Discussion: Manuel Pellegrini 2015/16

[mancyman]

as somebody used to say take a bow son. probably the best post i have ever seen on here damocles. agree with every word. awesome!!

 

[poh]

Great post damocles,the last 2 lines sum it up for me,while still here i will support the manager to the hilt,the man has earned respect and i for one will show it,then at the end of the season we wish him well and move on and up to even greater suscess.

 

[Dribble]

So I think the quadruple comment may have been aimed at me. I do not think that we will win the quadruple, but I find it amazing that you seem completely closed to the idea of Pellers staying, regardless of what he may achieve this year. I guess to each their own, but I would embrace that type of success with both arms and leg

What, you've only got one leg!

 

[City_Sean]

Even if we win the quadruple then I'd like Pellegrini to go.

This situation reminds me an AWFUL lot of the Mancini thing though I personally was against him going at the time due to some different circumstances. There will be people who cling to the idea that this club should have a great manager then stick with them for a long time. Unfortunately this is just not the model that our owner has elected to run the club with and there's very good circumstantial evidence to suggest that this is actually an extremely bad thing for the club even if they are successful.

Take Alex Ferguson for example. The plight that United are currently in can be almost entirely lay at his door. He failed to keep his training methods current, he failed to keep his backroom staff inventive and refreshed and due to his success it gave the United board an excellent excuse to fail to build the proper HR, scouting, performance analysis and executive structures in place that a modern football organisation really need. Simple really, Fergie controlled it. Want a new U21 Manager? No probs, one of Fergie's mate will give it a go regardless of their qualification. Need a new Chief Scout? No worries, Fergie's brother is into scouting a bit. Need someone to work in the sports science departments? No probs, Fergie's secretary's son has just done a degree in that or something. Bring them on board.

And this is perfectly fine as long as Alex Ferguson is there to keep everything together and in fact is probably better overall than the alternative system. As long as Alex Ferguson is there to hold it all together.

What happened to United is that David Moyes walked in and now wasn't even called David Moyes any more. He was called "Not Fergie" instead. I see the United logic here, he similarly ran Everton as a one man band and knew a lot of the same people that Fergie did so could keep the wheel turning for another 20 years potentially. The problem though is that David Moyes similarly ran Everton as a one man band so wasn't interested in Fergie's staff so brought his own over almost wholesale. Fergie's players like Rio Ferdinand took one look at Moyes and publicly said "I don't know why he is doing things differently". Because he wasn't a manager who they listened to, he was just Not Fergie.

Van Gaal is just a bad, an absolute nutter who should have never been given a top job ever again but he's a big name and United with their complete lack of executive structure jumped on it because they're morons. I genuinely hope after he leaves their next manager is Giggs or another of their Class of 92 as they constantly have to refer to their past to blind their fanbase to the fact that they are selling away their future. They bang on about philosophy without any understanding at all of what this entails in a post-Ferguson era. Van Gaal has a philosophy of a football team. We have a philosophy that shapes every decision made in the club from an executive level which in turn dissolves into a playing, development and recruitment philosophy. Comparing these two things is like equating nuclear power station and nuclear bombs because they both have nuclear in their name

So discussions of different regime types out of the way, we hopefully pretty much agree that limited terms managers are probably a good thing in football. They don't allow one person to have to big of an imprint on the club, clubs can up or downsize depending on their success (because having Davey Moyes locked in to a 4 year contract without breaks when Pep Guardiola and Jose Mourinho came on the market was probably not the best decision ever), and enthusiasm of the players is always kept as high as possible. These are the cycles that Soriano talks about.

I say this feels like the Mancini thing because it feels like this is the right time for Pellers to get his handshakes and move on, not just because of a couple of results but because of the situation we find ourselves in. The club has just announced a deal for investment valuing it at two billion pounds. We've successfully navigated the tricky FFP waters and now are expressing what we feel should be the proper spending levels bringing in players and the quality that we should be bringing in. Our sister clubs in New York and Melbourne are now beginning to establish and forge their own identities, as well as the existing expansion into Japan, Africa and potentially China or South America next. The training facilities have been built, moved into and the youth teams now have their own proper facilities and stadium. The women's team are breaking attendance records and challenging for titles. With people like Denayer, Iheanacho, Garcia and Maffeo we have a small group who you feel are ready right now for first team roles of differing degrees. We've got out of the group stages for the third year running in the Champions League and although enthusiasm is still low, the attendances are slowly creeping up as the fanbase sees UEFA recognised worldwide for the corrupt bureaucrats we've known them as since 2008. As a club we have transformed more under Manuel Pellegrini than I suggest we've done under any other manager in history - the Wigan FA Cup seems like a decade ago in terms of how much we've grown since then in every part of the club.

