I think it's obvious why we have had caretaker managers (for too long in a couple of instances), the same as just about every club has at times.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
ENIC
- Thread starter mattls
- Start date
Gazza
Frederic Kanoute
I think it’s not the case we seem to have more than most as shown.
Where was it shown that we have more caretakers than most? There was no data about other clubs, only ours unless I missed something?
Gazza
Frederic Kanoute
You suggested that it was the same as other clubs not me. In this respect we have had the most over any club 9, second is Chelsea 7 and third 5 is villa … other clubs have had less. We are top of the league of caretaker managers you will never sing that!
Yes, we've had the most because we are one of only 6 ever present clubs. 2 of those 6 clubs having two of the most successful managers in the PL and with little change so the odds are it was going to be us or Chelsea with the most. A better comparison is how often that we have caretakers compared to other clubs and not we've had 9 while someone in the PL for a couple of seasons has fewer.
We've had 5 periods with a caretaker under ENIC, most were short with only one period under Pleat that was way too long. I don't see the issue once we got the correct manager in after the caretaker period, (that hasn't always been the case) and a much more important point than caretakers that are here for a few weeks.
Finney Is Back
Andy Thompson
Having a caretaker for a game or two when a manager leaves unexpectedly is inevitable. Having one in place for several games after sacking a manager is simply poor planning.
Gazza
Frederic Kanoute
Going back to my original point of why have we had the need to have so many … poor initial recruitment? Manager not aligned to our transfer “strategy”?
Bishop
Nick Barmby
You're seemingly ignoring Liverpool and Everton as well. There are 4 ever presents who aren't Arsenal and Manchester United not just ourselves and Chelsea.
Gazza
Frederic Kanoute
It’s exactly the sort of response even when the facts present themselves. There is a genuine discussion as to why we have needed so many caretaker managers. Instead of giving a response it’s deflected with other film flam. Sorry if I come across as rude.
Bishop
Nick Barmby
I think it's the need as you mentioned to deflect potential criticism from Levy and the board, I can only describe it as a teflon defence because rather than discussing the points and maybe articulating reasons the why it's the case (and I do think there are reasons), instead it's just a deflection and one that just ignores reality. I dunno man.
So as genuine discussion
- Chelsea's success (as with Real Madrid) can show manager time in role is not always related to outcomes
For us, we need/needed to be perfect and demands/expectations are high
- Yes, that means certain hires were mistakes or unable to achieve expected results
I actually have no issue with club recognizing a mistake and moving to rectify fairly quickly
- The counter example I would give is United and OGS, I think they are still paying for the acceptance of mediocrity for 3 years
Gazza
Frederic Kanoute
Fair point.
However how can our club expect perfection from managers when they themselves are far from perfection?
Cannot tell me our expectations surely are not as high as Chelsea or Madrid as mentioned. Countering this … why have their model of manager merry-go rounds work where ours have failed miserably?
I also acknowledge that the club moved quickly to recognise a mistake … again though there seems to be far too many in comparison.
Muttley
Tony Parks
I think it's the need as you mentioned to deflect potential criticism from Levy and the board, I can only describe it as a teflon defence because rather than discussing the points and maybe articulating reasons the why it's the case (and I do think there are reasons), instead it's just a deflection and one that just ignores reality. I dunno man.
Just a thought but it is the sheer speed that the manager has lost the dressing room that has created the necessity for the caretaker to do more than one or two games? There is actually only one manager, Redknapp, that finished a season and left by mutual consent. I know Sherwood, Mason and others did but they were interim appointments. Way too many autumn/winter departures in my opinion.
I'm also wondering whether the same logic adds fuel to the process of finding quality replacements. In an ideal world, you know you're parting ways with your manager. The season ends, you've already done all of the due diligence and negotiations and the next guy turns up on July 1st for pre-season training. They've already been working in the background with you on summer transfer targets.
It seems our transitions haven't been anything like we've just seen with Klopp / Slot or Pellegrini / Pep. They are very reactive transitions and that can't help.
Bedfordspurs
Chris Waddle
Also a churn is when a better guy (club perception) became available
They sacked poch because someone thought Mou was better
They sacked Nuno because Conte had clearly said he would come
Muttley
Tony Parks
lol - getting caught by the media in a Spanish hotel foyer having chats with Ramos was another example.
Adds fuel to the fire that firing Ange after results implode would be a bad thing.
Gazza
Frederic Kanoute
100% it seems like Brighton are on the pulse admirably identifying players coming into their peak or managers also to a degree and have already done their homework quietly and make decisions effectively and quickly.
It just seems like the managers that we have hired and failed miserably and replaced with more of the same. This failure cannot just be on the managers there has to be some of it on the club. Further to this if you look closely as to why some have come and gone it’s usually due to players being flogged and not adequately replaced or managers not really fitting into the transfer policy that we seem to hold on to.
Caretakers are the equivalent of replacing Berbatov on deadline day with fraiser-Campbell on loan
Stating there are 6 ever presents is ignoring there are two others beside Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and us? Ok, if you can't figure out 6 - 4 =2....
And you ignore the part about the caretaker for a week or two isn't really an issue, the issue is getting the next manager right after the caretaker. If you moaned about taking too long to replace a caretaker, that is fair enough in a couple of cases. If you moaned about ending up with Nuno after a caretaker again, fair enough. But moaning about haveing caretakers, that's flim flam.
Actually don't think Chelsea is the last ever present (might be wrong), believe it might be Villa?
It's Chelsea, Villa were in the Championship for 2-3 seasons about 5 years ago.