Richard Hughes

What i find interesting is that this is the only article/tweet that i can find on the topic, so is it true or not!?

Personally i think he has a B- rating on transfer success. Some really successful ones and then some really obvious duffs. Is there someone out there readily available who could do better!? I'm not so sure.

Certainly an interesting time as an AFCB supporter, a lot of change but as yet, not much on the pitch progress.
 
DJ said:
Up until 11 months ago I would have said it was a profit.
Click to expand...
I'd say even with price inflation not accounted for it's nowhere near a profit otherwise we wouldn't have been in £200M (or whatever it was) in debt.
 
nd9cherry said:
Only 1 more to go now Bill
Click to expand...
The problems under Bill are:

Being instrumental in signing IA, who has not been able to have his team with him. Surely Hughes / Blake should have researched this.
Have signed players not suited to IA way of playing. Outarra, Traore, etc..
Blew a lot of money on players that did well in the Champ, but were never going to be good enough in the Prem. Ie Lowe, Pearson, probably Rothwell, etc..
Not signing hungry players. In our rapid rise through the leagues we had players who proved themselves, ie Daniels, Purches, etc...
Unlike Brighton who signed some bargain players who had everything to prove, and were able to progress up the ladder and secure huge wages.
Signed injured players and/or players with a poor injury record. Misguided to say the least.

Rant over
 
afcbpaul said:
The problems under Bill are:

Being instrumental in signing IA, who has not been able to have his team with him. Surely Hughes / Blake should have researched this.
Have signed players not suited to IA way of playing. Outarra, Traore, etc..
Blew a lot of money on players that did well in the Champ, but were never going to be good enough in the Prem. Ie Lowe, Pearson, probably Rothwell, etc..
Not signing hungry players. In our rapid rise through the leagues we had players who proved themselves, ie Daniels, Purches, etc...
Unlike Brighton who signed some bargain players who had everything to prove, and were able to progress up the ladder and secure huge wages.
Signed injured players and/or players with a poor injury record. Misguided to say the least.

Rant over
Click to expand...
Hmm well not sure I agree with all of this.

For example, dango and traore were signed way before AI was appointed, you could make this claim against most of the squad.

The championship examples are all during max era, completely different budget.

You fail to mention the success, such as tavenier, aarons, kirkez etc

Injured players, well guess depends what they were told by the medical team. Scott has returned in the time expected, adams clearly not, but who's fault is that.

Not saying Hughes is perfect, but it's not all poor.
 
afcbpaul said:
The problems under Bill are:

Being instrumental in signing IA, who has not been able to have his team with him. Surely Hughes / Blake should have researched this.
Have signed players not suited to IA way of playing. Outarra, Traore, etc..
Blew a lot of money on players that did well in the Champ, but were never going to be good enough in the Prem. Ie Lowe, Pearson, probably Rothwell, etc..
Not signing hungry players. In our rapid rise through the leagues we had players who proved themselves, ie Daniels, Purches, etc...
Unlike Brighton who signed some bargain players who had everything to prove, and were able to progress up the ladder and secure huge wages.
Signed injured players and/or players with a poor injury record. Misguided to say the least.

Rant over
Click to expand...

Those championship players got us promoted to the Premier League.
 
Last edited:
afcbpaul said:
Not signing hungry players. In our rapid rise through the leagues we had players who proved themselves, ie Daniels, Purches, etc...
Click to expand...
Of all the players you could have listed as players who came through our rapid rise along with Daniels, such as Francis, Cook, Elphick, Arter, Ritchie, Pugh, Pitman…

Instead you went with Purches, whose only promotion with us whilst as an active player was 2003… :)
 
afcbpaul said:
The problems under Bill are:

Being instrumental in signing IA, who has not been able to have his team with him. Surely Hughes / Blake should have researched this.
Have signed players not suited to IA way of playing. Outarra, Traore, etc..
Blew a lot of money on players that did well in the Champ, but were never going to be good enough in the Prem. Ie Lowe, Pearson, probably Rothwell, etc..
Not signing hungry players. In our rapid rise through the leagues we had players who proved themselves, ie Daniels, Purches, etc...
Unlike Brighton who signed some bargain players who had everything to prove, and were able to progress up the ladder and secure huge wages.
Signed injured players and/or players with a poor injury record. Misguided to say the least.

