Christian Stellini - Acting Head Coach for a small part of the season

[glorygloryeze]

Yeh didn't a Conte team lose to them?

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk

Just pointing out that Stellini was in charge on the touchline for that haha...

But hopefully we do see an upturn in results that at least allows us to get the better of that calibre of side, fingers crossed!

 

[alekaras]

Yeh didn't a Conte team lose to them?

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk

TBF, our performance against Wolves was actually decent. On the whole we were the better team and unlucky to lose that match. The players started brightly, which I'm pretty sure had more to do with Stellini than Conte. But we didn't react to the changes they made in the 2nd half, which probably had more to do with Conte than Stellini.

 

[glorygloryeze]

TBF, our performance against Wolves was actually decent. On the whole we were the better team and unlucky to lose that match. The players started brightly, which I'm pretty sure had more to do with Stellini than Conte. But we didn't react to the changes they made in the 2nd half, which probably had more to do with Conte than Stellini.

I certainly agree we played well vs Wolves.

However, i want to delve into this Stellini vs Conte narrative: what evidence do we have that not making changes to react early enough was because of Conte instead of Stellini? And what evidence do we have that the players started brightly because of Stellini instead of Conte?

How are you drawing the lines here and on what basis/evidence are you using to do so?

 

[AdamB]

what evidence do we have that not making changes to react early enough was because of Conte instead of Stellini?

I'd have thought that if Conte wanted to make a change, but Stellini disagreed, Conte would have the balls to over-rule his deputy

 

[Finney Is Back]

Judging by your posts in every single thread, how much we spend on wages seems to be key to how we perform.

Well in pretty much every big league in Europe (and probably the World) the teams that have the highest wage bills tend to be the teams that are at the top end of the league and win the trophies. Maybe it is just coincidence or maybe there is an actual correlation between the size of the wage bill and the number of high quality players that team will have in their squad. I suspect it is the latter.

 

[Finney Is Back]

What does how much we pay a manager have to do with where we finish in the table? I was just indicating what finish would warrant a bonus given we're paying a top manager £15 mil a year. Finishing 4th should not warrant a bonus.

Well at present it seems that it looking as though we won't finish in the top 4 gets our manager the sack so its probably only fair they get a bonus if they manage to finish in the top 4. Though I guess at our club keeping one's job might be considered a bonus for the manager considering how many of them get sacked?

Bonuses are always likely to be paid for surpassing realistic expectations. If the club had told Conte there was no bonus for finishing in the CL places then I doubt he would've taken the job and decisions like that are how you end up with managers like Nuno.

 

[Raziel]

Could the players liking Stellini be a potential double-edged sword?
Something that Conte said was the players didn't like being challenged by pressure and essentially liked to be comfortable...hmmm....

I don't really see a downside

- Worst case, they play the same brick they have all season
- Best case, a combination of being happy Conte is gone, wanting to prove him wrong and the removal of fear (I think the biggest issue) and "having" to play a certain way, allows us to lift the play and at least win the games we should

 

[Raziel]

Well in pretty much every big league in Europe (and probably the World) the teams that have the highest wage bills tend to be the teams that are at the top end of the league and win the trophies. Maybe it is just coincidence or maybe there is an actual correlation between the size of the wage bill and the number of high quality players that team will have in their squad. I suspect it is the latter.

There is a correlation but it isn't 1+1, both United & Arsenal in their worst period post SAF & Wenger had pretty high wage bills and brick results.

But the logic stands, better players -> higher wages -> better results??

 

[Finney Is Back]

There is a correlation but it isn't 1+1, both United & Arsenal in their worst period post SAF & Wenger had pretty high wage bills and brick results.

But the logic stands, better players -> higher wages -> better results??

Both clubs also did something that we didn't in this period and won trophies.

 

[Bishop]

There is a correlation but it isn't 1+1, both United & Arsenal in their worst period post SAF & Wenger had pretty high wage bills and brick results.

But the logic stands, better players -> higher wages -> better results??

Its not a case of higher wages -> better player. Instead it's a more proven higher quality player can demand and receive higher wages because that player is more in demand.

If you do it right, you pay those players whose absolute quality has been proven a higher wage packet this WILL lead to success. If you however just pay any odd player 400k a week you're just throwing your money away.

Hence amongst the historically successful teams you will see a correlation between wages bills and success.

Just think back to the 2002-2015 era when we were unwilling or incapable of paying wages to match the likes of Chelsea. That in turn we were consistently unable to attract the quality of player they were eg. Carvalho, Essien, Robben, Duff, etc etc

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[Finney Is Back]

Its not a case of higher wages -> better player. Instead it's a more proven higher quality player can demand and receive higher wages because that player is more in demand.

If you do it right, you pay those players whose absolute quality has been proven a higher wage packet this WILL lead to success. If you however just pay any odd player 400k a week you're just throwing your money away.

Hence amongst the historically successful teams you will see a correlation between wages bills and success.

Just think back to the 2002-2015 era when we were unwilling or incapable of paying wages to match the likes of Chelsea. That in turn we were consistently unable to attract the quality of player they were eg. Carvalho, Essien, Robben, Duff, etc etc

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

Happened more recently as well with Mane and Wjnaldum as good examples. Players that Pochettino wanted and fitted into the sort of range of transfer fee our club was prepared to spend but we were not prepared to pay Champions League level wages (despite actually being in the Champions League!)

