Coolcat
|
My point about JFH living football since childhood equally applies to virtually every professional player so I wasn't drawing any difference because he had such a successful playing career. Dean Austin has done the same rigorous coaching badges and there's no reason to believe he will be any less of a manager because he didn't get to the same heights as a player. The problem all managers have is they are up against virtually equivalent people who've done the same courses, know all the same tactics and man management skills. I don't believe there's a great deal of difference between managers at any levels despite what Sky Sports would lead us to believe. None have any revolutionary tactics so for me how the do is down to two factors - money and luck. If you've got a decent budget you'll do ok, if it's your lucky season then you'll do ok too. Managers should not believe their season is down to anything special they did, nor should the fans.
Fergie this time!
|
|
|
|
guest47
|
The first bit in bold: exactly, they all take 'the same courses'. The courses mean next to nothing. Do you really think taking a few exams after a long playing career (in your words, 'immersed themselves in the game since they were young') is going to make any appreciable difference to an ex-professionals chances of becoming a good manager? Know all the man-management skills? Again, theoretical knowledge of 'man-management' is virtually useless. It takes a certain personality to be a successful manager. This simply can't be taught, and it's the managers personality/charisma/leadership qualities that will make him a good 'man-manager' or not. Page/Edinburgh/Hasselbaink didn't have 'it', and though it's early on in his reign, Austin appears to have 'it' in spades.
The second bit in bold: You can not really believe that if a manager has decent budget or simply a 'lucky season' they will 'do OK'. This is complete nonsense IMO. Having a decent budget gives you an advantage but it is far from a given that a decent budget will guarantee any kind of success. Both Guardiola and Mourinho had huge budgets last season, both were aiming to win the title. One team generally played a defensive game, with a more direct attacking style, while one played an open possession style of play. Both managers have very different personalities and man-management approaches. Essentially both have stamped their personality, their fingerprint, on their team. If the managers had been hired by the other club, then the styles of play and most likely end of season result would have been reversed. The managers are everything to these teams current differing levels of success IMO.
You say the courses mean next to nothing but they are not 'a few exams'. For example Uefa level 5 cost around £9,000 and takes either 30 days intensive or 18 months and then there is no guarantee of passing, many fail. In order to apply for that you would need level UEFA level 4 which is around £3,500 and 18 days. You need UEFA level 3 to apply for that and so it continues. The problem for any aspiring manager has after going through all that everyone else has passed the same extensive courses. So you can imagine how frustrating it must be for a manager to have to listen to some fan who details exactly where he went wrong just because he 'played a bit'. As for man management, trust me they go on plenty of courses to hone that particular skill. Anyone that's been in any type of management job at a sizeable company knows the courses and football managers are no exception. It seems as if you have really bought into the new cult of manager that's recently portrayed by the media. They do this to add personality to games in a similar way to the managers at WWE. Beneath the exaggerated personas displayed by Klopp, Mourninho Ranieri etc is a person that knows the job inside out and the interviews are just part of the circus. I would suggest virtually all managers are at very similar skill levels which leaves the money and luck to differentiate them. This would explain why Raneiri was able to guide Leicester to the Premiership and was sacked the next season to give one example of many similar successes then seemingly strange failures. If you don't agree then why is it that each time a club goes for a manager it's from the same pool of ex-managers?
|
|
|
|
guest47
|
Not buying this at all.
We had a more than 'decent budget' last year but were massively outperformed by teams such as Shrewsbury who had less money but a man at the helm who had a far better tactical brain and transfer market acumen than any of our sorry incumbents.
If we had a manager from day one who didn't try to play a formation which was patently unsuitable for the personnel (JED) and then one who didn't sign players who were manifestly of an unsuitable character for a relegation dogfight (JFH signing KVV, Peirera, Bunney etc) then we would have stayed up.
Can you really ascribe Chris Wilder's success to 'money and luck' during our adversity-defying title winning side? Can you really say that there wasn't something 'revolutionary' or at least tactically innovative in Alan Knill's free kick routines (which have apparently been studied on the continent)?
Managers make a huge difference. Hopefully we now have a man at the helm who is at the very least a decent man- manager who is intelligent enough to keep it simple and clear tactically and let the players express themselves. That sounds easy to achieve, but we have had a litany of clowns who have failed on both these counts.
