[Archived] Managers Managing: Money Or Ambition?

[Gav]

So now that the dust has settled on what can only be described as a phenomenal Premeirship win by Leicester, Ranieri and lets give Pearson some credit, I bet chairmen around the country are asking themselves:

Why don't modern day managers actually manage instead of throwing millions down the drain to finish 4th from bottom?

Sunderland and West Brom for instance spent £80m between them, Newcastle spent £70m alone and went down, Villa spent £54.

The likes of Pulis and Allardyce would never ever tell the fans and chairman they could win the league, the same goes for plenty of other premiership managers also.

Why are those types of managers getting away with the annual dumbing down of expectations when Claudio has achieved it on a similar budget?

Money is used as en excuse time and time again, but that myth now been well and truly put to bed, but will the managers looking to finish 4th from bottom be held to account?

Did you ever hear Clough, Paisley, Kendall or Allison complaining over a lack of funds? You didn't, proper managers that actually wanted to manage, not manage exceptions through a series of excuses.

[PeteJD13]

There is nothing I hate more than the lets get to the magic 40 points Pulis has always spent money and produces turgid football, its one of the reasons I like Pardew at least he is ambitious and is prepared to talk his team up

[booth]

To be fair it's happened how many times in how many years?

[Mattyblue]

Don't really get the title?

What aren't they 'managing'?

Tony Pulis will be tasked by the owners/board of WBA to lead the team in a manner that will ensure they stay in the PL- and will be compensated accordingly if he does so.

It says more about the ambition of those owning/running the clubs than the managers.

[Gav]

Don't really get the title?

What aren't they 'managing'?

Tony Pulis will be tasked by the owners/board of WBA to lead the team in a manner that will ensure they stay in the PL- and will be compensated accordingly if he does so.

It says more about the ambition of those owning/running the clubs than the managers.

Terrible title, I'd posted and realised but couldn't change it.....

A manager should be aiming to finish as high as possible in any league he competes in, not playing down his chances saying the club can't compete.

If you can't buy the best players in the world you need to produce the best players or coach the players you've got.

Some managers are robbing a living in my opinion, but I do accept they're doing what owners and chairmen require of them, it's the fans that suffer.

[scotty_beam_me_up]

It's the same with the quality of sides put out in the cup competitions. THe fans would love a cup run but time and time again the teams in the lower half of the prem go out early to give themselves the best chance of eeking out 38 points to stay in the league. Same with Europe, teams work so hard to get there then rest players when they do. Think we've all been on the end of that. You travel thousands of miles to watch Rovers then see your stars sat on the bench when you get there.

There is nothing I hate more than the lets get to the magic 40 points Pulis has always spent money and produces turgid football, its one of the reasons I like Pardew at least he is ambitious and is prepared to talk his team up

It was good to see a manager put the FA cup before the league this season. Those Palace fans will remember that day for a lot longer than if they had got a top half finish in the league.

[alex l]

There's got to be realism or they'd be ridiculed. If Karanka, Bruce or Big Sam declared their sides are aiming to win the league, people would laugh. It's like Coyle saying we'll top the league - he'd be branded deluded before a ball has been kicked.

[Gav]

There's got to be realism or they'd be ridiculed. If Karanka, Bruce or Big Sam declared their sides are aiming to win the league, people would laugh. It's like Coyle saying we'll top the league - he'd be branded deluded before a ball has been kicked.

The reason for that Alex?

These managers have spent the last 20yrs telling the fans, media and chairmen that they simply can't win the league without £200m to spend. I saw an interview on Sky the other day with Kevin Keegan, probably from around 2012, where he stated exactly that, "No point even trying with less than £100m" and its been proven to be incorrect.

Most modern day managers are robbing a living by dumbing down everyones expectations, the myth of being unable to win the league is now fact, and finishing 4th from bottom is a success for many.

Can't think of many other industries that would allow such negative attitudes.

