You speak as if nothing is wrong. Our head coach who was doing great has just left us to join a team that could go down. We have 11 points from 12 games. Weve a squad full of short term contracts and all of our best players see their contracts expire next year. The performance and result on Wednesday did surprise me, Eustace's coaches had set up the team on Monday and obviously the players had a seige mentality and showed great character directly after what has unfolded. I dont think we csn sustain that purely on that feeling. These options being put forward are underwhelming. The reason your supposed short list has about 10 names on it is because even you know none of them stand out as a particularly good choice. One of them you want because he lives local and another after reading a couple of articles online, that tells you a lot.

I feel like a mixture of the pushing of the anger onto Eustace and our league position and win on Wednesday will quash the movement and dissent unfortunately. Nothing will happen, we will appoint someone sub par, the season will fizzle out, the issues will remain but things will stay the same.

Because the options are so underwhelming that such futile points are put forward to support one of a pretty poor set of potential downgrades on Eustace, as I listed above.

This on top of the statement which has led to the brunt of the criticism going straight to Eustace. Theyve dealt with it all brilliantly in terms of managing the dissenters, one thing theyve got right amidst a total mess.

You can tell how underwhelming a list of candidates we are discussing is considering the reasons that people are opting for who they are. Gerrard for a "bit of blood and thunder." His playing style was blood and thunder but as a person and manager he doesnt seem to be. And you cant just rely on that anyway. Gerrard because he would get us media attention. As if being "Steven Gerrard's Blackburn Rovers" is a good thing. Gerrard because he has a connection to Liverpool like other successful Rovers managers. Now that is clutching at straws. Duff because he knows the club having worked here. It was over 20 years ago and it was a totally different club. O'Neil because although he failed at Wolves he has excuses due to player sales. Ignoring the fact that his replacment has more points in half the games. Wicky because of a couple of nice articles online. Wellens because he lives local. Depressing.

Gerrard used to plan his training sessions in Saudi Arabia around when Liverpool were playing.

The head coach should always get the final say on transfers. Point being, we shouldnt get a head coach specifically because he is willing/desperate enough not to have the final say on transfers. I dont get your mindset of accepting a dysfunctional behind the scenes structure with people seemingly disagreeing on signings and just picking someone willing to put up with it. Hardly screams going for the best candidate. It was reported in the Lancashire Telegraph that Eustace didnt get his targets and youve echoed that. He clearly wasnt happy with January so I am guessing he didnt want the players mentioned. I dont think recruitment has been that good but then again its hard when your budget is a bag of magic beans. You missed Cantwell and Cozier Duberry who have both been crap. Ive already given my opinion on O'Neil prior to this vacancy. His replacement has more points for Wolves this season in half the number of games. Prepare for lots of goals going into our net if he comes. But why is Wicky your choice? How much do you actually know about him aside from the rumour that he is on the shortlist?

Yes, I was also wrong.

Why was it an impossible task? Their new manager has got more points in 8 games than O'Neil got in 16. Theyve still got a competitive squad with some good players in it. They were a disorganised and ill disciplined mess under O'Neil. Merely BEING in the Premier League doesnt make you a good manager if you dont do well. Hes certainly not got anything on his CV to suggest he would be a suitable choice to get into the play offs.

Not really answered my question. The structure we have had where people above the head coach often decide players against the head coaches wishes has proven dysfunctional. It pissed off Eustace to the point that he left. Why are we not bothering to change that? Why are you just accepting that when its caused issues?

Only Neto and Kilman that were important players that I can think of but I may have missed one or two. But either way, does that excuse conceding so many specifically from set pieces? Or his players repeatedly losing discipline? And is that squad really as bad as it was showing itself under him? Results since his departure suggest not. But even if that somewhat excuses him this season. What has he done to specifically make him an attractive proposition? Because hes seemingly a potential option, hes just hedging his bets to try and make it seem like something he wanted in case it happens.

Wolves did sell a couple of players but as youve seen with the improvment since he left, that squad was not as bad as it appeared under him. They had conceded over 20 set piece goals I think so early in the season. The players clearly cant have respected him much because towards the end they seemed to have a public showing of ill discipline in each game.

When you was anticipating January you definitely seemed happy to let him go. You wanted our strikers to be a new signing, Ohashi and Leonard. Its ok, like me you are probably surprised and didnt see it coming. But lets not make out like it was just me.

Eustace had not long since been sacked with Birmingham 6th in the league. O'Neil's Wolves side conceded so many goals from set pieces. They also had numerous spells of ill discipline. 2 huge red flags. I dont think he did particularly well at Bournemouth to be honest.

Seems a strange decision to just leave the whole structure as it is and just get someone grateful (so probably crap) to be here and take whatever hes given. But nothing will change with this dysfunctional club.

Do you just not like him as a person?

Weve collected 7 points from 17 times being behind this season apparently. Hardly a breath of fresh air. Just the 1 win which I think was against Oxford at home so right at the start of the season. As his reign went on, we did at least start to compete against sides at home who were at the top with incomparable budgets. Beat Arsenal and drew with Chelsea and I think United.

He finished 10th. He did more than keep us up. Gerrard?

Im pretty sure half of his list has changed to fit in with who is rumoured to be getting an interview. Wicky, O'Neil, Wellens.

Do you think we SHOULD purposely pick someone willing to concede the final say in transfers? Rather than thinking, having people picking players that the head coach doesnt agree with has caused problems and led us into a mess. Just let the head coach have the final say going forward and learn your lesson.

Is that really a factor in picking a manager? Thats genuinely something you think should be a tick in the box? Hardly as if his current job is local.

Why would he not? He failed in Saudi Arabia and at Villa before. He would be incredibly lucky to get our job but we shouldnt even consider it.

Its one thing people being unhappy with him at that time. But having seen what has happened since, I cant fathom how him being manager would be too much. His football is only seen as dull comparatively because of who he is. Eustace's football wasnt entertaining in the typical sense, we didnt score many, it was all build on being solid.

It seems from here that the shortlist comprises of Wellens, Karanka, O'Neil, Wicky, Carvalhal (seemingly all written off) and most hilariously of all, George bloody Boateng. That seems to be stemming from Nixon though. He is unreliable and often spouts shit but it seems he must have some sort of pally relationship with someone higher up, perhaps Waggott. Hence his sick inducing take on things including our genius move to get Dennis on lower wages by waiting until we had lost throughout January. So if there is any truth in that list, if thats who we are interviewing, its one hell of a depressing list. Hopefully hes wide of the mark as he often is.

Didnt realise Wellens' record was quite so bad. The fact that where he lives has been put forward as a positive tells you a lot.