I don't like Eriksson, and the other 4 are a bit too small fish for United, no?

i think fergie will wait for carlos queiroz to finish his contract with portugal..then make him his successor..

This post has been edited by scofield: Mar 27 2009, 04:42 PM

I don't know. maybe Alan Curbishley will do well if given sufficient resources. He almost got no money at Charlton. I think he is a great tactician...

Um other than Charlton breaking Chelsea's winning run with a 1-1 draw IIRC, I didn't really notice anything much about them, or Curbishley. With a whole list of renowned world class coaches, do we really want to risk it on Curbishley who's never really been tested on the European scene?

why.. afraid of him arr.. coz he's that damn good..

no keegan's better

If SAF or Jose Mourinho had to manage Charlton one day... cant see them winning anything at Charlton...

You cant simply rate a manager based on the numbers of trophy...Its almost impossible for a small club to win trophy nowadays...

I still think Alan Curbishley should be given a chance at bigger club...

i would like to know how Golden came up with his list in the first place

Alan Curbishley is good candidate.
But seem like we forget Roy Keane.

Small club coaches have to stand out on their own too. You can't expect to be given the opportunity to coach a big club if you don't stand out. Let me put it this way, Martin O'Neill or Alan Curbishley? David Moyes or Curbishley? Harry Redknapp (brought Portsmouth up from the brink of death) or Curbishley?

or I can put it this way. We take risks with whichever coach we plan to install, but who would you rather see at the helm of United, Frank Rijkaard or Alan Curbishley? Sure, Rijkaard might flop like Scolari, but his chances (in the newspaper at least, speaking metaphorically) would be better than Alan Curbishley, no? I'd rather have an established coach or someone who can relate to the club passionately than someone like Alan Curbishley.

to early to predict.. still got another season..

but think should be big names, someone with good record of winning something..

Beats me haha no disrespect btw Golden.

The thing is, there is little guarantee that a successful manager of a small club would be successful when given the resources of a heavy hitter.
Both jobs require subtle differences - for example in the transfer market - at a small club you need to be good at making the most of what your limited budget will get you, some like Harry Redknapp excel in buying these unknowns.
At a bigger club, there's probably a better scouting system in place (and surely it is easier to see the merits of a Messi as opposed to a Mr Kwrtastc from say Poland :lol), so the ability to spot talent might be secondary to the ability to actually motivate overpaid young men!

Btw, Keegan's a muppet at both facets, and if you are considering managers who have cut their teeth at clubs with little or no budget, why isn't Dario Gradi in the list? Oh wait, he's even older than ferguson. My bad.

---

Added on March 27, 2009, 5:19 pmI prefer Alan Curbishley


This post has been edited by madmoz: Mar 27 2009, 05:19 PM

!!! Are you saying.......that......Mr Wenger would be more well-suited for a smaller club?!

/politely

I'm sorry but your opinion matters not here.

Why would Rijkaard have a higher chance of success than Curbishley? He may have managed one of Europe's giants but it wasn't as though he had much to do. The only good thing I remember him doing is getting rid of a bunch of pensioners. Evidently he didn't do enough to keep his job there. He was a great player but that doesn't mean he'll amount to a decent manager.

Big names may be perceived to be a safe bet but who was Arsene Wenger before he signed? Who had heard of Gerrard Houllier before he won 5 cups for us in a season? Avram who?

wenger do hv good record at france n japan before he join arsenal..
houllier also with france club.. manage france before join liverpool
but avram who? he's friend to abramovic

Exactly like you said. Big names are a safer bet than smaller names. Why take more risk with a lesser known or experienced manager, unless you can justify it. If Charlton had the money they would have gone for a bigger named manager. It's how the world turns. (Except for Man City with Mark Hughes, that beat me).

When you employ a coach you look at his credentials don't you. 'This guy has the experience, he's won some cups, he's known as a great motivator, other coaches talk highly of him' so and so. Simply because on paper, he's a safer bet.

Why employ a fresh graduate when you can get an experienced worker, if money is no concern? I just think it's a smarter business/sporting option unless that fresh graduate comes first class, won all the top accolades, goes to an Ivy League university so on and so on.

o' Neil for United

I'd be lying if I said i would not dread on the day our dear gaffer decide to call it a day! All my life supporting Man Utd he has been there and of course he is hard to replace. But I would not speculate on who to replace SAF as there's tonnes of managers out there. I'm sure SAF would offer his piece of advice alongside David Gill on the right candidate that will suit our Man Utd tradition, flair, youth policy, style etc.

Then why are you rating SAF as well? He was nobody before managing. Bear in mind(you phony supporter you), if you had been digging some SAF's experience you would know how SAF lifted up clubs in Scotland before coming to United. You should know St. Mirren or Aberdeen at least ...

Suprised eh? Me too.

Yup, O'Neil is a good candidate.

This post has been edited by boxsystem: Mar 27 2009, 06:13 PM