| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... 15:13 - Nov 25 with 3379 views | El_Fenix |
The conventional wisdom is that Paul Hurst was the worst manager in the history of ITFC. An alternative view is offered below.
1. Evans made a huge mistake in offering Hurst the job. With hindsight, it is obvious that Hurst lacked the experience needed to manage an experienced (but mediocre) squad that was deeply upset by the departure of its previous manager. Brian Clough encountered comparable circumstances during his 44 day tenure at Leeds.
2. Hurst should not have accepted the job. He over-estimated his ability to manage a squad that remained loyal its previous manager. His naive attempts to impose his authority made the situation worse.
On the other hand:
3. Hurst did NOT 'choose to dismantle the squad'. Webster was already on his way out; Waghorn and Garner wanted out, and the money being offered for them was too good to turn down; and in any case, Evans has the final say for all transfer market transactions. Net income from player sales was around £10 million, and the amount made available to Hurst was around £5 million. This suggests a reduction in squad talent of around £5 million.
4. Hurst brought in several players who had talent and/or potential, e.g. Edwards, Harrison, Jackson, Nolan, Nsiala, Donacien, Jordan Roberts and Jordan Graham. He overpaid for some of them. This was because other teams knew that he had a budget and an urgent need to bolster his squad.
5. Hurst signed several useful players on loan. These included Chalobah, Pennington and Jonathon Walters. Pennington was arguably the ITFC player of the year, and Jonathon Walters could have had a major impact had he not got injured.
6. Hurst identified and started to address, weaknesses in the areas of the conditioning, strength and fitness of the squad, and the quality of the sports medicine.
7. Hurst reportedly engaged well with the younger players.
8. Hurst could not have foreseen that Bialkowski's form would take a huge dip, and Chambers would be dealing with personal issues, during the season.
9. Prior to his last two games in charge, when he was a dead man walking, Hurst's record was W1 D7 L5, or 0.833 points per game. Although this was poor, the team had not lost contact with the relegation pack. With Lambert in charge, the team obtained 21 additional points from 31 additional games, or 0.667 points per game.
Last season, playing in a lower division, Lambert ended on a run of W1 D1 L6, or 0.5 points per game. Can anyone explain why Evans fired Hurst, but gave Lambert a five year contract extension?
This story has all the elements of a Greek tragedy. However, Marcus Evans and Paul Lambert, not Paul Hurst, are the central characters.
|  |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |  |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 00:22 - Nov 26 with 800 views | bournemouthblue |
Both Webster and Waghorn were underpriced and rushed through to allow Hurst to get his signings in quicker
Two massive mistakes and something I was critical of at the time
Evans is far from blameless in this situation but Hurst was the main instigator there, whatever way we want to dress it up |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 05:02 - Nov 26 with 763 views | eddiespearitt03 |
Some would say there was a lot more going on behind the scenes.
Good players left and the squad refresh did not work out. There is more to this story that we,ll never know . |  | | |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 05:51 - Nov 26 with 755 views | cleaner |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 05:02 - Nov 26 by eddiespearitt03 |
Some would say there was a lot more going on behind the scenes.
Good players left and the squad refresh did not work out. There is more to this story that we,ll never know . |
Maybe, but he didn't exactly set the world on fire at Scunthorpe either. |  | | |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 06:16 - Nov 26 with 736 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
Stopped reading at “Brian Clough encountered comparable circumstances during his 44 day tenure at Leeds.” |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 08:15 - Nov 26 with 715 views | Herbivore |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 00:22 - Nov 26 by bournemouthblue |
Both Webster and Waghorn were underpriced and rushed through to allow Hurst to get his signings in quicker
Two massive mistakes and something I was critical of at the time
Evans is far from blameless in this situation but Hurst was the main instigator there, whatever way we want to dress it up |
Not sure the Waghorn deal could really be described as rushed, it dragged on for weeks. |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 11:50 - Nov 26 with 683 views | El_Fenix |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 00:22 - Nov 26 by bournemouthblue |
Both Webster and Waghorn were underpriced and rushed through to allow Hurst to get his signings in quicker
Two massive mistakes and something I was critical of at the time
Evans is far from blameless in this situation but Hurst was the main instigator there, whatever way we want to dress it up |
Really? Here are some inconvenient facts:
The 2018/19 season started on August 3, 2018.
Waghorn joined Derby County on August 8, 2018.
Garner joined Wigan on August 9, 2018.
The deals were sanctioned by Marcus Evans.
Decent value, and significant profits, were obtained. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 11:55 - Nov 26 with 670 views | wkj |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 11:50 - Nov 26 by El_Fenix |
Really? Here are some inconvenient facts:
The 2018/19 season started on August 3, 2018.
