Queens Park Rangers Fire Struggling Manager Mark Hughes
In news that should surprise no one, Queens Park Rangers Football Club decided to cut ties with manager Mark Hughes.
It's safe to say his short, one-year stint at Loftus Road was not an enjoyable one.
QPR was promoted for the 2011-12 season and finished just 17th in the Premier League. But thanks to solid players like Julio Cesar, Esteban Granero, Jose Bosingwa, Shaun Derry, Park Ji-Sung and Adel Taarabt, among others, the club had aspirations of soon landing in the middle of the EPL table. Hughes, however, led them in the exact opposite direction during his only season in charge.
Was firing Hughes the correct move?
After 12 league matches, the London side had tallied just four points: zero wins, four draws and eight losses. It was the worst ever start to a Premier League campaign.
As the criticism towards Hughes only continued to mount higher and higher, it appeared he was on his way out when he missed a training session to meet with chief executive Philip Beard.
Hughes escaped that meeting with his job, but it was clear he was on very thin ice and probably wouldn't last much longer if his club continued to put up such woeful results.
ESPN's Sean Smith summed up what was wrong with the veteran manager:
But we need a change, and we need it sooner rather than later. What was perfectly clear at the Southampton game was that the players have lost some of the fight they have had previously. In stark contrast, the Saints players looked prepared to crawl through fire for their boss, Nigel Adkins.
When heads go down so quickly, the club becomes like a broken down car: unless you replace the part that's broken, the car won't work. And no amount of hitting it with a hammer, or tinkering under the bonnet is going to change that. And Hughes is beginning to have the look of a broken cog.
Firing someone so early in his contract isn't always a fair move, but it was painfully clear that Hughes was the wrong man for this job. He took QPR, a club with a lot of history, back several steps and didn't look capable of making a turnaround anytime soon.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?