleep.

Warnock likes a powerful player or two, and building physically strong sides. As I say, I doubt he would struggle to get the best out of Hartley, Cox, Reuben and Brunt in particular. I would also expect to see less mardy and half hearted performances against sides we know we should be dispatching.

ejh wrote:

Angry wrote:

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

I don't understand your point really. Isn't a manager allowed/supposed to bring in the players they want to achieve an ambition agreed with the board of directors at the club?

As long as he delivers improved league finishes I doubt he would lose too much sleep.

Warnock likes a powerful player or two, and building physically strong sides. As I say, I doubt he would struggle to get the best out of Hartley, Cox, Reuben and Brunt in particular. I would also expect to see less mardy and half hearted performances against sides we know we should be dispatching.

My point is we have no money he can only get results with it. Do you think James Brent is going to allow him to do that? which rules him out of the running altogether.

What money would Warnock need? A very good squad for the level is already in place. There is a mixture of pace, power, strength and technique throughout the squad. If Warnock wanted more strength up front for example, he has Reid, or Brunt, or both. If he wants pace he's got Alessandra. The same applies throughout the squad - we have options aplenty.

ejh wrote:

What money would Warnock need? A very good squad for the level is already in place. There is a mixture of pace, power, strength and technique throughout the squad. If Warnock wanted more strength up front for example, he has Reid, or Brunt, or both. If he wants pace he's got Alessandra. The same applies throughout the squad - we have options aplenty.

One mans girlfriend is another mans drunken mistake. Again he will want money in the summer to bringing a squad load of players and james brent will not fund that at all and to be honest i wouldnt blame him. Warnock hasnt been at this level for nearly 20 years he is too out of touch with lower league football to know what players to bring in and where they are.

There are better suited managers out there if Sheridan leaves or when he leaves if not to Barnsley too choose from and a dinosaur with a gob isnt one of them.

ejh wrote:

Angry wrote:

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

I don't understand your point really. Isn't a manager allowed/supposed to bring in the players they want to achieve an ambition agreed with the board of directors at the club?

As long as he delivers improved league finishes I doubt he would lose too much sleep.

Warnock likes a powerful player or two, and building physically strong sides. As I say, I doubt he would struggle to get the best out of Hartley, Cox, Reuben and Brunt in particular. I would also expect to see less mardy and half hearted performances against sides we know we should be dispatching.

There were some "mardy and half hearted" performances when Warnock was in charge as well. I saw Argyle get two stuffings at Hereford and Fulham which were among my top 10 all time Argyle horror shows and there were several other displays which were less than convincing against sides that Argyle should have "despatched". As a matter of fact, it took Argyle 33 games to get to the 49 points mark in Warnocks season and that was with considerably more wherewithal and a much lesser reliance on loan signings than has been Sheridan's lot, so maybe it's an idea to give the old rose coloured specs a bit of a polish now and then because it sure wasn't all an easy ride in 1995/96.

Greenskin wrote:

ejh wrote:

Angry wrote:

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

I don't understand your point really. Isn't a manager allowed/supposed to bring in the players they want to achieve an ambition agreed with the board of directors at the club?

As long as he delivers improved league finishes I doubt he would lose too much sleep.

Warnock likes a powerful player or two, and building physically strong sides. As I say, I doubt he would struggle to get the best out of Hartley, Cox, Reuben and Brunt in particular. I would also expect to see less mardy and half hearted performances against sides we know we should be dispatching.

There were some "mardy and half hearted" performances when Warnock was in charge as well. I saw Argyle get two stuffings at Hereford and Fulham which were among my top 10 all time Argyle horror shows and there were several other displays which were less than convincing against sides that Argyle should have "despatched". As a matter of fact, it took Argyle 33 games to get to the 49 points mark in Warnocks season and that was with considerably more wherewithal and a much lesser reliance on loan signings than has been Sheridan's lot, so maybe it's an idea to give the old rose coloured specs a bit of a polish now and then because it sure wasn't all an easy ride in 1995/96.

It's not a case of rose tinted specs, we finished 4th that season (1pt off automatic with superior GD) and we would bite hands to have that now. As for Hereford they had a decent season themselves, which is a different prospect to being turned over by a side marooned at the bottom of the football league when you haven't won in 8 games! I personally don't think either Warnock or Sturrock would struggle with these players, or many other potential managers for that matter, that was the only point I wanted to make.

Greenskin wrote:

ejh wrote:

Angry wrote:

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

I don't understand your point really. Isn't a manager allowed/supposed to bring in the players they want to achieve an ambition agreed with the board of directors at the club?

