Yup besides the fact that Giggs has never managed anywhere, this is my next biggest issue. There are alternatives available who've had success at very high levels in Klopp, Ancelotti, and Guardiola. If Liverpool end up with Klopp and City with Guardiola, while we opt for Giggs... well it'd be pretty deflating.
The Argument for Giggs as our Next Manager
- Thread starter Walrus
- Start date
- Status
What did Enrique or Conte achieve before they got their chance? To me they just proved that they know what they are doing in football management, they didn't flop and that was good enough. We already know that Giggs has the winning mentality, expectations covered and the size of the club won't shock him - if he proves that he is a good manager then I'd be comfortable with him. If Giggs achieves a couple of seasons that Gary Monk has had, claiming big sculps and proving he is good in the market then I will be the one calling loudest for him to be given his chance. So far he is too much of an unknown quantity for it to be anything other than reckless romanticism. With the competition at the upper echelons of the league as cut throat as it is this will be one risk too far especially so soon after the Moyes debacle.
Deliberate quoting out of context much?
Remember Guardiola had no experience managing a club before Barca. Giggs is far more qualified than any of those you mentioned, since he hasn't already failed to be a good manager (Bruce/Hughes/McLaren/Queiroz) or never shown enough to make the step up (Phelan, Rene). He's also a better player than they ever were, which means he will command respect initially.
Plenty of people are happy to dismiss the notion without ever stating what they think would qualify him to actually do the job and to me that sounds like you just don't want the man to be in charge, whatever he does. Besides, what is football without romance? Just business and who gives a feck about supporting a business? Just because Moyes was a clown doesn't mean Giggs would be.
This is something I haven't really touched on because I want Giggs to be considered on merit, not just as a romantic notion, but I agree. It goes hand in hand with the idea that trophies are everything, and whether we as fans would prefer to finish 4th playing great football, or 1st from a season of grinding out shite 1-0 wins (this doesn't mean that it is impossible to play attractive football and win, of course).
It's not really specific to the Giggs situation but really, what is football without a bit of emotion and romance? It's the same criticism that has been levelled at the Glazers, that they have turned the club into a business and put money as the first priority rather than football. I don't expect the Glazers to make business decisions based on romantic arguments of course (which is one of the arguments I have given in support of Giggs), but as fans surely we are entitled to a bit of romanticism? It's a bit of a sad state of affairs when the supporters have become effectively like businessmen rather than football fans.
Well this club just spent £36m on a kid with less than 30 games in a top league, who knows exactly the competence of these people in football matters? Normally I wouldn't be against risks such as this one but right now the club is so fragile and any misstep could confine us down the Liverpool path and Liverpool have proven that it's not easy if not impossible to come back from such a sustained decline.
A kid who we haven't even seen play yet, so whilst we overpaid it is a bit early to be passing judgement and calling the club incompetent. Really though to go from that to the Giggs situation is a bit of a stretch of logic whichever way you look at it.
Best argument for having him as manager yet. At least this actually gets to the real crux of the matter.
When put like this I can kind of get on board. I mean, I wouldn't vote for it. But if it happens I'll keep saying this to myself like a mantra, both fingers crossed, hoping it all works out.
You said the club wouldn't be sending out sound bites on Giggs' assured ascension if they hadn't thought it through and weren't confident that Giggs has it in him to succeed in the job. I only pointed out to you that the people running this club are capable of anything as seen by the Martial signing which on it's merits, as things stand, is indefensible. But you are right it would only be nothing compared to giving an inexperienced but difficult to sack novice the most important job in the club. Thirty six million for Martial won't break us but three seasons of bad results poor signings and the fallout of sacking our most legendary player could very well break us with very little prospect of recovering immediately.
I'm not sure deferring to authority here is much of an argument.
I don't think the club are trying to sell him as a manager anyway. There's been a gradual story building of Giggs as our manager that was born out of him taking over temporarily from Moyes. LvG is just playing to that narrative, he doesn't know either way.
I still don't get your argument though as you can't possibly claim he's linked to the role because of his skill. It's because he's a united legend and yes with that includes the benefit of knowing the club.
Is me agreeing with you really that awful?And there is the exact reason I have been avoiding mentioning it
I deliberately stated that it wasn't an argument for Giggs, but an argument for the fact that it at least merits discussion, and that if Giggs were as incompetent as some here seem to fear, then the club surely wouldn't entertain the notion and LVG wouldn't be coming out with these statements.
