Indeed, my point when I posted the win percentages though was that even taking that into account Morgan's record is [istill [/i better than Agar's. It seems to have passed most people by though.

Well the thread OP mentions both, the discussion over the last few pages that I joined in with was quite specifically about Morgan and Agar?

It's 4% or so better. Woot.

And if we're going to play the excuses game, what about Agar having to play a season and a half with Sharp's less than stellar signings?

Fact is that neither coach has a fantastic SL record for a variety of reasons.

FC IS one of the top jobs!!

At what point where Maguire, Brown and Co fighting to get the job then

It wasn't an excuse on Morgans part in fact the complete opposite, I personally see that first season in SL as his biggest success to date, more so than finishing 4th in 2009. It was an extremely difficult task that not many people gave him much hope of.

They'd have had to have been asked first, and we all know that didn't happen.

Exactly

dream on........

You weren't using it as an excuse, but the poster I replied to was.

FWIW I tend to agree with you. IMO Morgan's main strength as a coach is the ability to squeeze the maximum possible performance out of 'average' players.

So you dont think that FC that A Grade , solvent , in a cracking stadium that brings in marque players club is a top job then??
wow

must v been the smell of the docks and the beach at hessle that sold it to Fitz i guess

In a nutshell...NO!

Now Saints who [uhad[/u a cr@p stadium...YES!

spot on, it does make you wonder just how good he could be with a squad like ours, he knows his stuff thats for sure but too much of a media whore for me

even more


oh well life is a box of chocolates

Wonder why Omeley chose FC over Saints then when both were in the running for his signature???
FC, Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Bradford , Warrington all considered huge clubs and huge jobs

Have you actually looked at your 'squad' there's only 17 of them and half of them are injury prone.

You have a great stadium, lots of fans and one of the best financials of the league but in comparison your squad is poor.

Many players are coming around the world so they're not bothered about geographical differences between Manchester, West and East Yorkshire: look at Mason coming to KR - arguably the biggest signing in SL for a long time. But I do think that aside from their salary, they must look at their chances of getting to the CC final, club facilities (stadium etc) and the support. Beyond the squad, a coach is going to be particularly interested in training/playing facilities and finances.

the squad is thin - not poor!

The Hull coaching job should be one of the plumb jobs in SL, however under the current regime it will never be seen as such

You're wasting your time. You're on a thread where some people are claiming that Rich Agar is a better head coach than Justin Morgan remember.

The majority of FC fans are like Newcastle fans up until they got relegated, constantly talking about what a great big club they are, how great their players are and how next year will be their year... all the while they can't see the laugh that the board of directors are having at their expense. Unfortunately for FC, there isn't even the prospect of relegation to snap the fans out of their delusions.

A thin squad is by definition poor, not saying the players in it are poor just the make up of the team.

The whole idea of a squad is to cover for any likely eventuality. Its a risk analysis based exercise.

ie. cover the key areas and any areas that are likely to need to be covered if a player is say susceptable to injury.

Your squad doesn't have that cover, if you get your first 17 out I agree its a good team, past that and any key position and its a struggle wthout major shuffles to cover, I personally think that makes it a poor squad.

The definition of squad is "a sports team or a group of players from which a team is selected". Poor is when they're not very good. Also, Hull will not complete the season without taking on further recruits.

Not neccesarily, you could have the best 13 players in the league yet an absolutey awful 14-25, thats still a poor squad if you pick up 4 or 5 injuries. Great players can be part of a poor squad. The last bit qualifies my statement.

Do you and I really want to descend this low?

Let's move on eh?

Good point, we agree on something..