Thanks for all responses so far....I can't say that I feel as passionately against as some of you do, but I understand the reasoning....so what do we have
Media darling - is he really? Is this a concern for us in choosing a new manager?
Long ball game/boring football - perhaps a matter of opinion, but this could well be a defining criteria that we should focus on the debate for who next.
Impact manager - I kinda agree with St. Mick here, although arguably he had reasonable tenures at Leicester, Celtic and Villa. I suppose it depends on what standards you want to measure it here. I have not been able to explain the reason behind the dramatic impact he initially had and the relative decline in the last few months. Would be interested to hear comments and reasons for that.
Can't comment on him being the Gary Neville of his day, but you definitely paint a picture with that image.....if that's how you feel, then I can fully understand it
So based on the feedback so far, the 4 major criteria for our new manager are:
1. Must have more than 20 years top flight experience and have won multiple trophies and titles?
2. Must employ sexy football at all times?
3. Mustn't be a media darling?
4. Bears no resemblance to Gary Neville
Not looking to start an argument with anyone here, but I see so much discussion around who it should or shouldn't be, but little agreement on the criteria that we would judge the acceptability of a manager for the club. Playing a little devils advocate to get to the crux of the discussion.
Love you all people..