*Official* English Football Season 2015-16

[sledger]

It's the nature of the beast. Though there are a few exceptions to this (notably Wenger) past successes tend not to matter much once your short term form falls off a cliff. It's even worse in Brazil according to Tim Vickery, where if you lose 4-5 games on the spin you will usually be sacked no matter what, regardless of who you are and what you have achieved.

 

[Uppercut]

I think owners are putting more thought into it than they used to. Like Pulis and Allardyce have carved out a reputation for keeping teams up, so clubs turn to them in a crisis. But once they've secured the club's position, they want to turn to someone who can take the club in a different direction. How someone fits within a club is important too, you don't want a transfer specialist like Redknapp at a club where the manager doesn't sign the players. It's only on Talkshite where the conversation is reduced to 'why him be sack, him do good job'.

 

[GIMH]

Presumably he's talking about West Ham. Though it'd be a somewhat dubious assertion if so.

They were in the championship at the time and Chelsea had been up near the top a lot pre Abramovich

 

[sledger]

They were in the championship at the time and Chelsea had been up near the top a lot pre Abramovich

Haha oh yeah. Maybe it's Charlton he's referring to then. Just about the only other option.

Edit: Or Fulham.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

it is just a typical case of Furby exaggerating his point for the millionth time.

 

[Furball]

They were in the championship at the time and Chelsea had been up near the top a lot pre Abramovich

Historically I'd say West Ham and Chelsea would be around about the same.

 

[Furball]

Why do managers who get sacked repeatedly keep getting high-profile gigs? Seems like such a closed system. I mean, after someone's been sacked from two or three separate clubs within a few years, I'd have thought nobody would want them managing?

Do you have examples of these managers?

 

[GIMH]

Historically, sure, but I don't think at the time Mourinho came in you could say Chelsea were the 4th biggest club in London. I'd say they were 2nd after Arsenal (obviously now it's them, then Spurs, then Arsenal)

 

[sledger]

Do you have examples of these managers?

 

[Dan]

Do you have examples of these managers?

I won't claim to know the story behind every single 'by mutual consent' that appears on managers' wikipedia pages, but given Mourinho left Chelsea the first time "by mutual consent", left Real Madrid "by mutual consent" and only recently left Chelsea again "by mutual consent" after apparently clashing with players and leaving them languishing in mid-table halfway through a season, it seems kinda weird to me that he's immediately being linked to the Manchester United job. I'd have thought that after those results, his next step would be backwards -- re-prove himself, like Pellegrini did at Malaga or Raneri is now doing a Leicester -- and then be brought back in by the top clubs.

Or Mancini: sacked by Inter, sacked by Man City, ends up back at Inter again. Like, what changed?

Plus it seems like Steve McLaren has cycled through half a million teams by now, has never really been successful at any of them, and still contrives to get himself a managerial gig.

I mean, sure, I get that these guys aren't entirely useless at their jobs, but it seems like the top clubs just cycle through a few big-name managers who always seem to end up getting "mutual consent"-ed a couple of years later when they can't keep the team performing. It seems slightly weird to me that clubs keep looking to the same few names.

 

[sledger]

The McClaren one really is odd. I can understand why the rest get you mention get hired - because people like Mourinho whilst divisive and combustible have an excellent track record from a results perspective. Another notable example of this is Ancelotti - sacked by several high profile teams, but the bloke has won the Champions League more than anyone. But McClaren really is a total dud. I can just about understand why people were still giving him a crack at it about 5 years ago, as you could just about make a case for the jury still being out on him, but Newcastle's decision to appoint him at the start of this season was ridiculous. Every man and his dog could see how that was going to go.

 

[GIMH]

With Mourinho, it's guaranteed he'll deliver short term results. He never gets the boot in his first season. That's the answer to that one

 

[The Sean]

Arsenal, Tottenham, ???

Presumably he's talking about West Ham. Though it'd be a somewhat dubious assertion if so.

Haha oh yeah. Maybe it's Charlton he's referring to then. Just about the only other option.

Edit: Or Fulham.

Pretty obviously Brentford.

 

[Furball]

McLaren did an ok job at Derby to be fair to him.

 

[Uppercut]

Dan is basically right though tbf. Mediocre British managers constantly found new jobs at the same level as one they'd previously ****ed up for years. Hence the term "managerial merry-go-round", which you don't hear so much anymore.

They've mostly been natural-selected out of circulation or into the Championship now. Casualties of the rise of cosmopolitan hipster clubs like Swansea, Southampton, Bournemouth, Leicester and Watford. The TV money effect applies to managers as well as players, so the smaller Prem clubs can attract big names. You look at the guys that are in the running for the Everton job, ten years ago it would've been Martin O'Neill and Alan Curbishley.

 

[sledger]

Tbf though the stock of both those two was pretty high ten years ago. They were both held in pretty high regard.

 

[cpr]

McLaren did an ok job at Derby to be fair to him.

To an extent, he took them out of a rut and instilled belief in them, and got them up the table. Then exploded spectacularly when the pressure to exceed was on.

I tipped him to be alright at Newcastle because of his ability to dig a poor club out of a hole. Yeah....

 

[GIMH]

I think owners are putting more thought into it than they used to. Like Pulis and Allardyce have carved out a reputation for keeping teams up, so clubs turn to them in a crisis. But once they've secured the club's position, they want to turn to someone who can take the club in a different direction. How someone fits within a club is important too, you don't want a transfer specialist like Redknapp at a club where the manager doesn't sign the players. It's only on Talkshite where the conversation is reduced to 'why him be sack, him do good job'.

Goughy actually arguing the similar view to you at this minute on talksport

 

[Furball]

Rossiter to Rangers confirmed

 

[Furball]

Hibs stay down. Lovely