Naismith In!!!!

[busbyfth]

Finish 3rd and maybe give him a 2 year deal, as he's very much a rookie.

Finish 4th and the team played well - a 1 year deal (same reason as above)

Worse than 4th and we look elsewhere.........but, daft to say give him the job now as surely waiting until the end of the season gives  everyone a chance to be able to study more form in the book, and gauge his potential capabilities. 

Remember that over the last five years we have handed out costly/lengthy contracts to many players/coaches which backfired !!....Lose against StM this weekend and the whole discussion probably ends. This game is HUGE ! 

[WageThief]

5 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

The day when beating St Mirren decides a manager for Hearts is a dark day mate. Come on.

 

Nothing can stop Tom Hardy and his dug helping to spread the word about Naismith. Like a really shit version of Paul Revere and his horse.

 

[Ray Gin]

24 minutes ago, Dazo said:

If you’re a stats man and completely ignore the context, circumstances and performances then no it shouldn’t be enough. I think taking those into account he’s certainly moved into the being considered camp. 3 wins and the jobs his imo. 

 

I've already said in another thread if he gets 9 points from the remaining games he should get the job.

 

Offering him it at this stage though would be mental.

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

Just now, WageThief said:

 

Nothing can stop Tom Hardy and his dug helping to spread the word about Naismith. Like a really shit version of Paul Revere and his horse.

 

How did you know I was a Beastie boys fan?

[Carter]

6 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Harsh to judge and it's not his team, but some  folk are really excited after a defeat to hibs ( which ended our run v them), a humping of Ross county ( but our home form has been strong last two seasons) and a 2-0 defeat v celtic (worse than our last home league game v them, although the red card changed the game).

 

It's great that some are giving Naismith more support and leeway than they ever gave Bob,  but results haven't been better and ultimately imo things won't change that much  until we get a new manager and have a clear out. 

 

Way too early to be championing Naismith,  but likewise it's harsh to judge him as it's not his team.

 

One big positive of Bob getting the boot is that it's apparent any new manager will get some time and not hounded and abused after every poor result, that is only a good thing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let it go FFS.

[Dazo]

1 minute ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Not at all, it's not his team and no way shows his potential as manager. 

Only a dafty would blame him imo

 

Blame is pointless anyway, I wouldn't judge him either way.

 

 

It wouldn't help him tho, finishing below 4th also likley means 2 defeats to hibs in his short time here, type of thing some hold against a manager for years.

 

 

Only a dafty would slaver such pish and make up excuses. Not his team ? 😂 

 

We have good players, a good coach can easily get those players 4th. 

[Dazo]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

I've already said in another thread if he gets 9 points from the remaining games he should get the job.

 

Offering him it at this stage though would be mental.

I’m not arguing with you, I agree at this stage it would be mental. There are shoots of positivity around his style though. 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

Just now, Ray Gin said:

 

I've already said in another thread if he gets 9 points from the remaining games he should get the job.

 

Offering him it at this stage though would be mental.

It’s all relative though.

 

If we have a choice of Naismith or Robinson - I go for Naismith.

 

A choice of Naismith or Knutsen - Knutsen.

 

I am not anti Naismith.

 

I am anti idiots/numbskulls that think that Naismith getting 9 points means it should be his gig no matter what:

 

Complete mentalist behaviour.

[bigfatskinnyjambo97]

1 minute ago, Carter said:

Let it go FFS.

Was just about to say the same thing 🤣. The only Neilson who should be getting defended at this stage goes by the name of Lewis. Just accept that Bob was shit, his time was up and that Naismith has made massive improvements to the team. 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

1 minute ago, Dazo said:

I’m not arguing with you, I agree at this stage it would be mental. There are shoots of positivity around his style though. 

The positivity being based on our own fans perception of the BARE MINIMUM required.

 

Id rather have a manager that provides the bare minimum and a level above that.