As long as he delivers improved league finishes I doubt he would lose too much sleep.

Warnock likes a powerful player or two, and building physically strong sides. As I say, I doubt he would struggle to get the best out of Hartley, Cox, Reuben and Brunt in particular. I would also expect to see less mardy and half hearted performances against sides we know we should be dispatching.

There were some "mardy and half hearted" performances when Warnock was in charge as well. I saw Argyle get two stuffings at Hereford and Fulham which were among my top 10 all time Argyle horror shows and there were several other displays which were less than convincing against sides that Argyle should have "despatched". As a matter of fact, it took Argyle 33 games to get to the 49 points mark in Warnocks season and that was with considerably more wherewithal and a much lesser reliance on loan signings than has been Sheridan's lot, so maybe it's an idea to give the old rose coloured specs a bit of a polish now and then because it sure wasn't all an easy ride in 1995/96.

the playoff final from what i recall was a very boring and dull game.

Angry wrote:

Greenskin wrote:

ejh wrote:

Angry wrote:

ejh wrote:

The window isn't really open for him to do that. Not until the summer anyway. Interestingly both QPR and Leeds are both doing considerably worse than when he was at both clubs.

Because he plays a certain way and bulk buys players to play it. It no wonder managers who take over from him struggle with the exception of palace as he wasnt there long enough to burden padrew.

Warnock is better off retired he wont succeed here again, he barely did it here the last time by the skin of his teeth.

I don't understand your point really. Isn't a manager allowed/supposed to bring in the players they want to achieve an ambition agreed with the board of directors at the club?

As long as he delivers improved league finishes I doubt he would lose too much sleep.

Warnock likes a powerful player or two, and building physically strong sides. As I say, I doubt he would struggle to get the best out of Hartley, Cox, Reuben and Brunt in particular. I would also expect to see less mardy and half hearted performances against sides we know we should be dispatching.

There were some "mardy and half hearted" performances when Warnock was in charge as well. I saw Argyle get two stuffings at Hereford and Fulham which were among my top 10 all time Argyle horror shows and there were several other displays which were less than convincing against sides that Argyle should have "despatched". As a matter of fact, it took Argyle 33 games to get to the 49 points mark in Warnocks season and that was with considerably more wherewithal and a much lesser reliance on loan signings than has been Sheridan's lot, so maybe it's an idea to give the old rose coloured specs a bit of a polish now and then because it sure wasn't all an easy ride in 1995/96.

the playoff final from what i recall was a very boring and dull game.

It was an understandably tense affair and the standard of football was nothing special, in fact iirc the standard of football throughout that whole season was probably worse than we are seeing this season under Sheridan imo. Warnock or Sturrock would be poor replacements for JS, especially the latter who is so far gone you'd have to be demented to want him back

Odds 20/1 on skybet

I was led to believe that Sheridan had applied for the vacant manager's job at Burton.  Purchasing a club is far more attractive if their is no manager currently in post...

Warnock's mob had Trigger and Littlejohn up front. That's a fair approximation to Alessandra and Reid now. He had Corrazzin too.

A typical midfield would have been Maugé, Ledbitter, Clayton and Logan. Plenty of knuckle there if needed but not much flare. Also Barlow, Baird, Billy and McCall.

A back four of Patterson, Hill, Heathcote and Williams. Pretty solid if you ask me. Also Curran.

He didn't really bother with a goalie but we had either Blackwell or Cherry so not bad there either.

They might have taken a while to bed in but that's a pretty formidable team, horrible to play against and definitely useful in a ruck.

I saw Warnock's lot draw 0-0 with Beck's Lincoln at Sincil Bank on a freezing cold day. It was comfortably the worst game of football I have ever seen.

I take it you did not go to Newport away this season then, SFD? :-O

ejh wrote:

I take it you did not go to Newport away this season then, SFD? :-O

He was stood behind me for it

I don't think the Newport game on Boxing Day was THAT bad compared to some of the tripe served up during the five years of shite. It wasn't good but we had our chances and had our moments. More than can be said in many games of the past few years.

I only remember the one shot on target, and that didn't exactly trouble the keeper. Add the abject weather, torrential downpour in an uncovered stand, and watching Argyle two goals behind and getting physically bullied by Newport's average players - nope, they don't come much worse than that for me!

*At least in previous seasons we have played crap but had a crap team of crap players. At Newport we had decent players out, and playing a team below us in the table. But you are right there have definitely been far worse performances, particularly the admin years.