You just need to ask the average Oxford fan what they think to Wilder to realise he isn't some sort of new Messiah and did strike lucky with that great season. I reckon he thought the same and cashed his chips straight away to join a club with the budget that is more likely to continue that success. Knill's free kick routine was great to see but come on, it was hardly revolutionary, clubs try plenty of similar routines on the training ground and some making it to games. Do you really think no-one has thought of a couple of passes with a runner before? You do need plenty of skill and knowledge to be a professional league manager but the problem is all clubs have the the same skilled manager in charge. Unfortunately for them it's a league so they can't all do well, so it has to be something else that makes the difference and you can guess what I think that is.
|
|
|
|
Coolcat
|
You just need to ask the average Oxford fan what they think to Wilder to realise he isn't some sort of new Messiah and did strike lucky with that great season. I reckon he thought the same and cashed his chips straight away to join a club with the budget that is more likely to continue that success. Knill's free kick routine was great to see but come on, it was hardly revolutionary, clubs try plenty of similar routines on the training ground and some making it to games. Do you really think no-one has thought of a couple of passes with a runner before?
You do need plenty of skill and knowledge to be a professional league manager but the problem is all clubs have the the same skilled manager in charge. Unfortunately for them it's a league so they can't all do well, so it has to be something else that makes the difference and you can guess what I think that is.
Cashed in his Chippy surely?
|
|
|
|
Wolvo
|
But Jimmy didn't clap fans
|
Pink Army!
|
|
|
guest2677
|
You say the courses mean next to nothing but they are not 'a few exams'. For example Uefa level 5 cost around £9,000 and takes either 30 days intensive or 18 months and then there is no guarantee of passing, many fail. In order to apply for that you would need level UEFA level 4 which is around £3,500 and 18 days. You need UEFA level 3 to apply for that and so it continues. The problem for any aspiring manager has after going through all that everyone else has passed the same extensive courses. So you can imagine how frustrating it must be for a manager to have to listen to some fan who details exactly where he went wrong just because he 'played a bit'. As for man management, trust me they go on plenty of courses to hone that particular skill. Anyone that's been in any type of management job at a sizeable company knows the courses and football managers are no exception.
It seems as if you have really bought into the new cult of manager that's recently portrayed by the media. They do this to add personality to games in a similar way to the managers at WWE. Beneath the exaggerated personas displayed by Klopp, Mourninho Ranieri etc is a person that knows the job inside out and the interviews are just part of the circus. I would suggest virtually all managers are at very similar skill levels which leaves the money and luck to differentiate them. This would explain why Raneiri was able to guide Leicester to the Premiership and was sacked the next season to give one example of many similar successes then seemingly strange failures. If you don't agree then why is it that each time a club goes for a manager it's from the same pool of ex-managers?
If you think managerial appointments come from the same revolving pool of failed ex managers you might be wrong. Take a look at the league management career lengths of our 15 permanent managers post millennium to date. Only Johnson's is lengthy, four got past season five but didn't get to ten. The remaining ten barely registered as having a league management career at all. If that's representative of league managers as a whole, then they don't stay on the merry-go-round for very long. I'm afraid I also strongly disagree that because football managers are all qualified to the same uefa levels they are therefore all equally skilled. It's not like that in the rest of the world, why should it be in league management?
|
|
|
|
bungle
|
You just need to ask the average Oxford fan what they think to Wilder to realise he isn't some sort of new Messiah and did strike lucky with that great season. I reckon he thought the same and cashed his chips straight away to join a club with the budget that is more likely to continue that success. Knill's free kick routine was great to see but come on, it was hardly revolutionary, clubs try plenty of similar routines on the training ground and some making it to games. Do you really think no-one has thought of a couple of passes with a runner before?
You do need plenty of skill and knowledge to be a professional league manager but the problem is all clubs have the the same skilled manager in charge. Unfortunately for them it's a league so they can't all do well, so it has to be something else that makes the difference and you can guess what I think that is.
You seem to put an inordinate amount of importance on management courses. Yes they cost money and yes they are reasonably rigorous but to say that everyone who passes is 'same skilled' is incredibly simplistic and analogous to saying that everyone who gets an English literature degree is capable of writing a nobel prize winning novel or that everyone who gets a MBA is capable of being a CEO. Management is about decision making. In any field there is a huge variation in strategic intelligence, emotional receptiveness, conscientiousness and work ethic and football management is no exception. I've no doubt that JFH has every coaching qualification under the sun. Unfortunately, that didn't stop him playing Periera in central midfield rather than McWilliams or persisting with Bunney over Buchanan despite the fact that every opponent targeted our left side. His decision making and man management was manifestly inferior to virtually every other manager in the league. A few questions for you: 1. Do you think that we would have gone down last season if Chris Wilder, Paul Hurst or even Dean Austin had been our manager? 2. Do you really think that tactics, timing of substitutions and team selections are irrelevant and that 'money and luck' are the only relevant variables? Ridiculous debate but it's passing the time I suppose.
|
|
« Last Edit: July 26, 2018, 20:38:01 pm by bungle »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
OCoole
|
You seem to put an inordinate amount of importance on management courses. Yes they cost money and yes they are reasonably rigorous but to say that everyone who passes is 'same skilled' is incredibly simplistic and analogous to saying that everyone who gets an English literature degree is capable of writing a nobel prize winning novel or that everyone who gets a MBA is capable of being a CEO.
