Igor the Interim

[DubSpur]

Up until 15 years ago, I would have agreed with you, but football has become a game of patterns and systems, with little room left for improvising. Old-school managers like Clough, Ferguson or Keegan would have no place in today's football, unfortunately. To be successful as a manager, you no longer need to know your players, think outside the box and devise a strategy according to your squad. You need to be able to implement an efficient system.

If your players can't adapt to different systems and/or managers then, quite simply, they're not good enough, regardless of their ability with a football.

That's what we're about to find out. Some people still think our squad should at least have us in midtable but the players couldn't/wouldn't adapt to Frank, they couldn't adapt to Tudor and unless something changes very quickly, they'll be playing in the Championship next season. They're not bad players per se, but they just don't fit into any system: they can't play three at the back, they can't play a very attacking game, they can't adapt to the opposition... well, we are where we are for a reason.

As for the managers, maybe I'm wrong but I think my explanation still beats 'he's incompetent', 'he's an idiot', 'he's a dinosaur' or 'he's trying to get us relegated on purpose' - arguments I've read many times over the years.

There have always been patterns in systems in football. Some come into and go out of fashion depending on what way the most successful teams of the moment are playing. What has changed is managers wanting players to stick to those patterns and less individualism in the game.
You still need to know your players and how they fit into a system. I'd say knowing your players is even more important now on a personal level as modern players need more handholding. Ferguson would adapt to any era, he was a master at motivation and ensuring that he had the correct people around him.

They adapted to Frank, it's just the system he had them playing lacked any creativity beyond putting a cross in. They won't adapt to Tudor if he keeps constantly playing players out of position doing roles they don't have the ability for.

 

[Mikey10]

One more chance this evening than he probably should have had to show that he can affect some level of change. Hopefully we see something. If we don't then we really have to make another change before Sunday.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Up until 15 years ago, I would have agreed with you, but football has become a game of patterns and systems, with little room left for improvising. Old-school managers like Clough, Ferguson or Keegan would have no place in today's football, unfortunately. To be successful as a manager, you no longer need to know your players, think outside the box and devise a strategy according to your squad. You need to be able to implement an efficient system.

If your players can't adapt to different systems and/or managers then, quite simply, they're not good enough, regardless of their ability with a football.

Just in the last week I've heard from Bale and the Chelsea manager that it's quite the opposite.

Getting to know your players as individuals is massive.

The strategy/system is 10% according to Rosenior.

 

[Mr Gogolak]

Just in the last week I've heard from Bale and the Chelsea manager that it's quite the opposite.

Getting to know your players as individuals is massive.

The strategy/system is 10% according to Rosenior.

Then I suppose he's happy to change formation and his whole line-up from one game to the next? I don't watch Chelsea at all, so maybe he does, but I very much doubt it. There was a guy who was famous for using lots of players and different formations when I was a kid... Howard Kendall, maybe? Anyway...

The only manager I've seen in recent years who doesn't seem to rely on attacking patterns of play is Mourinho and nobody considers him an elite manager anymore.

I can think of many reasons why they'd say that. First of all, as a manager, you absolutely don't want to lose the dressing room. It's important to know your players as individuals, because that's the one thing you have to avoid at all costs (Frank says hi). Also, modern-day managers tend to make a difference between systems (ie formations) and philosophies (ie individual instructions, general intent). For instance, you could set-up your team in a 4-4-2 but if you instruct one of your forwards to drop down and tell your wingers to press the full-backs, you effectively play in 4-2-3-1. It's the most obvious example, but there are plenty of others.

It could also be because managers are more distanced from the everyday work on the pitch, these days. Wenger is the blueprint now. They have coaches for almost everything so yes, they most work as motivators but there's still a lot of detailed work being done on the training pitch and that's why most of these guys like to work with 'trusted people' (people who know what they actually want).

Now, if Bale wants to watch a Premier League game with me and tell me that the patterns of play aren't worked on in training and that players are given a lot of freedom, I'd be happy to entertain him, but he'll have a hard time convincing me.

Having said all that, I sound assertive because of my mediocre grasp of the English language, but all this is nothing but my opinion. I'm trying to explain the reasons why I came to these conclusions, but I can't claim any particular knowledge on the game. So, if that's a load of bull... then it wouldn't be the first time in my life I spouted nonsense!