Are English managers useless ...

[FellTop]

Graham Potter seems to be the next outstanding coach. Won't be popular as he is at Brighton but tactically excellent and plays good football

I am a fan of his. His sides are so good to watch and like you say tactically he is smart. I remember when his Ostersund side played in Europe they got loads of credit and rightly so, but what he had done in the seasons before was even more impressive. If I was Spurs or Everton I wouldnt look beyond him - a better bet than the ex Wolves manager in my opinion but seemingly in the press he is the one everyone touts.

 

[FellTop]

In years gone by we exported English managers to Europe's top clubs. Bobby Robson is lauded by some of these modern 'elite' managers. Ronaldo said he was the greatest coach be ever had. Mourhino says he was the greatest manager he has ever seen. His record overseas was extraordinary. He started in a time though when the Cobbolds trusted him at Ipswich and he had time to build. It was also a time when money was not so crucial. He got a chance to learn and develop.

It wasnt just Robson. Venables did well overseas. Roy Hodgson also has a winners record in Europe. Go beyond English and Toshack had a great record.

Maybe there is a trend toward overseas coaches and you clearly have some good ones like Tuchel, Guardiola, Klopp. Whether in years to come we will see Gerrard, Potter, Howe, Lampard at the top end of the merry go round, time will tell. It will require the sort of opportunities and time afforded to Tuchel and Klopp for them to progress and learn their craft. The English league doesnt seem to give people time anymore (Lampard at Chelsea) so their chance to learn is not as great. Perhaps then Potter and Gerrard going to different countries will help them, who knows. One thing I do believe is that there is no fundamental difference between Klopp and Gerrard, or Potter and Tuchel, in terms of mentality or ability, that would prevent the english coaches achieving trophy success in years to come. As with all great managers they need a chance to learn to be great.

 

[Smug in Boots]

So how do you win the first?

Gerard is showing what is possible.

Most owners at the top make vanity appointments.

That's the bit I struggle with tbh, I don't know why they'd do that. Surely Potter would be much cheaper than Pep so there's an obvious immediate saving. If Pep left this summer which English manager would you think could do a similar job.

It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely interested.

 

[FellTop]

That's the bit I struggle with tbh, I don't know why they'd do that. Surely Potter would be much cheaper than Pep so there's an obvious immediate saving. If Pep left this summer which English manager would you think could do a similar job.

It's not a trick question, I'm genuinely interested.

I am not sure any English manager could do a similar job. Pep has had years more experience to learn and develop. Same as Klopp and Tuchel. I think they are all better now than any English manager. Give Potter another 4 or 5 years in the premier and maybe he could achieve what they are all doing, but I do think that is potentially the only difference - experience.

When I say vanity appointments I mean the likes of Mourinho at Tottenham who looks to be on the way down. Ancelloti at Everton was another that wasnt well thought through. Arteta at Arsenal would be another. I would fancy Potter to a better job than the three of them have done last season.

The question I would ask is who should be next Spurs or Everton manager. Conte seems favourite at Spurs. Nuno at Everton. I can see the argument for Conte but I would have doubts he will fit the Tottenham way for long. I cant see the argument for Nuno though. Potter at Everton for 3 or 4 years could be great for both parties, whether the owner at Everton thinks that way I dont know...

 

[The Norton Cat]

Its a perception thing which is deeply rooted in the history of the game. We codified the game and were so sure of our preeminence that we never bothered to develop and didn't even bother to join FIFA. Tactics? Tactics were for Johnny Foreigner. He was too weak and too scared to play the game properly so he had to use tactics, which was tantamount to cheating. This view continued into the 1930s and 40s and English managers who wanted to employ tactics were laughed at. But some of them went abroad and learnt from the foreigners who had taken our game and improved it. People like Arthur Rowe came back in the 1950s and won the title with Spurs using the 'push and run' approach. Slightly later Vic Buckingham did the same thing. They'd learnt from the so called Danubian School which, through the Magical Magyars of 1953, visited upon England their first major trouncing by a non-British side. Ironically, the Danubian School was influenced by other British coaches who had gone abroad taking with them ideas spawned by the notion of passing the football, first carried out by Queens Park of Glasgow. As @FellTop says, many foreign coaches, particularly Guardiola and Mourinho were influenced by people like Bobby Robson but its possible to trace a line back from Guardiola, through Robson, through Buckingham, through the Danubian School, right back to Queens Park.

