Head coach ...not manager

Come on guys ffs
We are after a head coach not a manager
Exciting times ahead with a new direction

At last I can see a plan developing within our higherarchy

A new head coach probably young with new ideas ,who will be backed up by a committee
A committee that will be made up of dalman,choo,slade,tan,and the new head coach all working together for the benifit of our club

I hope we do bring in a young hungry head coach eager to prove himself ,with fresh ideas ,who would not be scared to use the youngsters where ever possible,should this be rowberry then I will give him my support and backing

Not some old dinasour manager in charge of everything,wasting our money on high wages and transfer fees ,that if don't come off we lose money on or can't sell off .

My big concern in the above is will our fans give him a chance ,going by today's reaction (a great signing of intent IMO)to the signing of immers I'm not to sure,too many over reacting to this signing in a negative way .

Any way I for one am happy with today's activity ,and look foreward with anticipation for much more positive dealings and a new season with renewed hope

Most on here do not know difference between head coach and manager, if you believe what's said on here

Most on here do not know difference between head coach and manager, if you believe what's said on here

Basically, a manager has control of pretty much everything and interacts directly with the chairman.

A head coach does not have control and is overseen by a transfer committee, who makes the majority of decisions for the head coach regarding signings. Our new head coach will have to report to Slade, who will then act as the go between passing on the head coaches ideas to Tan and the rest of the board/transfer committee.

This is probably why Immers has been signed already, as it's definite a head coach will be appointed, not a manager. Therefore, it doesn't matter who comes in as this is the way our club will work anyway with our transfer committee making the decisions.

Brendan Rodgers summed it up best when he said at Liverpool, he was declined the striker he wanted to replace Suarez and was given a list of alternatives. Rodgers was asked to pick one of the players from the list, which is why he ended up with Balotelli because none of the other strikers to replace Suarez at the time were any good. Rodgers didn't want Balotelli, but it was either Balotelli or nobody, so he had no choice.

That's my take on it anyway.

So basically its a YES man we are after who trains the players that he's given, if this is the case who picks the final team before kick off or does a head coach suddenly become the manager then

Also how can fans want a head coach out if results don't go rite I mean he's not the manger afterall just a trainer for the training pitch

So basically its a YES man we are after who trains the players that he's given, if this is the case who picks the final team before kick off or does a head coach suddenly become the manager then

Also how can fans want a head coach out if results don't go rite I mean he's not the manger afterall just a trainer for the training pitch

Head coach trains players picks team identifies players needed!! But doesn't have control of .who is bought in a committee does that normally , a manager has overall control over all matters player wise signings, wages ect ect. So bad results are down to head coach no one else.

So basically its a YES man we are after who trains the players that he's given, if this is the case who picks the final team before kick off or does a head coach suddenly become the manager then

Also how can fans want a head coach out if results don't go rite I mean he's not the manger afterall just a trainer for the training pitch

Head coach trains players picks team identifies players needed!! But doesn't have control of .who is bought in a committee does that normally , a manager has overall control over all matters player wise signings, wages ect ect. So bad results are down to head coach no one else.

How can results be down to a head coach if there not his players 100% that's my point allan, its ok saying he only has half a say but the next thing fans will blame him for results yet there not his players to get results, its a catch 22 situation

I know modern football has changed for the worse but f**k me it sounds bizzare really might aswell call it a nodding dog role but face the blame anyway when the hit squad are out in force

So basically its a YES man we are after who trains the players that he's given, if this is the case who picks the final team before kick off or does a head coach suddenly become the manager then

Also how can fans want a head coach out if results don't go rite I mean he's not the manger afterall just a trainer for the training pitch

Head coach trains players picks team identifies players needed!! But doesn't have control of .who is bought in a committee does that normally , a manager has overall control over all matters player wise signings, wages ect ect. So bad results are down to head coach no one else.

Does not sound like much of a job!

On a hiding to nothing from the day they start.

Why would anyone do that?

Most on here do not know difference between head coach and manager, if you believe what's said on here

Basically, a manager has control of pretty much everything and interacts directly with the chairman.

A head coach does not have control and is overseen by a transfer committee, who makes the majority of decisions for the head coach regarding signings. Our new head coach will have to report to Slade, who will then act as the go between passing on the head coaches ideas to Tan and the rest of the board/transfer committee.

This is probably why Immers has been signed already, as it's definite a head coach will be appointed, not a manager. Therefore, it doesn't matter who comes in as this is the way our club will work anyway with our transfer committee making the decisions.

Brendan Rodgers summed it up best when he said at Liverpool, he was declined the striker he wanted to replace Suarez and was given a list of alternatives. Rodgers was asked to pick one of the players from the list, which is why he ended up with Balotelli because none of the other strikers to replace Suarez at the time were any good. Rodgers didn't want Balotelli, but it was either Balotelli or nobody, so he had no choice.

That's my take on it anyway.

Ross and thats my make on it and I don't like the modern way.

lets hope this transfer committee doesnt go and splash the cash on Zahore. he looks a donkey to me

lets hope this transfer committee doesnt go and splash the cash on Zahore. he looks a donkey to me

Should do alright then
The last striker we had that some called a donkey on here didn't do so bad did he
Take a bow RUDDY GESETEDE ee aw ee aw