Next England Manager? Next England Captain?

[mysticsniper]

Capello has the best win % of any England manager, we've had plenty of **** managers but Capello wasn't one of them where results are concerned.

Allardyce would be a disastrous appointment for me, let's have it right McClaren pipped him to the job last time out which says it all.

McClaren was already the England assistant manager and had the ear of the FA, so would seem to be a natural progression, no one knew he would be so lame.

Who really cares about win percentages, I want tournament progression, it's been 20 years since we last made the semi's any competition

 

[Gilly]

Capello has the best win % of any England manager, we've had plenty of **** managers but Capello wasn't one of them where results are concerned.

Allardyce would be a disastrous appointment for me, let's have it right McClaren pipped him to the job last time out which says it all.

Win percentages are great for league managers, because the points average across the league are what matters. That's not true for International managers, who only have 2 objectives per year: qualify for major tournament, win major tournament.

Winning your friendlies, then getting to a major tournament and drawing with USA and Algeria then getting truly pumped by Germany doesn't mean anything other than abject failure.

 

[Newbfail]

competitive win percentages are whats important, not the mickey mouse qualifiers or placid friendlies, I would be interesting to see tournament win % for England managers.

 

[Gilly]

Let us also recall that Hodgson's win percentage was over 77% before the Euros.

 

[BaZ87]

Win percentages are great for league managers, because the points average across the league are what matters. That's not true for International managers, who only have 2 objectives per year: qualify for major tournament, win major tournament.

Winning your friendlies, then getting to a major tournament and drawing with USA and Algeria then getting truly pumped by Germany doesn't mean anything other than abject failure.

And that's the problem with appointing Fat Sam. He, just like Hodgson, Pulis and all these other go to managers when you're worried about getting relelgated, play the percentages. They don't set their teams up to win games, they set their teams up not to lose, knowing that they'll probably pinch the odd win every 3 or 4 games. When your objective is to pick up 40 points per season that works. The problems come when they're asked to win regularly.

Newcastle have had some terrible sides over the past 10 or so years but Allardyce's Newcastle were just about the worst Newcastle side I can ever remember Liverpool facing. Suddenly he was at a club where they didn't accept playing not to lose, pinching the odd win here and there which will keep them afloat, and he stunk the place out. Not only couldn't he set a team up to go out and win the game but he couldn't put his trademark organised defensive structure in place either. He was lost, just like Hodgson was at Liverpool and England, and Moyes when he went to Utd.

I'm not saying Allardyce should be condemned after his brief spell at Newcastle and doesn't deserve a 2nd chance but should England be taking chances on managers? Not for me and certainly not after the embarrassment of Hodgson's era.

I'd much rather see England go to somebody like Eddie Howe than Steve Bruce or Allardyce. At least with him you can see how what he's doing or trying to do with Bournemouth can be transferred to England.

 

[Gilly]

competitive win percentages are whats important, not the mickey mouse qualifiers or placid friendlies, I would be interesting to see tournament win % for England managers.

Winterbottom 21.4%
Ramsay 66.6%
Greenwood 50%
Robson 33.3%
Venables 40%
Keegan 33.3%
Hoddle 50%
Eriksson 50%
Capello 25%
Hodgson 27%

This is WC and Euros only, we have never qualified for the Confederations Cup and I didn't include le Tournoi or lower 'summer tournaments'.

 

[MooMoo444]

Some of those percentages are dire. We're not the best footballing country in the world but we should be winning at least 3/5 I would say.

 

[mysticsniper]

Sunderland have confirmed Big Sam in talks with the FA

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36783415

Winterbottom 21.4%
Ramsey 66.6%
Greenwood 50%
Robson 33.3%
Venables 40%
Keegan 33.3%
Hoddle 50%
Eriksson 50%
Capello 25%
Hodgson 27%

This is WC and Euros only, we have never qualified for the Confederations Cup and I didn't include le Tournoi or lower 'summer tournaments'.

Those stats don't show the whole picture, seeing as the likes of Eriksson and Hoddle never made it past the quarters in a tournament. While Robson and Venables have been our best managers since Ramsey.

