Got into yet another heated debate last night when I pointed out to a number football followers in the Freshy (albeit of RS persuasion!) that it now appears that to succeed as a manager you no longer need to have played the game at senior level!
I based that assertion on the fact that no less than FOUR leading managers of recent times certainly `had no medals` to show the boys! Both Mourinho and Chelsea new man, ABV, were Robson apprentices (merely interpreters, some say!) whilst Wenger gave up playing at 20 and Sven was said to be an embarrassment in shorts ? and later without them!
"How could any theorist have the understanding of a Kenny D?" I was asked ? and whilst my reply was a little inflammatory, it`s a difficult one to answer.
So what do my fellow contributors feel on the issue?
Could someone who has not played the game at senior level be the surprise successor to Moyes and have any hope of bringing that glory we all crave for?
Richard Dodd, Posted 25/06/2011 at 15:11:57
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 25/06/2011 at 15:40:04
2 Posted 25/06/2011 at 15:56:04
3 Posted 25/06/2011 at 15:57:44
The major coaching courses for the qualifications that managers need these days are in the summer, when the best players are either on international duty or having their only break of the year (as they get picked for every game during the season).
In theory, the right person could do better than Moyes with what we've got, but probably not much better. And would we get the right person?
4 Posted 25/06/2011 at 17:19:02
I think it will take something like a massive financial shock resulting in a collapse of tv revenues or something similar to give clubs like Everton more of a level playing field like it was in the 8os.
Assuming no rich benefactor turns up, I am more convinced than ever that EFCs future will revolve around the academy which I think the development of is the single best decision the board have made in the past 20 years.
5 Posted 25/06/2011 at 17:54:57
6 Posted 25/06/2011 at 17:42:45
They cant see past "King" Kenny (until he wins nothing!!).
I myself played at a decent level until a drunk driver demolished any chance of a full time pro career.
From that point I always firmly believed that the higher level you play the more understanding you get of the game and therfore leave it to the professionals.
However I now believe that all sports are getting more detailed and more scientific so it is less important to have played the game versus having the intelligence and character and understanding of the game to organise,manage and motivate a team.
Sometimes that ability manages to overcome not having the best players at your disposal but I have also always and still do maintain that the teams with the best players will usually win the most games.
Boas has yet to prove himself in the premier league and IMO will struggle to match Ancelloti who I do rate very highly and who has played the game at a decent level so it is arguable both ways and mature managers do have the most trophies to show off e.g. Fergie, Shankly, Paisley, Catterick, Kendall, Graham, Venables etc.
7 Posted 25/06/2011 at 18:26:03
8 Posted 25/06/2011 at 18:20:06
Yet another contender for Everton's new motto perhaps?
Look Richard don't be coy mate, if you fancy the job of replacing DM put forward your CV and best of luck to you.
However, your constant vitriolic attacks on the stewardship of BK may go against you.
9 Posted 25/06/2011 at 18:11:33
Does anyone think that maybe Ferguson would never have had the success at Manure over the years without the big money backing and the stature of the club attracting every capable player in the world. If he were so to speak suddenly find himself at the helm of West Ham could he get them back to the Prem.and into the top six with what little they have. I don't think so. Yes he managed to turn Manure's fortunes around all those years ago but he had a lot to draw on. Moyes on the other hand has won nothing but done a lot of good things over ten years at Goodison and the question is will we accept the lack of success much longer. I suggest that he will move on soon and possibly to Manure. Regarding being a good manager without having played at a high level well I think it is only necessary to be a good coach and having the respect of the players around you rather than having been a good player but once again available money is a big plus.
10 Posted 25/06/2011 at 18:47:34
Different sport, but a decent example none the less, in Australia the best rugby league (NRL) coach by far is Wayne Bennett. He played a bit of league in an inferior Queensland league when he was young, but has gone on to be the most successful coach in Australia. He has done this at multiple clubs, and as the NRL has salary caps, with very comparitive resources.
If the premier league had financial equality, it would be interesting to see if any "non players" gained success as managers.
But this is all conjecture anyway, money buys trophies these days, obviously you can tell the better managers from the crap ones, but shit managers at rich clubs have an obvious advantage.
11 Posted 25/06/2011 at 22:00:10
Yet he was a success in the 60's....
12 Posted 25/06/2011 at 22:05:26
13 Posted 25/06/2011 at 21:36:48
plus a deep interest in the game could, all things being equal, be a successful manager/coach.
Having loads of cash would certainly be helpful yet there must be an enormous dollar value on a well paid manager who has been in the job for ten years.
Over that time span from chilhood to manhood he is a major influence over the development of young players
What we see on the field for better or worse is the creation of such a manager.
SAF and the 'special one' had they a similar time span even with severe financial constraints would have more to show in the way of trophy's than our current incumbent.
