Transfer Rumours Glenn Hoddle has applied for the job...

All this stuff with coaches/managers seems a newfangled idea to me. Was Hoddle a coach or manager when working successfully with England or Chelsea or Swindon or Southampton? Either way he did a very good job. I am not sure there is such a thing as manager anymore? Look at Guardiola. Began his career as a coach doing badges etc, before becoming a head coach of Barcelona B, Barcelona and then Bayern. There is nothing to fear in a coach or manager, its a title. The likes of Wilkinson, Souness etc were just bad at it!

They are one in the same thing. The only real difference is the amount of time you actually spend coaching and how much you delegate. I don't think there are many delegators left now.

Then there is the other side of things like how much input you have in transfers. Sir Bob was a head coach. Right up the end of his time "managing" he was on the training pitch everyday orchestrating the drills etc. He liked to have input in transfers. He wasn't managing all the different elements of the football club though!

Essentially the majority of it is down to coaching and surrounding yourself with good coaches/staff. Hoddle is one of the few who has managed to not let his own career get in the way of becoming a good coach/manager. Whether he is the right guy for here is an entirely different matter. I couldn't see him toeing the line with Ashley. Like KK I think it would just turn combustible very quickly.

Far too simplistic to say "if Hoddle is so good, how come QPR aren't". There are hundreds of different elements to consider aside from just Hoddle. Perhaps the main difference between a coach and a manager is a manager decides the whole club set up/structure. A coach just fits into that structure and brings a team with him to populate some of it. Either way, a manager is a dying breed because these billionaires have people who decide what the right structure is!

 

You quite often come close to making a credible comment, then just miss by a chasm larger than a very large geomorphological feature. Not that you'll reply like...

 

Don't tar us with your relegation fodder brush

 

This is a very good point and post - it's worth stating that the only ones making a meal of this are the fickle and pandering media.

Once upon a time a "manager" not only had to prepare a team (either directly - and the best ones were directly involved, such as Clough, SBR - or indirectly) but then had to deal with things like the media, some commercial stuff as well. Now the game is massively different. Commercial stuff such as transfers, sponsorship, advertising are now more linked than they used to be. Where once advertising was on a billboard, now it's in a player's name. Where once you could say "I like that lad, let's get him chairman", now it's agents, contracts, release clauses, psychology, sponsors, and all other kinds of financial implications. So we have people responsible for that side, and a manager - rightly - is expected to prepare the team whilst leaning on other aspects of the club, such as the youth and the footballing philosophy.

Ours is a bit more stringent, in that we will need to keep selling the odd player to balance the books and remain profitable. Again, that's not the remit of a manager. What we don't know is how close the Coach is to the board, how aware they are of the activity, but in the past we've only ever sold for very top dollar.

In a nutshell, I don't know what the fuss is. If not having a manager rules out Steve Bruce et al, no problem. I'd like them to make a decision, however, as Carver lost 7 of 8 last season, has a generally pi$$poor record whenever he's been in charge and although one or two have said "I like him", that's not a glowing endorsement to steer this somewhat sizeable club to safety. There are plenty of options out there. The only one I'd be more tempted to wait for is Steve McLaren, I think he's the safest bet of literally anyone.

 

A Manager /coach Is only as good as the chairman at the helm. A chairman who is too involved with team decisions hinders whoever the manager/coach is and ruins any skill the said Manager/coach has. A manager/coach is one of the toughest jobs in football and should when appointed be given full control including transfers and should not be questioned of his decisions by the Board. He will know the budget he has to play with and should be left alone to get on with the job that the club has appointed him for.

 

I'm sure he made a decent comment in 2013.

 

The English premier league is well behind the rest of Europe in a lot of respects. Multiple times now FIFA have stated out and out disliking for the league and it's status within world football, and I don't blame them. To do anything in this league, you need a bare minimum of £20 Million investment every year. And that will probably cover some sort of cup push.
To win the league £100+ million.

How can any business truly make any money if it requires huge and I mean HUGE sums of money invested into it permanently to do anything worthwhile. Only for it to snap up foreign only talents and sell them usually for huge losses. English managers demanding to be in charge of finances in the modern game is old fashioned and wrong. Simple as. I'm 100% in agreement with the club in searching for a head coach. It's the only decision of there's I've supported in a long time.

The day's of the manager is over. Head Coach is the future, the managers who refuse will be unemployed indefinitely. The managers who advance with the time will make it. You can't trust a man with coaching badges to deal with 100's of millions of pounds. If a manager wants a firm say and slight control of finances they will need to undertake some sort of University level course. Like any other business manager would when dealing with such sums of money.

Anyone who disagrees with that I have no idea what generation of football they're looking at, because it's not modern football.

 

ManCity got themselves burned then, as they had to pump in three quarters of a billion so far ...100 million buys you ..the current Liverpool. I would say it requires half a billion plus, to even consider a push and stay there for the CL slots...which is truly insane, unsustainable and a cancer eating away at English football as a whole

Agree with your sentiment, even though I tend to think today's PL manager will be more a 'half and half manager/head coach' with regards to finance and players in/out. ie, aware and (ideally) surrounded by the back room staff (including finance/scouts etc) to enable them operate within a reasonable budget AND maintain a vision for the team/style/ambitions etc etc.

60 million a year pumped in from sky means even 'average/make up the numbers' teams (like ourselves) can/could afford to post huge yearly losses on player dealings if they so choose without the real risk of going bust (mind you Rooneys wages alone would take a huge slice of that 60 million so hate to imagine the total wage bill ManU/city/chelsea et al)

 

It'll become unsustainable the way things are going and I can't wait for the day when it all comes crashing down. The PL is boring - The same teams every season battling out for the main prize. It will head the way of Serie A one day.