Waghorn joined Derby County on August 8, 2018.
Garner joined Wigan on August 9, 2018.
The deals were sanctioned by Marcus Evans.
Decent value, and significant profits, were obtained. |
Value from transfers is only useful if it improves our position, or at very least consolidates it - none of the replacements were experienced or ready for the Championship. No manager in their right mind would truly believe an inexperienced strike force is the key to success. |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 12:42 - Nov 26 with 649 views | El_Fenix |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 11:55 - Nov 26 by wkj |
Value from transfers is only useful if it improves our position, or at very least consolidates it - none of the replacements were experienced or ready for the Championship. No manager in their right mind would truly believe an inexperienced strike force is the key to success. |
From the viewpoint of supporters, what you say is true.
From the viewpoint of Marcus Evans, a significant fraction of incoming transfer fees can be used to offset operating losses. And Evans has the final say.
If a portion of the £5 million from the sale of Waghorn had been made available to him, Hurst could have bought a Championship level striker. It wasn't, he didn't - and the rest is history.
In an effort to be fair to all parties, I will point out the following circumstances:
Evans reportedly discussed limitations on the transfer budget with Hurst during the interview process, Hurst assured him that he could operate with a budget of £3 million. Hurst had spent that much money by the time that Waghorn and Garner departed. Evans therefore deemed it appropriate to use the incoming transfer fees to offset operating losses. In reality, an available £3 million budget with two quality strikers in the squad is very different from a £3 million budget, that has already been spent, with no quality strikers in the squad.
There are always shades of grey ... | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:07 - Nov 26 with 627 views | itfcjoe |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 12:42 - Nov 26 by El_Fenix |
From the viewpoint of supporters, what you say is true.
From the viewpoint of Marcus Evans, a significant fraction of incoming transfer fees can be used to offset operating losses. And Evans has the final say.
If a portion of the £5 million from the sale of Waghorn had been made available to him, Hurst could have bought a Championship level striker. It wasn't, he didn't - and the rest is history.
In an effort to be fair to all parties, I will point out the following circumstances:
Evans reportedly discussed limitations on the transfer budget with Hurst during the interview process, Hurst assured him that he could operate with a budget of £3 million. Hurst had spent that much money by the time that Waghorn and Garner departed. Evans therefore deemed it appropriate to use the incoming transfer fees to offset operating losses. In reality, an available £3 million budget with two quality strikers in the squad is very different from a £3 million budget, that has already been spent, with no quality strikers in the squad.
There are always shades of grey ... |
The Waghorn and garner deals were pushed through to allow us to sign Nolan, Nisala and Jackson |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:09 - Nov 26 with 623 views | Herbivore |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:07 - Nov 26 by itfcjoe |
The Waghorn and garner deals were pushed through to allow us to sign Nolan, Nisala and Jackson |
I was going to mention that we signed those three with the proceeds of the Waghorn and Garner sales. | |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:26 - Nov 26 with 611 views | patrickswell |
You cannot market a New Era with a record of 1 win, 7 losses and 7 draws - not to mention the fact that everyone at the club looks like they want to jump down a hole rather than fight on and make the thing work.
Hurst’sjudgememt and man-management were hopelessly flawed. He went for revolution over evolution but lacked the skills and the players to pull it off. With the exception of Edwards and possibly Jackson, none of his signings improved us in the Championship or have shown themselves to be particularly indispensable in League One either.
Whatever failings Lambert may have, Hurst brought a lot on himself and on the club. By the sound of it, he repeated a lot of these flaws at Scunthorpe. |  | | |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:29 - Nov 26 with 602 views | Herbivore |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:26 - Nov 26 by patrickswell |
You cannot market a New Era with a record of 1 win, 7 losses and 7 draws - not to mention the fact that everyone at the club looks like they want to jump down a hole rather than fight on and make the thing work.
Hurst’sjudgememt and man-management were hopelessly flawed. He went for revolution over evolution but lacked the skills and the players to pull it off. With the exception of Edwards and possibly Jackson, none of his signings improved us in the Championship or have shown themselves to be particularly indispensable in League One either.
