Martinez would be an interesting appointment. Finally a chance for him to show that he can push a club on with a bit of money to spend. I can't decide whether he's been conning the media season after season, or he's genuinely done a top job and their relegation was to be expected. Pulis did reasonably well at Stoke, but when you look at some of his signings, you have to wonder if they could have achieved more under a more positive manager.
Kightly £3m, Adam £4m, Butland £6m, N'Zonzi £3m, Shea £3m, Crouch £10m, Palacios £8m, Jones £8m, Whitehead £3m, Huth £5m, Begovic £3m, Tuncay £5m, Kitson £5m, Olofinjana £3m.
That's a selection of Pulis's most notable dealings at Stoke. Some proved to be bargains, but others stand out as signings representing awful value. The average age of Pulis's signings needs to be considered as well. Stoke virtually never get a reasonable fee when they sell these players on. Bit of a low-end O'Neill approach. Overall their net spend under Pulis is close to £75m. Have they achieved enough?
Definitely, most of his buys have been older players, who have little or no resale value, which would be important to a team like Stoke. As I said earlier in the thread, I also think he is sort of a low-end O'Neill. Both have had teams rife with indiscipline, a penchant for largely buying foreign players who have played in the PL (Huth, Begovic), little to no concept of scouting outside of the British Isles, a willingness to overpay for older players (Crouch) and inability to use a full squad.
The lack of value with some buys is notable. Kitson was a club record signing at £5.5m and played 34 games scoring three times. Michael Tonge cost £2m only played 12 games and ended up being sent out on loan five times. Andrew Davies was bought for £1.3m and played twice, while Tom Soares who was once linked with us made only seven appearances for Stoke. Arismendi cost £2.5m during their second PL season and never played a single game for them. Maurice Edu appeared in a single game for Stoke last season, while Jamie Ness never played in one. Matthew Upson played more games on loan for Brighton in 2013, than he did for Stoke in two years. Woodgate was a shadow of his former self and Owen was a waste of space.
The signing of Tuncay seemed to sort of hint at an obvious lack of creativity, but he wasn't given the type of role he needed to thrive in. He would have been a terrific piece for us under Rafa. Kitson was a massive bust, but had been heavily linked with a move to Spurs the season prior. Sorensen was a cracking buy, as were Huth and Begovic. His gambles on troubled figures ended up with mixed results. While Etherington was likely a success, Pennant was a bust and Palacios who seemed at the time like a decent pick-up at £8m, clearly never recovered from personal tragedy.
Deserves more credit than he is going to get. Took them into the Premiership - Into Europe - And to a Cup Final.
Places Stoke haven't been since the mid-seventies. Dire football but it got results and next manager is going to find it a hard act to follow.
Trying to turn this Stoke squad into a Swansea type side is more likely to lead to relegation than it is success.
Completely agree. However, I think what undid him was the lack of tactical evolution in the team. He made a point of signing older players and playing the same approach, rather than using the FA Cup and Europa League as a means to evolve and aim for something more. Instead they've regressed badly with their owners paying a premium for a large squad of average or past it players, playing a dull style of football that hasn't got them into the upper echelon of the league. I think Stoke's owners will be smart enough to know that they cannot pick someone who is a 180 in terms of approach. They need someone with a bit of vision, who can use next season to pragmatically sift through the team and look to add a bit more invention, but retain a core defensive mindset for the interim.
