PDA

View Full Version : The importance of football managers



joe breezy
07-08-2013, 05:43 AM
I've ordered this book that says football managers only make 15% difference.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/0670922242/ref=mw_dp_mdsc?dsc=1

Sounds about right and I often think the importance of managers is way over estimated.

There are so many other factors that it goes some way to explaining why football managers are such a success at one club then a failure at another.

Take Tony Mowbray - a hero at Hibs where he had a golden generation just at the right time coming through the youth academy but now he is a disaster at Boro who were beaten by Accrington Stanley last night.

There is a limit to what a manager can achieve at a club thanks to other factors and a record at one club will rarely equate to a similar record elsewhere.

Not many managers have found success in every role and some of the greatest have been total failures at some clubs.

I don't think Mowbray would be the answer for Hibs just now and I definitely think we need more than a new manager to fully exploit the impending opportunity of being Edinburgh's only top tier team.

Waxy
07-08-2013, 05:53 AM
The players themselves have most influence. Must be something to do with their surroundings and the people in charge which makes them happy and want to win. Theb theres the fans. If the fans are constantly moaning, deep down will they look forward to matchdays? Doubt it. Right now Hibs will probably get better results away from home. Hopefully starting sunday. Us hibbys can be a bit ott brutal when giving stick at ER.

rcarter1
07-08-2013, 06:11 AM
Interesting fact. I wonder how its calculated and does the 15% refer to points gained? I presume that it is an average, and occasionally the manager can turn a team around spectacularly (or the opposite). FWIW, I think the current squad has more potential to progress than last years. If we are playing decent stuff, and near the top end by Xmas, the mood should improve at Easter Road.
Would be interesting to objectively measure crowd influence on performance. Are the Hibs crowd worse than other clubs, or do we just have a higher expectation?

joe breezy
07-08-2013, 06:47 AM
It was the Boro score last night that got me thinking on this again...

Was Mowbray such a good manager or was he lucky to have those players we had coming through?

I think if we're honest with ourselves managers need time and we probably are a bit impatient

I actually thought we were okay against Motherwell most of the game

We were stopping Motherwell getting chances and if we'd nicked a goal probably would have been happy

Mmmhh, let's see what happens - we definitely could do with a euromillions winning Hibs fan taking over from Farmer I think

joe breezy
07-08-2013, 06:50 AM
Interesting fact. I wonder how its calculated and does the 15% refer to points gained? I presume that it is an average, and occasionally the manager can turn a team around spectacularly (or the opposite). FWIW, I think the current squad has more potential to progress than last years. If we are playing decent stuff, and near the top end by Xmas, the mood should improve at Easter Road.
Would be interesting to objectively measure crowd influence on performance. Are the Hibs crowd worse than other clubs, or do we just have a higher expectation?

Yes home advantage, is it the crowd or I it the familiar surroundings

Players say the crowd does affect them but can't imagine that's always a positive thing at Easter Road

Islington Hibs
07-08-2013, 07:05 AM
I have never managed a whelk stall, let alone a football club but I do think the manager is the most important factor. Clearly he needs the materials, and there is a whole load of luck, but the ability to instil confidence, and never say die attitude and belief is pretty critical.

At Easter Road we seem to lack this. I don't entirely blame Fenlon for this as the culture of the Club seems brittle but that needs addressing, by Fenlon or whoever. We go one down and well everyone clams up....... That was what was so encouraging about the Falkirk game. Never before have I seen us come back from such a position. A rarity mind.

OrdHibby
07-08-2013, 07:15 AM
Truth be told Mowbray ain't a good manager. Great idea's but his teams are soft as putty. He was a refreshing appointment after Blobby but failed in the big games. Better than what we have now though.

ScottB
07-08-2013, 07:28 AM
Thing is, that 15% where the manager really matters is what we are lacking:

The ability to pick up a team that's doing badly and get them back into a game, the ability to watch from the sidelines, see it's not working, make a tactical change and turn the game around etc etc.


