That's a crazy decision. Unless something has went on in the background of course. They've started ok, are finally developing young players which Stoke haven't done for a long time and they spent a fortune getting him out of Plymouth. Mental.
That club is absolute chaos. When we look back at it, the way they took Neil and pandered to him (allowing him to appoint the whole football structure at the club) shows that they were going completely down the wrong route - despite what the whiners in our fanbase said at the time. If we're charitable about this move I guess we could say that this is their current DoF moving on a coach he didn't appoint and making space for his own man. Still looks chaotic though.
About to appoint Norwich first team coach apparently. Now we get to watch a traditionally working class northern area grapple with their team in red and white putting a non-traditional football structure in place based on young players and 'modern' technical coaching structure of often unknowns. Should be fun
Surely with an appointment like this you need to give them pre season. Could've given him the 2 weeks in the international break also. Can't see this ending well.
I'm trying to think back to the Rohl and Cifuentes appointments. Both hit the ballpark that this one would (more DR than MC) but I wonder if the circumstances are perhaps different. My guess is that SWFC and QPR fanbases had all but given themselves up to relegation - even at that early stage. That gives an amount of freedom I think. Not sure Stoke are quite in that position. Also the money their owners spend on the club creates a level of expectation that could make things toxic if it doesn't start well - similar to what would have happened here if RLB hadn't got us off to a flyer. Still might with our lot tbf
I dont understand this decision. Mind you I often dont when it comes to clubs and their decision making around sacking coaches. Seems like the last thing clubs judge coaches on these days is progression. You are either have to be mad or desperate to take the majority of jobs on imo. Or you just love the game more than the vast majority.
It works both ways. Some coaches demand commitment, loyalty and teamwork ... ... then jump ship at the first sign of cash or jumping a division.
Moving for money or promotion is part of most career paths. Being sacked for performing well isnt. I dont blame most coaches in the modern game tbh. They know barring a minority of clubs there is no loyalty to them at all.
He may have been sacked for punching the chairman for all we know. They had one attempt on target during the loss at Oxford, that's not performing well tbf.
Judging on one game isnt fair. Even if Oxford were rank no hopers it wouldnt be fair. I think they have started well overall and he seems to be trying to bring a better style of play. Stoke fans seem disappointed in the main. Spoke to one earlier who said it was ridiculous. The point is far wider than Stoke to be honest. We are a prime example of sacking coaches like they grow on trees recently. If owners keep making such rubbish appointments they are continually sacking them, maybe the owners themselves are part of the problem as they are incapable of making good footballing decisions...
I wasn't, it was just an example ... they only had two at home to West Brom. Besides anyone going to Stoke knows the situation there but they'll go for the money ... ... the fella from Norwich will go because it'll double his wages and guarantee a payout. I doubt he has the slightest concern for Alex Neil or Schumacher. After he's sacked he'll just go somewhere else.
Which goes some way to underpinning what I say. Coaches move on for money because they know they can perform well and get no recognition, or sacked at the whim of an owner of DOF. They need a selfish streak if they are to make a living. Players have the luxury of keeping their job, coaches not at all. Mind you, Bobby Robson wasnt far off when he said you need to a rubbish coach to be a rich one, if your agent gets you the best pay off deal. So long as clubs keep up this cycle of getting rid of a coach every year or less, they will continue to fail. Coaches will feel obliged to take the bigger pay check, because they will be always looking over their shoulder. Wouldnt be the worst idea in the world to block sacking and hiring coaches outside of tfr windows to be honest. At least then they could coach for more than one game at a time.
As I said, we've no idea why he was sacked ... ... he had a safe job at Plymouth if that's what he wanted, they were above Stoke when he walked out. He also took three of Plymouth's staff with him so did them no favours. If he's been sacked I've no sympathy, everyone knows Stoke's owner is deranged.