Whatever failings Lambert may have, Hurst brought a lot on himself and on the club. By the sound of it, he repeated a lot of these flaws at Scunthorpe. |
It's a measure of how bad Lambert has been that he hasn't really offered any improvement on Hurst. | |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:39 - Nov 26 with 595 views | patrickswell |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:29 - Nov 26 by Herbivore |
It's a measure of how bad Lambert has been that he hasn't really offered any improvement on Hurst. |
He managed them just as poorly last season. Gave them something a bit more settled to work around this year, which helped at the start of the season. Unfortunately, they can’t get it together in bigger games and the lack of fight which bedevilled us for 2 seasons is rearing its head again. | | | |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:48 - Nov 26 with 579 views | Herbivore |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:39 - Nov 26 by patrickswell |
He managed them just as poorly last season. Gave them something a bit more settled to work around this year, which helped at the start of the season. Unfortunately, they can’t get it together in bigger games and the lack of fight which bedevilled us for 2 seasons is rearing its head again. |
What has he given them to work around though? He's kept the same formation but he largely did that in the opening 10-12 games last season as well when we were winning. It's all well and good blaming the players and a lack of fight, but what I see is a complete lack of a system or any kind of organisation on the pitch. I don't know what they work on all week but there aren't any signs across any of Lambert's three seasons here that he can get a team to develop and improve as the season progresses. We don't have any real identifiable patterns of play. Sorry mate, but this is all on Lambert. | |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:02 - Nov 26 with 559 views | MrTown |
Would we be worse off with Hurst now? I don't know.
Stuck it on a few players here to be fair to him, , some of the players didn't like that and threw him under the bus.
I do think sometimes, would the club be better now had Evans stuck by Hurst.
It's hard to imagine we would be any worse. |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:04 - Nov 26 with 556 views | El_Fenix |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 13:26 - Nov 26 by patrickswell |
You cannot market a New Era with a record of 1 win, 7 losses and 7 draws - not to mention the fact that everyone at the club looks like they want to jump down a hole rather than fight on and make the thing work.
Hurst’sjudgememt and man-management were hopelessly flawed. He went for revolution over evolution but lacked the skills and the players to pull it off. With the exception of Edwards and possibly Jackson, none of his signings improved us in the Championship or have shown themselves to be particularly indispensable in League One either.
Whatever failings Lambert may have, Hurst brought a lot on himself and on the club. By the sound of it, he repeated a lot of these flaws at Scunthorpe. |
No-one is marketing Hurst's brief stay as a New Era. Far (in fact very far) from it.
The OP started with statements that Evans was wrong to offer Hurst the job, Hurst was wrong to accept it, and Hurst's man-management skills were very poor. It then introduced some shades of grey that simplistic Hurst-haters ignore; and ended with a statement that Evans and Lambert, not Paul Hurst, have primary responsibility for the club's present predicament.
The shades of grey are associated with problems that Hurst identified and tried to do something about, and actions that he took that were understandable in the circumstances that he was facing.
As George Santayana observed, 'Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them'. In order to learn the lessons of history, one must usually consider shades of grey. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:13 - Nov 26 with 549 views | itfcjoe |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:04 - Nov 26 by El_Fenix |
No-one is marketing Hurst's brief stay as a New Era. Far (in fact very far) from it.
The OP started with statements that Evans was wrong to offer Hurst the job, Hurst was wrong to accept it, and Hurst's man-management skills were very poor. It then introduced some shades of grey that simplistic Hurst-haters ignore; and ended with a statement that Evans and Lambert, not Paul Hurst, have primary responsibility for the club's present predicament.
The shades of grey are associated with problems that Hurst identified and tried to do something about, and actions that he took that were understandable in the circumstances that he was facing.
As George Santayana observed, 'Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them'. In order to learn the lessons of history, one must usually consider shades of grey. |
I'll try and go through points one by one, as think they are especially generous to Hurst:
3 - Hurst pushed through the Waghorn deal as wanted the money freed up to bring in his guys.
4 - It was way too much, too soon - those guys needed help alongside them but all that quality went out the door
5 - The Pennington and Walters deal was pushed through by Evans, because we lacked Championship experience. Hurst wanted the Wimbledon guy to sign, but Evans overruled and lined up Pennington
6 - Lambert identified this and has apparently did something, we never saw what he did so hard to judge
7 - He didn't. He banned the U23 squad from drinking bottled water at the training ground and they had to bring their own, he relegated Dozzell back to the U23 squad.
8 - Bart's dip in form was down to how he was managed, what issues did Chambers have?
9 - His record was poor, as is Lambert's - PL should have had the same treatment as Hurst as Hurst was struggling at a higher level with a lower budgeted squad.
Hurst had some bad luck, that Rotherham game at the start of the season was a killer and if a few things dropped differently it may have gone differently - but he then compounded the situation by panicking.
he did too much in that first summer, then didn't get the rub of the green to get people on side and then he was struggling - it's a shame but more understandable what happened compared to lambert's spell when an experienced manager is making rookie mistakes | |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 15:08 - Nov 26 with 521 views | patrickswell |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:04 - Nov 26 by El_Fenix |
No-one is marketing Hurst's brief stay as a New Era. Far (in fact very far) from it.