But stability is lethargy when it comes to building the biggest club in the world. We've grown almost as far as we can under Pellers. Let's say 90% of what we could reasonably have hoped for. Do we, in the summer, knowing that he can take us another 10% give him another year or do we cast our eyes over to our stated number one target probably since 2008 in Pep Guardiola and see where we end up when he takes us 90% of the way he can?

Concentrating on whether Pellers should go depending on if we pick up six points against Norwich or PSG have a goal ruled on or offside just seems to me like an incredibly small view of picking the next manager. We're ready for the next man as a club and I think we've already secured him. Even if Pellers wins the CL in a resounding 10-0 Final victory against Barca it doesn't matter because his time is over. I think we almost all agree that if it's not over then it certainly feels like it is beginning of the end rather than the end of the beginning here.

Losing our long term target in Pep Guardiola who can give us yet another boost of energy and momentum in the right direction because we feel understandably sentimental for our current manager would be an incredibly poor decision and not one which I believe our board will make.

Sacking him before the end of the season would be ludicrous but keeping him past this summer would be equally abhorrent. Get behind him for the next 6 months whilst he attempts to go out on top then welcome in the new guy.

Good post this Damo. I think Pellegrini has been a brilliant manager for us, came in and steadied the ship, as well as playing some delightful football and giving us two trophies.

I think it's evident he lacks the nous to be an elite manager, and for that reason we need to upgrade, I just hope the players recognise that we need to send him off on a high and give him a trophy or two this season.

For all the flack Manuel has had, he's been a dignified manager, one who has had the respect of the players since day one.

I really hope this time (unlike Mancini) we can send him off after lifting the title.

 

[flb]

Even if we win the quadruple then I'd like Pellegrini to go.

This situation reminds me an AWFUL lot of the Mancini thing though I personally was against him going at the time due to some different circumstances. There will be people who cling to the idea that this club should have a great manager then stick with them for a long time. Unfortunately this is just not the model that our owner has elected to run the club with and there's very good circumstantial evidence to suggest that this is actually an extremely bad thing for the club even if they are successful.

Take Alex Ferguson for example. The plight that United are currently in can be almost entirely lay at his door. He failed to keep his training methods current, he failed to keep his backroom staff inventive and refreshed and due to his success it gave the United board an excellent excuse to fail to build the proper HR, scouting, performance analysis and executive structures in place that a modern football organisation really need. Simple really, Fergie controlled it. Want a new U21 Manager? No probs, one of Fergie's mate will give it a go regardless of their qualification. Need a new Chief Scout? No worries, Fergie's brother is into scouting a bit. Need someone to work in the sports science departments? No probs, Fergie's secretary's son has just done a degree in that or something. Bring them on board.

And this is perfectly fine as long as Alex Ferguson is there to keep everything together and in fact is probably better overall than the alternative system. As long as Alex Ferguson is there to hold it all together.

What happened to United is that David Moyes walked in and now wasn't even called David Moyes any more. He was called "Not Fergie" instead. I see the United logic here, he similarly ran Everton as a one man band and knew a lot of the same people that Fergie did so could keep the wheel turning for another 20 years potentially. The problem though is that David Moyes similarly ran Everton as a one man band so wasn't interested in Fergie's staff so brought his own over almost wholesale. Fergie's players like Rio Ferdinand took one look at Moyes and publicly said "I don't know why he is doing things differently". Because he wasn't a manager who they listened to, he was just Not Fergie.

