Hudson Interview.

[Hilts]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Is this surprising though?

Most of these players were picked up on a free or for very little because not many other clubs wanted them.
You assemble a full squad of players that most other clubs at this level don't want and try to mould them together as a team to overachieve headed up by a manager with no experience (managers that no other team in this league would entertain either) and this is what you get.

Shop in the bargain basement of football and you'll eventually reap what you sow.

Some gifted managers can make a team of misfits into a competent team.
Inexperienced managers not so much.

Have you got evidence to back up not many clubs wanted the players he brought in.

Reading and Preston for starters lost players to us because they couldnt compete.

[blue lewj]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Have you got evidence to back up not many clubs wanted the players he brought in.

Reading and Preston for starters lost players to us because they couldnt compete.

Well the players who ended up on a free, at most places, would be pushed out to obtain a fee if possible. They weren't wanted at that stage.

I am not talking wages here. I am talking actual fees paid.

Yes, supplement a decent squad with freebies. You don't build a full squad. We're getting roughly what we deserve with how we have chosen to do footballing business.

We have players that would not interest many other clubs are this level and are having the squad managed by men who nobody else in this league would employ in that position. That's the reality.

Disagree? Tell me the players that most other clubs here would take off us on their wages?

[blue lewj]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Let's not beat about the bush here.

Any club in this league who decides to reduce the squad and replace large gaps with under 23s whether good enough or not then backs this up with a squad rebuild of largely free agents and is managed by a rookie manager is heading for trouble.

I'm not sure why we feel we should be the exception to the rule.

[Hilts]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Disagree? Tell me the players that most other clubs here would take off us on their wages?

I have no idea what wages our players are on.

I dont disagree that our squad is really poor and I blame Morison.

You seem to be making out we were on an extremely tight budget and its no suprise we are heading for relegation.

I dont believe our budget was so tight that it was inevitable we would go down.

Not good enough a budget for promotion/play offs Id agree but when you had Ince saying they couldnt compete with us for Rinamota then to see them doing much better than us I look to who put this squad together.

[blue lewj]

Re: Hudson Interview.

I have no idea what wages our players are on.

I dont disagree that our squad is really poor and I blame Morison.

You seem to be making out we were on an extremely tight budget and its no suprise we are heading for relegation.

I dont believe our budget was so tight that it was inevitable we would go down.

Not good enough a budget for promotion/play offs Id agree but when you had Ince saying they couldnt compete with us for Rinamota then to see them doing much better than us I look to who put this squad together.

The way I see it is we have people here who make decisions at the club.

I think we can all agree that most of the managers they have installed have not been good enough.

We can lay blame with the constant, that being the board.
Or we can blame the manager, and the next one, the one after him and the next one after that.

Would most people here choose a man with no experience prior to a few games here to rebuild a squad? I very much doubt it.
Why then did our board believe this was the right thing to do?

I just feel they should be culpable. Not the people they employ that fail again and again. The sad part is they still trust their decision making skills.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Re: Hudson Interview.

No it isn't surprising and I was baffled this summer when people were lauding the transfer window, it was a poor window. It says it all that we're lauding Callum O'Dowda, who's never been more than an average player at this level, as some kind of worldbeater and pinning our hopes on Ebou Adams (who at 26 has never played at this level) being our saviour when he's back from injury

The board certainly shouldn't have given the window to Morison that's on them, however the way he chose to spend the money he was given is on him, he was more than happy to take the credit so he should take the blame

Good players - Robinson, O'Dowda, Collins, Kipre, Romeo, Philogene
OK (and generous with some) - Rino, Etete, Allsop
Bad - Ojo, Sawyers, Nkounko, Simpson
Unknowns/young (again, generous with some) - Daley-Campbell, Tanner, Adams, Alnwick

Some of the good players are genuinely good. I think O'Dowda is the pick of the bunch, if he was a left back earlier in his career, he wouldn't play for us. Robinson is as good as expected, Romeo better. The OK players are fine, I don't think Allsop stops much but he's not to blame. Etete has something but is so raw. To be honest, I'd put Rino in the bad pile, and create an ugly pile for the rest but at least he's got his merits. The 4 bad players are honking. They're so bad it is criminal. Daley-Campbell looks miles off it, and I'd be surprised if any of them come off. Adams is a massive gamble who had a 65% pass completion in League 2 with a grand total of no assists. He gave the ball away a third of the time and didn't create anything with it so I'm hardly getting excited to see him come back.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Re: Hudson Interview.

I had a lot more confidence in us staying up under Morison than I do under Hudson

Steve Morison was manager for 45 games. He got 16 wins, 8 draws and 21 defeats. He was a shit manager. Mick has a better record.

Just let that sink in. Mick McCarthy lost EIGHT games in a row at the end and has a better record than Morison. Young players had less opportunities under him too. When Morison got sacked we were basically bottom of every shots on target or shots taken in the division. We were about 4th in shots from outside the box though, because we couldn't create anything inside it. We had scored 7 goals this season when he got sacked. Seven. That's it. In 10 games, we'd scored seven times. He is without a doubt one of the worst managers we've ever had but that's OK cos the centre halves and Allsop passed the ball between themselves a few times.