Management is about decision making. In any field there is a huge variation in strategic intelligence, emotional receptiveness, conscientiousness and work ethic and football management is no exception.
I've no doubt that JFH has every coaching qualification under the sun. Unfortunately, that didn't stop him playing Periera in central midfield rather than McWilliams or persisting with Bunney over Buchanan despite the fact that every opponent targeted our left side. His decision making and man management was manifestly inferior to virtually every other manager in the league.
A few questions for you:
1. Do you think that we would have gone down last season if Chris Wilder, Paul Hurst or even Dean Austin had been our manager?
2. Do you really think that tactics, timing of substitutions and team selections are irrelevant and that 'money and luck' are the only relevant variables?
Ridiculous debate but it's passing the time I suppose.
You are once again the voice of reason
|
|
|
|
guest3114
|
Not that I am into it that much but the difference in culture in Oz around managers is remarkable. Down here AFL is a religion and Collingwood are probably the biggest club. Home attendances range from 50,000 to 100,000 and the media attention is 24-7. Over the last 3 or 4 seasons Collingwood haven’t made the playoffs (top 8 position) which is the bare minimum with regards to expectation. Despite this I can’t recall anyone suggesting that the coach Nathan Buckley (who got the job in around 2012) should be sacked. In fact he got a 2 year extension to his contract at the end of last season. This year they are flying and the play offs are a formality. I reckon they will win it if Richmond don’t. Exactly the same story with Richmond who won the title last year for the first time in nearly 40 years with a coach who has been in charge for 10 years. This is typical of all the teams and sacking managers isn’t really on the agenda. There seems to be an acceptance that it’s sport and some elements are beyond the control of the coach. Many teams have had the same coach through prolonged downturns of a couple of seasons to see them bounce back and win the title. What it proves to me is a bad season doesn’t always make a bad manager. Despite all this it just seems alien to me and I can’t get my head around it. I talk here about managers getting sacked after 3 or 4 months and people reckon it’s insane. Perhaps we should have kept JFH for 10 years, what do you reckon?
|
|
|
|
Tabasco Kid
|
I've no doubt that JFH has every coaching qualification under the sun. Unfortunately, that didn't stop him playing Periera in central midfield rather than McWilliams or persisting with Bunney over Buchanan despite the fact that every opponent targeted our left side. His decision making and man management was manifestly inferior to virtually every other manager in the league.
Nailed it Bungle. 100%. As an aside, does anyone know how to get the swarm of moths out of my kitchen, after I left the door open?
|
Were in the pipe 5 by 5.
|
|
|
Wolvo
|
1. Do you think that we would have gone down last season if Chris Wilder, Paul Hurst or even Dean Austin had been our manager?
Chris Wilder and JFH took us over bottom of the table. Both left us third from bottom. Difficult question really.
|
Pink Army!
|
|
|
guest3114
|
Nailed it Bungle. 100%. As an aside, does anyone know how to get the swarm of moths out of my kitchen, after I left the door open? Environmentalist route; put a bright light on outside and turn the lights off in the kitchen. (Using solar/wind/renewable power source obviously) Don’t give a sh1t about that bollocks route; get the vacuum cleaner and extension hose out. JFH route: pull all available personnel back into the kitchen with no clear plan or direction regarding what to do next.
|
|
|
|
guest47
|
You seem to put an inordinate amount of importance on management courses. Yes they cost money and yes they are reasonably rigorous but to say that everyone who passes is 'same skilled' is incredibly simplistic and analogous to saying that everyone who gets an English literature degree is capable of writing a nobel prize winning novel or that everyone who gets a MBA is capable of being a CEO.
Management is about decision making. In any field there is a huge variation in strategic intelligence, emotional receptiveness, conscientiousness and work ethic and football management is no exception.
I've no doubt that JFH has every coaching qualification under the sun. Unfortunately, that didn't stop him playing Periera in central midfield rather than McWilliams or persisting with Bunney over Buchanan despite the fact that every opponent targeted our left side. His decision making and man management was manifestly inferior to virtually every other manager in the league.
A few questions for you:
1. Do you think that we would have gone down last season if Chris Wilder, Paul Hurst or even Dean Austin had been our manager?
2. Do you really think that tactics, timing of substitutions and team selections are irrelevant and that 'money and luck' are the only relevant variables?
Ridiculous debate but it's passing the time I suppose.
