Manager vacancy: Hill out, but why?

Ingy The Wingy, Flickr Ingy The Wingy, Flickr
Jamie Smith October 15, 2012
Ha ha ha! Nice one JMC. 3 years ago

Burnley have ruled Keith Hill out of the running – but doesn’t he tick all the right boxes?

When news initially broke that Eddie Howe was leaving the club, Keith Hill was one of the first names to come to my mind.

The Barnsley boss was among those linked with the job when Brian Laws was sacked, but Howe’s record was far more impressive at the time and he got the nod.

Family reasons have forced Howe to return to Dean Court and as a result, we find ourselves yet again searching for a new manager.

Reports today say Hill is not being considered for the vacancy at Turf Moor and this comes at the same time Lee Hoos is speaking about the need for a manager to suit our “footballing philosophy”.

We’ll have more on what exactly our footballing philosophy is later, but to me it is playing an attractive brand of football on the deck, bringing through young, local talent and developing players and selling them on for a profit, in a nutshell.

For me, Hill ticks all of those boxes, so I was surprised to hear he’s not being considered by Hoos and the board.

He’s youngish but has managed in both the lower leagues and the Championship with success in both. He has a promotion on his CV, at Rochdale of all places. Promotions happen less frequently at Dale than I go on dates with Scarlett Johansson. His Barnsley team keep it on the floor and are attractive to watch and he’s kept them up easily on one of the smallest budgets in the division. They have the same number of points as us with a much worse squad after ten matches of the season.

Also-rans such as Ricardo Vaz Te became stars under his watch and have gone on to be Premier League players for large profits. He’s northern and a straight-talker. He clearly has a lot going for him and with his position at Oakwell reportedly under threat due to an impending foreign takeover, it might be the right time for him to consider a move.

But it seems like we’re not interested. Hill was my favourite for the job and I admit to feeling surprised, disappointed and even a little baffled that we’re not going to be pursuing him. It will be interesting to keep a close eye on his career to see how he gets on in the future.

What do you make of Burnley ignoring Hill’s credentials? Comment below.

  • Mike Mada

    Might be a smokescreen or even a cunning plan…

    • Jamie Smith
      Jamie Smithin reply to Mike Mada

      perhaps, perhaps…but I’m not one for conspiracy theories!

  • chris

    because they will have to spend some of that £1.4 million.brendon needs the cash with all his debts and court cases comming up he needs all the cash he can get.

    • Jamie Smith
      Jamie Smithin reply to chris

      I don’t think that’s how it works, really. Flood, nor any of the board, can’t just take money out of the club.

      • James Bird
        James Birdin reply to Jamie Smith

        Don’t speak such sense Jamie!

        • Jamie Smith
          Jamie Smithin reply to James Bird

          this isn’t CM. sense is allowed, even encouraged!

          • Mark Baileyin reply to Jamie Smith

            Ha ha ha! Nice one JMC.

  • Doug

    I dont understand why our board feels a need to publicly rule out names so quickly. First Coyle and now Hill. They’re silent when we need news and vocal when they should just be getting on with it. Its unprofessional.

    • Adam Haworth
      Adam Haworthin reply to Doug

      This hasn’t come from the board. It’s been leaked (or speculated?) by local newspapers. Not confirmed.

  • Jamie Smith
    Jamie Smith

    Hill back in the running according to Chris Boden. Woop!

  • Comment