Contingency planning : When Ange is sacked, who should replace him?

[Lilbaz]

Imagine if Levy got held to the standards they now wand Munn held to, he'd have sacked himself 20ish years ago.

No. This is worse than 20 years ago and up until this point.
Someone posted the stats this is the worse loss ration in the league in our entire 143 year history.

I want new owners, but this is bad.

 

[parklane1]

If he had sacked him in October a lot of the fans would have been on Levy's case for doing so. What ever he does seems to be the wrong thing so he has clearly taken another route and people are not happy with this either, he is just going from the motion of every option he has and when he has done it all he can sit there and say, i done what you asked multiple times and i am still getting moaned at regardless of what i do.

To much sense in that for some to understand.

 

[Raziel]

Blimey, we wouldn't last long in our jobs if we got sacked after one bad (with hindsight) decision. Out of interest, what do you think is an acceptable success rate of choosing a manager and them coming good within 1.5 seasons?

It's not the one decision

- it's the decision to stick with the decision.
- This is very normal, you create a plan, you have a check in, goals/kpi's are red, you present a view of why
- Ultimately, the answer in those meetings is some variation of continue, stop, change, etc.
- In this case we chose continue, and it was the wrong call (so now it's two bad decisions), and considering there was probably more than one review, it's likely 3 or 4 bad calls.

Conte, Jose, Ange all had a better first season than 2nd, so the idea of judging after 15/18 months doesn't seem to have a lot of merit, especially interesting where hindsight probably showed Ange wasn't going to improve out of first season.

This is classic, risk/reward stuff, you don't get paid lots of money with no risk. I've spent 20+ years in roles where every single year, if you don't make your objective, high chance of being fired, regardless of previous year's results.

If he had sacked him in October a lot of the fans would have been on Levy's case for doing so. What ever he does seems to be the wrong thing so he has clearly taken another route and people are not happy with this either, he is just going from the motion of every option he has and when he has done it all he can sit there and say, i done what you asked multiple times and i am still getting moaned at regardless of what i do.

Yes, but that's part of what he is paid to do, make tough calls regardless of popular opinion.

- If we had sacked Ange in Oct - Dec, and the we were now in 6th-8th and with a better chance in cup, no one would give brick, and fans would have moved on.

I'm usually seen as a Levy defender, this is actually something I see as one of his bigger fudgeups, one of his better attributes has been willing to correct quickly. There is no reasonable explanation to Ange still being in a job, and if Munn is some part of that, and he pushed to stay course, he's got to be accountable as well. Levy as always, has to focus now on getting the next one right (with the help of the people he has brought in)

 

[Legohamster]

Fans demanded levy step back from football decisions.
Seems he did.

Still want new owners. The whole mentality and perception of the club need to change.

Some fans need to change their mentality aswell though. If it's raining it's not levy tinkling on you.

Yes, I don't quite get the hate for Levy over Ange, he's taking guidance from Munn, the question is if Levy will trust him again when he's got it so wrong

 

[parklane1]

Yes, I don't quite get the hate for Levy over Ange, he's taking guidance from Munn, the question is if Levy will trust him again when he's got it so wrong

No, No, do you not know EVERYTHING is Levys fault.

 

[Trixster]

The next manager won't, because backing Ange showed everyone that giving a manager who is poor, or in an extended death spiral changes nothing. Hindsight says, Nov/Dec would have been par for course and the right decision.

My expectation is Ange goes, highly likely Munn goes with him, new manager has 18 months to get it right.

So you're assuming the next manager will be just as poor then?

Backing a poor manager (for this league) and backing a new manager who hasn't proven to be poor are not the same thing. If the new one hits a slump due to w/e reason, provided they show a willingness to learn, adjust, a plan B, and the humility to change what clearly isn’t working ""It's what we do mate"", ""It's how we play"" - IF we get that, they deserve time imo.

 

[Lemonade Money]

I'm usually seen as a Levy defender, this is actually something I see as one of his bigger fudgeups, one of his better attributes has been willing to correct quickly. There is no reasonable explanation to Ange still being in a job, and if Munn is some part of that, and he pushed to stay course, he's got to be accountable as well. Levy as always, has to focus now on getting the next one right (with the help of the people he has brought in)

You realise you need to give someone time to implement their ideas? You do know some players take a season to acclimatise to their new club? You're well aware of our injury list this season? We don't really know what's going on behind closed doors, but from the little we know, you are 100% certain Munn's the one to blame? I'm not saying he should go, or he should stay, I just don't know how you can be so certain. Put it this way, if Levy come to you and said 'I want you to come into the club, shadow Munn, look at the books, and tell us if we should sack him or not', would your response be 'I don't need to, I already know the answer'?