Nah, just as I said I would like the discussion to be on Giggs merits rather than purely romanticism, as I believe there are actual arguments of merit in his favour.
Giggs merits? You should probably have made a thread about him as a player then.
Not a hope. Good player in his day, though.
If he's the one to become next manager I'd rather give LvG more time here to fully fulfill his plan even based on that so called controversial philosophy just to prepare Giggsy with every aspect... or just bring back Sir Alex and win the league already.
I will repeat my question from early - do you genuinely, honestly believe that the Glazers and those in charge of the decision making process, would base a decision of this importance on purely romantic reasons?
Like it or not, the club appears to be backing Giggs to take over from LVG, and I think you would have to be mental to believe that they are doing so purely on "club legend" grounds.
No. I don't think they would. So either a) it's a misunderstanding and it'll never actually happen. Or b) as you said, maybe the powers that be see something. But we have to remember how flawed their decisions can be.
If they see it, I don't. I don't think anyone outside the club could. But if they go for it, to answer your question, they'll do it because they think it's worth the risk and believe he can do it.
(plus that it'll be popular with fans.)
Because popularity with the fans has always been the priority of the Glazers decisions....
Anyway I think we have reached an impasse here - I have made my points, you don't deem them as relevent, not really much more can be said at this stage.
So these are ''implied merits'' or as another poster aptly stated it's you deferring to authority when you couldn't find one good reason to hire him instead of more established managers? The merits you are talking about haven't been proven in any football setting that they will aid him in managing a football team. Okay he knows United inside out but Mourinho didn't have tp know Chelsea like the back of his hand inorder to win the title ten years ago. He learned from Fergie but you forget that under Fergie he was a subject not a partner - he was being managed it's not like throughout those decades Fergie was interested in anything beyond extracting good performances from him. In a fair recruitment process Giggs wouldn't stand a chance against Mourinho, Carlo or even Wenger.
If the club has already decided on him as our manager then it's unfortunate because it will prove that we have not learnt a single lesson from the Moyes disaster.
I think the United job will be seen as a damn good one in 2017 or 2018 when Van Gaal presumably goes.
Memphis-Shaw will give us a still young, productive left wing and hopefully one or 2 of Martial, Januzaj, Pereira and Wilson will be starting to produce in attack. Schneiderlin, Darmian and Smalling will still only be about 27 or 28 and anchor the defense (along with Shaw). Herrera and Mata might be around and only 29 or 30. Hell, De Gea might even be here. We'll probably sign a big player or two next summer to join them, and that's a much more promising squad to take over then the one we just had.
And similarly, the "points" you are making are pretty irrelevant. Mourinho won a trophy at Chelsea without knowing the club, therefore knowing the club is not a useful factor. You are adding 2 and 2 and making 5 there.
Giggs was a player under Ferguson yes, but he was one of the senior members of the squad, and was in his latter years (along with Scholes and others) involved in the coaching and training at the club. It is naive to suggest that Giggs would not have learnt anything during his many years under Ferguson. Your suggestion that Fergie wasnt "interested in anything beyond extracting good performances" is laughable when talking about a man who was known and famous for his father-like status to players at the club, and whose role was often described as going far beyond a simple 'manager'. I simply couldnt disagree more on this.
When LVG steps down, Giggs is likely to have been assistant manager at the club for at least four years. That is four years of being trained and mentored for the position - and not just any position, but the position of managing Manchester United. That is worth more than managing Everton or anything but an elite club for four years. It is not a guarantee of success, but nothing is. I already discussed with Invictus that even the likes of Guardiola, Klopp, Ancelotti and Mourinho have question marks on their records (which isnt saying that they are bad managers, simply that they are not a guaranteed success like many here are making out).
The "implied merits" or "deferring to authority" that you speak of is simply (as I have stated multiple times) an argument that the Giggs for manager discussion is one worth having. And that the posters who instantly just laugh off the suggestion, or call those who support it idiots, or claim that there is no rational argument for Giggs as manager - are simply wrong. It is one thing to have an opinion, it is another to stick your head in the sand and refuse to accept any sort of argument that goes against that opinion, and to brush off those arguments as ridiculous, or romantic. So I will state again - those inside the club will have a far better idea than any of us fans as to the credentials or potential of Ryan Giggs as a manager. Thus far, the noises coming from those inside the club appear to be that he is not just in contention, but is basically already agreed upon as LVGs successor.
