Hiring managers with different styles

Someone

Something
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
8,583
Location
Somewhere
Why do we always hire managers that are so different from one another?

I swear every manager post Fergie was the complete opposite from the previous one in terms of playing style.

Moyes > Van gaal > Mourinho > Ole > ETH > Amorim

Why do we do that to ourselves? Each one came with new principles and new players required. And you just know it that the next manager will be playing a different system and we'll end up trying to accommodate all the WBs and 10s we've signed to fit the current system.

I feel like each time we go all in, in the hope that this is the one. But that's no way to run a club in the modern era.

Rant over.
 
Someone said:
Why do we always hire managers that are so different from one another?

I swear every manager post Fergie was the complete opposite from the previous one in terms of playing style.

Moyes > Van gaal > Mourinho > Ole > ETH > Amorim

Why do we do that to ourselves? Each one came with new principles and new players required. And you just know it that the next manager will be playing a different system and we'll end up trying to accommodate all the WBs and 10s we've signed to fit the current system.

I feel like each time we go all in, in the hope that this is the one. But that's no way to run a club in the modern era.

Rant over.
Click to expand...

We have a structure in place now and a blueprint by INEOS Wilcox and Berrada.

This is the painful period so we just have to embrace it, better than another 10 years of crap.
 
TheNewEra said:
We have a structure in place now and a blueprint by INEOS Wilcox and Berrada.

This is the painful period so we just have to embrace it, better than another 10 years of crap.
Click to expand...
That remains to be seen, to be fair. It's still early days so the jury is still very much out on them.
 
The styles / systems are overplayed.

We’re shit because we’ve constantly signed bad players, or players at the wrong end of their career.

Ten Hags signings haven’t ruined us because they’re a different system to Amorim. They’ve ruined us because the players are shit.

Other than one or two specific wingbacks, good players are flexible from system to system.

We don’t have system players. We have bad players.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
That remains to be seen, to be fair. It's still early days so the jury is still very much out on them.
Click to expand...
We’re making more sensible signings and structuring the squad better, but yes in terms of ability (which is the most important thing) the jury is still out
 
Someone said:
Do we? They were both here when we kept ETH.
Click to expand...
It comes off as a statement of faith more than anything else.

I remember long essays being posted here when Murtough was promoted to DOF, about how we finally had a structure in place, specific details on personnel and their roles, and how all our problems were finally solved.

Then the transfer window came around and they all went right back to "sign whoever the manager wants and inshallah".
 
TheNewEra said:
We have a structure in place now and a blueprint by INEOS Wilcox and Berrada.

This is the painful period so we just have to embrace it, better than another 10 years of crap.
Click to expand...

Wow, that’s a bit of faith there.

Appears to me Ashworth didn’t at all believe this manager was in line with structure he was putting in place and lost his job due to it.

Seems absolutely nuts to decide mid season that we’d now be 5-2-2-1 team, can’t for a second believe any of that was planned.

Reckon more likely is that City wanted him, so our none football CEO did a Woodwood and went over Ashworth to hire him.
 
100 said:
We’re making more sensible signings and structuring the squad better, but yes in terms of ability (which is the most important thing) the jury is still out
Click to expand...
Yes, as far as transfer strategy goes, early signs have been positive
 
Knowing how broke we are, it was a terrible call to go for a dogmatic manager with an exotic style mid season.

It won't work without heavy investment, and even then it might likely fail and leave us with a new badge of deadwood. Our footballing structure doesn't deserve the name
 
I feel like the last three before Amorim were not exactly the same but preferred to be the underdog and were most comfortable on transitions or a deeper definsive line with a target man (Jose). This mentality has probably set us back the most.

Amorim does feel like a bit of a throwback to LvG in some ways.
 
100 said:
The styles / systems are overplayed.

We’re shit because we’ve constantly signed bad players, or players at the wrong end of their career.

Ten Hags signings haven’t ruined us because they’re a different system to Amorim. They’ve ruined us because the players are shit.

Other than one or two specific wingbacks, good players are flexible from system to system.

We don’t have system players. We have bad players.
Click to expand...
Yes they're overplayed but you can't possibly deny that constant change hurts. Most top clubs now sign players for the long term and hire managers that fit their current squads. We completely ignore that when we make managerial decisions. I don't think Slot is necessarily is a great manager, nor is he a carbon copy of Klopp, but the squad matched his ideas so it worked.
 
We dont normally, but we have this time

From Vaal Gaal through to ETH being fired and even with Ruud, we played 4-2-3-1

Amorim is our first change to that first choice formation. Obviously its tougher to do mid season and to get players who dont know the system to understand it
 
I think amorim is somewhat similar to what rangnick wanted.

I think ETH started down the path, and in what I would consider a fairly cowardly move, and perhaps seeing the spells of brilliance oles teams had, turned away from it.

Lets be clear on one thing - 3 or 4 at the back is not an important part of the style. It goes no way to explain the performances we are seeing. The issues are the work rate and bravery that the players aren't displaying. the coach needs to work on that with them.

the important thing for the future is that we don't turn away from this style - again, 3 or 4 at the back is not important, but the underlying tactics are style should be what we build on
 
TheNewEra said:
We have a structure in place now and a blueprint by INEOS Wilcox and Berrada.

This is the painful period so we just have to embrace it, better than another 10 years of crap.
Click to expand...
neither have done a director of football job. need to appoint a director of football and then berrada needs to forget about trying to make those decisions.
 
We haven't had a structure in place. We had fecking Woodward calling the shots for years. Then we half-arsed it with Murtough.
 
Crashoutcassius said:
I think amorim is somewhat similar to what rangnick wanted.

I think ETH started down the path, and in what I would consider a fairly cowardly move, and perhaps seeing the spells of brilliance oles teams had, turned away from it.

Lets be clear on one thing - 3 or 4 at the back is not an important part of the style. It goes no way to explain the performances we are seeing. The issues are the work rate and bravery that the players aren't displaying. the coach needs to work on that with them.

the important thing for the future is that we don't turn away from this style - again, 3 or 4 at the back is not important, but the underlying tactics are style should be what we build on
Click to expand...

Let’s be clear… we’re currently playing 5 at the back.
 
I think all the managers were quite similar in terms of they all either started out or resorted to pragmatism and counter attacking/direct football. Only exception is LVG who resorted to cautious possession football.

We’ve been completely behind the curve on recruitment and our coaching. The league has moved on and left us behind, I think we genuinely have the least physically capable squad in the league.

I think RR and Amorim recognise it but it’s almost too big a job and will take multiple transfer windows and probably managers to resolve.
 
We also seem happy to hire managers who either don’t know the league (ETH ,Amorim, LVG) know the league but not successful (Moyes, Solskjaer) or successful but past it (Mourinho)
 
Apart from Van Gaal who adopted a possession game with players who struggled to progress the ball forward,
the rest of the coaches have been similar where we look to play direct football.

Erik ten Hag's idea was to create a more dominant team but he did adapt due to the lack of quality in the build up phase and the possibility was there last summer to upgrade the weaknesses in the build up phase where he could possibly succeed in implementing a more dominant brand of football by signing the right CBs and midfielders. But they definitely got it wrong and you do not sign midfielders who are limited on the ball. It was easy to see those mistakes and spending the Ugarte/Zirkzee money on midfielders who raised the physicality and athleticism along with having the ability to thread the lines was a must.

Two midfielders with the aforementioned attributes straight into the first 11 and it will make a noticeable difference imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.