 

What team’s support aspires for their team to perform to the bare minimum standard?

[WageThief]

2 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

How did you know I was a Beastie boys fan?

 

Your timorous sleekit nature....

 

I actually discovered Revere from old Bob D, the first white rapper.

[bigfatskinnyjambo97]

1 minute ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

The positivity being based on our own fans perception of the BARE MINIMUM required.

 

Id rather have a manager that provides the bare minimum and a level above that.

 

What team’s support aspires for their team to perform to the bare minimum standard?

Bare minimum my arse mate! Team has been class last two games. Go and just get behind the team and stop clinging on to Robbie's pubic hairstyle. 

[Dazo]

13 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

It’s all relative though.

 

If we have a choice of Naismith or Robinson - I go for Naismith.

 

A choice of Naismith or Knutsen - Knutsen.

 

I am not anti Naismith.

 

I am anti idiots/numbskulls that think that Naismith getting 9 points means it should be his gig no matter what:

 

Complete mentalist behaviour.

It isn’t just the 9 points though is it ? It’s style, attitude and performances of the players that come with those points. If we got those points playing poorly he wouldn’t be considered imo. 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Dazo

[Costanza]

1 hour ago, johnking123 said:

Still 4 games to go. Will judge after that.

This is the only answer.

We will know a great deal after the St Mirren game though given it's away

[bigfatskinnyjambo97]

7 minutes ago, Dazo said:

It isn’t just the 9 points though is it ? It’s style, attitude and performances of the players that come with those points imo. If we got those points playing poorly he wouldn’t be considered imo. 

Spot on 

[kingantti1874]

12 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

The positivity being based on our own fans perception of the BARE MINIMUM required.

 

Id rather have a manager that provides the bare minimum and a level above that.

 

What team’s support aspires for their team to perform to the bare minimum standard?

what manager guarantees that? Who is out of work or at a club we can buy out of contract or who would see hearts as a step up? 
 

Who says Steven Naismith will deliver the bare minimum? He’s at the start of his career, once he has his feet under the table and has his personnel maybe just maybe he will turn out to be a great manager.

 

And again we need to find one becuase we aren’t capable of hiring a ready made one. 
 

 

[kingantti1874]

14 minutes ago, Dazo said:

It isn’t just the 9 points though is it ? It’s style, attitude and performances of the players that come with those points imo. If we got those points playing poorly he wouldn’t be considered imo. 

yup.  THD wants a vanity manager.  Stendel was a vanity manager and look how that needed up.

 

if we continue in this vein, with continued improvement and consistent application and style I’ll be delighted 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

3 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

what manager guarantees that? Who is out of work or at a club we can buy out of contract or who would see hearts as a step up? 
 

Who says Steven Naismith will deliver the bare minimum? He’s at the start of his career, once he has his feet under the table and has his personnel maybe just maybe he will turn out to be a great manager.

 

And again we need to find one becuase we aren’t capable of hiring a ready made one. 
 

 

King - don’t you agree that whether or not a Naismith should be appointed depends on what options we have?

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

3 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

yup.  THD wants a vanity manager.  Stendel was a vanity manager and look how that needed up.

 

if we continue in this vein, with continued improvement and consistent application and style I’ll be delighted 

I want a manger that takes us above the bare minimum we want. The bare minimum gets us nowhere.

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

22 minutes ago, Dazo said:

It isn’t just the 9 points though is it ? It’s style, attitude and performances of the players that come with those points. If we got those points playing poorly he wouldn’t be considered imo. 

No.

 

It doesn’t matter what happens - it should be down to what managers want to sign for us and who is the best option.

 

For example - extreme admittedly - but if Naismith won the next 3 games and we qualified for Europe but Muscat was happy to manage us, or Knutsen, then Naismith is priced out.

 

Dont you agree?