Again if you think that the Glazers would make such an important appointment based purely on a fanciful, romantic notion of a club legend (which means nothing to them as businessmen by the way) running the club, you must be living on another planet, because based on their tenure at the club so far, that is pretty much the last thing they would do. Therefore to state that there is no possible argument for Giggs other than a romantic one, is clearly wrong.
I have enjoyed discussing the issue with some in here - @Invictus made several excellent posts with well reasoned points arguing against Giggs. That is a long way from those who just dismiss the idea out of hand, refuse to acknowledge or read the arguments put forth by the pro-Giggs camp, and insult anyone who disagrees.
The fact that LVG stated about Martial that he was "a signing for the next manager" shows that he appears to be trying to build a team that will be able to compete at the highest level for years to come, and the players you have listed in addition would form potentially an incredible core for the squad in a few years time.
This ties in with what I have been saying about the squad being left in a good state for Giggs to take over. I would not be in the pro-Giggs camp if the squad was left in a mess with another large transition to be dealt with by the next manager, but to take over and continue/evolve what LVG has done - that is a role I think that Giggs would be perfect for in his first couple of years, before/whilst adapting and tweaking the team into one that is then his own.
I have said it before but I think Giggs taking over from LVG in 2 years is still too early for him.
However it appears to me there are too many either trying to belittle or not understand just how important Giggs lifetime of being at Utd and being exposed to all the various training drills and training ground coaching has. All of those years on the training pitch under world class coaches is a significant feather in his cap. His playing career also adds in some important layers, he has played alongside some of the clubs/games greatest players and all of those experiences add yet more layers. He will have observed ego's, form struggles, dealing with media etc, and how Fergie and the backroom coaching staff dealt with those sorts of things. Its not an insignificant type of experience. Couple that with his UEFA coaching badges and then his time he will spend under LVG means he does have some meat to his CV. The reality is that most of the work is done on the training grounds, however to fans it isnt something we get to see or something that we hear much about so it can become a factor we dont value as highly as we should.
@Walrus Mourinho, Wenger, Guardiola(Bayern), Ancelloti and Pellegrini prove that not knowing the club is not a limiting factor towards achieving success. It also proves that knowing the club is not important and thus irrelevant because clubs should always be evolving in all aspects. If your club can only succeed by being managed by those with an intricate knowledge of the goings on at that said club then that club needs a massive clear out because it's environment is toxic.
Secondly being on the coat tails of a genius is no guarantee of success. I'd rather have a self made man than one who will always be second guessing himself mimicking what his mentor would do. Football is changing and the circumstances are never identical to make decisions basing on someone else's approach. We haven't seen anything from Giggs to suggest that he is a great football mind/innovator and you want us to find out when he has already the most important job at our club!
The Glazers haven't made that appointment yet so it's you who is living in another planet or time. And I don't remember seeing the press release that made LVG their spokesman.
My take on this is that football is about an equal opportunity industry as you will find - the cream in this industry always rises to the top no matter the obstacles. Too many underdog stories have played out in front of our eyes for it not to be, from Sir Alex through the likes of Wenger, Mourinho to guys like Simeone, Klopp and now there is talk of Tuchel. If you want the big jobs well just take the route that others have taken and prove yourself not just wait for it on platter just because one was a legend, he wasn't playing for free and he isn't the only legend we have. Serving an apprenticeship under LVG does not equate to proving oneself good enough to lead a club with designs on being the biggest. We need to see Ryan Giggs the manager not Ryan Giggs the student before we entrust him with the future of the club we all love so much.
Secondly being on the coat tails of a genius is no guarantee of success. I'd rather have a self made man than one who will always be second guessing himself mimicking what his mentor would do. Football is changing and the circumstances are never identical to make decisions basing on someone else's approach. We haven't seen anything from Giggs to suggest that he is a great football mind/innovator and you want us to find out when he has already the most important job at our club!
The Glazers haven't made that appointment yet so it's you who is living in another planet or time. And I don't remember seeing the press release that made LVG their spokesman.