 

[Artery]

I'd be ok with Big Sam for now tbh, as long as he doesn't continue at Sunderland too.

 

[daz]

And that's the problem with appointing Fat Sam. He, just like Hodgson, Pulis and all these other go to managers when you're worried about getting relelgated, play the percentages. They don't set their teams up to win games, they set their teams up not to lose, knowing that they'll probably pinch the odd win every 3 or 4 games. When your objective is to pick up 40 points per season that works. The problems come when they're asked to win regularly.

That is a good point, and to that end you then would have to consider those managers that have set up teams and have dominated the lower divisions, e.g. the Championship.

Eddie Howe as you say would be a good shout for that.

 

[Gilly]

Those stats don't show the whole picture, seeing as the likes of Eriksson and Hoddle never made it past the quarters in a tournament. While Robson and Venables have been our best managers since Ramsey.

Whilst I agree that they don't show the whole picture, I delivered what was asked

That said, the Capello one is particularly telling.

And that's the problem with appointing Fat Sam. He, just like Hodgson, Pulis and all these other go to managers when you're worried about getting relelgated, play the percentages. They don't set their teams up to win games, they set their teams up not to lose, knowing that they'll probably pinch the odd win every 3 or 4 games. When your objective is to pick up 40 points per season that works. The problems come when they're asked to win regularly.

Newcastle have had some terrible sides over the past 10 or so years but Allardyce's Newcastle were just about the worst Newcastle side I can ever remember Liverpool facing. Suddenly he was at a club where they didn't accept playing not to lose, pinching the odd win here and there which will keep them afloat, and he stunk the place out. Not only couldn't he set a team up to go out and win the game but he couldn't put his trademark organised defensive structure in place either. He was lost, just like Hodgson was at Liverpool and England, and Moyes when he went to Utd.

I'm not saying Allardyce should be condemned after his brief spell at Newcastle and doesn't deserve a 2nd chance but should England be taking chances on managers? Not for me and certainly not after the embarrassment of Hodgson's era.

I'd much rather see England go to somebody like Eddie Howe than Steve Bruce or Allardyce. At least with him you can see how what he's doing or trying to do with Bournemouth can be transferred to England.

I wouldn't mind us trying Howe, but he is relatively inexperienced and that goes against him.

We've had expansive managers that couldn't get the best out of wonderful players. Perhaps it's time that we accept that until we have a wholesale change in ethos throughout the infrastructure that we're better off being difficult to break down?

 

[mysticsniper]

I wouldn't mind us trying Howe, but he is relatively inexperienced and that goes against him.

We've had expansive managers that couldn't get the best out of wonderful players. Perhaps it's time that we accept that until we have a wholesale change in ethos throughout the infrastructure that we're better off being difficult to break down?

I'd go for either Eddie or Sam, but we have seen managers in the past that have done well at the club level, but failed on the national stage.

I do think that a winter break would help with these bunch of wimps we call footballers, if looking at the other European national teams is anything to go on.

 

[Steedie]

Allardyce will be no better than Hodgson what a sad state of affairs

 

[KingOfTheDaves]

The problem with international football is the ego of the players.

Any international manager needs to be someone who is either:
1) Recent world class player. i.e. Klinsmann, van Basten
2) Club manager who has won it all. i.e. Ferguson, Mourinho
3) Disciplinarian. i.e. Conte, Simeone

Basically they need to be able to tell self absorbed, know-it-all players to 'shut up and sit down'.

Hodgson and McLaren failed because they aren't in any of the 3 boxes.

Allardyce could be considered a disciplinarian, but I don't see the players believing in him or his system. Same with Eddie Howe, I think tactically he is a very good manager, I just don't see the likes of Rooney, Wilshere or Cahill listening to him. He might have more luck with the younger players

 

[Eddie]

If the picked players don't believe in the manager then the manager should just pick players who do.

This continued bowing down to so-called 'elite' players is just not the way to go, imo.

I'd be quite happy with a load of players from the lower leagues if it meant England actually started playing as a team and looked like they gave a toss.