 

[Muttley]

Yes, I don't quite get the hate for Levy over Ange, he's taking guidance from Munn, the question is if Levy will trust him again when he's got it so wrong

But we don't really know the process for the hiring of Ange right?

I think we saw Munn on some sort of gardening leave from his prior job before being able to start his new job. We assumed he was in cahoots with his new employer before day 1 on the hiring of a key role. I still think that was probably the case, but don't know who else had a major say in the hiring.

The way I prefer to think about it is something else Munn said (which I can never remember properly). He basically said that he does what needs to do to create a place for his reports to succeed in their roles. He removes obstacles and gives them a platform to do well. I always interpreted that as Munn waiting for Ange to have everything in place before being totally measured. That means things like the medical team overview, the new players in the squad and of course consideration for the massive injury list and the fatigue it created.

If I've read the tea-leaves correctly, Munn has now seen Ange in those conditions he talked about and therefore has to move him on.

 

[Legohamster]

But we don't really know the process for the hiring of Ange right?

I think we saw Munn on some sort of gardening leave from his prior job before being able to start his new job. We assumed he was in cahoots with his new employer before day 1 on the hiring of a key role. I still think that was probably the case, but don't know who else had a major say in the hiring.

The way I prefer to think about it is something else Munn said (which I can never remember properly). He basically said that he does what needs to do to create a place for his reports to succeed in their roles. He removes obstacles and gives them a platform to do well. I always interpreted that as Munn waiting for Ange to have everything in place before being totally measured. That means things like the medical team overview, the new players in the squad and of course consideration for the massive injury list and the fatigue it created.

If I've read the tea-leaves correctly, Munn has now seen Ange in those conditions he talked about and therefore has to move him on.

I think we can safely assume Munn and Levy had chats over the manager without technically being employed at that point, in the same way Paratici was "banned" from football

That is a fair point in seeing Ange in those conditions, I do however think some at the club more than likely had concerns as early as last season, I guess they hoped he would adapt and look to improve himself as he got more of his players in - Solanke etc

I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the Munn/Levy conversations over Ange

 

[Robspur12]

Blimey, we wouldn't last long in our jobs if we got sacked after one bad (with hindsight) decision. Out of interest, what do you think is an acceptable success rate of choosing a manager and them coming good within 1.5 seasons?

It's been a catastrophic decision in terms of money lost and the club being able to attract decent players in the immediate future due to the likely failure to get Champions League football. He's also sat by while this has happened in front of him rather than taking decisive action. If I lost the amount of money for my firm that we are likely to lose, yeah I think I would be worried about my job.

 

[Muttley]

It's been a catastrophic decision in terms of money lost and the club being able to attract decent players in the immediate future due to the likely failure to get Champions League football. He's also sat by while this has happened in front of him rather than taking decisive action. If I lost the amount of money for my firm that we are likely to lose, yeah I think I would be worried about my job.

lol - you need to work on your narratives at work then.

You gotta admire Ange for saying things like taking the team from 8th to 5th when we're languishing in 15th. Then following it up a week or so later with the logical argument that having one bad season every 3 or 4 seasons should be acceptable, knowing he's only in his second season.

I actually think our ex Mayor of London and UK Prime Minister would be proud of some of Ange's word smithing.

 

[thfcsteff]

It's been a catastrophic decision in terms of money lost and the club being able to attract decent players in the immediate future due to the likely failure to get Champions League football. He's also sat by while this has happened in front of him rather than taking decisive action. If I lost the amount of money for my firm that we are likely to lose, yeah I think I would be worried about my job.

Curiously, the single success in that regard this season has been the fast-track development of Bergvall and Gray, along with the actual development of Spence. Add to them the (admittedly too early) integration of Moore, and there's probably three players right there who somewhat mitigate the need for a few incomings. There have to be several aspects to Munn's lack of performance which have contributed to his wobbly stock. Changing the medical staff in the summer maybe? Too young? Failing to connect the dots with Angeball versus what a medical staff might need to be? I'd guess that he has made mistakes. Christ, there have been so many all over the place haven't there!!!

 

[Raziel]

You realise you need to give someone time to implement their ideas? You do know some players take a season to acclimatise to their new club? You're well aware of our injury list this season? We don't really know what's going on behind closed doors, but from the little we know, you are 100% certain Munn's the one to blame? I'm not saying he should go, or he should stay, I just don't know how you can be so certain. Put it this way, if Levy come to you and said 'I want you to come into the club, shadow Munn, look at the books, and tell us if we should sack him or not', would your response be 'I don't need to, I already know the answer'?

Never said that mate, what I did say is

- Ultimately he now has the title of all things football
- We have deviated from norm (any other manager in Levy's tenure would have been out in Oct)
- Us sticking with Ange, had to have been supported by Munn (if not directly proposed)

^^^ none of that is speculation. What I added, is based on my own experience, those things would usually end up with Munn being in a very difficult position.