[Veevs]

So now that the dust has settled on what can only be described as a phenomenal Premeirship win by Leicester, Ranieri and lets give Pearson some credit, I bet chairmen around the country are asking themselves:

Why don't modern day managers actually manage instead of throwing millions down the drain to finish 4th from bottom?

Sunderland and West Brom for instance spent £80m between them, Newcastle spent £70m alone and went down, Villa spent £54.

The likes of Pulis and Allardyce would never ever tell the fans and chairman they could win the league, the same goes for plenty of other premiership managers also.

Why are those types of managers getting away with the annual dumbing down of expectations when Claudio has achieved it on a similar budget?

Money is used as en excuse time and time again, but that myth now been well and truly put to bed, but will the managers looking to finish 4th from bottom be held to account?

Did you ever hear Clough, Paisley, Kendall or Allison complaining over a lack of funds? You didn't, proper managers that actually wanted to manage, not manage exceptions through a series of excuses.

Even Claudio stated up to near the end of the season survival in the PL was his goal.. not taking anything from their achievements they deserved the league title, but last season was a perfect storm for them with a bunch of players hitting the form of their careers (mahrez, Kante, Vardy, drinkwater) which enabled the kind of football Claudio had to use and at the same time three of the so called big five had utter disasters on the management front.

Clough, Paisley and co all managed in an era when the money simply was nothing like it is today.. now clubs are spending insane sums of money to bring in the best players from around the globe, it is pretty easy to understand the frustration of managers when they spend 50 on a bunch of players and then big boys walk out and splash similar sums on single players.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

Claudio's hardest job will be the up and coming season. Now fans' and owners' expectations have been raised, it will be interesting how much time he'll get if the team returns to the previous season's form and they are not in the top half.

The likes of Big Sam and Pullis are good at keeping owners expectations at a level that they are confident they can achieve so keep their jobs relative safe. the only times that Sam raised his head above this were Newcastle and West Ham where the fans expecations are excessive and look what at happened.

[J*B]

If I was a Leicester fan Ranieri could get 10 points all season and he would still be a hero.

[frosty]

Pulis does a good job at keeping teams away from the drop zone, no doubt about that, but his limit is about 13th place and 43 points.

Big Sam is a class above imo, finishing 5th and always being around top 7 with Bolton (after their first couple of years following promotion) proved that.

As for Ranieri, yeah, irrelevant what happens next season - he'll forever be king.

[onlyonejackwalker]

How much did Leicester spend compiling last year's PL winning squad?

[Gav]

How much did Leicester spend compiling last year's PL winning squad?

I seem to recall they had a net spend of £20m last season, similar to Boro, Derby, Bournemouth and Palace

[Iceman]

So now that the dust has settled on what can only be described as a phenomenal Premeirship win by Leicester, Ranieri and lets give Pearson some credit, I bet chairmen around the country are asking themselves:

Why don't modern day managers actually manage instead of throwing millions down the drain to finish 4th from bottom?

Sunderland and West Brom for instance spent £80m between them, Newcastle spent £70m alone and went down, Villa spent £54.

The likes of Pulis and Allardyce would never ever tell the fans and chairman they could win the league, the same goes for plenty of other premiership managers also.

Why are those types of managers getting away with the annual dumbing down of expectations when Claudio has achieved it on a similar budget?

Money is used as en excuse time and time again, but that myth now been well and truly put to bed, but will the managers looking to finish 4th from bottom be held to account?

Did you ever hear Clough, Paisley, Kendall or Allison complaining over a lack of funds? You didn't, proper managers that actually wanted to manage, not manage exceptions through a series of excuses.

One of the things which annoys me, is that people don't understand the difference between a coach and a manager. That's all

[Gav]

One of the things which annoys me, is that people don't understand the difference between a coach and a manager. That's all

Who would you say is responsible for the coach? who usually appoints the coaches?

Who usually get sacked if the coach is useless?