Edited May 9, 2023 by Tom Hardy’s Dug

[Wee Hammy]

In over 60 years supporting Hearts I think I can honestly say there have only been 3 managers who have had us playing football that genuinely made me really look forward to the next game. The first was a rookie- Alex Macdonald, second a real coup for us - Burley and third a Hearts man - Jefferies. Given Burley’s reign was so short we’ll never know how it would have progressed but along with Macdonald he instilled a belief in the team that no matter who we played we could expect to win or give it a damn good shot. Much as I enjoyed the team Jefferies put together I always felt he didn’t have same belief in games in Glasgow as the other 2 - 98 apart 😊

So it’s interesting to read everyone’s thought on who might get it given that in my view our success rate over the years has been less than spectacular and success has been with one from three different categories of options.

[Dazo]

7 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

No.

 

It doesn’t matter what happens - it should be down to what managers want to sign for us and who is the best option.

 

For example - extreme admittedly - but if Naismith won the next 3 games and we qualified for Europe but Muscat was happy to manage us, or Knutsen, then Naismith is priced out.

 

Dont you agree?

Well no I don’t agree because there is no context or details to which they agree to be our manager. Whether we like it or not there will be a cost threshold that will rule out managers who may consider us. 

[jamboinglasgow]

12 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

My view is that I like Naisy and he has the team playing exactly how I want.  So, on the face of things, delighted if we give him the job.

 

However, there is a lot more to managing/being head coach of a club our size than getting the team playing well for a limited amount of games.

 

Longterm squad view, integrating new players, managing all those personalities, reacting to adversity, changing tactics when needed longer term and that's not even getting in to the training field stuff of course.  And he'd also need to appoint a team as I doubt it'd be Parky and Frankie.

 

So lots of variables which mean a good screen shot of the guy now doesn't necessarily mean he's the correct guy longterm.

 

That's not being down on him, it's just a cautionary tale I'm telling myself more than anything.  If we go out in our last 4 games like we have our last 2, I see us picking up 12 points min.  I really do.  Thats maybe daft, but I do.  He'd then maybe need to get the job.  But we'd need to get a right good team in beside him.

 

Great post.

 

If Naismith is made manager I would be delighted, but just want to make sure we are making the right decision.

 

I think Naismith getting the team playing how we want can focus the board a bit on what they want from a manager. Now whether that is Naismith or not will be seen at the end of the season.

 

I do think that one benefit of the sporting director model is that it can take certain jobs away that a manager would normally do, leaving a head coach to focus on the main parts of the first team role. So may make it easier to make the step up. 

 

I am cautionary as I think sometimes caretaker managers can sometimes get a team going after a bad run of the previous manager, mainly because they are so different. It doesn't mean they are the right manager for a longer term.

[Bull's-eye]

Go for the best candidate for the job, if its Naismith then come out and say so.

 

It should have become rather obvious to the board that managers have a shelf life and they should plan accordingly.

 

Lets be brutally honest, in our current state if we get a manager in who pulls up trees he will be off sharpish.

 

The lack of planning in manager recruitment is naive at best currently.

[Agentjambo]

Shows exactly how poor a manager Neilson was and how poor the football produced was that folk are dropping their pants for a rookie like Naismith with no senior management experience at the 1st sign of improvement/playing style…if Neilson had lost 2 out of 3 matches the same people would have his head on a stick.We need to take our time with a proper procedure like every club should do and not just appoint someone on a whim like we did previously with Levein and Neilson.

[kingantti1874]

26 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I want a manger that takes us above the bare minimum we want. The bare minimum gets us nowhere.

Yet seem to be of the belief that naisy is the bare minimum.  I don’t believe that.  
 

you seem to be off the belief we will be able to attract a manager who will guarantee that. I don’t believe that either.

 

we have to continue playing like we have done for the last 2 games to the end of the season but if we do we’d be absolutely crackers to let Naismith Go and gamble on an unknown vanity project.  
 