Van Gaal is just a bad, an absolute nutter who should have never been given a top job ever again but he's a big name and United with their complete lack of executive structure jumped on it because they're morons. I genuinely hope after he leaves their next manager is Giggs or another of their Class of 92 as they constantly have to refer to their past to blind their fanbase to the fact that they are selling away their future. They bang on about philosophy without any understanding at all of what this entails in a post-Ferguson era. Van Gaal has a philosophy of a football team. We have a philosophy that shapes every decision made in the club from an executive level which in turn dissolves into a playing, development and recruitment philosophy. Comparing these two things is like equating nuclear power station and nuclear bombs because they both have nuclear in their name

So discussions of different regime types out of the way, we hopefully pretty much agree that limited terms managers are probably a good thing in football. They don't allow one person to have to big of an imprint on the club, clubs can up or downsize depending on their success (because having Davey Moyes locked in to a 4 year contract without breaks when Pep Guardiola and Jose Mourinho came on the market was probably not the best decision ever), and enthusiasm of the players is always kept as high as possible. These are the cycles that Soriano talks about.

I say this feels like the Mancini thing because it feels like this is the right time for Pellers to get his handshakes and move on, not just because of a couple of results but because of the situation we find ourselves in. The club has just announced a deal for investment valuing it at two billion pounds. We've successfully navigated the tricky FFP waters and now are expressing what we feel should be the proper spending levels bringing in players and the quality that we should be bringing in. Our sister clubs in New York and Melbourne are now beginning to establish and forge their own identities, as well as the existing expansion into Japan, Africa and potentially China or South America next. The training facilities have been built, moved into and the youth teams now have their own proper facilities and stadium. The women's team are breaking attendance records and challenging for titles. With people like Denayer, Iheanacho, Garcia and Maffeo we have a small group who you feel are ready right now for first team roles of differing degrees. We've got out of the group stages for the third year running in the Champions League and although enthusiasm is still low, the attendances are slowly creeping up as the fanbase sees UEFA recognised worldwide for the corrupt bureaucrats we've known them as since 2008. As a club we have transformed more under Manuel Pellegrini than I suggest we've done under any other manager in history - the Wigan FA Cup seems like a decade ago in terms of how much we've grown since then in every part of the club.

But stability is lethargy when it comes to building the biggest club in the world. We've grown almost as far as we can under Pellers. Let's say 90% of what we could reasonably have hoped for. Do we, in the summer, knowing that he can take us another 10% give him another year or do we cast our eyes over to our stated number one target probably since 2008 in Pep Guardiola and see where we end up when he takes us 90% of the way he can?

Concentrating on whether Pellers should go depending on if we pick up six points against Norwich or PSG have a goal ruled on or offside just seems to me like an incredibly small view of picking the next manager. We're ready for the next man as a club and I think we've already secured him. Even if Pellers wins the CL in a resounding 10-0 Final victory against Barca it doesn't matter because his time is over. I think we almost all agree that if it's not over then it certainly feels like it is beginning of the end rather than the end of the beginning here.

Losing our long term target in Pep Guardiola who can give us yet another boost of energy and momentum in the right direction because we feel understandably sentimental for our current manager would be an incredibly poor decision and not one which I believe our board will make.

Sacking him before the end of the season would be ludicrous but keeping him past this summer would be equally abhorrent. Get behind him for the next 6 months whilst he attempts to go out on top then welcome in the new guy.

Nailed it about United, why the fuck would Pep want to go there, even without the pull of City with Txiki and co being there, they are still living in a Busbyesque class of 92 dream world.

 

[cyberblue]

Fantastic post by Damocles sums it up nicely the top teams in Europe with the odd exception change there managers regularly weather they win something or not

 

[BillyShears]

@Damocles the grand cycle of life and managers. Pellegrini has hit too many brick walls in 2015 making his succession much easier to deal with. I also think that the spectre of Guardiola is getting to him a little bit. He looks like a man who knows it's his last season and wants maybe a little too desperately, to be successful.

As I said when this thread first popped up, it's such an absurd and ridiculous world we live in that anyone thinks we should be sacking Pellegrini mid season when he's only a few points off the top of the league, but that doesn't mean that he shouldn't go in the summer.

Just to bring this back to Guardiola. Rory Smith was on the Times Podcast with Gab Marcotti on Monday talking about Pep. Here's what he had to say.

I think Guardiola wants United more than any other club in England. I think the history of the club appeals to him, the international reputation of the club appeals to him, and I think the circumstance of the club appeals to him, where he has a lot of money, and he can finally prove that he can take a club that's not winning and turn into one that's winning.

Then that well known rag sympathiser Tony Cascarino pitches in with this:

And in a strange way there's actually be less pressure at United than City because obviously City won the title a couple of years ago, they should win it this year, if you pitch up at City it's like pitching up at Bayern Munich, you have to win whereas United have had this fallow period where as Rory says if he can restore former glories then it'll be more of an achievement. And there'll be more patience there.

