Your preferred manager

Parky had to given credit because he stuck to his principles, even if his 442 got unpicked one week he would still stick with it, and more often than not it worked.
The football Stuart wants to play is better to watch but we haven't got the players needed to play it, which is partly his own fault, although some of the players were under contract. AOC is good on his day but too inconsistent, Paudie isn't as good as we thought (or hoped) he was and BRE is just a big bruiser (some times), so three at the back doesn't really work. The wingers are no where near good enough, certainly DMH is no Mark Marshall. The best crossers of a ball are Wood and Evans but where do you play Evans? At Portsmouth he was allowed a bit of a free rein,
The squad looks a bit disjointed, a bit like the one we had the other year.
Despite his critics Billy Clarke has probably looked the most comfortable on the ball but where do you play him.
McCall needs to find a system that works and soon. It's a start that he's twice admitted he got it wrong. If eventually he has to go, fair enough but I desperately want him to succeed, not because he is a legend but because I am sick of changing managers. The club needs some stability.
We should be able to find a system that this squad can adapt to but I think it starts with four at the back.

 

It is. Just like the how the Cowleys were tolerated at Lincoln and Parky was tolerated at Bradford and Bolton, Huddersfield fans would also have 'tolerated' them if they had brought success. We ain't gonna get the Cowleys at Bradford but id be more than happy if we did.

 

I hear a lot about styles of football the appointment of Stuart was welcomed by the majority because he likes to play an attacking style. Taking Saturday for example he played three up front it was an attacking line up. He could have matched them up which would have probably lead to a dour match but possibly with a result.
There are very few matches at this level that can be classed as good football. Pragmatism is needed Parky knew this. Getting out of this league has to be the aim either with pretty football or not

 

Huddersfield fans "tolerated" a manager who took over a team that had one point from six games, kept them up with a game to spare.

 

Not sure where this "cowleys are hated' has come from? Always come across well in interview, seem very ambitious. maybe soem mistake ambition for big headedness.

 

Lincoln were glad to get rid apparently, naturally after they'd set up the training facilities with cash from the cup runs and received a fee from Huddersfield.

 

I believe both Flynn and Weaver being at their clubs for several years also helps build a squad and improve it year on year just as Parky did.

 

Or Paul Madeley booooooooooooooooo but what a player.

 

Good but nowhere near the goal scoring record

 

https://bantamtalk.com/index.php?threads/your-preferred-manager.4351/page-2#post-412500

Not hated but disliked.

 

Absolutely fantastic post and sums up exactly where the club is at right now.

 

Without doubt the best submission I have read on this forum. Bravo Zulu.

 

I was meaning more his ability to fill most outfield positions and look comfortable playing them.

 

I think sometimes certain people "click" in a particular job.
The Cowley brothers did brilliant at Lincoln but there's always
that doubt about whether it was just a good fit for them there
or whether they had genuine talent and ability which would be
forthcoming at any club. But that is dependant on the new clubs
circumstances and a new appointment means they are not
doing too well so success is no easy thing with new manager.

 

Agree so much with this post - so much of it is down to timing, circumstances and being the right fit. I think the Cowleys (currently) are the epitome of this at Lincoln, its not to say they could not be a success elsewhere but I am not convinced they are not in many ways similar to Stuart - not in style of play but in that so much of their success there was built around team spirit and togetherness that came from their man management style

 

There's no hard and set rule, for every successful manager that moves on to successful pastures new there are many many more who fail at the next port of call. Like Eddie Howe who was a great success for Bournemouth but failed with a short spell at Burnley. Then went back to Bournemouth and was a success again.

 

Didn't they do well at Huddersfield?

And I have no idea how they can be compared to Teflon. They actually achieved something, had success, promotion, they had great cup runs....where are Teflons?

 

Stats are interesting as a comparison
McCall
P478 W188 D111 L179 Win% 39.3
Cowley
P658 W338 D148 L172 Win% 51.4

 

One main difference is that Stuart hasn't doubled up as a PE teacher and Non League manager for over 430 matches.

 

Interesting though stats may be and theirs are better than Teflons ultimately it is about the end product. The Cowleys did well at Lincoln and they did well stepping up at Huddersfield where the pressure was significantly higher.

Many of Teflons backers have used his stats as a core plank in their argument that he is a good manager....