14 Posted 25/06/2011 at 22:00:44
Some top quality players become top managers but imo its a completely different skill in managing a team and building a club.
There has always been top clubs in England with better resources than the rest, this just leads to bigger expectation at these clubs were the manager also has to be able to handle pressure if things are not going well.
I also believe that rarely the most successfull clubs rely on one man to run everything. The manager will have the final say on team selection and most things but other coaches who have a good understanding of football and bring qualities in other areas are not far behind forming a partneship.
15 Posted 25/06/2011 at 22:35:21
16 Posted 26/06/2011 at 06:09:11
Dave #5 and Trevor #12 I agree, Bertie Mee any one.
Most of the successful managers I have seen from the late 50's were Halfbacks, Stein, Docherty, Busby, Shankly, Paisley, Kendall. Fullbacks, Ramsey, Nicholson (?). Or rip shit and bust run through brickwall centre forwards Catterick, Clough, Ferguson.
Fancy Dan inside forwards were and are very thin on the ground.
The only 2 I can think of would be Revie, who was a deep-lying centre forward, but not quite a fancy dan more of a deep thinker; And George Graham. Who both turned out teams of Prussian efficiency and nasty to boot.
Those who can, do ( or did ) those who can't, teach ( or coach )
So Doddy you may well be right
17 Posted 26/06/2011 at 09:05:35
18 Posted 26/06/2011 at 09:53:43
He was awful and played in an awful side.....
Johnny Carey who was a brilliant fullback and twice won footballer of the year actually signed most of the EFC greats and Catterick added Tony Kay and brought in Royle to oust Young (he got a kicking for it)....
As I said before Catterick was not a players manager....he was a suit and tie manager..
19 Posted 26/06/2011 at 10:32:34
20 Posted 26/06/2011 at 11:01:54
21 Posted 26/06/2011 at 15:55:14
22 Posted 26/06/2011 at 16:04:00
Jimmy Gabriel's sister once told me most of the players hated Catterick because he was such a hard nut but you can't argue with the style of football and the trophies he won as manager.
A lot of supporters gave credence to John Carey for building the early 60's team but you can't argue that the '66 and '70 teams were Catterick's.
23 Posted 26/06/2011 at 16:34:06
Venables was never a prolific goal socrer by any stretch of the imagination. I agree about HK and Clough.
24 Posted 26/06/2011 at 17:40:31
You've got all the qualities our chairman, who you hold in such regard, looks for .......Yes Mr K , No Mr K, whatever you say Mr K !
Why doesn't it surprise me that you hang around with 'redshites' ?
25 Posted 27/06/2011 at 10:25:10
IMO Rob Keys has the right of it. You can't teach instinct eg the instinct that Cahill has and Latchford Had of being in the right place in the right time, nor being brave enough to put your head or into that right place, which maybe 6 inches and a fraction of a second infront of some ones boot ( top man Osman Vs City ).
The rest of it is just God given, the reflexes and the co-ordination, the skill.
Some have the skill of actually doing it and don't even know how they do it, they just do it and some can't even understand why others can't, just chip the ball over the keeper and into the top corner, simple.
Some of us mere mortals learn over time what you do do and what you don't do, this is the percentages game and then you hope that some player(s) on an instinctive level conjour up that something extra to increase your percentage and if they are in Royal Blue we call it School of Science, aka in new money (credit to Mr Buckley ) joined up footy
Being able to do it in your twenties means nothing, if you don't know just what and how to put it accross when your playing days are over or, as you say for Harry, never really arrived.
So the day of the never played at any meaningful, say semi pro, or even lower could be on it's way.
Woo Hoo, thats me that is, giz a job. I can do that job
26 Posted 27/06/2011 at 13:00:09
Some excellent players turn out to be excellent managers as well, but a more common story is that a manager is appointed based on his playing reputation, and isn't actually any good.
I don't really understand why people think a manager had to have been a good player. Its a fairly simple point that those for whom things come easily can't necessarily explain why, whereas those who struggled or even failed have had to analyse the reasons, so will have far more of an insight. (I've just scanned up and seen this point made by Rob, well I second it.)
27 Posted 28/06/2011 at 12:17:25
Pick the best playeras available for each position.
Tell them to score 1 more than the opposition
Piss easy this manager lark
28 Posted 29/06/2011 at 03:52:35
IMHO management is exactly what it says on the tin: to manage people, to get the job done through people. So management is all about creating an environment and motivating the people (here your overrated overpaid mercs) to pull in the same direction, which should be winning something for the club.
It is also some ways akin to Project Management, where each season can be regarded as a project, you have a definate start date and end date, and hope to achieve as much deliverables within the time frame. You have resources (in Everton's case lack of) and need to manage them accordingly.
But having some experience in actually playing the game is required otherwise the manager cannot relate to the plight of the players, and the players will not respect the manager. It allows the manager to play the empathy card with the players.
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.