However, despite this, I am firmly of the opinion that English coaches are still looked on with scorn. We now want to embrace innovation and and a highly tactical, technical approach but firmly believe only foreigners can do it. Just look at how many of even our fans respond to Lee Johnson when he talks about the technicalities of the game. "He thinks he's too clever", "he talks in jargon" etc. If his name was Leo Giovannifils, everyone would lap it up.

So, in my opinion we're all stuck in the past. There are lots of great English/British coaches but fans/owners think a foreigner is better. We all despise David Moyes but I know for a fact that amongst his colleagues, his reputation is second to none. English managers are just as good as anyone else but we don't expect them to be and they're not fashionable.

 

[Smug in Boots]

Its a perception thing which is deeply rooted in the history of the game. We codified the game and were so sure of our preeminence that we never bothered to develop and didn't even bother to join FIFA. Tactics? Tactics were for Johnny Foreigner. He was too weak and too scared to play the game properly so he had to use tactics, which was tantamount to cheating. This view continued into the 1930s and 40s and English managers who wanted to employ tactics were laughed at. But some of them went abroad and learnt from the foreigners who had taken our game and improved it. People like Arthur Rowe came back in the 1950s and won the title with Spurs using the 'push and run' approach. Slightly later Vic Buckingham did the same thing. They'd learnt from the so called Danubian School which, through the Magical Magyars of 1953, visited upon England their first major trouncing by a non-British side. Ironically, the Danubian School was influenced by other British coaches who had gone abroad taking with them ideas spawned by the notion of passing the football, first carried out by Queens Park of Glasgow. As @FellTop says, many foreign coaches, particularly Guardiola and Mourinho were influenced by people like Bobby Robson but its possible to trace a line back from Guardiola, through Robson, through Buckingham, through the Danubian School, right back to Queens Park.

However, despite this, I am firmly of the opinion that English coaches are still looked on with scorn. We now want to embrace innovation and and a highly tactical, technical approach but firmly believe only foreigners can do it. Just look at how many of even our fans respond to Lee Johnson when he talks about the technicalities of the game. "He thinks he's too clever", "he talks in jargon" etc. If his name was Leo Giovannifils, everyone would lap it up.

So, in my opinion we're all stuck in the past. There are lots of great English/British coaches but fans/owners think a foreigner is better. We all despise David Moyes but I know for a fact that amongst his colleagues, his reputation is second to none. English managers are just as good as anyone else but we don't expect them to be and their not fashionable.

There's also been the notion that English managers are more interested in lining their pockets, by any means, while neglecting the long term health of the club. From Redknapp through Venables to Allardyce there's been allegations of financial irregularities and brown envelopes.

Even going further back Brian Clough, Don Revie, etc, were rumoured to have been fond of a bit of cash flowing their way.

If this idea persists it may explain why some clubs are wary.

 

[FellTop]

Its a perception thing which is deeply rooted in the history of the game. We codified the game and were so sure of our preeminence that we never bothered to develop and didn't even bother to join FIFA. Tactics? Tactics were for Johnny Foreigner. He was too weak and too scared to play the game properly so he had to use tactics, which was tantamount to cheating. This view continued into the 1930s and 40s and English managers who wanted to employ tactics were laughed at. But some of them went abroad and learnt from the foreigners who had taken our game and improved it. People like Arthur Rowe came back in the 1950s and won the title with Spurs using the 'push and run' approach. Slightly later Vic Buckingham did the same thing. They'd learnt from the so called Danubian School which, through the Magical Magyars of 1953, visited upon England their first major trouncing by a non-British side. Ironically, the Danubian School was influenced by other British coaches who had gone abroad taking with them ideas spawned by the notion of passing the football, first carried out by Queens Park of Glasgow. As @FellTop says, many foreign coaches, particularly Guardiola and Mourinho were influenced by people like Bobby Robson but its possible to trace a line back from Guardiola, through Robson, through Buckingham, through the Danubian School, right back to Queens Park.

