Ian Royal wrote:Name an inexperienced manager to do well here, who hadn't been coaching / playing here for at least the preceding year first.
Pretty inexperienced? He was still a player with no management experience when he took over.tonyrfc wrote:Mark Mcghee was pretty inexperienced when he took over
I don't necessarily agree, but if they don't think McDermott has shown he's capable of recreating the successful environment and team now that he did the first time around (which I could understand the train of thought) then why would they stick with him when they've spotted a young and hungry manager who they think could work better under the blueprint.Ian Royal wrote:...I just don't see why on earth anyone with a brain would want him over the previous incumbent - McDermott.
Because you shouldn't be able to reach that conclusion in such a short space of time without some truly terrible performance. And it really wasn't that bad.Hoop Blah wrote:Ian Royal wrote:Name an inexperienced manager to do well here, who hadn't been coaching / playing here for at least the preceding year first.Pretty inexperienced? He was still a player with no management experience when he took over.tonyrfc wrote:Mark Mcghee was pretty inexperienced when he took over
To be fair though, football and RFC are very different now than 25 years ago and expectations even more so.
I don't necessarily agree, but if they don't think McDermott has shown he's capable of recreating the successful environment and team now that he did the first time around (which I could understand the train of thought) then why would they stick with him when they've spotted a young and hungry manager who they think could work better under the blueprint.Ian Royal wrote:...I just don't see why on earth anyone with a brain would want him over the previous incumbent - McDermott.
You're a very important man.Platypuss wrote:It's only the fact that Dave hasn't posted on this much which keeps my delete finger holstered.
Please do, the thread title makes me angryPlatypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.
Alright ginger, calm down.genome wrote:Please do, the thread title makes me angryPlatypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.
Far more shocking modding going on with the stickying of utterly pointless threads.Platypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.
leon wrote:Alright ginger, calm down.genome wrote:Please do, the thread title makes me angryPlatypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.

pretty much covers the TB tbfwingnut wrote:utterly pointless threads
Er yes, point takensputnik wrote:pretty much covers the TB tbfwingnut wrote:utterly pointless threads
to what?genome wrote:Please change the thread title
I can live with that.Sebastian wrote:You're a syllable short of a joke there Forbes.
FTS, back to R&G it goes. Poor, poor form, Brendy.Platypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.
You'll have to ask Forbs about that one.wingnut wrote:Far more shocking modding going on with the stickying of utterly pointless threads.Platypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.
But the DM did an article PP?Platypuss wrote:FTS, back to R&G it goes. Poor, poor form, Brendy.Platypuss wrote:Shocking title
Shocking nobbing (not official yet)
Minded to delete the whole thing pour encourager les autres.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Silver Fox, Yellowcoat2 and 131 guests