Almost all our recent managers have lacked that, even Mowbray. The only one who seemed able to vary game plan and change tactics mid match was Collins.

superfurryhibby
07-08-2013, 07:29 AM
15% difference at the top levels of our game would be one hell of a difference.

I do wonder how much difference it would have made if we had stuck with Mixu or Yogi and given them the time to rectify their mistakes and learn on he job. Could it have been any worse than what we have endured over the past three years or so?

CorrieHibs
07-08-2013, 07:33 AM
Truth be told Mowbray ain't a good manager. Great idea's but his teams are soft as putty. He was a refreshing appointment after Blobby but failed in the big games. Better than what we have now though.

I'd agree with that. We got some hidings when Tony was in charge against them. We also won big game against the old firm in Glasgow. I think Mowbray was blessed with a great generation. I just always felt he never had a plan B. Truth be told i think a better manager would of been more successful. 2006 had our name on the cup!

PeeJay
07-08-2013, 07:35 AM
I've ordered this book that says football managers only make 15% difference.


Think you'll find - whatever their statistics may insinuate - that a good manager makes all the difference...

Pretty Boy
07-08-2013, 07:36 AM
I can't help but think that a manager 'only' making 15% difference is actually a huge difference.

Broken Gnome
07-08-2013, 07:53 AM
I can't help but think that a manager 'only' making 15% difference is actually a huge difference.

I wondered about that on Sunday, particularly seeing Collins' frustration at his teammates setting up camp thirty yards behind him, and the type of influence Fenlon had. Can't imagine many sides Craig, Robertson, Thomson and Jones had played for had been set up quite so conservatively for a home game. Seemed at odds with the way they would naturally want to play.

Not sure any in-game influence Fenlon has is an enjoyable one. That said, if new signings are impressed with what he has to say, there must be some sort of grand winning plan. Somewhere.

joe breezy
07-08-2013, 09:48 AM
Aye, I guess 15% is a large margin when we consider the fine margins in sporting success...

i do think that managerial success is hard to predict though - sometimes all the ingredients come together for a manager at one club then it just doesn't happen at the next

Speedy
07-08-2013, 10:25 AM
15% difference to what? 15% more wins? 15% better in every game?

Not sure I believe you can put a number to it. Would Man Utd have only been 15% less successful if they had Fenlon as manager for the last 20 years? What about if they had me as manager?

Edit: I'm guessing the book says it's x% players, y% fans, z% luck etc.

Sergy Pie
07-08-2013, 10:40 AM
I'm not too sure of the use of the word difference here. Maybe influence is slightly better.

A manager has an array of resources at their disposal which helps them reach their end goal of winning a match (coaching staff, medical team etc). All have a say in how successful a team will be in some shape or form. All things considered, the manager will be crucial for the 90 minutes all these factors will come together and contribute to each game. He will ultimately be responsible for the snap decisions in that 90 minutes that can bring everthing that was out of his control to fruition.

Although the manager may have a small percentage of how much difference he can make, it's the consequences of his decisions and the gravity his input makes which for me which is telling. To use a slightly weird analogy, some snakes venom only carries 1% of specific toxins in volume but those toxins are 70% responsible for actual killing. Small input but big consequences is what i'm getting at here.

Stevie Reid
07-08-2013, 10:55 AM
Truth be told Mowbray ain't a good manager. Great idea's but his teams are soft as putty. He was a refreshing appointment after Blobby but failed in the big games. Better than what we have now though.

A pretty ridiculous generalisation, IMO. Yes, there were disappointing cup defeats, with the 4-0 loss to Hearts being the obvious sore one, but we also had very notable derby wins home and away, two 3-0 wins at Ibrox, and a win away at Parkhead against Martin O'Neill's Celtic team who were pushing for the league. In his two full seasons in charge we won 46% of our league games and scored 125 goals, which is unbelievable really.

Went on to do very well at WBA, before a disaster at Celtic and now looking that it's unravelling at Middlesbrough. Still wouldn't say he's not a good manager.

jonty
07-08-2013, 10:55 AM
If I was 'only' to get a 15% pay rise, i'd be happy.

Is 15 the new 1-5 ?