The OP started with statements that Evans was wrong to offer Hurst the job, Hurst was wrong to accept it, and Hurst's man-management skills were very poor. It then introduced some shades of grey that simplistic Hurst-haters ignore; and ended with a statement that Evans and Lambert, not Paul Hurst, have primary responsibility for the club's present predicament.
The shades of grey are associated with problems that Hurst identified and tried to do something about, and actions that he took that were understandable in the circumstances that he was facing.
As George Santayana observed, 'Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them'. In order to learn the lessons of history, one must usually consider shades of grey. |
I refer to the New Era in terms of how it was being marketed at the time rather than any slight on your post.
In real terms, it played out like Keane’s start did, only with less money and with less riding on it in terms of prestige than there was in 2009/10, hence why Keane was given substantially more time than Hurst. [Post edited 26 Nov 2020 15:11]
| | | |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 15:11 - Nov 26 with 515 views | El_Fenix |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:13 - Nov 26 by itfcjoe |
I'll try and go through points one by one, as think they are especially generous to Hurst:
3 - Hurst pushed through the Waghorn deal as wanted the money freed up to bring in his guys.
4 - It was way too much, too soon - those guys needed help alongside them but all that quality went out the door
5 - The Pennington and Walters deal was pushed through by Evans, because we lacked Championship experience. Hurst wanted the Wimbledon guy to sign, but Evans overruled and lined up Pennington
6 - Lambert identified this and has apparently did something, we never saw what he did so hard to judge
7 - He didn't. He banned the U23 squad from drinking bottled water at the training ground and they had to bring their own, he relegated Dozzell back to the U23 squad.
8 - Bart's dip in form was down to how he was managed, what issues did Chambers have?
9 - His record was poor, as is Lambert's - PL should have had the same treatment as Hurst as Hurst was struggling at a higher level with a lower budgeted squad.
Hurst had some bad luck, that Rotherham game at the start of the season was a killer and if a few things dropped differently it may have gone differently - but he then compounded the situation by panicking.
he did too much in that first summer, then didn't get the rub of the green to get people on side and then he was struggling - it's a shame but more understandable what happened compared to lambert's spell when an experienced manager is making rookie mistakes |
Thank you for taking time to respond in thoughtful detail. I feel flattered. Your two final paragraphs provide a summary that I find to be fair and balanced.
Some points-by-point are subject to interpretation. You have more detailed knowledge than I do on points 3 and 5. My insights on points 7 and 8 were based on comments that Dobra and Chambers, respectively, made in interviews.
I am glad that the OP generated spirited discussion. I have played the role of a defense lawyer who stipulates that his client is guilty, then argues that he does not deserve the death penalty, and that other people are the real villains. A jury will ultimately decide ... | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 15:16 - Nov 26 with 508 views | jayessess |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 14:04 - Nov 26 by El_Fenix |
No-one is marketing Hurst's brief stay as a New Era. Far (in fact very far) from it.
The OP started with statements that Evans was wrong to offer Hurst the job, Hurst was wrong to accept it, and Hurst's man-management skills were very poor. It then introduced some shades of grey that simplistic Hurst-haters ignore; and ended with a statement that Evans and Lambert, not Paul Hurst, have primary responsibility for the club's present predicament.
The shades of grey are associated with problems that Hurst identified and tried to do something about, and actions that he took that were understandable in the circumstances that he was facing.
As George Santayana observed, 'Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them'. In order to learn the lessons of history, one must usually consider shades of grey. |
I do have a slight feeling of "sliding doors" with Hurst, really. I remember thinking at the time that he desperately needed a good start to the season, otherwise it was likely to get away from him very quickly.
He was coming in to a club that had been dominated by one personality for half a decade, into a dressing room with a lot of senior players who'd been there for a long time and clearly resented what had been done to McCarthy.
Having immediately come in and effectively said - this club is run badly, the players have a lot to prove, the coaching, sports science, tactics are out-of-date and we need a lot of new personnel - it had to go well, very quickly or it was going to spiral out of control.
If a couple of those first few games had gone our way (and they definitely could have done), would it have a been a different story? |  |
| |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 15:17 - Nov 26 with 507 views | El_Fenix |
| A Reassessment of the Paul Hurst Era ... on 15:08 - Nov 26 by patrickswell |
I refer to the New Era in terms of how it was being marketed at the time rather than any slight on your post.
In real terms, it played out like Keane’s start did, only with less money and with less riding on it in terms of prestige than there was in 2009/10, hence why Keane was given substantially more time than Hurst. [Post edited 26 Nov 2020 15:11]
|
Got it. I thought you were setting up a straw man. My apologies. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
