Rousseau 9,381 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 He'd one good season as manager of West Brom and other than that very little of note as a manager. But as a number 2 and a coach he's highly regarded in football apparently, certainly the list of clubs he's coached at is pretty impressive. He must have learned something during his time as Mourinho's assistant. It's about expectation, I'd have been very disappointed if we'd appointed Stevie Clarke, but he's a decent appointment for a club like Kilmarnock. I'd say the same about PC, his CV would have made him an interesting appointment for Killie, doesn't make him Rangers material though. I just thought our perceptions interesting. When you look at their CV's, PC looks by far the better candidate -- too good for Killie --, but we're saying one is a dud and another has wonderful credentials? And when it came to us, a 'No.2 career' was irrelevant. I thought Killie getting Clarke was a coup, but now that I look, I'm not sure why? (I know Clarke wasn't touted as Rangers quality.) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnMc 2,473 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 I just thought our perceptions interesting. When you look at their CV's, PC looks by far the better candidate -- too good for Killie --, but we're saying one is a dud and another has wonderful credentials? And when it came to us, a 'No.2 career' was irrelevant. I thought Killie getting Clarke was a coup, but now that I look, I'm not sure why? (I know Clarke wasn't touted as Rangers quality.) Why do you think PC has a better CV than Clarke? A couple of Portuguese minnows, a big-ish Mexican club and then obscurity in the middle east against a guy who has coached or managed some big, big clubs and some smaller provincial clubs in England. The bottom side in the SPFL being able to appoint a guy who has coached the first teams of Chelsea, West Ham, Newcastle and Liverpool is fairly impressive, on paper at least. Kilmarnock have been appointing people with significantly weaker CVs than Clarke over the last 20 years. I'm not sure how PC is too good for Kilmarnock myself, his CV is pretty ordinary by any standards. It's academic, neither should be in the frame for the Rangers job in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,429 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Clarke, experienced at big clubs, with big coaches, presumably took the Killie job as he was missing the smell of the liniment, and the roar of the crowd. (OK, I know, I know, the former, only.) If he does well, or better than as well as might be expected, he may fancy himself to be handily placed when Brenda Brent leaves, is dismissed, or is caught in bed with a dead woman or a live trans-sexual. On the other hand, maybe the Job Centre was about to sanction him.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Steve Clarke had a very good reputation as a number 2 and always seems highly regarded, so I think he's a bit of a coup for Kilmarnock. I do totally get what you're saying about what's he actually achieved, but if you look at the majority of clubs in Europe, there's only a very small percentage who have the level of expectation that we do (relatively speaking) and an even smaller percentage who are used to winning trophies year in, year out. So that list of managers who've been there and done it (all those things in the list above) ends up as a very tiny percentage of candidates available at any one time. PC was a gamble and could have been a success, but if it was between him and Clarke, I'd have said Clarke every day of the week because of his experience in British football. I don't envy the Board's job one little bit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,381 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 (edited) Why do you think PC has a better CV than Clarke? A couple of Portuguese minnows, a big-ish Mexican club and then obscurity in the middle east against a guy who has coached or managed some big, big clubs and some smaller provincial clubs in England. The bottom side in the SPFL being able to appoint a guy who has coached the first teams of Chelsea, West Ham, Newcastle and Liverpool is fairly impressive, on paper at least. Kilmarnock have been appointing people with significantly weaker CVs than Clarke over the last 20 years. I'm not sure how PC is too good for Kilmarnock myself, his CV is pretty ordinary by any standards. It's academic, neither should be in the frame for the Rangers job in my opinion. I don't really know what I'm arguing to be honest! I just thought our perceptions were interesting. I wasn't overwhelmed at PC's appointment, but I thought he had a decent track record -- and I still believe it was a step forward for us, if not as far as we would've liked! I maintain he has a better CV than Clarke. If you take their 'coaching' (or, No.2) career then, clearly Clarke has experience of 'bigger' clubs -- although, at Chelsea I suspect he was just around because he was a club man, as it certainly wasn't to 'coach' in the traditional sense with Jose's preferred team --, but that same mentality ('winning', 'pressure' etc.) is gained at Sporting, Panathanaikos and Rapid Bucharest. You said he [Clarke] must have learned something from Jose, but PC was brought up in that whole philosophy, and even teaches it. Of course, you have to transfer that over to the team, and neither