The New Manager Thread

[Rowan]

Did someone in here just compare Kenny to George Graham. Bloody hell, I know I was young at the time but my recollection is of Kenny's teams playing fast, passing and attacking football while Graham's played boring yawnfests built on defensive stability and a penchant for comfortably holding on to
their one goal advantage. If that was what we wanted we could have kept Houllier (Nee offense Gerard).

George Graham was a crooked, bung taking 1-0 merchant and should never be allowed to be anywhere near the game in any capacity ever again. He showed just how much integrity he had when he ****ed off 'dirty' Leeds to manage Spurs. Arsenal patio in his back garden indeed. To make that comparison is an insult.

And has anyone considered that one of the reasons that Kenny's peers aren't around now us possibly because they are all old as **** (cept Cloughie of course who's a bit too dead to be managing current teams). Those that aren't are about somewhere, although at this late hour I can only think of Coppell (not working but he could probably walk into something).

[Craig_H]

Anyway, ignore me, I'm just having a whinge.

Sure it's been posted, but Guus's agent says:

"Guus just started two weeks ago in Turkey and as much as he likes the Premier League and as much as he respects Liverpool as a legendary club with a great future ahead, a switch would be hardly doable," added van Nieuwenhuizen.
"Two weeks ago for the same reason he refused the position at Inter Milan post Jose Mourinho.
"I know, never say never and especially in football this is true, but for me this is an impossible thought."

The golden Guus is on his way

[Craig_H]

if football hasnt moved on in the last 15- 20 years why are the managers from then not in huge demand now?

why are they still not at the top of the pile?

because it has moved on.

we may not want it to but the King last managed 15 years ago. It doesnt make him a great manager now.

Not that i'm disagreeing with you, but i'd like someone to break down for me what 'football has moved on' means exactly.

What exactly is it about football of today that makes it so impossible for a manager who hasnt been a manager for 10-15 years, to re-take a management position and succeed?

I know this sounds simplistic, but 10-15 years ago, it was 2 teams of 11 each, 2 goals, a pitch and a ball. As it is today.

[CJ]

Did someone in here just compare Kenny to George Graham. Bloody hell, I know I was young at the time but my recollection is of Kenny's teams playing fast, passing and attacking football while Graham's played boring yawnfests built on defensive stability and a penchant for comfortably holding on to
their one goal advantage. If that was what we wanted we could have kept Houllier (Nee offense Gerard).

George Graham was a crooked, bung taking 1-0 merchant and should never be allowed to be anywhere near the game in any capacity ever again. He showed just how much integrity he had when he ****ed off 'dirty' Leeds to manage Spurs. Arsenal patio in his back garden indeed. To make that comparison is an insult.

And has anyone considered that one of the reasons that Kenny's peers aren't around now us possibly because they are all old as **** (cept Cloughie of course who's a bit too dead to be managing current teams). Those that aren't are about somewhere, although at this late hour I can only think of Coppell (not working but he could probably walk into something).

it was me that made the comparison. i also said i didnt like the man or his style of football.

the comparison was that both where winning things at hte same time. so its not an insult its a valid comparison. the point i was making was that no one would consider someone who was sucessful 20 years ago and hasnt worked as a manager for a number of years.

[Craig_H]

61 pages?

Has anyone thought of the Spain boss, Del Bosque?

He likes football played well, and he may persuadde the better spanish players to come, and Torres to stay.

It's funny you mention that Charly, i was thinking of him the other day.

I'm not sure he's had a huge amount of success in club management though, obviously won a few bits at Real Madrid, but then any manager worth his salt should win things at Madrid. I also wonder if he'd want to try something so different at his age - he's not that young, is he?

[Craig_H]

it was me that made the comparison. i also said i didnt like the man or his style of football.

the comparison was that both where winning things at hte same time. so its not an insult its a valid comparison. the point i was making was that no one would consider someone who was sucessful 20 years ago and hasnt worked as a manager for a number of years.