My take on this is that football is about an equal opportunity industry as you will find - the cream in this industry always rises to the top no matter the obstacles. Too many underdog stories have played out in front of our eyes for it not to be, from Sir Alex through the likes of Wenger, Mourinho to guys like Simeone, Klopp and now there is talk of Tuchel. If you want the big jobs well just take the route that others have taken and prove yourself not just wait for it on platter just because one was a legend, he wasn't playing for free and he isn't the only legend we have. Serving an apprenticeship under LVG does not equate to proving oneself good enough to lead a club with designs on being the biggest. We need to see Ryan Giggs the manager not Ryan Giggs the student before we entrust him with the future of the club we all love so much.
This is exactly what I think, (and have said along those lines). People argued to the end of world against it seem to have this ego thing wanting a brand name manager for the sake of it.
The basis on which in appointing Giggs actually has both merits and romance. Win-win.
What merits?
I might be guilty of that but the fact is what he has now or will have in two years time won't be enough when staked against the very best operators in this business whom we have access to and the ability to lure. What we need to see is whether all that exposure, all those badges and the mentoring actually produced a great or potentially great manager. We are simply too fragile to be another lab rat so soon after the spectacular failure of our attempt at cloning Ferguson through his home boy who was ''cut from the same cloth''.
I dont believe this to be true. There are so many variables in play that I have no doubt there have been many people within football (of all sorts of jobs) who have never got to the top because some variable has tripped them up. To get to the top in football as a coach, player, manager, scout, physio etc etc etc requires talent but also a certain degree of luck or good fortune. The cream doesnt always rise to the top. Sometimes its the most resilient.
The fact is only about three managers are qualified to take this job and if luck or any other factor trips you then it's most likely you were never good enough in the first place. For example we could say Ole picked the wrong club to start his PL career with, if he lets that failure keep him down for good when he still relatively young and this defines him for the rest of his career can we really call it luck or simply that he flattered to deceive? Certain things will always drag you down at one time or another but with the rate of managerial turnover being as it is opportunities will always present themselves, hell Wally with the Brolly is back in the big time (well sort of), FSW at Real Madrid etc.
@itso 7 Firstly, I dont agree with your statement about football being an equal opportunity industry. As @Stack just said, there is a fair old element of luck and circumstance involved. Would Messi have been retained as a pro in other clubs when he had growth defects which hindered him as a teenager? Would Guardiola have had his big break at another club? Talented individuals of course - but it can be argued that both were lucky to even get a chance to kick start their careers as a player and manager respectively, and they got a chance that most other clubs would not give them.
Thousands, perhaps millions of very talented kids never get a chance to even sign a professional deal. For a player, if you arent scouted at a very early age and taken on by a club or academy, your chances of making it are going to slim dramatically. Talent is required, but so is luck.
Regarding the rest of your post, I agree with various parts of it, however your assertion and examples of other managers only really show that you can gain success in specific circumstances. I have gone into it in more detail previously in this thread, but there are question marks and criticisms that can be levelled at almost any manager - Guardiola got thrust immediately into an elite position, and has never had to manage anything but a world class team. If he had had 'the Giggs treatment' and gone out to earn his stripes at a lesser club, would it have worked? For all those calling him a footballing genius - was this really evident before he got the Barca job, or is it a case of hindsight being 20/20? In my opinion it is the latter.
Mourinho? He has shown that if you give him a blank cheque book and only care about long term success, he can deliver it. I actually thought that based on that, he would have been a great choice to replace Ferguson when we needed someone to steady the ship and keep the trophy train rolling for a few years while we settled into a post-Fergie era and found a long term replacement. But Jose has a very questionable track record of getting on with his superiors, of any sort of youth development, and an absence of any long term planning or squad building. Even at Chelsea now after coasting to the league last year, questions are being asked about whether he will successfully integrate some of Chelsea's extremely talented crop of youngsters into the first team. Likewise Pellegrini at City. Wenger, until the fairly recent FA cup triumphs, hadnt won a trophy in nearly a decade at Arsenal - isnt that precisely the "trophy drought" situation that people have been dreading with a Giggs appointment?
