Forums:
no i don't mean we should become a rudderless ship with no one at the helm but with the modern approach being a 'coach' rather than a manager appointed and then those above him buying the players and telling him to make the best out of what he's given sort of thing, is this the way forward for us perhaps? i'm opening this up for debate as there is much to ponder in my opinion such as if so who would fit the bill as a first team coach, picking the team, tactics etc but leaving the rest up to the board and also is our board good enough to buy players alone? allardyce is an old school manager, getting his hands in all the pies so to speak or at least thats the way i believe he wants to manage. pelligrini and even rogers apparently don't decide on players, its up to the board and he in turn is tasked with getting the best out of them. is this even a good approach? does it then undermine the 'coach' or does it free him from some of the stresses he doesnt need? i don't think its worked at liverpool if as i hear thats the case there because rogers has ended up working with players he can't fit into his philosophy. i guess if the man is appointed knowing exactly what the scenario is regarding his role then he can have no complaints down the line. poyet complained about this all the time yet i am sure he was aware when he went into his job no? speaking of poyet what happened to him as a contender? not long ago there was clamour for him to replace sam….
I've wondered the same thing,
I've wondered the same thing, I reckon long gone are the days of the manager who controls everything, it's just too big a job, certainly for a top club. Sam might not like having players bought for him much, but it's the way of the world.
Reckon this is an ideal
Reckon this is an ideal opportunity for the owners to appoint a new Head Coach. This will then give them carte blanch to buy who they want, with no questions asked. Could be the worst decision they will ever make as the OS drawers closer, who knows?
yep , agreed , football to me
yep , agreed , football to me has always been a game of instinct and most teams pick themselves , the technicality's that have come into the game ridiculous, from the manger on the touch line making all sorts of hand signals to the thing that really gets on my tits , when a subs being made and the one of the coaches ( Kid at shitty is a fine example ) has all these pages of print outs presumably of the pitch and the players , their like school masters with a pupil explaining to the lad what to do , who to cover and if possible score a goal or two ,its not rocket science, when i was a lad there didn't seem to be all this 442 451 , overlapping full backs , playing in the hole , remember the old line outs one centre half ,and two full backs three , what were ten called half backs , one on each wing ,two inside forwards and one centre forward , they had strips that looked like they were glued on , and pitches so shitty it sometimes looked as if you were playing on marsh land , so as i said its like a lot of things , instinctual, managers getting 3 or 4 mill , you've only got to be good at the spoken word these days for the post match interview
We need a big floating head
Yea I know we already have one.
Actually it is a good point Dicks, the game is being run more and more by the owners these days and may one day work better than just one Manager doing all the Wizard of Oz malarkey maybe what is needed is a collaboration between several people the thing is this is pretty now or new so it may be quite some time off before we all know if it will be beneficial but I actually like that the Chairmen may be able to directly over rule the manager one day without the players even batting an eye lid.
It sounds ridiculous now but so did not being able to pass the ball back to your goal keeper, with time things can change.