Curiously, the single success in that regard this season has been the fast-track development of Bergvall and Gray, along with the actual development of Spence. Add to them the (admittedly too early) integration of Moore, and there's probably three players right there who somewhat mitigate the need for a few incomings. There have to be several aspects to Munn's lack of performance which have contributed to his wobbly stock. Changing the medical staff in the summer maybe? Too young? Failing to connect the dots with Angeball versus what a medical staff might need to be? I'd guess that he has made mistakes. Christ, there have been so many all over the place haven't there!!!

Yes, the positives have been

- Gray, Bergvall probably being a year or two ahead now of original development plans
- Spence basically being a "free/new" signing instead of a commercial write off
- Kinsky & Danso adding some badly needed depth
- Keeley, Donley, Yang all having good/productive loans with extensive play time
- Probably a view that adding one/two youth players is doable (Vuskovich)
- Dreaded squad refresh almost done

The negatives

- Manager (just a mistake now)
- Medical team
- Next season highly likely to have no European football
- A few players that are neither here nor there (not brick, but are they really the long term answer)

The problem for me is not the mistakes, it's the failure to correct them quickly

Now I will caveat all of this with, new CEO, talk of Paratici returning, ongoing talk of investors, is the delays in decisions due to expected other input? none of us know ..

 

[Muttley]

Yes, the positives have been

- Gray, Bergvall probably being a year or two ahead now of original development plans
- Spence basically being a "free/new" signing instead of a commercial write off
- Kinsky & Danso adding some badly needed depth
- Keeley, Donley, Yang all having good/productive loans with extensive play time
- Probably a view that adding one/two youth players is doable (Vuskovich)
- Dreaded squad refresh almost done

The negatives

- Manager (just a mistake now)
- Medical team
- Next season highly likely to have no European football
- A few players that are neither here nor there (not brick, but are they really the long term answer)

The problem for me is not the mistakes, it's the failure to correct them quickly

Now I will caveat all of this with, new CEO, talk of Paratici returning, ongoing talk of investors, is the delays in decisions due to expected other input? none of us know ..

Actually, it is great to see the positives especially the development (and exposure) of some of the younger players.

The one you obviously forgot is winning the EL

 

[Baleforce]

Blimey, we wouldn't last long in our jobs if we got sacked after one bad (with hindsight) decision. Out of interest, what do you think is an acceptable success rate of choosing a manager and them coming good within 1.5 seasons?

Most of us don’t have jobs this important, Ange’s year is up there with Liz Truss crashing the economy, you only get to fudge up that badly once.

 

[Muttley]

Most of us don’t have jobs this important, Ange’s year is up there with Liz Truss crashing the economy, you only get to fudge up that badly once.

Unless your name is Donald

 

[thfcsteff]

Never said that mate, what I did say is

- Ultimately he now has the title of all things football
- We have deviated from norm (any other manager in Levy's tenure would have been out in Oct)
- Us sticking with Ange, had to have been supported by Munn (if not directly proposed)

^^^ none of that is speculation. What I added, is based on my own experience, those things would usually end up with Munn being in a very difficult position.



Yes, the positives have been

- Gray, Bergvall probably being a year or two ahead now of original development plans
- Spence basically being a "free/new" signing instead of a commercial write off
- Kinsky & Danso adding some badly needed depth
- Keeley, Donley, Yang all having good/productive loans with extensive play time
- Probably a view that adding one/two youth players is doable (Vuskovich)
- Dreaded squad refresh almost done

The negatives

- Manager (just a mistake now)
- Medical team
- Next season highly likely to have no European football
- A few players that are neither here nor there (not brick, but are they really the long term answer)

The problem for me is not the mistakes, it's the failure to correct them quickly

Now I will caveat all of this with, new CEO, talk of Paratici returning, ongoing talk of investors, is the delays in decisions due to expected other input? none of us know ..

I hate assumptions these days, but if I was going to have a couple, it'd be in the old 'we're going to go in another direction with this pool of players' model. The one good thing is that these players are, for the most part, modifiable to a slightly more controlled style of play.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Fall guy so you didn't have to think about Levy.

I don't think that's possible.

 

[Gazza]

If he had sacked him in October a lot of the fans would have been on Levy's case for doing so. What ever he does seems to be the wrong thing so he has clearly taken another route and people are not happy with this either, he is just going from the motion of every option he has and when he has done it all he can sit there and say, i done what you asked multiple times and i am still getting moaned at regardless of what i do.

When you consistently fail to deliver it’s always going to get people looking at form and history. Unfortunately this will be Levi’s fault as he is also part of the abject failures at this club.

 

[Gazza]

No, No, do you not know EVERYTHING is Levys fault.

Stop being so far right/left. There should be balance. But certainly left is accumulating a lot of mess for bad form and decisions made.