 

[this_is_gav]

The problem with international football is the ego of the players.

Any international manager needs to be someone who is either:
1) Recent world class player. i.e. Klinsmann, van Basten
2) Club manager who has won it all. i.e. Ferguson, Mourinho
3) Disciplinarian. i.e. Conte, Simeone

Basically they need to be able to tell self absorbed, know-it-all players to 'shut up and sit down'.

Hodgson and McLaren failed because they aren't in any of the 3 boxes.

I'd argue Capello was too much of a disciplinarian, to the extent that he snuffed out any thought of adventure at all.

I largely agree with you, but I think a journeyman manager (eg the 90s Hoddle) isn't a bad thing as long as they have decent general man management skills.

Tactical nous isn't as important an asset for an international manager given the limited time with the team, as long as you're good enough to make relatively sensible tactical decisions (such as not continuing to pick the current Sterling in your starting 11, and picking players with an eye to changing the system that isn't working ie bringing a couple of natural wingers, irrespective of their ability).

 

[da_mic_1530]

And that's the problem with appointing Fat Sam. He, just like Hodgson, Pulis and all these other go to managers when you're worried about getting relelgated, play the percentages. They don't set their teams up to win games, they set their teams up not to lose, knowing that they'll probably pinch the odd win every 3 or 4 games. When your objective is to pick up 40 points per season that works. The problems come when they're asked to win regularly.

Newcastle have had some terrible sides over the past 10 or so years but Allardyce's Newcastle were just about the worst Newcastle side I can ever remember Liverpool facing. Suddenly he was at a club where they didn't accept playing not to lose, pinching the odd win here and there which will keep them afloat, and he stunk the place out. Not only couldn't he set a team up to go out and win the game but he couldn't put his trademark organised defensive structure in place either. He was lost, just like Hodgson was at Liverpool and England, and Moyes when he went to Utd.

I'm not saying Allardyce should be condemned after his brief spell at Newcastle and doesn't deserve a 2nd chance but should England be taking chances on managers? Not for me and certainly not after the embarrassment of Hodgson's era.

I'd much rather see England go to somebody like Eddie Howe than Steve Bruce or Allardyce. At least with him you can see how what he's doing or trying to do with Bournemouth can be transferred to England.

Perfect Perfect Perfect post - I failed to articulate my views at work (as a Newcastle fan) as well as this

 

[UTmaniac]

I'd much rather see Shearer have a go than appoint Sam, Sam has had his fair share of rescuing Premiership sides over the years, but I'm struggling to embrace the idea of him managing the top English players at international level.

 

[Caseh]

The problem with international football is the ego of the players.

Any international manager needs to be someone who is either:
1) Recent world class player. i.e. Klinsmann, van Basten
2) Club manager who has won it all. i.e. Ferguson, Mourinho
3) Disciplinarian. i.e. Conte, Simeone

Basically they need to be able to tell self absorbed, know-it-all players to 'shut up and sit down'.

Hodgson and McLaren failed because they aren't in any of the 3 boxes.

Allardyce could be considered a disciplinarian, but I don't see the players believing in him or his system. Same with Eddie Howe, I think tactically he is a very good manager, I just don't see the likes of Rooney, Wilshere or Cahill listening to him. He might have more luck with the younger players

If they don't listen to the Manager, drop them. No excuses, no exceptions. They do as the Manager asks or be dropped.

 

[McBain]

Win percentages are great for league managers, because the points average across the league are what matters. That's not true for International managers, who only have 2 objectives per year: qualify for major tournament, win major tournament.

Winning your friendlies, then getting to a major tournament and drawing with USA and Algeria then getting truly pumped by Germany doesn't mean anything other than abject failure.

Same as virtually every manager we've ever had then. I'm not saying he was the best manager we've ever had, but he's far from the second worst.

At the end of the day win percentages give a fair reflection, every manager has the easy friendlies and qualifiers. Let's not forget some of our managers failed to qualify for a major tournament.

Oh and that Germany game was a joke, completely legitimate goal ruled out at, 2-1 was it? Could've been a different tournament (as doubtful as that may be).