The desperation amongst the media for Pep not to come to City is pretty staggering. You'd think as things become clearer someone would have the balls to say "actually it makes perfect sense that Pep would choose City over United". Going to be very difficult for the media to just sweep all this "he wants United more than City" under the carpet after he joins us.

 

[meltonblue]

Although I get the reasoning, I personally struggle that anyone could have their role in question when they have either completed all of the targets given to them, or likewise haven't had the opportunity to fail at at least one of them yet.

It seems some have bought fully into the European idea of the head coach and the three year cycle that Soriano spoke about. That isn't necessarily the best model either though. If the rest of the structure is in place and is independent of the manager (which was always the issue of replacing a Ferguson type manager - their control over the whole club), then conversely I don't see the harm in keeping a head coach if they are fulfilling their targets. There are benefits to it too - continued stability of playing style, development of players in the same ethos, reduced pressure of seeing it as such a short cycle that results are paramount so youth aren't blooded as much as they could be (which is what Pellegrini has been guilty of).

I just find it too early to judge either way what the right thing to do at the end of the season is, particularly if Guardiola has a u turn and stays at Bayern. I'd rather either wait until the end of the season and assess the situation, or at least wait until one of the targets is no longer achievable.

I just feel if we are not careful, we are going to end up in a situation where the targets set for a head coach are going to be so high, they all seem like a disappointment, and so the underlying feeling will be to make a change, increasing the pressure and reducing their chances. Take Guardiola now or Ancelotti at Real. Guardiola will be judged on whether he wins the CL at Bayern, anything else and he's a failure in some peoples eyes and he knows that. I can guarantee the season after he goes, they won't win it either though unless with a bit of luck - it is a cup competition after all and why I struggle with it being used as a sole target. Likewise, I don't believe giving Benitez the Madrid role is likely to see any more benefit than if they had allowed Ancelotti another season to continue to progress the areas he felt needed work.

I just don't think there is a right or wrong answer to this apart from get behind Prllegrini whilst we are still challenging in every single competition we entered this season. Once they are unrealistic then absolutely. The club may well have already got a deal with Guardiola. As fans, then rather than think about that already and how much better it might be, let's support the current manager so he doesn't play out the rest of the season knowing he's unwanted or a dead man walking, as that just helps it come true.

 

[kunaguero10]

How many times this year have we been able to play the preferred starting back four this year. More less, how many times in a row?

Not many, which is a problem, but there is no excuse for any of the centre halves to keep diving in near the halfway line (see Otamendi for the first goal), or for Pellegrini choosing to tell the defence to defend so high up the pitch. That decision is irrelevant to who's playing or not.

 

[cleavers]

Not many, which is a problem, but there is no excuse for any of the centre halves to keep diving in near the halfway line (see Otamendi for the first goal), or for Pellegrini choosing to tell the defence to defend so high up the pitch. That decision is irrelevant to who's playing or not.

I disagree with this, of course its a reason. I don't think there is anything wrong with that strategy, if everyone is implementing as they should. However the real issue is we that don't implement it consistently, and there's a very good reason for that this season imho, and its the lack of stability in the back 4, and whoever is playing in front of them. The only run we've had where it was consistent was the first 5 games, and we won them all without conceding a goal, so it does definitely work.

We've lost 4 league games, 2 of them we should have won West Ham H, and Spurs A ( we didn't because we didn't take the chances provided), 2 of them we were well beaten Liverpool H, and Stoke A. We've also lost 2 CL games, one of which we blew by not taking our chances early on, the second by conceding a sloppy goal, and being unable to recover from it.

I don't know the stats, but one of our biggest issues is not taking our chances consistently, we've had games like Newcastle and even Monchengladbach, where we can destroy a team in minutes with clinical finishing, then others like Spurs and West Ham, where we have been well on top and missed a bag full. I'd wager we've had more shots on target than anyone else, and yet taken a smaller proportion of the ones created.

Both issues highlighted are down to individuals for me, the lack of consistency in defence to operate the high line effectively (mainly down to constant changing of players, this time enforced), and the missed (often easy) chances.

The manager has certainly made mistakes, don't think there is any doubt about that, but its not solely on his plate like some would suggest.