Printable View
Brady spoke with Wenger the day after he publicly declared his interest in the job on RTE. Wenger stated that he would not stand in Brady's way if Brady got the job. So if Delaney spoke with Wenger about Brady I'm sure Wenger would push Brady's case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
That is quite different to Wenger pushing Brady's case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
If Brady decided to go for whatever reason, not sure Wenger or anyone else could stand in his way. There may be contractual implications but as we all know that can be easily sorted.
The strange thing is that Brady has been the lone voice on the RTE about Delaney having too much power "its one man" etc.
Brady would not get this team to the WC. So I hope its not him. He admitted himself that he is not the ideal candidate and that the FAI should be looking for someone who has had success as a manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
That's the problem and the reason why none of the 'big names' are queuing up for the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
I don't think the best manager in the world, whoever that may be, would be confident of getting this team to the WCF (they might actually get them to the WC! :D). Tomorrow's WC group qualifying draw will be a big factor in finalising who is in and who is out.
Noely I have to ask. Is your "insider/source" a former UCL man? If so I really think I can hazard a guess as to who it is, as I reckon soccerc could too.
This talk of Brady, which if true, is ridiculous. If Oscar Wilde appoints Brady after appointing Staunton, then there will be no saving him after the next disasterous campaign.
Brady successful at the academy? How many youngsters has he produced for the first team? Wenger clearly doesn't give a stuff about the Academy, since not only does he buy established players from overseas, but youngsters, as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Brady was a crap manager at Brighton and a crap manager at Celtic. I see no evidence whatever he would be a good manager of the ROI.
The UCL part is right Kingdom. I use to run a team in the UCL. In the 80's. Have kept in contact with few of the old heads.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
Venables has a stench off of him, we need to do whatever it takes to let the FAI know that he is not wanted here. It's not because he is english, or an east end boy, it is because his track record recently is not good enough and his relationship with money is open to question.
It seems that he has always been more interested in financial gain than success with teams that he has managed. According to John Delaney we have more money than ever before to offer to a manager and what happens, that smarmy git Venables slithers into the frame.
I for one will be disgusted if the exhorbitant price of tickets for Croke Park is used to line the pockets of Venables. I will have to seriously consider attending games while he is the manager. I realise that it is the team I will be supporting, not Venables, however the depth of my distaste of that man is a major factor.
Fabregas and Hoyte came directly through the Academy. Also the 'youngsters' that are brought over at 17/18 have all been developed through their Academy. Diaby, Flamini, Van Persie, Clichy, Bendtner, Clichy, Song and even Walcott have all spent time at the Academy when they were first signed by Arsenal before going into the reserves and first team squads.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
BTW, I agree Brady is not the man for the ROI manager's job.
The Academy exists to find and develop young players for the first team. Of those players, precisely one* was found and developed by the Arsenal Academy - Hoyte - and there's no guarantee that he will make it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Contrast that with e.g. West Ham in the same period, or Southampton, in whose Academy Walcott was first schooled, along with Gareth Bale and Andrew Surman.
* - Though I'll give you Steve Sidwell. Now at Chelsea. ;)
ashley coleQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
can all this brady stuff be moved to the brady thread - its making the el tel thread pop up on the top of the page and look like we're all interested in talking about him
Cesc was at Arsenal for around 3 months before he made his first team debut - he had nothing to do with the Arsenal Academy. Wenger prised him away from Barca reserves - Barca were not suprsingly very p!ssed off....Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Bendnter was just 17 and already a very well known player in Denmark and WEnger specificially went over and got him. He did spend time in the Academy but I'm not sure Brady does any coaching there atall! Wenger has also gone off and got the likes of Vela from Mexico, Fran Merida from Barca etc.
My point is I'm not sure how much coaching Brady does if any atall - I think his role is more administrative / fgiurehead at Arsenal.
In terms of manager there is no way Brady is the man. I think he is setting himself up for the performance director role, which he would do well i'm sure, but for that role i think i would prefer Steve Heighway. T
here are arguements about who the Arsenal academy are responsible for, but there is no doubt the Liverpool academy produced Steve McManaman, Robbie Fowler, Steven Gerrard, Jamie Carragher, Dominic Matteo, David Thompson, Steven Warnock and Michael Owen. And he is available
Yes Steve Bould is the coach of the Arsenal academy and 'manages' the u18 side.Quote:
Originally Posted by kennedmc
Brady is the Director of the academy
Lets get back to the reasons why Venables should or should not get the job. Hopefully most of you are in the should not camp.
he convinced Steve McLaren to play 3 at the back away to croatia.
those are tactics from ten years ago.
france 98 showed up wingbacks as a non-viable option in high level football
and in an away game ffs
strong anti-venables article in the sindo today
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...s-1229974.html
Yet Fanning seems certain Venables will get the job.
So what's going on here exactly? Is the FAI using external advisors or are they simply (allegedly anyway) convinced Venables is the man and no amount of advice or lobbying otherwise will change their minds? Is the FAI in any way united on this?
Both Croatia and Australia played 3 at the back in WC06. Australia didn't use wing backs so much as a 3-1-4-1-1 wuth Grella protecting the back 4, a regular midfield, Cahill playing off Viduka.Quote:
Originally Posted by eekers
A pro Venables piece in This is London (Evening standard online I think - how objective would that be? Venables has mates well placed in the media, especially London & the Standard always sticks up for their own) said that TV wanted a different role to be played by the 3 CBs than Mclaren. They went with 3 at the back but with McLaren's idea of how to use it. Like it counted anyway, Croatia were better that day too and would have been no matter who or how England lined up.