I get it, you just want the best for the club and that’s 👌.  But we may already be in possession of a guy on a serious upward trajectory 

 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

15 minutes ago, Dazo said:

Well no I don’t agree because there is no context or details to which they agree to be our manager. Whether we like it or not there will be a cost threshold that will rule out managers who may consider us. 

Totally agree.

 

so why rule out anyone until we know?

[Agentjambo]

1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said:

Yet seem to be of the belief that naisy is the bare minimum.  I don’t believe that.  
 

you seem to be off the belief we will be able to attract a manager who will guarantee that. I don’t believe that either.

 

we have to continue playing like we have done for the last 2 games to the end of the season but if we do we’d be absolutely crackers to let Naismith Go and gamble on an unknown vanity project.  
 

I get it, you just want the best for the club and that’s 👌.  But we may already be in possession of a guy on a serious upward trajectory 

 

Who said anything about this “vanity project “that you keep going on about??

[bigfatskinnyjambo97]

30 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I want a manger that takes us above the bare minimum we want. The bare minimum gets us nowhere.

Disagree that the team is only doing the bare minimum under Naismith. Also, we were worse than this 'bare minimum' you keep banging on about for the majority of the season and we were still 11 points clear in third at one stage. So, clearly, even playing below the bare minimum (horrible, vague expression), we can still get somewhere. 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said:

Yet seem to be of the belief that naisy is the bare minimum.  I don’t believe that.  
 

you seem to be off the belief we will be able to attract a manager who will guarantee that. I don’t believe that either.

 

we have to continue playing like we have done for the last 2 games to the end of the season but if we do we’d be absolutely crackers to let Naismith Go and gamble on an unknown vanity project.  
 

I get it, you just want the best for the club and that’s 👌.  But we may already be in possession of a guy on a serious upward trajectory 

 

You don’t know the trajectory of Naismith- he maybe just has players who are relieved they don’t have to play for Neilson anymore:

 

And I don’t want a vanity project/

 

I just want people like you to accept that Naismith has done absolutely nothing to show he is the best option for us moving forward:

 

not only do games/results prove this but also, we don’t know what other managers are in the hat to mange us.

 

So let’s quit this “we beat st Mirren and he should get the job” bullshit:

 

it goes to show that fans know duck all on the scheme of things.

[kingantti1874]

27 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

No.

 

It doesn’t matter what happens - it should be down to what managers want to sign for us and who is the best option.

 

For example - extreme admittedly - but if Naismith won the next 3 games and we qualified for Europe but Muscat was happy to manage us, or Knutsen, then Naismith is priced out.

 

Dont you agree?

 

absolutely not. Whats had Muscat done before taking over from postecoglu? Would you have employed him when he was sacked after 6 months in Belgium?

 

Knutsen I see the attraction, but 1. He’s turned down far bigger clubs than hearts and 2. what had he done before current job? Why can't naismith go on to achieve similar success 

 

 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

Just now, kingantti1874 said:

 

absolutely not. Whats had Muscat done before taking over from postecoglu? Would you have employed him when he was sacked after 6 months in Belgium?

 

Knutsen I see the attraction, but 1. He’s turned down far bigger clubs than hearts and 2. what had he done before current job? Why can't naismith go on to achieve similar success 

 

 

I am not presenting fait accomplis mate. I am just saying that it is beyond mental to think that Naismith is the best option available to us moving forward:

[Watt-Zeefuik]

14 hours ago, Wee Mikey said:

 

St Mirren next. As for Malky Mackay, do you mean the fella who has Ross Co at the foot of the table, or is there another Malky Mackay out there? Seriously, if that eejit gets the job then my ST will be in serious jeopardy of getting shredded.

 

Yeah, realized my mistake on this weekend after I posted. Mackay wasn't a serious suggestion. Just that we may get some very fine candidates, but we will also get an epic pile of has-beens and second chancers that I'd rather avoid.