However, despite this, I am firmly of the opinion that English coaches are still looked on with scorn. We now want to embrace innovation and and a highly tactical, technical approach but firmly believe only foreigners can do it. Just look at how many of even our fans respond to Lee Johnson when he talks about the technicalities of the game. "He thinks he's too clever", "he talks in jargon" etc. If his name was Leo Giovannifils, everyone would lap it up.

So, in my opinion we're all stuck in the past. There are lots of great English/British coaches but fans/owners think a foreigner is better. We all despise David Moyes but I know for a fact that amongst his colleagues, his reputation is second to none. English managers are just as good as anyone else but we don't expect them to be and they're not fashionable.

Great post and insight.

I have done my coaching badges with the FA. I did them again post the England DNA project which is now considered leading. The depth it goes to now is excellent and based on the best of European models (France which ironically was influenced to some extent by Hoddle), Holland, etc. However if you go back further the European coaching models were developed in response to English football. They decided they couldnt match up to the direct balls and big forwards we played to. The miles we ran and balls into the box were a problem for them. They responded with the creation of the technical player who could keep the ball and move it. We have now responded in kind and the youth level results show we are now in the ascendency again. Foden, Bellingham, Sancho are all examples of the way we now coach. My point in this rambling post is it can go in cycles and we have a better history, and hopefully future, than we sometimes think.

 

[Bigmackem]

David Moyes was as successful in Spain as what he was at SAFC , -disaster yet he ended up at West Ham and is now being linked with a return to Everton . Perhaps the North East is really a foreign country ?

 

[rb92]

English coaches have had success in other sports, notably cricket and rugby. There is a stigma that has developed in football since the advent of the glamourised Premier League against English coaches, for whatever reason they are seen as boring and not in tune with the modern game. Look at the stick Allardyce got at the end of the season about being a long ball merchant, he actually had to come out and say that none of his teams had ever played a long ball in his entire career. There is a perception that you have to hire a foreign coach to be successful.

 

[The Norton Cat]

English coaches have had success in other sports, notably cricket and rugby. There is a stigma that has developed in football since the advent of the glamourised Premier League against English coaches, for whatever reason they are seen as boring and not in tune with the modern game. Look at the stick Allardyce got at the end of the season about being a long ball merchant, he actually had to come out and say that none of his teams had ever played a long ball in his entire career. There is a perception that you have to hire a foreign coach to be successful.

He was telling a little bit of a fib there though. The game that came after, against West Ham, his West Brom side had consistently played long balls from deep in midfield for his wingers to run on to. And thats a little bit like he had us set up. What he wasn't doing was just playing long balls in to a big No. 9. Playing the ball long doesn't make him a bad coach though and it doesn't make for bad football. When Ruud Gullit first signed for Chelsea, commentators and fans were drooling over his ability to hit long passes to the feet of the forward players. If I remember correctly, Franck LeBouef used to do the same thing.
I think what Allardyce would really have liked to have said is, I'm a technically proficient coach and know exactly what I'm doing but you all dismiss me as some kind of caveman.

You're right about the perception that you have to hire a foreign coach to be successful. Jose Mourinho has been highly successful but one of his mantras is "he who has the ball has fear" and he'll instruct his teams to bypass midfield. That doesn't make for the beautiful football that we all imagine foreign coaches are going to bring. We expect that to be how British coaches approach things but compare that to how West Ham have played this season, under a British coach.

