The Football.....

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Dreadful result.🤬
Even with only ten games left I’ll take on a new manager just to try to motivate the team even though they shouldn’t need motivating.
I’d take either Potter or Rodgers but I can’t see that happening and I don’t see Sullivan having the balls to get rid of Moyes.

 

[Dave7]

My 1

Im not a Chelsea fan but this is a joke right?

My 1st though was its a late April fools joke.
BUT......
Apparently they are still paying his wages of €85K per week. So, depending on the deal Chelsea get a free manager till the end of the season.

 

[cisamcgu]

My 1

My 1st though was its a late April fools joke.
BUT......
Apparently they are still paying his wages of €85K per week. So, depending on the deal Chelsea get a free manager till the end of the season.

I think that was for the 20/21 season, and it ended at the end of that season, after he was sacked

 

[Dave7]

I think that was for the 20/21 season, and it ended at the end of that season, after he was sacked

Thanks.
I will double check as the short article led me to believe it was ongoing.

 

[T4tomo]

Watford might have had more… 18 apparently in 10 years

I wasn't far off with my guess....

or become a Watford and change your manager twice a season.

 

[AndyRM]

I honestly don't get why owners think that constantly chopping and changing managers is a good idea.

Or managers, like ours (McInnes) who think that playing different formations and players every week is wise. I think we've played the same team and formation twice consecutively this season, mystifying.

 

[cisamcgu]

I honestly don't get why owners think that constantly chopping and changing managers is a good idea.

Or managers, like ours (McInnes) who think that playing different formations and players every week is wise. I think we've played the same team and formation twice consecutively this season, mystifying.

I think it is because the owner cannot sack a player, otherwise they just sit on the sidelines and still cost tens of thousand pounds a week. Also, a player that has been "sacked" like that will not be as attractive to other teams and will therefore represent a "capital loss" to the club when they sell them.

Sacking a manager is easy in comparison.

But I may be completely wrong

 

[Dave7]

I think that was for the 20/21 season, and it ended at the end of that season, after he was sacked

Just found another article which more or less backs up your comment.
Thanks

 

[Scaleyback]

I honestly don't get why owners think that constantly chopping and changing managers is a good idea.

Or managers, like ours (McInnes) who think that playing different formations and players every week is wise. I think we've played the same team and formation twice consecutively this season, mystifying.

Managers (and their agents) want everyone to believe ' it's all about managers ' when really it's all about players. Sure when a club changes a manager, results will improve, players start trying to impress ? However without a influx of new players the existing squad usually ' find their level '
Hence the constant turnover of managers not long in position. Of course there are exceptions, some will say Eddie Howe at Newcastle, but he has strengthened the squad significantly. Patrick Vieira at Crystal Palace got to spend £4,000,000 (chicken feed) on his squad after taking over from Roy Hodgson. The customary lift in results followed his takeover followed by the squad ' finding their level ' followed by the sacking of Vieira. And so the wheel keeps turning.

 

[Dayvo]

Watford might have had more… 18 apparently in 10 years

Watching a German cup match on Eurosport yesterday, as one does, the English commentater said that Stuttgart had used four different managers for the last four cup games! 😳
Couldn’t find anything in writing to confirm it, but that must be some kind of record in itself.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Useful source for checking eg manager turnover stat's by team etc. Some surprisingly high numbers from eg Y2000:

https://www.soccerbase.com/teams/team.sd?team_id=142

 

[vickster]

Arsenal pretty stable...other than the short tenure of the Brylcreamed Spaniard and a following caretaker stint for Freddie

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Arsenal pretty stable...other than the short tenure of the Brylcreamed Spaniard and a following caretaker stint for Freddie

Both AFC and MUFC stability skewed by the two obvious long-termers. Maybe the last we will ever see of that ilk. Although Klopp seems to be doing ok.

MUFC are also now playing catchup being on their 8th in the decade since SAF left.

On the continent the high turnover trend is similar: Bayern Munich 16, Barcelona 15, Real Madrid 17.

 

[vickster]

Both AFC and MUFC stability skewed by the two obvious long-termers. Maybe the last we will ever see of that ilk. Although Klopp seems to be doing ok.

MUFC are also now playing catchup being on their 8th in the decade since SAF left.

On the continent the high turnover trend is similar: Bayern Munich 16, Barcelona 15, Real Madrid 17.

Only 9 managers since 1986, GG was there for nearly 10 years too.
Not sure it really matters however!

 

[Scaleyback]

Based on my premise in #29,229 above there is some logic ? in the Chelsea's and Watfords's (and others) of this Premier league era in the continual rotation of managers. 'Familiarity breeds contempt' will degrade most managers is the usual pattern. New manager starts off with a clean slate, everyone thinks he's a 'good guy' as time passes and players get dropped etc, resentment builds, a gradual erosion as the manager 'loses the dressing room' Replace the manager at the opportune time and you 'cut off the head' of this simmering rebellion and gain the natural lift of a new face, new words and the bonus of players once again trying that little extra % to impress the new guy. And so the wheel keeps turning.