[kingantti1874]

2 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

You don’t know the trajectory of Naismith- he maybe just has players who are relieved they don’t have to play for Neilson anymore:

 

And I don’t want a vanity project/

 

I just want people like you to accept that Naismith has done absolutely nothing to show he is the best option for us moving forward:

 

not only do games/results prove this but also, we don’t know what other managers are in the hat to mange us.

 

So let’s quit this “we beat st Mirren and he should get the job” bullshit:

 

it goes to show that fans know duck all on the scheme of things.

No I don’t but the early pattern has demonstrated potential. 
 

im more bothered about the style of play and attitude of the players at this point.  
 

anyone in the hat work either be

 

1. out of work

2. at a smaller less glamorous club

3. Or be a inexperienced gamble. (like naismith)

 

I KNOW we aren’t in the market for knutsen for example. 

[Agentjambo]

3 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

absolutely not. Whats had Muscat done before taking over from postecoglu? Would you have employed him when he was sacked after 6 months in Belgium?

 

Knutsen I see the attraction, but 1. He’s turned down far bigger clubs than hearts and 2. what had he done before current job? Why can't naismith go on to achieve similar success 

 

 

Are you trying to say that Naismith isn’t a bigger gamble than a more experienced manager?

[kingantti1874]

2 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I am not presenting fait accomplis mate. I am just saying that it is beyond mental to think that Naismith is the best option available to us moving forward:

I get it partially. I’m not saying the job should be his.  We need to see how it goes for the remaining games.  But if we continue in the same vein then it would be beyond mental to lose him. 
 

there are no sure things at our level 

[Go for it 1308]

1 hour ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Harsh to judge and it's not his team, but some  folk are really excited after a defeat to hibs ( which ended our run v them), a humping of Ross county ( but our home form has been strong last two seasons) and a 2-0 defeat v celtic (worse than our last home league game v them, although the red card changed the game).

 

It's great that some are giving Naismith more support and leeway than they ever gave Bob,  but results haven't been better and ultimately imo things won't change that much  until we get a new manager and have a clear out. 

 

Way too early to be championing Naismith,  but likewise it's harsh to judge him as it's not his team.

 

One big positive of Bob getting the boot is that it's apparent any new manager will get some time and not hounded and abused after every poor result, that is only a good thing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jesus wept....the bloody 'bob' talk again! Let it go FFS!!!!!!

[kingantti1874]

1 minute ago, Agentjambo said:

Are you trying to say that Naismith isn’t a bigger gamble than a more experienced manager?

like who?
 

If he proves it over the course of the last few games then I absolutely am yes. 
 

michael Carrick was inexperienced but turned out to be far better for Middlesbrough than Chris wilder ? 
 

possession is 9/10ths of the law. If Naismith does the business it’s his seat to lose IMO

[Agentjambo]

1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said:

I get it partially. I’m not saying the job should be his.  We need to see how it goes for the remaining games.  But if we continue in the same vein then it would be beyond mental to lose him. 
 

there are no sure things at our level 

Who says he won’t be part of a new managers coaching staff?

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

1 minute ago, kingantti1874 said:

No I don’t but the early pattern has demonstrated potential. 
 

im more bothered about the style of play and attitude of the players at this point.  
 

anyone in the hat work either be

 

1. out of work

2. at a smaller less glamorous club

3. Or be a inexperienced gamble. (like naismith)

 

I KNOW we aren’t in the market for knutsen for example. 

I am sure we aren’t in that market either.

 

It doesn’t mean we crawl up our arse and just accept a Scottish stereotype because we performed a bit better for less than 10 games.

 

I presume you must agree that who we appoint depends on the applicants we have shortlisted?

 

I presume you agree it would be negligent for our board to appoint Naismith solely on the basis that we played with some sort of energy for 3 games he was in charge?

 

 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

3 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

like who?
 

