How much difference do managers make? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Generally Midfield
- Start date
Warwickhunt
Well-Known Member
I think it's more of a case that we turn managers into crap
skybluegod
Well-Known Member
Ferguson? Wenger? Nigel Adkins and Southampton? Sean Dyche with Burnley? Would argue all of these managers were pretty relevant to the long term at these clubs.
It depends on how the club acts... if they care about the clubs long-term progression or about short term results.
Managers at CCFC seem to get caught up in the general negative malaise surrounding the club. They are also provided with a ready made excuse to fail provided by universal fan hatred of the owners. On saying all that though if someone with half a brain was given £5 million to get promotion I think it would be achieved as this is a crap league.
Generally Midfield
Well-Known Member
someone sent me this link. It's not the same as the thing I remember seeing and is from 2012 but is on this topic - Subscribe to read
bringbackrattles
Well-Known Member
Troy Deeny of Watford who has seen a lot of managers at his club. He has stated before the players aren't bothered really, because as professional footballers they know their roles, and he said most of them dont listen to them anyway. He commented also they could do better without a manager !
skybluesam66
Well-Known Member
ask most people on a shop floor - they would probably say the same, but they would very quickly lose direction
bringbackrattles
Well-Known Member
Not really. A leader could take charge ? A good captain on the pitch has got more respect than a manager, as he's in there amongst things. So I understand Deenys comments.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Someone has to be interviewed after the game. Someone has to accept the accolades after a win and be the scapegoat after a defeat.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Confucious says: When a ball bounces, it goes both up and down.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Keep them during the up bit
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
Imagine going to work and not putting a shift in. Week in, week out. When questioned about why, your response is the owner don't put a shift in/doesn't care/never see him or her. Do you think it would be accepted? Footballers are no different. Just like everyone of us when we go to work, we have to be professional and do the job to the best of our ability. Surely professional pride comes into it to? I worked at a company who went into administration due to management errors. We were the first company to come out of administration without stopping a production line. Everyone pulled together, why can't footballers?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Everyone pulled together when we went into administration and moved to Northampton and the manager who did that ended up getting sacked due to poor performances. Hero to Zero.
Footballers and football managers are human like the rest of us. Players will respond to the manager and that cycle continues up regardless of profession. If the manager gets demotivated because of what’s happening above him eventually players will respond to that in a negative way. We seen that with Presley, Mowbray and for all we know it could be happening again now. Both SP and TM went from not being able to do anything wrong in the early days of their tenure to not being able to do anything right later on. Why is that. We’re now in a situation approaching that with Robbins, the call for the saviours head are getting louder after every game. There has to be a reason for this pattern doesn’t there?
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
We're not the only club who employs managers who start well and drop off. Koeman at Everton. Shakespeare at Leicester. Do they have owners as shit as ours? I'm not saying the owners don't influence things, I'm saying there not the sole influence. How could we be so shit in the league last year but beat oxford at Wembley? There is clearly more to it than just owners being shit or players being shit. My point was if the players are being paid and provided with the right facilities but don't turn up, them and the manager have to take a share of the blame.
Let's agree to disagree now, I don't fancy ruining my morning going round in circles.
Let's agree to disagree now, I don't fancy ruining my morning going round in circles.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If it was as easy as paying wages and providing training facilities everyone would be top wouldn’t they. We’re no different from any other club in providing the basics. It’s bigger than that and whatever “it” is it’s a common denominator regardless of the managers experience, credentials and history.
SkyBlueZack
Well-Known Member
What if sisu leave and we're still shit?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I don’t see a connection between the managers and owners in any kind of conspiracy theory way
In fact it’s a myth to say that the manager turnover is worse under these owners. The mcginnity era was a permenantly revolving door and if you take out the long servers - Milne, strachan and Sillett it’s always had quick turnover.
These owners actually are slow to react and appoint poorly. Coleman was as dumb as you get as he’d got no experience for this league. The clueless oaf even signed Eastwood after wolves refused to loan him as they knew it would expose fitness and altitude issues. Boothroyd was in decline so again absurd. Thorn wouldn’t have been considered anywhere else.
Other clubs would have fired Mowbray when the cracks were coming. Instead they became gaping chasms. Allowing Venus to play football manager was also absurd.
I suspect the current situation will drift too long as well - again robins would be axed by December unless things change at most clubs.
Managers are mostly short term sticking plasters. You don’t build long term in football. You deliver an expectation. If you don’t you get fired and if you over deliver you get head hunted. It’s not a normal profession.
These owners hang on to duds too long or employ complete duds who couldn’t manage to even tie their own shoelaces let alone manage a club.
In fact it’s a myth to say that the manager turnover is worse under these owners. The mcginnity era was a permenantly revolving door and if you take out the long servers - Milne, strachan and Sillett it’s always had quick turnover.
These owners actually are slow to react and appoint poorly. Coleman was as dumb as you get as he’d got no experience for this league. The clueless oaf even signed Eastwood after wolves refused to loan him as they knew it would expose fitness and altitude issues. Boothroyd was in decline so again absurd. Thorn wouldn’t have been considered anywhere else.
Other clubs would have fired Mowbray when the cracks were coming. Instead they became gaping chasms. Allowing Venus to play football manager was also absurd.
I suspect the current situation will drift too long as well - again robins would be axed by December unless things change at most clubs.
Managers are mostly short term sticking plasters. You don’t build long term in football. You deliver an expectation. If you don’t you get fired and if you over deliver you get head hunted. It’s not a normal profession.
These owners hang on to duds too long or employ complete duds who couldn’t manage to even tie their own shoelaces let alone manage a club.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
Watford: A rising force through careful planning not instability and chaos
This matches what I have been saying previously, we cant keep flip flopping between different managers who all have a different philosophy on how the game should be played and in my opinion shows that Robins or whoever the manager is shouldnt be the person to put the infrastructure in place.
This matches what I have been saying previously, we cant keep flip flopping between different managers who all have a different philosophy on how the game should be played and in my opinion shows that Robins or whoever the manager is shouldnt be the person to put the infrastructure in place.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Uh? Watford have had 7 managers in 4 years!
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
But stability behind the scenes.
SkyBlueScottie
Well-Known Member
Read the article, stability behind the scenes, and other people not the manager responsible for putting the infrastructure in to place. Where as we are reliant on the manager doing the job, or at least have been.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So sacking managers every 6 months has no impact at all?