 

[Raziel]

Both clubs also did something that we didn't in this period and won trophies.

Context matters

- The trophies United and Arsenal won since SAF & Wenger would be a success for us
- For them? that decade+ has been an unmitigated disaster, 20 years of almost total dominance tinkled away, also rans, the fact that they seem slightly more together in this season doesn't change the fact that they have been terribly mismanaged and failed to plan/adjust/whatever from SAF & Wenger

 

[Finney Is Back]

Context matters

- The trophies United and Arsenal won since SAF & Wenger would be a success for us
- For them? that decade+ has been an unmitigated disaster, 20 years of almost total dominance tinkled away, also rans, the fact that they seem slightly more together in this season doesn't change the fact that they have been terribly mismanaged and failed to plan/adjust/whatever from SAF & Wenger

Yep.... and why is that?... Because they have typically always operated wage levels in excess of ours and therefore been able to have squads containing more quality than ours. It allows them to win trophies even when being considered poor by their former standards.

 

[Lemonade Money]

Happened more recently as well with Mane and Wjnaldum as good examples. Players that Pochettino wanted and fitted into the sort of range of transfer fee our club was prepared to spend but we were not prepared to pay Champions League level wages (despite actually being in the Champions League!)

This also happens the other way round, see Dele and Richarlison off the top of my head, but don't let your agenda get in the way a chance to slag off someone who has devoted their life to THFC. If only Levy's dad was an agent, he'd know everything!

 

[Bishop]

This also happens the other way round, see Dele and Richarlison off the top of my head, but don't let your agenda get in the way a chance to slag off someone who has devoted their life to THFC. If only Levy's dad was an agent, he'd know everything!

I'm not really sure I understand this. Are you saying Dele and Richarlison were paid CL level wages despite not being CL players or something?

Can you explain your point please, it's not really clear

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[Raziel]

Yep.... and why is that?... Because they have typically always operated wage levels in excess of ours and therefore been able to have squads containing more quality than ours. It allows them to win trophies even when being considered poor by their former standards.

I really have no idea what point you are trying to make

- Madrid spends more money than us, they win more, so does probably 9-10 clubs in world football, zero argument (we know our model does not help us win)
- We kind of agreed wages matter, my point was it's not really 1+1 absolutely equals 2, highlighting those two clubs
- You are doubling down on those two clubs whose return on spend is fudging terrible (United has spent the same/more amount as City in the last decade, on gross, net and wages), in that time City has won 14 trophies including PL multiple times, United? 3? a couple of domestic cups and a Europa league.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I really have no idea what point you are trying to make

- Madrid spends more money than us, they win more, so does probably 9-10 clubs in world football, zero argument (we know our model does not help us win)
- We kind of agreed wages matter, my point was it's not really 1+1 absolutely equals 2, highlighting those two clubs
- You are doubling down on those two clubs whose return on spend is fudging terrible (United has spent the same/more amount as City in the last decade, on gross, net and wages), in that time City has won 14 trophies including PL multiple times, United? 3? a couple of domestic cups and a Europa league.

I wasn't really doubling down. I was merely stating that even in their fallow periods post Wenger and Ferguson those two clubs have still managed to win major trophies unlike ourselves in that same sort of period, perhaps that is because those clubs' larger wage bill allowed them to carry a bigger, better squad which is ultimately important especially later in the season. As an example here - if we had lifted the 45% of turnover wage cap and brought in Wjinaldum and Mane instead of Sissoko and Nkoudou/Njie then I think we probably would've increased our likelihood of winning a trophy a two. All subjective of course.

 

[alekaras]

I certainly agree we played well vs Wolves.

However, i want to delve into this Stellini vs Conte narrative: what evidence do we have that not making changes to react early enough was because of Conte instead of Stellini? And what evidence do we have that the players started brightly because of Stellini instead of Conte?

How are you drawing the lines here and on what basis/evidence are you using to do so?

I said probably starting brightly had to do with Stellini. And I'm basing it on the fact that Conte didn't give the team talk via Zoom, but rather Stellini did. Given how abrasive Conte can be, I wouldn't be surprised if the softer approach of Stellini made a difference (and even if Conte did give the team talk over Zoom, it's different than having him in your face and Stellini still had the last word with the players). Where we lost our momentum was in the second half after a number of changes that Wolves made that overloaded the midfield. In all likelihood Conte was calling the shots as far as subs were concerned, so the fact we didn't react to Wolves' changes is probably down to him. I may be wrong, but I don't think that what I outlined is much of a stretch.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I said probably starting brightly had to do with Stellini. And I'm basing it on the fact that Conte didn't give the team talk via Zoom, but rather Stellini did. Given how abrasive Conte can be, I wouldn't be surprised if the softer approach of Stellini made a difference (and even if Conte did give the team talk over Zoom, it's different than having him in your face and Stellini still had the last word with the players). Where we lost our momentum was in the second half after a number of changes that Wolves made that overloaded the midfield. In all likelihood Conte was calling the shots as far as subs were concerned, so the fact we didn't react to Wolves' changes is probably down to him. I may be wrong, but I don't think that what I outlined is much of a stretch.

Not sure I see the latter part of it that way. Surely it would be Stellini actually at the game who should be spotting Wolves' tactical changes and making the decisions on our shape to counter that?

 

[billyiddo]

Sissoko was paid the same money that Wijnaldum was on at Liverpool apparently, 90k or something