 

[Smug in Boots]

English coaches have had success in other sports, notably cricket and rugby. There is a stigma that has developed in football since the advent of the glamourised Premier League against English coaches, for whatever reason they are seen as boring and not in tune with the modern game. Look at the stick Allardyce got at the end of the season about being a long ball merchant, he actually had to come out and say that none of his teams had ever played a long ball in his entire career. There is a perception that you have to hire a foreign coach to be successful.

It's quite an anomaly that the three relegated managers, in the top English league, were three Englishmen who'd all been touted as the National manager. The 4th and 5th bottom were also English and have been mentioned in that regard.

To be honest i don't know why this is and am interested in what other people are saying.

 

[The Norton Cat]

It's quite an anomaly that the three relegated managers, in the top English league, were three Englishmen who'd all been touted as the National manager.

The 4th and 5th bottom were also English and have been mentioned in that regard.

To be honest i don't know why this is and am interested in what other people are saying.

You can be a top manager but, ultimately, the success that you have is reliant on the ability of your players. British coaches are unfashionable so its less common that they get jobs at the top clubs who can afford the top players. Or that's my conclusion anyway.

 

[FellTop]

It is interesting that 10 of the 20 prem clubs had english managers at some point this season. As has been said though the top 4 or 5 clubs seem to not trust english coaches. Brendan Rogers (not English I know) would be regarded ready for a top club again surely but seems to get overlooked.

When Chelsea appointed Lampard most people thought it was too soon but it would have been interesting to see what had happened if he had been given more time. I am pretty confident Tuchel is benefitting from some of the work Lampard did, particularly the likes of Mount and James. He is also getting value from the players Lampard brought in.

I wonder whether the culture at some clubs means they look at certain nationalities first. Wolves look like they are going for another Portugese manager and it is suggested that is because of a better fit to their squad, when compared to Lampard for example.

There are some really talented coaches that go under the radar a bit too. For example, Aaron Danks has just left his job as assistant with England U21 after being offered a position with Anderlecht and Vincent Kompany. He is very highly rated as a coach but whether he is a future head coach or manager remains to be seen. The talent is there but like anyone they need to create an opportunity.

 

[Smug in Boots]

You can be a top manager but, ultimately, the success that you have is reliant on the ability of your players. British coaches are unfashionable so its less common that they get jobs at the top clubs who can afford the top players. Or that's my conclusion anyway.

It's all quite puzzling to me.

Roy Hodgson was given the Liverpool job and brought in some terrible signings including one of their worst ever keepers.

He was backed, by the club, but lost at home to Northampton and only lasted about 30 games iirc.

He was dreadful in the 2014 World Cup and should've been sacked which would've spared us the shame of the 2016 Euros.

His so called 'international success' is all with clubs & competitions almost no one has heard of, nothing with Inter Milan.

Yet he's often put forward as an example of how English managers can succeed abroad.

 

[Smug in Boots]

It is interesting that 10 of the 20 prem clubs had english managers at some point this season. As has been said though the top 4 or 5 clubs seem to not trust english coaches. Brendan Rogers (not English I know) would be regarded ready for a top club again surely but seems to get overlooked.

When Chelsea appointed Lampard most people thought it was too soon but it would have been interesting to see what had happened if he had been given more time. I am pretty confident Tuchel is benefitting from some of the work Lampard did, particularly the likes of Mount and James. He is also getting value from the players Lampard brought in.

I wonder whether the culture at some clubs means they look at certain nationalities first. Wolves look like they are going for another Portugese manager and it is suggested that is because of a better fit to their squad, when compared to Lampard for example.

There are some really talented coaches that go under the radar a bit too. For example, Aaron Danks has just left his job as assistant with England U21 after being offered a position with Anderlecht and Vincent Kompany. He is very highly rated as a coach but whether he is a future head coach or manager remains to be seen. The talent is there but like anyone they need to create an opportunity.

You may be onto something.

At a time when the PL squads are rammed with foreign players it may be impractical to employ English managers ...

... the way Wolves are going they'll become the first club to have Portuguese as the official first language.

 

[FellTop]

It's all quite puzzling to me.

