ToonForum - Newcastle United Forum

Jaiston wrote:

Bodacious Benny wrote:I like the idea of Vieira as he's a proven winner with a strong winning mentality. He also seems to have a made a good impact for the Man C U21s. I like the idea that he might give us something new rather than the mundane tripe we'd get with McLaren. He seems pretty well connected too.

Any coach should be able to do that, it's Man City.

Any coach should be capable of taking more than 4 points from 11 Premier League games but it doesn't always work out like that.

West Ham are talking to bilic, de boer, emery and bielsa. The gulf in ambition between them and us is staggering.

Cheesoid wrote:Is rather have Paul Jewell than Vieira because he's got PL experience.

<wenger>

How do you know that Vieira is better than him?

He could be mint like but I'd sooner us go for Garde.

Apparently Bayern tried to get him to take over their reserves with a view to replacing Pep.

The more I read about this, the more I want to go with Vieria and the more I think it's not going to happen.

Over The Line wrote:Apparently Bayern tried to get him to take over their reserves with a view to replacing Pep.

The more I read about this, the more I want to go with Vieria and the more I think it's not going to happen.

Didn't know that, the guy come cross to me as a clever intelligent footballing man and is ambitious. If we get him it would be the first sign of intent. Always liked the guy as a player and when I've seen him on TV.

dls wrote:West Ham are talking to bilic, de boer, emery and bielsa. The gulf in ambition between them and us is staggering.

Read that story, but I still have doubts they'll land any of that group. That said, I'd be happy with any of those 4.

I'm over Colo wrote:

dls wrote:West Ham are talking to bilic, de boer, emery and bielsa. The gulf in ambition between them and us is staggering.

Read that story, but I still have doubts they'll land any of that group. That said, I'd be happy with any of those 4.

Yeah, be interesting to see if they pull it off. Even so, the fact they're trying for names like that is a far cry from going in for the 3rd time for manager who has just been sacked for failing spectacularly at a Championship club.

dls wrote:

I'm over Colo wrote: Read that story, but I still have doubts they'll land any of that group. That said, I'd be happy with any of those 4.

Yeah, be interesting to see if they pull it off. Even so, the fact they're trying for names like that is a far cry from going in for the 3rd time for manager who has just been sacked for failing spectacularly at a Championship club.

Touche. But the difference is also that West Ham love to make big claims in the press about their ambition, often naming players they have no hope in signing. This could just as easily be an example of that, but for managers. By comparison we never really leak anything to the press, and if anything, our club prefer to downplay ambition and set lower expectations. My point is, I'd take all of this with a grain of salt, and names being leaked to the press don't impress me much until it results in action.

I'm over Colo wrote:

dls wrote:
Yeah, be interesting to see if they pull it off. Even so, the fact they're trying for names like that is a far cry from going in for the 3rd time for manager who has just been sacked for failing spectacularly at a Championship club.

Touche. But the difference is also that West Ham love to make big claims in the press about their ambition, often naming players they have no hope in signing. This could just as easily be an example of that, but for managers. By comparison we never really leak anything to the press, and if anything, our club prefer to downplay ambition and set lower expectations. My point is, I'd take all of this with a grain of salt, and names being leaked to the press don't impress me much until it results in action.

Yeah that's true. Think the difference is this time that they want a big name manager because of the new stadium. They absolutely have to fill that or they'll end up having to buy it which would cost them more than they could afford.

I just wish we'd show some sort of ambition. Even if it doesn't come off at least go for someone like that. It feels like there has never been a better opportunity to start to galvanise the fans and give the club an entire overhaul. Instead we're going to be stuck with McClaren with Carver as assistant and nothing is going to change. Frustrating.

dls wrote:

I'm over Colo wrote: Touche. But the difference is also that West Ham love to make big claims in the press about their ambition, often naming players they have no hope in signing. This could just as easily be an example of that, but for managers. By comparison we never really leak anything to the press, and if anything, our club prefer to downplay ambition and set lower expectations. My point is, I'd take all of this with a grain of salt, and names being leaked to the press don't impress me much until it results in action.

Yeah that's true. Think the difference is this time that they want a big name manager because of the new stadium. They absolutely have to fill that or they'll end up having to buy it which would cost them more than they could afford.

I just wish we'd show some sort of ambition. Even if it doesn't come off at least go for someone like that. It feels like there has never been a better opportunity to start to galvanise the fans and give the club an entire overhaul. Instead we're going to be stuck with McClaren with Carver as assistant and nothing is going to change. Frustrating.

Oh I totally agree about wanting a new manager that demonstrates ambition and a change in club policy. I'm just not going to get upset about West Ham rolling out big names, because they always do, and our fans wouldn't believe we were going after those managers even if we were.

As much as I'd like Vieira, I hate the term "he's a born winner" the media always use to talk up a manager (usually one who's new in management). That's how Vieira has been described, but it's hardly the case that great players who won a lot automatically become great managers is it?

Southern fairy wrote:As much as I'd like Vieira, I hate the term "he's a born winner" the media always use to talk up a manager (usually one who's new in management). That's how Vieira has been described, but it's hardly the case that great players who won a lot automatically become great managers is it?

Yes. But as a player he was a born winner and leader. They're not saying he'll make a great manager but saying he's a born winner can't be argued with.

But they are saying it as a means of supporting the opinion that he'll be a great manager. Which is rubbish.

Didn't win anything at Cannes or Milan. Not a born winner.

[tweet][/tweet]

Johnny from the block wrote:[tweet][/tweet]

To be honest we might as well just make Carver the manager if we're going to appoint McClaren.

Johnny from the block wrote:[tweet][/tweet]

Oh ffs, McClaren it is, with Carver as his number 2. Stone and Woodman etc will still be here. 12th place at best next season, bookmark this.

That could literally mean anything from "you're sacked" to "you're manager".

TJR wrote:

Johnny from the block wrote:[tweet][/tweet]

To be honest we might as well just make Carver the manager if we're going to appoint McClaren.

Did McClaren do something to you or something?

Jaiston wrote:Didn't win anything at Cannes or Milan. Not a born winner.

And the award for most stupid comment on here is won

Assuming your not fishing, I'd say 3 Premier League titles, 5 FA cups, 4 community shields, 4 Serie A titles (with 2 different clubs), 2 Italian Cups, a World Cup, a European Championship winner, confederations cup winner and too many individual accolades to count clearly make the man a born winner, especially considering that he captained sides to many of those honours.

But to give you credit, he didn't win anything in the 5 appearances he made for Milan...