If he proves it over the course of the last few games then I absolutely am yes. 
 

michael Carrick was inexperienced but turned out to be far better for Middlesbrough than Chris wilder ? 
 

possession is 9/10ths of the law. If Naismith does the business it’s his seat to lose IMO

But equally nobody in modern history has been better for Sheffield United than Wilder.

Edited May 9, 2023 by Tom Hardy’s Dug

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

2 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

Who says he won’t be part of a new managers coaching staff?

Indeed.

 

[Agentjambo]

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

like who?
 

If he proves it over the course of the last few games then I absolutely am yes. 
 

michael Carrick was inexperienced but turned out to be far better for Middlesbrough than Chris wilder ? 
 

possession is 9/10ths of the law. If Naismith does the business it’s his seat to lose IMO

I’m sure we have many CV’s and agents contacting the club from over Europe.

There aren’t many Michael Carrick success stories going around.

 

[kingantti1874]

10 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I am sure we aren’t in that market either.

 

It doesn’t mean we crawl up our arse and just accept a Scottish stereotype because we performed a bit better for less than 10 games.

 

I presume you must agree that who we appoint depends on the applicants we have shortlisted?

 

I presume you agree it would be negligent for our board to appoint Naismith solely on the basis that we played with some sort of energy for 3 games he was in charge?

 

 

I think it would be negligent not to consider him on the basis of experience. Every “experienced” manager we go for will have failed at least one 

[Agentjambo]

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

I think it would be negligent not to consider him on the basis of experience. Every “experienced” manager we go for will have failed at least one 

And vice versa….he can’t be judged a long term success on 7 games.

[kingantti1874]

5 minutes ago, Agentjambo said:

I’m sure we have many CV’s and agents contacting the club from over Europe.

There aren’t many Michael Carrick success stories going around.

 

There certainly aren’t. Imagine we had one and lost him. 
 

as I’ve said.  We won’t have a single CV from an experienced manager who hasn’t “failed” at least once, we won’t have a single applicant from a manager who is managing a wealthier / bigger club than hearts right now we will have plenty of applicants like Dwight Yorke or other young coaches who represent a bigger gamble than naismith.

 

I maintain some of you (no pointed fingers) just want a sexy name 

[kingantti1874]

Just now, Agentjambo said:

And vice versa….he can’t be judged a long term success on 7 games.

agreed. So (if he proves he is worth a shot over the remaining fixtures)  a 1 year contract then and see how he gets on. 

[kingantti1874]

14 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

But equally nobody in modern history has been better for Sheffield United than Wilder.

Paul Heckingbottom about to match him ? And failed miserably at Middlesbrough where he was labelled a dinosaur by their fans .

 

id back him.  But as I say he’d only be a candidate if he’s failed somewhere else 

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, kingantti1874 said:

yup.  THD wants a vanity manager.  Stendel was a vanity manager and look how that needed up.

 

if we continue in this vein, with continued improvement and consistent application and style I’ll be delighted 

It’s style AND substance that’s required for me.  Style so far has been ok, even the Hibs game where there were some signs of improvement.  Substance not so good yet. Poor return from ER, it does look like RC had a really bad day against us judging by their results before and after visiting Tynie, and whilst promising against Celtic when 11 v 11 zero attempts on target doesn’t really cut it for me.   Hopefully next four are better still on both counts. 

[graygo]

1 hour ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Indeed.

 

Hearts team now doing the bare minimum that some fans demand - the bare minimum - yet they want to appoint Naismith who hasn’t shown anything that suggests he will get the team to do that bare minimum. And even then has won 1 out of 3 games.

 

The guy might go on to be brilliant but he hasn’t shown he is anything special so far. He has shown (credit to him) that he can get Hearts players to do the bare minimum that a lot of fans expect.

 

Thats w he’ll of a low bar on which to call for him to be made manager. Even result a don’t seem to matter.

 

Come on man, have a word with yourself before posting.