I agree it's a valid comparison.

For Ferguson v Wenger of the last 10 years, read Dalglish v Graham in the mid-late 1980s.

[CJ]

Not that i'm disagreeing with you, but i'd like someone to break down for me what 'football has moved on' means exactly.

What exactly is it about football of today that makes it so impossible for a manager who hasnt been a manager for 10-15 years, to re-take a management position and succeed?

I know this sounds simplistic, but 10-15 years ago, it was 2 teams of 11 each, 2 goals, a pitch and a ball. As it is today.

its always been like that. formations have changed tactics have changed. if you can have a look at maureens leaked notes for playing us i think.

the science of the game has moved on.

again i will mention what the forrest players thought of clough at the end. he was too simplistic they wanted more coaching more information on the opposition and the team around clough did that without his knowledge as they respected him to much to say he wasnt up to it anymore.

now kenny may be fully up to speed with modern techniques etc but for me its too much of a risk and remember the risk is that some people will bracket him with souness the manager. look at some peoples opinions on him despite him being in the top 3 of players who have ever played for us. (i admit the article in the scum may also form part of tht view)

look at how fit players are now. wasnt there an article on how now the most important part of the game is when posestion changes as teams are that well drilled?

Would shanks be a good manager now? probably not as he was very much a motivator and not a huge tactics man and modern football tactics have evolved hugely. it doesnt mean shanks isnt a legend and it doesnt take away from the fact that he set the template for the club for a number of years.

but sucessful clubs look forwards and no matter how you look at it the King is not forwards he is a romantic look to our past, a legend who doesnt need to do anything as his place is cemented and assured

[CJ]

I agree it's a valid comparison.

For Ferguson v Wenger of the last 10 years, read Dalglish v Graham in the mid-late 1980s.

if the King had stayed in management then it would be different as there are managers like whiskey nose, Capello (just i think) lippi, woy, sven maybe, who are still about but 15 years is a big gap and he didnt pull trees up at newcastle but then who has i suppose.

[Rowan]

it was me that made the comparison. i also said i didnt like the man or his style of football.

the comparison was that both where winning things at hte same time. so its not an insult its a valid comparison. the point i was making was that no one would consider someone who was sucessful 20 years ago and hasnt worked as a manager for a number of years.

Newcastle did when they hired Keegan the first time (yeah, I know but I'm feeling particularly lazy tonight).

Don't get me wrong Marsh. I'm not advocating going and getting Trevor Francis, Howard Wilkinson or Graham Taylor (a man I actually have quite a bit of respect for). But I just think the style of football we played under Kenny was probably as close to the style we were crying out for towards the end if Rafa's tenure. I'm not sure how important an instant understanding of things like Pro zone, sports science, horse bits injections and not letting the team smoke a packet of regal kingsize at half time are for the manager. This us where I see the game moving on and, to my knowledge, we pay people other than the manager to deal with this. All Kenny would have to do is buy the right players and get them playing the right way (and hire the right staff to help with all the stuff he's less offay with).

Football is still football, as it was before Kenny ever even
managed. If he surrounded himself with the right people he'd be as much a success as any other top manager (my opinion of course).

George Graham on the other hand wouldn't. Too inflexible a style and too close to the pensive, defensive flaws Rafa's detractors have pointed out (when we were bad that is as, under Rafa, when we were good we were unstoppable).

[Rowan]

if the King had stayed in management then it would be different as there are managers like whiskey nose, Capello (just i think) lippi, woy, sven maybe, who are still about but 15 years is a big gap and he didnt pull trees up at newcastle but then who has i suppose.

He took a disjointed team that was falling apart at the seams to Third in the league and within a whisker if winning the Fa Cup. Not bad for the Toon. Given time he may have even won something for them. But we all know how paitient my North East brethren are...

[CJ]

Newcastle did when they hired Keegan the first time (yeah, I know but I'm feeling particularly lazy tonight).

