Why is everyone obsessed with managerial stability?

[moomba]

The only thing I would say is that the grass isn't always greener and no manager is guaranteed to succeed.

Stability for the sake of it is a bit pointless, but so is chopping and changing whenever a team hits a bad patch.

 

[kiam06]

If you think its boring now,wait until you get your wish with Mourinho.

Mouriniho would be the wrong manager

I'd take boring all day if we won it's football not the Odeon.

 

[Blue Haze]

Because of whiskeynose


For some reason, all other successful European clubs are overlooked. Nevermind Barcelona have their third manager since 2005, and since have won 3 European cups and 5 La Liga (about to be 6). Nevermind Chelsea hire and sack like crazy but have been more successful than us since 2008, they even had more success than we had last season with 2 managers. Nevermind that Wenger is trophyless for 7 years with all that 'stability.'

Nope. Stability can only come if we hire a manager and stick with them for 20 years, just like whiskeynose. It's a bizarre notion based on an obsession with one manager and the memory of the failings of a time when City was nearly broke.

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

good post and an interesting view.

although we won't be getting mourinho, not well the barca lads are upstairs. they were part of the team that turned him down for barcelona.

We aren't Barcelona.

 

[Vienna_70]

I obviously don't know how old you are, but if the 91 in your username is anything to go by, you don't remember the Swales era.

 

[Anonymous]

good post and an interesting view.

although we won't be getting mourinho, not well the barca lads are upstairs. they were part of the team that turned him down for barcelona.

We aren't Barcelona.

but the people at barcelona who turned mourinho down because of his character are now at our club and will be a very large part of the decision making process for our managerial post.

 

[daztrueblue91]

I obviously don't know how old you are, but if the 91 in your username is anything to go by, you don't remember the Swales era.

We are no longer in the Swales era though are we. I am not totally dismissing the concept on stability as in some situations it can be good however we are a major team now and the main stability we need we have got in the Sheikh, Soriano and Txixi. I would rather have 12 different managers in 20 years and win 20 trophies than 1 manager in 20 years and win 10 trophies. I just think that no club should rely on a manager like United do the rags and as long as we are competitive and successful I don't really mind who is in charge.

 

[Ducado]

Hooray! Just what we needed another manager thread, was the other one getting boring?

 

[Burtonblue]

Because it matters!
Or of course we could just be the new Chelsea.

 

[moomba]

I obviously don't know how old you are, but if the 91 in your username is anything to go by, you don't remember the Swales era.

We are no longer in the Swales era though are we. I am not totally dismissing the concept on stability as in some situations it can be good however we are a major team now and the main stability we need we have got in the Sheikh, Soriano and Txixi. I would rather have 12 different managers in 20 years and win 20 trophies than 1 manager in 20 years and win 10 trophies. I just think that no club should rely on a manager like United do the rags and as long as we are competitive and successful I don't really mind who is in charge.

I look at Chelsea, and I think they are ruining the club with what they're doing with managers. I wonder if they would have been just as successful as they were if they showed a bit more patience with their managers, I suspect the long term it will be to their cost.