[NYCBlue]

Re: Hudson Interview.

100% I could see clear improvement under Morison and really thought we’d click. Under Hudson we look absolutely clueless.

Me too. In my opinion, Morison just needed time. Of which had plenty.

[Rjk]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Steve Morison was manager for 45 games. He got 16 wins, 8 draws and 21 defeats. He was a shit manager. Mick has a better record.

Just let that sink in. Mick McCarthy lost EIGHT games in a row at the end and has a better record than Morison. Young players had less opportunities under him too. When Morison got sacked we were basically bottom of every shots on target or shots taken in the division. We were about 4th in shots from outside the box though, because we couldn't create anything inside it. We had scored 7 goals this season when he got sacked. Seven. That's it. In 10 games, we'd scored seven times. He is without a doubt one of the worst managers we've ever had but that's OK cos the centre halves and Allsop passed the ball between themselves a few times.

You have to look a little bit beyond the base numbers I think.

The team that McCarthy took over in his first season had millions of pounds more player value and player wages at it's disposal - it should have been a lot better than it was.
However for some reason McCarthy kept dropping Harry Wilson - a genuine quality player at this level and instead was playing Leandro Bacuna.
Then into the next season - huge amount of cost cutting, McCarthy just gets worse and worse - the days of playing 5 centre backs were genuinely the strangest tactical thing I can recall from any cardiff manager - he had completely lost the plot.

When Morrison took over he also almost immediately lost our 2 best players from the first half of the season in Moore and Giles - take them out of McCarthy's teams and we would have been in even more trouble.

Then this season - even more cost cutting, and a whole new squad to try to gel.
Yes there were problems, specifically making chances and getting shots in the box, but I feel there's a chance we could have gelled eventually under Morison- now we will never know so it's a moot point.

[2b2bdoo]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Steve Morison was manager for 45 games. He got 16 wins, 8 draws and 21 defeats. He was a shit manager. Mick has a better record.

Just let that sink in. Mick McCarthy lost EIGHT games in a row at the end and has a better record than Morison. Young players had less opportunities under him too. When Morison got sacked we were basically bottom of every shots on target or shots taken in the division. We were about 4th in shots from outside the box though, because we couldn't create anything inside it. We had scored 7 goals this season when he got sacked. Seven. That's it. In 10 games, we'd scored seven times. He is without a doubt one of the worst managers we've ever had but that's OK cos the centre halves and Allsop passed the ball between themselves a few times.

I don’t think that tells any kind of story, MM was a good short term appointment and did well for us until the next season when it was horrendous. That losing 8 games in a row was also the worst attempt of football I’ve ever seen from any team. Put it this way I’m more positive that Hudson will keep us this season than I would have on us staying up if MM had stayed last season. Morison took over and kept us up pretty comfortably in the end, a very good turn around considering our form and how low moral was. The new season and a huge turn over of players and result severe mixed to say the least, some good performances and some very poor ones, but it was always going to take time. We won’t know how we would have done given time but my opinion is I had more faith in him than Hudson. I suppose it’s the old would Malky have kept us up in them Prem debate.

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: Hudson Interview.

When Morrison took over he also almost immediately lost our 2 best players from the first half of the season in Moore and Giles - take them out of McCarthy's teams and we would have been in even more trouble.

Almost immediately? Hardly. In fact, Morison had those players in his side for two months.

It’s funny how positively some people are now reflecting on Morison’s record this season. After all, the side lost to Reading, Bristol City, Luton, Millwall and Huddersfield under his guidance, and failed to score in five of his ten matches.

[2b2bdoo]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Almost immediately? Hardly. In fact, Morison had those players in his side for two months.

It’s funny how positively some people are now reflecting on Morison’s record this season. After all, the side lost to Reading, Bristol City, Luton, Millwall and Huddersfield under his guidance, and failed to score in five of his ten matches.

Who would be your preferred option? Had we stuck with Morison or that we have Hudson for the rest of the season?

[J R Hartley]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Who would be your preferred option? Had we stuck with Morison or that we have Hudson for the rest of the season?

Should have stuck with Morison so he could own this god awful squad we’ve been left with. He’s had a get out of jail card by Tan pressing the trigger so early.

It takes a special kind of manager to be
allowed to get rid of Packs, Vaulks and Bacuna and then actually make the midfield worse.

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Who would be your preferred option? Had we stuck with Morison or that we have Hudson for the rest of the season?

Neither.

The side scored more than one goal in just one game under Morison this season. While I thought his sacking was a little hasty, I’m almost certain he would have been booted out by now anyway. The squad he put together simply isn’t very good.

As for Hudson, I’ve said from day one that I don’t believe he’s management material and nothing I’ve seen so far has convinced me otherwise.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Re: Hudson Interview.

Who would be your preferred option? Had we stuck with Morison or that we have Hudson for the rest of the season?

Take the bold option and appoint a football manager. We wasted what should have been an incredible opportunity to rebuild the team on a clown. Morison was dire. His football was dire. His transfers were worse. He’d have been sacked because Gavin Whyte is getting game time and he’s genuinely better than some of Morison’s signings, and Whyte is miles off the level required himself