Roy Hodgson was given the Liverpool job and brought in some terrible signings including one of their worst ever keepers.

He was backed, by the club, but lost at home to Northampton and only lasted about 30 games iirc.

He was dreadful in the 2014 World Cup and should've been sacked which would've spared us the shame of the 2016 Euros.

His so called 'international success' is all with clubs & competitions almost no one has heard of, nothing with Inter Milan.

Yet he's often put forward as an example of how English managers can succeed abroad.

Might be a bit harsh on him, although I agree about his time with England.

Some of his success in Sweden was regarded as miraculous in that country. Lots of trophies, but also one with a 'minnow'. He is also considered to have transformed the Swedish game, along with his mentor Houghton.

At Inter he took over a team bottom and got them into Euro positions. They had been a pretty hopeless team when he arrived and he got them somewhere close to competing again.

He also got Switzerland on the map internationally.

Not saying he is Robson or Toshack but he had his moments in the sun. No doubt he will be remembered for England v Iceland, and perhaps that is fair enough.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Might be a bit harsh on him, although I agree about his time with England.

Some of his success in Sweden was regarded as miraculous in that country. Lots of trophies, but also one with a 'minnow'. He is also considered to have transformed the Swedish game, along with his mentor Houghton.

At Inter he took over a team bottom and got them into Euro positions. They had been a pretty hopeless team when he arrived and he got them somewhere close to competing again.

He also got Switzerland on the map internationally.

Not saying he is Robson or Toshack but he had his moments in the sun. No doubt he will be remembered for England v Iceland, and perhaps that is fair enough.

I agree with you, mate, he's respected enough on the continent to carry a bit of status in UEFA. Personally I think he should have been manager after Sven left instead of McLaren and that by the time he got the England job he was really only a short term appointment that got stretched out way too long, a bit like Ron Greenwood.

I don't think that there's any one particular reason why British managers and coaches are looked down on these days, more like a combination. Not being given a chance at bigger clubs because foreign coaches are seen as more glamorous is one. Impatient owners who want success as soon as possible chopping and changing managers regularly is another. Foreign ownership wanting a management or coaching set up that they're familiar with could be another factor. Foreign coaches because squads are full of overseas players can be another. Managers being written off after early set backs, which may not be their fault, and not being given another chance. Fear of failure meaning clubs go for a safe bet and on paper some foreign managers look better than British ones. Up and coming managers being ignored or dismissed as only any good in lower leagues, while a big name is parachuted in despite them maybe being past it or not a good fit. Younger managers only getting the job because the club is skint and can't afford a name, then being peddled when the club has some money because they aren't seen as ambitious enough or able to attract higher profile players. There's probably other reasons, and it would probably fall down to each individual clubs circumstances at any given time as to which one or ones applied, and would vary massively.

The thing to me is, it's not like all foreign managers are outstanding successes all the time. There have been plenty of duds and plenty who flopped, yet it does seem that they are more easily forgiven than British managers are. Look at Aitor Karanka. Yes, he got Boro promoted, but was sacked after an awful run of form before they were ultimately relegated and his times at both Forest and Birmingham have been disasters. But I wouldn't rule him out of getting another management job in Britain. Did Marco Silva really do enough to justify getting the Everton job, particularly when his reign at Watford ended with him being sacked with lousey form and performances? If Sheffield United honestly thought Chris Wilder was the man for them last time in the Championship, which he got them promoted from, why do they think Slavisa Jokanovic is now after a pretty unspectacular period in the ladt couple of years since getting Fulham promoted? Klopp has been a success at Liverpool and Farke has done well getting Norwich promoted twice (and relegated once), but Wagner ultimately failed at Huddersfield and his successor, Jan Siewert, failed so badly he's now forgotten about. Throw in Stendl and Magath and it shows that there's no guarantee that an overseas manager is going to be vastly superior to a home grown coach. I'm not dismissing foreign managers and in truth I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate, but it does feel as though home grown coaches have more to do to get a chance and are dismissed more easily and forgiven less readily than an overseas coaches are.