The point I am making here is not that Giggs is a better or more proven manager than any of the above, but simply that there is no safe, risk-free option. If you hire a Mourinho then you are right, he doesnt really need to know the club inside out to deliver his particular brand of success. However if you want someone who is going to integrate youth into the first team, I dont think you can argue that having existing experience and relationships with the youth setup would not be a benefit to the manager. Similarly, working with the first team squad, understanding how they have been coached and trained, the system that the players have grown used to playing in - experiencing all of this first hand has to be seen as a significant contributing factor. Giggs knows the drills, the set pieces - everything about the current coaching setup. He knows which elements of it the players probably dont like, and I would hope by now that he has started to develop his own ideas of how to improve things - I dont think that is unrealistic at all.
Another poster said it previously - but as fans we are blissfully ignorant of what goes on behind closed doors at the club, on the training field, in the gym etc, and yet this is regarded as such an integral part of the football club. This is an area where it must be said that Giggs' existing knowledge, experience within the club and relationships with the players and staff, is a benefit to him over any external candidate.
I went on a job interview the other day and there were 5 of us - two internal candidates and three externals. In my humble opinion I felt that the internal candidates were less qualified for the job, but one of them ended up getting it, primarily due to the fact that she had had existing exposure to the company and to the job in question, and that was a huge advantage, even over an arguably better qualified external candidate.
Thousands, perhaps millions of very talented kids never get a chance to even sign a professional deal. For a player, if you arent scouted at a very early age and taken on by a club or academy, your chances of making it are going to slim dramatically. Talent is required, but so is luck.
Regarding the rest of your post, I agree with various parts of it, however your assertion and examples of other managers only really show that you can gain success in specific circumstances. I have gone into it in more detail previously in this thread, but there are question marks and criticisms that can be levelled at almost any manager - Guardiola got thrust immediately into an elite position, and has never had to manage anything but a world class team. If he had had 'the Giggs treatment' and gone out to earn his stripes at a lesser club, would it have worked? For all those calling him a footballing genius - was this really evident before he got the Barca job, or is it a case of hindsight being 20/20? In my opinion it is the latter.
Mourinho? He has shown that if you give him a blank cheque book and only care about long term success, he can deliver it. I actually thought that based on that, he would have been a great choice to replace Ferguson when we needed someone to steady the ship and keep the trophy train rolling for a few years while we settled into a post-Fergie era and found a long term replacement. But Jose has a very questionable track record of getting on with his superiors, of any sort of youth development, and an absence of any long term planning or squad building. Even at Chelsea now after coasting to the league last year, questions are being asked about whether he will successfully integrate some of Chelsea's extremely talented crop of youngsters into the first team. Likewise Pellegrini at City. Wenger, until the fairly recent FA cup triumphs, hadnt won a trophy in nearly a decade at Arsenal - isnt that precisely the "trophy drought" situation that people have been dreading with a Giggs appointment?
The point I am making here is not that Giggs is a better or more proven manager than any of the above, but simply that there is no safe, risk-free option. If you hire a Mourinho then you are right, he doesnt really need to know the club inside out to deliver his particular brand of success. However if you want someone who is going to integrate youth into the first team, I dont think you can argue that having existing experience and relationships with the youth setup would not be a benefit to the manager. Similarly, working with the first team squad, understanding how they have been coached and trained, the system that the players have grown used to playing in - experiencing all of this first hand has to be seen as a significant contributing factor. Giggs knows the drills, the set pieces - everything about the current coaching setup. He knows which elements of it the players probably dont like, and I would hope by now that he has started to develop his own ideas of how to improve things - I dont think that is unrealistic at all.
Another poster said it previously - but as fans we are blissfully ignorant of what goes on behind closed doors at the club, on the training field, in the gym etc, and yet this is regarded as such an integral part of the football club. This is an area where it must be said that Giggs' existing knowledge, experience within the club and relationships with the players and staff, is a benefit to him over any external candidate.
I went on a job interview the other day and there were 5 of us - two internal candidates and three externals. In my humble opinion I felt that the internal candidates were less qualified for the job, but one of them ended up getting it, primarily due to the fact that she had had existing exposure to the company and to the job in question, and that was a huge advantage, even over an arguably better qualified external candidate.
On the romance notion, Melbourne Victory appointed a club legend to the main job after being assistant for a few years. We won the title and it's clearly my favorite success for the team but winning is winning. Honestly, when United next lifts the Prem no one is going to care who got us there, all that matters is celebrating the title.
Have you read though these pages? There are so many, but to begin with,, read this OP first:
feel like Invictus answered this point really comprehensively already. Guardiola was far more proactive than Giggs has been.
