This is the same Bournemouth that was fined 8Mil for breaking financial fair play to get into the Premier League right?
Do managers really make a difference?
- Thread starter Bassmansam
- Start date
This is the same Bournemouth that was fined 8Mil for breaking financial fair play to get into the Premier League right?
I don't know why people think football managers are that different to any other job. Every who has worked for a long time at a number of different companies will have had good an bad managers. Companies are run into the ground, employees leave and the competition improves as others stagnate. Managers are partially responsible for this. Have a poor manager who doesn't make you feel valued, doesn't improve you or make you coming to work enjoyable and it shows.
Even in the smallest premier league teams you have a set of players worth millions and the carrot of staying in the PL with its prize money. Your manager can be your most important asset in that.
Look at how teams play with different managers. How can that not make a difference. Look at how United play now vs when we were under LvG. Managers pick players they want for the style of football they want to play. If that doesn't work they're first for the chop usually. High risk, high pay.
Even in the smallest premier league teams you have a set of players worth millions and the carrot of staying in the PL with its prize money. Your manager can be your most important asset in that.
Look at how teams play with different managers. How can that not make a difference. Look at how United play now vs when we were under LvG. Managers pick players they want for the style of football they want to play. If that doesn't work they're first for the chop usually. High risk, high pay.
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
None of what you said provides a strong argument, you are being quite vague and you seem to have blind faith in your reasons. Man Utd finished 6th in the league last year, no better than what Van Gaal achieved, this season they are doing better as they have bought a proven premier league goal scorer in Lukaku. If you want to judge a managers greatness on his purchases then that is ok, but some managers have a huge advantage in this area.
Its not something that you can put exact numbers on. What exactly are you after. If everyone else in the league has a fantastic year then even if you are a good manager and perform well you might not appear to do as well as the season before even though you play better football, your fans are happier and you have made some good signings.
LvG was a **** manager because he finished 6th in the league by playing awful football, completely removing the joy from the game and hoping that he could stifle the opposition with a single goal most of the time. The fans hated the football, the players hated the football, we didn't do well in any way shape or form and players clearly didn't want to come and play under him/wanted to leave because of him.
Last season we took our foot off the gas in the PL near the end because we were more likely to get CL via the EL but we were fighting for top four until very near the end, we won two trophies, one of which is the second tier european cup and we played good football at times. You could see we weren't killing off games but we were moving in the right direction and the players and fans were happy.
Lukaku has scored a lot of goals so far but most of them have been tap ins. We are playing good football and taking teams apart this season. I really can't understand how people look at our time under LvG and Moyes and say "look, nothing has changed".
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
Of course things have changed , moyes didnt have lukaku, pogba , matic for a start!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,009
- Location
- Surrey
No, he failed in his pursuit of high profile targets (most likely because they knew he was a melon), failed to get backup targets and ended up just buying a mostly useless Belgian, who he didn't even know how to use! It's taken Mourinho, a good manager to even understand how to get the best out of him.
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
So because the club failed to land a high profile player Moyes is a melon?
Surely if he was 'mostly useless' he wouldn't be getting £100m a week at United, playing regularly and even scoring and winning matches?
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
Did you quote the wrong post?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 3,875
Man Utd lost the champions league final to Barcelona when Ferguson was in charge, what’s the excuse there then ?
United also lost 6-3 to Southampton, 6-1 to City, 4-0 to Middlesborough, etc, during Ferguson's time in charge, I don't really see your point. Every manager loses games, that's football. Ferguson was and still is the best manager I have ever seen at building teams year after year. Sure, we had some poor years by United standards where we only managed to finish third, but Ferguson always rebuilt the team and got them back to winning.
Also, imo part of being a good manager is good player recruitment. Mourinho won't have just told Woodward what positions he wanted sorted out this summer, he'll have given him specific targets having identified the weaknesses in the squad and the players that would be suitable to improve us.
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
Building a team when you have big resources isn’t rocket science is it?
My point is i do not understand why managers have so much emphasis placed on them by the media?
I did, sorry!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,009
- Location
- Surrey
There are quite a lot of things you don't understand which is becoming abundantly clear.
But it does take a certain type to last at a big resource club, Real Madrid is a prime example the standard is to compete for champions league and the league they have sacked managers who have come only second to Barcelona in the league or runners up in competition.
Edit: Mourinho is a winner but he has not lasted long at clubs because of how intense he gets, he alienated himself at most clubs due to his managerial ways that bring success, he also doesn’t nurture younger players but bring in proven players to get the job done, he pushed out De Bruyne and Lukaku just at Chelsea alone to win instantly
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,086
- Location
- Surrey
As a Palace supporter, I simply have no comment. 
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,009
- Location
- Surrey
nothing you have said proves me wrong.
Sure. All managers are equal, it's just players and money. That's why people much smarter than you pay millions of pounds a year to get the best....because they're all equal.
You're a visionary.
There is a whole lot more to being a manager than building a team - and even then building a team isn't just about getting the best players possible. Increasingly football has integrated a level of macro as well - the complexity of analysis in the last few years has increased massively.
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,263
Well this kind of proves my point, he brings in the best players which in turn helps him win trophies. If that makes him a "good" manager then so be it. It doesn't seem like a particularly hard job though, yet the media bang on about it like these guys are some kind of genius.
But it shows massive flaws, he let go Lukaku for 20 million at Chelsea let him develop and then bought him for Man U at 70 odd million, De Bruyne left for pittance and got a move to Man City for 50 million.
Then take some off the coaches down the years at Ajax, they literally are famed for nurturing the young from academy to first teamers and have won titles. Even Pep at Barcelona won a lot with players that came through the also famous la Masia academy