The other thing about Hughton was this

In his second season, he got caught between two stools: he'd signed players to (in theory) help develop us, but when they didn't deliver, it became suicidal to play more open. You can't play open if you end up with 0 by your name every week.

So I think he wanted to be MORE defensive - but couldn't because of pressure from the board (which should've either backed him or sacked him; there's no in-between) and the fans. Consequently, I don't think the players knew what the manager wanted of them by the end - but I don't think that was all his fault.

This season, after initially being quite open and playing good football, we didn't have much to show for it. Similar problem, in other words. So Neil did the only sensible thing he could: he closed up, and tried to develop a reliable template for most games. But as he's a much harder headed man than Hughton, I can't see him succumbing to external pressure in the same way; we CAN play in different ways under him, but I don't envisage him becoming similarly confused.

Even if we go down, we should stick with him. The time to sack AN is either:

a) If we go down, fall outside the play-off positions and look all at sea, or

b) If we stay up, but fall into a similar Hughton-style rut

This is a hard, hard, hard league, folks. Every point is precious; every win to be celebrated with gusto. Last season, we had the best squad in a massively inferior division. Now we have one of the worst ones in one of the best leagues in the world.

Posted By: thebigfeller, Dec 5, 21:46:43