For anyone who missed it:
Unless someone wants to actually itemise what Giggs has done that compares to this, maybe enough with the Guardiola comparisons?
Last edited:
What skills make Giggs a standout manager?
Man-management/motivation? (what I think was SAF's outstanding quality)
Tactical knowledge to prepare for and have influence during games? (Mourinho's forte)
Coaching skills? Will he be a hands-on coach like LvG/Moyes?
Excellence at delegating and marshalling resources?
Handling/making use of the press?
In other words, on what basis would you hire him? Is it simply down to he's-been-at-the-club-for-twenty-years-and-was-a-great-footballer-and-has-done-some-coaching-badges-and-watched-two-giants-of-the-managing-sphere-ply-their-trade-and-so-is-qualified-to-run-the-club?
It may indeed be that he excels at some of the skills above. We don't know because he's untried, and that's precisely the point - would it not be one hell of a risk to give the keys of your £1bn racing car to someone who has never raced before except in the passenger seat? Unfortunately, I think Walrus is right in that if he's ever going to get a chance, it'll be after LvG. And the only top club that'll give him a chance is this one, because other top clubs won't be persuaded by the fact that he's-been-at-a-club-for-twenty-years-and-was-a-great-footballer-and-has-done-some-coaching-badges-and-watched-two-giants-of-the-managing-sphere-ply-their-trade. Woodward and the Glazers may well hand him the keys - I just hope they have a decent insurance policy...
Man-management/motivation? (what I think was SAF's outstanding quality)
Tactical knowledge to prepare for and have influence during games? (Mourinho's forte)
Coaching skills? Will he be a hands-on coach like LvG/Moyes?
Excellence at delegating and marshalling resources?
Handling/making use of the press?
In other words, on what basis would you hire him? Is it simply down to he's-been-at-the-club-for-twenty-years-and-was-a-great-footballer-and-has-done-some-coaching-badges-and-watched-two-giants-of-the-managing-sphere-ply-their-trade-and-so-is-qualified-to-run-the-club?
It may indeed be that he excels at some of the skills above. We don't know because he's untried, and that's precisely the point - would it not be one hell of a risk to give the keys of your £1bn racing car to someone who has never raced before except in the passenger seat? Unfortunately, I think Walrus is right in that if he's ever going to get a chance, it'll be after LvG. And the only top club that'll give him a chance is this one, because other top clubs won't be persuaded by the fact that he's-been-at-a-club-for-twenty-years-and-was-a-great-footballer-and-has-done-some-coaching-badges-and-watched-two-giants-of-the-managing-sphere-ply-their-trade. Woodward and the Glazers may well hand him the keys - I just hope they have a decent insurance policy...
Yes, it's a Nice idea. Just like the idea of having Boris Johnson as PM or Michael Jordan as president. Except people will soon disavow the idea when things don't quite pan out the way they'd envisaged.
I have said this a couple of times in this thread but just so you are clear, I dont think Giggs should be our next Manager. However the way you have written what i have bolded seems to me to be done in a way to belittle those things. There are solid reasons why Giggs may not be the right person to be the next manager but the stuff you have written that i bolded are significant feathers in his cap, not things to demean or try to diminish in importance. Too many people debating against Giggs as the next manager dont seem to understand how important and useful those things are.
I believe the only tangible link Giggs has with Guardiola is he's a legendary figure of the club he's synonymous with. Guardiola, however minimal had experience and credentials. He also had a director of football who would let Guardiola focus on coaching the first team something Giggs probably won't have. Giggs doesn't strike me as somebody who has the persona of a top manager. For what it's worth, I feel van Gaal is credited more than he ought to be with Guardiola's managerial career. Cruyff and Bielsa had more of an influence.
I really dont think they are important attributes for a manager though. They are impressive achievements for him as a player, no doubt. Nobody would ever (I hope) take that away from him. But they dont belong on his CV when applying for a manager's job.
Let's look at the clauses.
He's been at the club for twenty years - is there actually ANY correlation between success and history with a club? SAF: new to United (and every other club he managed) - success. Mourinho: moved around, successful everywhere, without history. Clough: dont think he had any history with Derby or Forest before managing them? Wenger: No history with Arsenal before managing them. Of coruse there are examples of people who have been successful at a club they had a history with, but that is because we are not saying there is inverse correlation, we are saying there is no correlation (or negligible correlation).
