kpturner

I am sure many of the managers on that list would co ck a snoop at Saints, but your post seemed to me to be specifically about Tisdale and whether he would prefer Exeter or Saints. Personally, knowing bugger all about his abilities as a manager other than he has done well with the Grecians and wears cravats, I wouldn't be bothered if he did turn us down. IMHO he would jump at it though.

I expect when/if our takeover is done and dusted and announced in the media the West Ham fans will be saying the same about the Saints takeover. Fact is, if you are not watching the media every day waiting for news (because it is of no interest to you) then when it gets announced it seems like it was all done in 5 minutes flat.

Does it mention me being signed by Saints as replacement for Surman? All true!

I think you could make a similar list for most clubs - especially those that have fallen from grace as quickly as we have. However long the list of negatives you can dream up, it would still be a no brainer if somebody had to choose between managing Saints and managing Exeter (assuming that person was confident in his ability to do either). It is plain daft to think otherwise IMHO.

Didn't Marco Van Basten go virtually straight into managing the Dutch national team after doing little more than piddling around with Ajax reserves for a few months?

Well it is hardly a major article on Shearer joining Southampton is it? More a case of a journo wondering how to finish one of his sentences....oh, I know, I'll mention the highly unlikely Southampton link as well.

I'd rather wait and see that the takeover is completed then worry about the manager. It is all a bit too quiet for my liking, not that I am paranoid or anything.

:confused:

Errr - no!

Yep - sailed right over my head. OK, what was the point of the question? Why would it not be classed as a takeover? Were you asking a pertinent question relating to the current situation or were you just making a flippant throw-away remark?

Your post certainly stands out from all the others Oooh - have a guess why :-)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8084182.stm Recent discussions on this forum (while waiting for a buyer) touched on the possibility that football in this country is heading for meltdown. Holding companies going bust is a subject close to home for Saints fans, but when you consider that even a successful Premier League team (who finished second this season) may also be in the same boat, does it mean the beginning of the end? I also heard that Man Utd debts are around the £1bn mark!! Obscene? Sorry if this has already been covered - couldn't find it.

As usual Oooh, I haved missed the point you are trying to make :confused:

I expect we will retain most of our squad too (rightly or wrongly). Leicester did ship one or two of their regulars didn't they - Hume for example?

I guess you mean "no" it was not unfair - not "yes" it was.

Personally speaking, yes I fully expect they will want to play for SFC in League 1.....at least until the January window when everyone can take stock of the situation.

Presumably there is still scope for the backer to change his mind right up until the deal is signed and sealed. One thing that has always nagged me about clubs that have sugar daddies to keep them in the manner they have become accustomed (like Chelsea, potentially Poopey and, of course, us) is what happens if the aforementioned Sugar Daddy comes a cropper? I don't mean to be morbid, but what if he/she pegs it unexpectedly? I know that this would be a disaster for the friends and family - but is it usual for safeguards in place to ensure that such an eventuality does not result in disaster for the football club also? Leaving aside the mercenary insensitive aspects of the question for one moment, does anyone know? I am probably being simplistic, but I just have visions of Abramovich stepping off a curb at the wrong time and plunging Chelsea into financial ruin as a result ;-)

I accept the inference may be there, so I would just like to clarify that the inference was not intentional.

Well thank you for those considered observations. On reflection, and taken out of context with the entire thread, the comment to which you allude does indeed sound sanctamonious. This being so, I would only request that you take a step back and review all the relevant posts and put my comment(s) into perspective. You may well still disagree which is fine, but you will also see that I have not made the assumption to which you allude in your second post at all - in fact completely the opposite. You say " I suspect those that activly wanted administration, you could count on one hand, and that out of a fan base of 60,000 +." and I agree with you 100%! So hopefully my head is not quite as far up my arse as you think.

If the appointed board need to look to places like this for advice then I would be worried.

What?? You mean that stuff on these forums is not treated seriously by the outside world??! #-o

Dodgy spelling aside, you confused the hell out of me there :confused: Whatever Stanley is, he doesn't come across as someone in love with RL - or have I missed some subtle irony in your post?

Doubtful - I haven't been here long but the only things that I have seen that have turned out to be correct have been posted elsewhere first (like the BBC, Sky, OS or dare I say it, the Echo....oh - and Radio Solent).

Maybe he is referring to 35 different boards and 63 managers/coaches.

Probably - just needs some posts to set the trend I suppose. Just seems a bit premature (says the eternal optimist) :-)