Rant over
Click to expand...
Rant accepted


But what is AI's way of playing. I accept theciiteeh defeat, but not by 5.
I also don't accept we can switch formations - never did under Howe. In his previous employment (according to Spanish reports) AI was 433 or nowt
 
People will inevitably bang on about how terrible Hughes was that's always been the case despite our success. Personally I'm completely indifferent to whether he stays or goes. Like with a player though you need to replace with something decent and workable.

You'd hope Foley has been developing a massive new multi-club recruitment team anyway irrespective of Hughes' involvement. His departure may be due to that, the apparently flawed sacking of O'Neil and appointment of Iraola or possibly he's even been headhunted by another club. If the latter is the case you wouldn't trust any of his player recommendations from now until he leaves.
 
afcb_rednblack said:
I’d be genuinely interested to know what the net £ profit (or loss) is as a consequence of all Hughes transfer dealings since 2014. That would then enable an informed view.

I think I know what the answer is, but I have no sense of the extent of the loss.
Click to expand...
Basing judgement on net profit or loss is not an informed view. In fact, it’s flawed.

Hence we let players like fraser lerma and king leave for free as it was judged better to get the value for them in the pitch
 
Da Bomb said:
What i find interesting is that this is the only article/tweet that i can find on the topic, so is it true or not!?

Personally i think he has a B- rating on transfer success. Some really successful ones and then some really obvious duffs. Is there someone out there readily available who could do better!? I'm not so sure.

Certainly an interesting time as an AFCB supporter, a lot of change but as yet, not much on the pitch progress.
Click to expand...
B- suggests a scientific basis for grades esp with a minus thrown in; good to understand that basis
 
SlowDownDerek said:
People will inevitably bang on about how terrible Hughes was that's always been the case despite our success. Personally I'm completely indifferent to whether he stays or goes. Like with a player though you need to replace with something decent and workable.

You'd hope Foley has been developing a massive new multi-club recruitment team anyway irrespective of Hughes' involvement. His departure may be due to that, the apparently flawed sacking of O'Neil and appointment of Iraola or possibly he's even been headhunted by another club. If the latter is the case you wouldn't trust any of his player recommendations from now until he leaves.
Click to expand...
Or maybe a knee jerk (need to do something reaction...anyways seems Hughes had enough as he is working his notice (so they say)
By the way.....I am no fan of Foley or AI
 
nd9cherry said:
Or maybe a knee jerk (need to do something reaction...anyways seems Hughes had enough as he is working his notice (so they say)
By the way.....I am no fan of Foley or AI
Click to expand...

If it was a sacking based on a 'need to do something reaction' you'd think they'd make it a bit more clear and public.
 
AFCBade said:
Interesting development.

I think he has done an excellent job for the club including a difficult 2022 summer. Worked well with Eddie and had good European contacts. Not every signing will work but he has recruited in some decent afcb signings.

Like many, I suspect, I haven’t made up my mind re the 2023 signings yet and think AI hasn’t been helped as much as he could have given the transfer kitty available. However, having said that, I do think it takes time for some signings to settle into the team.
Click to expand...
That's annoyingly reasonable everything you've said there! ;)
 
Cherriess said:
Not a sacking. If so, he'd be kept away you'd think. Having said that, there are ways of getting people to jump, so who knows?
Click to expand...

I've no idea either .... but if I was going to wildly speculate I wonder if he was on a massive bonus relating the takeover which is why he didn't go to Celtic. Maybe that's sorted now so he's free to bugger off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;