He was a great footballer - As was Keane, Robson, Bruce, Ince, Hughes... Ill tell you who wasnt a great footballer: SAF. His career was pretty modest, it was OK, but it was unspectacular. Moutrinho's and Wenger's was even worse. THIS IS NOT A FACTOR.
He's done some coaching badges - this is a prerequisite, not an advantage over his rivals.
He watched two giants of the managing sphere ply their trade - I said before, what is important is what you know, not where you learned it. Many, many players have observed great managers. Many players have travelled the world (like Guardiola did, as invictus so helpfully pointed out), not just watching but studying, from not just two, but countless different managers. What is important is evidence that you have actually learned something from all this observation. This is what we dont know about Giggs. But Van Gaal and SAF will have a better idea. And I can only assume, if he is ultimately given the job, they must have had long conversations about management with him and found his thoughts on the subject to be quite worthwhile. I can only speculate about that, I havent heard it, I havent seen any evidence of it. I heard SAF talking about Ole in those terms a long time ago, but not Giggs. LVG talked about Carrick in those terms too. We'll just have to wait and see.
So to reiterate and conclude, I dont think @McUnited was belittling those achievements, I think he was questioning their relevance in this context, which I think is fair enough because I do too.
We will have to agree to disagree. Fergie, Mourinho, Clough, Wenger the managers you mention have all been heavily involved with on the training pitch sessions. In fact just this week the Scottish FA released a video filmed in the last week of Fergie talking about Jock Stein and in it he makes mention of organising the training drills. Its not just a case of talking to the players, telling them that they need to play a particular formation and maybe press in certain areas of the pitch. If it was that easy we could all do it. The training drills have to be designed to prepare a team for each different opposition. Phase of plays need to be worked through. Different coaches will design a training session for a the same phase of play and they will end up with different methods.
The UEFA coaching badges arent any sort of thing you breeze through, the UEFA A and B pro licenses cover all areas of management from running and designing training drills, to man management, the use of technology, sports science etc etc. Its not a weekend coaching course, they are significant in depth and content. Sure all managers must have them but that doesnt mean its any less important. Using your angle then all players train but it doesnt give them an advantage over other players....
Its not a case of simply obeserving Fergie and LVG, he has spent his entire career learning and understanding the multitude of training drills Fergie and his backroom staff have employed to deal with various on pitch problems players encounter during a game. That is a significant tool to have in his locker. He has been able to see how Fergie handles different players and has seen how he himself was dealt with by Fergie. Again thats a very significant bit of experience, its not like he was playing under Mick McCarthy for 20 or so years...
His playing career has meant that he has had to deal with all sorts of issues, pressure, success, disappointment etc etc. Thats invaluable experience. Sure any manager who has played has had to deal with those things but the point is that they are things where he has gained experience.
All these things are entirely relevant and very important parts of his CV.
You sound like you are belittling these things to be honest.
Right... but they didnt have a history with a specific club that made them more qualified to manage them though. Isnt that the point we are discussing? Not sure what any of this has to do with what I said to be honest.
Not saying they are easy at all. Im saying every single candidate going for the job or who would be under consideration will have them.
A degree in medicine is not an easy thing to get. But if someone who has one applies to be a doctor, does that mean he will automatically get it? Or will anyone who doesnt have one not even be considered? It is a prerequisite.
Oh come on. Are we now saying Giggs' playing career is unique because he has experienced pressure, success and disappointment? For someone who doesnt think Giggs should be our next manager, you are remarkably keen to elevate the fairly general experiences he has had as a footballer to make them sound special.
I actually wonder whether being a one club man is an advantage or a disadvantage. I think perhaps seeing more different ways of doing things might have its own advantages.
Im really not belittling Giggs' achievements as a player. What he achieved, staying at one club for so long, keeping his place, reinventing himself into multiple positions, the sheer number of trophies he has won, are all incredible achievements. I just dont think they are achievements that necessarily translate into management. If he succeeds as a manager, and if he is given the job i obviously hope he does, it will be for other reasons than these ones. Sure, observing two great managers for a long period will help, but it wont be enough. It will be his own analytical skills, hard work and innovation that will take the best aspects from those managers, adapt them to make them his own, and most importantly execute them effectively on the training pitch that will ultimately decide whether he succeeds or not.
- Status