I'm saying that everyone who takes the time and effort to go through the necessary coaching courses has a pretty reasonable idea of tactics and combine that with the likelihood they've played at a reasonable level means they've got a knowledge of tactics that could safely be argued is beyond someone who watches the game every other Saturday. My argument isn't about JFH but your criticisms of him are rather like pointing out to a heart surgeon where he went wrong because you watched practically every episode of Casualty. In any event there was a thought at the time that Buchs wasn't up to the speed of League One and a replacement needed to be found. Shaun McWilliams was a young lad with a raw talent and JFH could have done a lot of damage to his potential by throwing him in as a short term fix. My point has always been that sacking managers after a short term of only months is futile and in itself damaging as so much money is wasted paying up the contracts. The new manager is obliged to bring in new players to show he is that new broom and this leads to over bloated squads full of mediocre players - recognise that? To answer your question directly, I think we would still be in League One if we had stuck with Rob Page. He was doing a reasonably good job with limited finances and the minute we went through a sticky patch the fans turned on him. I'm no big fan of Page but the money wasted on paying up his contract followed by JE and JFH would have been much better spent on players and facilities. Of course tactics and the rest are relevant but no current manager is doing anything particularly revolutionary. All the tables are finishing virtually according to the player budgets and the odd few that are above and below that are getting more or less of their fair share of luck. Ironically the appointment of Dean Austen did the club a big favour. He was appointed by JFH and was the first team coach so I doubt he spent the time disagreeing with everything JFH stood for. This means he won't feel obliged to make wholesale changes any incomer would have been obliged to do so. Perhaps the continuity I keep arguing for, albeit unintended, will give us success this season, let's hope so.
|
|
|
|
Deepcut Cobbler
|
Nailed it Bungle. 100%. As an aside, does anyone know how to get the swarm of moths out of my kitchen, after I left the door open?
Close your wallet...
|
“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun and in the morning We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon
The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
|
|
|
everbrite
|
You seem to put an inordinate amount of importance on management courses. Yes they cost money and yes they are reasonably rigorous but ..............etc
Interesting post Bungle but would comment as follows: a) the diplomas appear to be which every aspiring manager would want. That’s a fact! I believe luck does play a significant part in a Managers career. All great managers, politicians and leaders have this elusive factor from Ferguson to Wilder. For instance Alexander the Great had it in plenty - even to this day people carry round old coins with his image in the hope luck would favour them. It’s the same with Wilder, up popped Toney to save us and Oxford losing an influential player in the last game. b) Some of your points are based on hindsight - they are there to be seen c) Alton’s claim that we don’t give managers sufficient time for example Page but he was in my view just plain unlucky with catastrophic defeats against ‘Boro and Rovers. If we as the fans/KT kept our nerves we might have ridden the storm. d) Our present situation is largely due to Wilder leaving, with his luck and devoted fans we might well have reached the Championship; Holmes may well have been still our player!
|
2020 Grand National S/S 3rd Place
|
|
|
guest48
|
To answer your question directly, I think we would still be in League One if we had stuck with Rob Page. He was doing a reasonably good job with limited finances and the minute we went through a sticky patch the fans turned on him. I'm no big fan of Page but the money wasted on paying up his contract followed by JE and JFH would have been much better spent on players and facilities.
I think a lot of fans had doubts about Page when he turned down the opportunity to sign John Marquis saying "We can get better than him" and finished up signing JJ Hooper. Also his "Only Welsh" signing policy was limited when Gareth Bale decided to stay in Madrid.
|
|
|
|
Wolvo
|
I think a lot of fans had doubts about Page when he turned down the opportunity to sign John Marquis saying "We can get better than him" and finished up signing JJ Hooper. Also his "Only Welsh" signing policy was limited when Gareth Bale decided to stay in Madrid.
Cornell and Nyatanga (loan)? JED brought in Poole and Taylor. Wilder brought in Adams and Bodin. Bit harsh to criticize a manager for bringing in two Welsh players.
|
Pink Army!
|
|
|
guest2677
|
Cornell and Nyatanga (loan)?
JED brought in Poole and Taylor. Wilder brought in Adams and Bodin. Bit harsh to criticize a manager for bringing in two Welsh players.
Call me stupid, but i think Barton's quip about Page failing to sign Bale was a joke.
|
|
|
|
Poggy
|
I had the conversation with some mates over the summer as to who our worst post-Wilder manager was and it was pretty unanimous that it was JFH.
The level of incompetence was staggering. Had he been sacked earlier we might be looking forward to another season in L1
|
|
|
|
guest47
|
I think a lot of fans had doubts about Page when he turned down the opportunity to sign John Marquis saying "We can get better than him" and finished up signing JJ Hooper. Also his "Only Welsh" signing policy was limited when Gareth Bale decided to stay in Madrid.
I'm not sure Page was our Dick Rowe when it comes to Marquis. I thought he went back to Millwall straight after the end of the season before Page had been appointed. Mind you, if the club is also going to condemn a manager for one or two signing errors it's no wonder we are going through them ever few months.
|
|
|
|
|