was able to do so (PC with us, anyway). Managerially (or, No.1), surely PC has the edge? He's won things at "big-ish" (subjective) clubs. They're both respected coaches (PC around Europe and South America, Clarke in England... ), and whether you believe PC was a step forward or not -- not, in your case -- I still maintain PC has the better CV. But, yes, it is academic. Clarke's appointment is a bit of a coup, but I'm not sure why? Maybe it's my own prejudice regarding British and European coaches. There must be a reason why he'd been out of work for a year, and had to take a step down. It doesn't matter. Edited October 30, 2017 by Rousseau 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Didn't take training today apparently....Who didnt 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrheadboy 16 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 I know McInnes seems to be the media’s favourite and it seems with fans too,just got to say while I admire what he has done at St Johnstone and Aberdeen I am just a bit underwhelmed. I said earlier in the thread my pick is Alan Pardew and I have not changed he has worked in big club like aNewcastke and for many years in the Premier League so he is no mug. I think he has good profile and certainly good contacts in England that along with our DOF can only be good for the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Jaws 570 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 I've said it more than once on these boards and I'll say it again. I like Derek he's a good lad but I don't want him to be the Rangers manager. Theres no need to repeat whats already been said and the Rangers Observer article sums up exactly why I think that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,381 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Why do you think PC has a better CV than Clarke? A couple of Portuguese minnows, a big-ish Mexican club and then obscurity in the middle east against a guy who has coached or managed some big, big clubs and some smaller provincial clubs in England. The bottom side in the SPFL being able to appoint a guy who has coached the first teams of Chelsea, West Ham, Newcastle and Liverpool is fairly impressive, on paper at least. Kilmarnock have been appointing people with significantly weaker CVs than Clarke over the last 20 years. I'm not sure how PC is too good for Kilmarnock myself, his CV is pretty ordinary by any standards. It's academic, neither should be in the frame for the Rangers job in my opinion. I don't really know what I'm arguing to be honest! I just thought our perceptions were interesting. I wasn't overwhelmed at PC's appointment, but I thought he had a decent track record -- and I still believe it was a step forward for us, if not as far as we would've liked! I maintain he has a better CV than Clarke. If you take their 'coaching' (or, No.2) career then, clearly Clarke has experience of 'bigger' clubs -- although, at Chelsea I suspect he was just around because he was a club man, as it certainly wasn't to 'coach' in the traditional sense with Jose's preferred team --, but that same mentality ('winning', 'pressure' etc.) is gained at Sporting, Panathanaikos and Rapid Bucharest. You said he [Clarke] must have learned something from Jose, but PC was brought up in that whole philosophy, and even teaches it. Of course, you have to transfer that over to the team, and neither was able to do so (PC with us, anyway). Managerially (or, No.1), surely PC has the edge? He's won things at "big-ish" (subjective) clubs. They're both respected coaches (PC around Europe and South America, Clarke in England... ), and whether you believe PC was a step forward or not -- not, in your case -- I still maintain PC has the better CV. But, yes, it is academic. Clarke's appointment is a bit of a coup, but I'm not sure why? Maybe it's my own prejudice regarding British and European coaches. There must be a reason why he'd been out of work for a year, and had to take a step down. It doesn't matter. I think it's just my own prejudice against British coaches. I watch a lot of European matches, and I'm constantly fascinated by what's on offer, tactically; Leipzig, Dortmund, Atalanta, Napoli, Lille (albeit poorly at the moment!), PSG, Celta Vigo etc., are all remarkable in there own way. Even when you look at the English PL, you have Guardiola, who's different from Mourinho, who's different from Conte, who's different from Klopp, and so on. And, then I look at the British coaches, and they're basically, for me anyway, producing variations of the same tactic; it's dated, boring and will not achieve anything of note in European competition. That British element has it's part to play in the British game, but it's not the whole story. Sir Alex had that British knack ingrained in his teams, but he also relied upon Portuguese and Dutch coaches to supplement what he had. To bring it back to the OP, that British element will have it's benefits, but I'm unconvinced it will take us to the next level. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Just had a look at McInnes's European record and while he beat some mostly unheard of minnows in the early rounds, he's lost to some incredible mediocrity, Real Sociadad aside (but shouldn't the second finishing team in Scotland be able to go toe to toe with them). This year it was Limassol... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.