Don't get me wrong Marsh. I'm not advocating going and getting Trevor Francis, Howard Wilkinson or Graham Taylor (a man I actually have quite a bit of respect for). But I just think the style of football we played under Kenny was probably as close to the style we were crying out for towards the end if Rafa's tenure. I'm not sure how important an instant understanding of things like Pro zone, sports science, horse bits injections and not letting the team smoke a packet of regal kingsize at half time are for the manager. This us where I see the game moving on and, to my knowledge, we pay people other than the manager to deal with this. All Kenny would have to do is buy the right players and get them playing the right way (and hire the right staff to help with all the stuff he's less offay with).

Football is still football, as it was before Kenny ever even
managed. If he surrounded himself with the right people he'd be as much a success as any other top manager (my opinion of course).

George Graham on the other hand wouldn't. Too inflexible a style and too close to the pensive, defensive flaws Rafa's detractors have pointed out (when we were bad that is as, under Rafa, when we were good we were unstoppable).

the team under Kenny did play the best football however its a bit of a myth that this is the type of football Liverpool is known for and used to. (i know you didnt say that)

my concern is that if it was as simple as you say then why arent all those managers about and at top clubs and being linked?

[Kenneth]

Oh and the name "Broner" came about from this Polish fella i work with...
his real name in Bronek but i used to always think he was called Broner until i realised that wasnt his name at all. haha

Still call him Broner now

sorry, I may have missed it, but did someone actually ask you for an explanation?

[Rowan]

the team under Kenny did play the best football however its a bit of a myth that this is the type of football Liverpool is known for and used to. (i know you didnt say that)

my concern is that if it was as simple as you say then why arent all those managers about and at top clubs and being linked?

I'm thinking who was about. Erm, Kendall's about 70, Cloughie's dead, Dave Sexton well. Billy Bonds retired. Big Ron retired, Trevor Francis was a disaster at the time, Wilkinson retired, Venables is a crook, read the same for George Graham, Taylor retired, Joe Kinnear went on health grounds, Coppell could easily still get work if he wanted it. But I think in the main most of the managers back then wouldn't have been in post if at the time clubs had the financial clout to draw in major managers from abroad (and I don't just mean Ireland). Sky money increased the profile of English teams considerably and made them more attractive to the cohort of top managers that would normally have stayed in their own leagues. How many foriegn managers were there in the 90/91 season? However, Kenny was a top manager then and had the foriegn invasion happened earlier he would have still won as many titles as he did. The old time tracksuited cloggers would have been out on their arse, as happened anyway '95 onwards.

[CJ]

I'm thinking who was about. Erm, Kendall's about 70, Cloughie's dead, Dave Sexton well. Billy Bonds retired. Big Ron retired, Trevor Francis was a disaster at the time, Wilkinson retired, Venables is a crook, read the same for George Graham, Taylor retired, Joe Kinnear went on health grounds, Coppell could easily still get work if he wanted it. But I think in the main most of the managers back then wouldn't have been in post if at the time clubs had the financial clout to draw in major managers from abroad (and I don't just mean Ireland). Sky money increased the profile of English teams considerably and made them more attractive to the cohort of top managers that would normally have stayed in their own leagues. How many foriegn managers were there in the 90/91 season? However, Kenny was a top manager then and had the foriegn invasion happened earlier he would have still won as many titles as he did. The old time tracksuited cloggers would have been out on their arse, as happened anyway '95 onwards.

what facts do you have to back up that Kenny was different to the others in terms of management ability and also to adapt with the time? i am not saying your wrong but i cant see anything to back it up either.

facts is a bit much i think. what gives you the view that rather than facts.

[Kenneth]

How about we just agree that, as with any new manager coming in, we don't know whether he would be a sucess or not. We'll only know when one is appointed and gives it a go.

There you go, just saved days and days and pages and pages of wasted discussion. Think how much time you owe me