Ducado said:Hooray! Just what we needed another manager thread, was the other one getting boring?
Skashion said:The two most successful footballing dynasties in England have been built on managerial stability. Whereas our 35 years of winning feck all was built on managerial instability... Might have something to do with it.
Burtonblue said:Because it matters!
Or of course we could just be the new Chelsea.
city91 said:A reoccurring theme throughout all the topics on managers whether it be Mancini, Pep or Mourinho is stability.
On one hand people are saying don't get Mourinho because he will fuck off after three years, then people are saying get Guardiola (who apparently will stay here longer, however he only ever signed one year deals at Barca) and then people are saying keep Bobby because we need stability.
Now WTF is stability? it means absolute nothing without success. Yes Mancini has been very successful for us so far an IMO the minimum he deserves is the rest of the season with us and then take it from there. However the thing that I think will cost Mancini his job is not the fact we may not win a trophy but the fact that our performances have been awful compared to last year. We play slow boring football and are starting to get found out especially in Europe. We honestly seem to have gone backwards since last year and all this talk not building on the team in the summer is nonsense. Bobby should be getting a lot more from our team and everyone knows it.
Also back onto the topic of stability look at Arsenal and Everton, they have give their managers loads of time but Arsenal have won sod all for 8 years and Moyes has never won a thing with Everton.
Now I do not want us to take the Abramhovic approach and sack a manager every six months or so but there is nothing wrong what so ever with changing a manager every 3 years or so. Bobby has even said he is not going to stay with us after his contract expires but some people are still obsessed with keeping the same manager.
The real stability we already have in Sheikh Mansour, Khaldoon, Soriano and Txixi. As they are the real power at the club, they are the people who will build our footballing philosophy not the manager. We are now one of the biggest teams in Europe and a project that any manager would love to work with. Our project is probably the most ambitious and exciting in the world. Soriano and Txixi will only employ a manager who shares their vision for the club and this should be noted as they will ensure who ever comes in works the Man City way.
We need to stop seeing changing a manager as a negative thing and start looking at it as a positive thing. The manager of Man City position will appeal to the best and that is what we should be looking at. Managers need to know that they have the full support of the owners but underachievement will not be tolerated and by underachievement I do not just mean not winning this as we will never win everything every year but I also mean getting the best out of the players and making the most out of the resources available.
If we were to get rid of Mancini at the end of the current season we should look at all the positives he has achieved with us and remember him for them. There is nothing worse than keeping a manager or player past his sell by date. Just like watching Tiger Woods, Ricky Hatton or Michael Schumacker in their sports, they were all great sporting hero's but should have gone out when they were the best so they could be remembered as the hero's they truly were.
Personally I think Bobby has taken us as far as he can and he will always be a legend in my eyes but if we were to get Mourinho at the end of the season. Even if he was only here for three years if that meant us winning the champions league then so be it. That would be a key step in future development and creating competition for the managers. I feel that managers should be treated like players and that competition brings out the true character in everyone. If someone cannot handle competition then they should not be at a big club simple as.
city91 said:Ducado said:Hooray! Just what we needed another manager thread, was the other one getting boring?
Feel free to merge it with a another thread if you wish. I was trying to look at the issue of stability in general rather than turn it into a Mancini out or Mourinho in thread.
great post, as is the original. I'd also throw in the fact that there is an instinctive and blind loyalty to any manager amongst sections of the fanbase and the 'stability' thing is used as a shield.Blue Haze said: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.
de niro said:city91 said:A reoccurring theme throughout all the topics on managers whether it be Mancini, Pep or Mourinho is stability.
On one hand people are saying don't get Mourinho because he will fuck off after three years, then people are saying get Guardiola (who apparently will stay here longer, however he only ever signed one year deals at Barca) and then people are saying keep Bobby because we need stability.
Now WTF is stability? it means absolute nothing without success. Yes Mancini has been very successful for us so far an IMO the minimum he deserves is the rest of the season with us and then take it from there. However the thing that I think will cost Mancini his job is not the fact we may not win a trophy but the fact that our performances have been awful compared to last year. We play slow boring football and are starting to get found out especially in Europe. We honestly seem to have gone backwards since last year and all this talk not building on the team in the summer is nonsense. Bobby should be getting a lot more from our team and everyone knows it.
Also back onto the topic of stability look at Arsenal and Everton, they have give their managers loads of time but Arsenal have won sod all for 8 years and Moyes has never won a thing with Everton.
Now I do not want us to take the Abramhovic approach and sack a manager every six months or so but there is nothing wrong what so ever with changing a manager every 3 years or so. Bobby has even said he is not going to stay with us after his contract expires but some people are still obsessed with keeping the same manager.
The real stability we already have in Sheikh Mansour, Khaldoon, Soriano and Txixi. As they are the real power at the club, they are the people who will build our footballing philosophy not the manager. We are now one of the biggest teams in Europe and a project that any manager would love to work with. Our project is probably the most ambitious and exciting in the world. Soriano and Txixi will only employ a manager who shares their vision for the club and this should be noted as they will ensure who ever comes in works the Man City way.
We need to stop seeing changing a manager as a negative thing and start looking at it as a positive thing. The manager of Man City position will appeal to the best and that is what we should be looking at. Managers need to know that they have the full support of the owners but underachievement will not be tolerated and by underachievement I do not just mean not winning this as we will never win everything every year but I also mean getting the best out of the players and making the most out of the resources available.
If we were to get rid of Mancini at the end of the current season we should look at all the positives he has achieved with us and remember him for them. There is nothing worse than keeping a manager or player past his sell by date. Just like watching Tiger Woods, Ricky Hatton or Michael Schumacker in their sports, they were all great sporting hero's but should have gone out when they were the best so they could be remembered as the hero's they truly were.
Personally I think Bobby has taken us as far as he can and he will always be a legend in my eyes but if we were to get Mourinho at the end of the season. Even if he was only here for three years if that meant us winning the champions league then so be it. That would be a key step in future development and creating competition for the managers. I feel that managers should be treated like players and that competition brings out the true character in everyone. If someone cannot handle competition then they should not be at a big club simple as.
i'm a stabilty person, mind you having watched city for 47 years and seeing unstablity hurt us over and over again you may forgive me.
that said you make some brilliant points in your well thoughtout post. if this as far as bob can take us then so be it, what i do not like though is all the cloak and dagger rumours going on during the season. it should be put to bed till the end of the season when we know exactly how we have done and how we have performed getting there.
Madrid have scored over 100 goals in each of the past 2 seasons in la liga.Thenumber1blue said:If you think its boring now,wait until you get your wish with Mourinho.
Ducado said:city91 said:Ducado said:Hooray! Just what we needed another manager thread, was the other one getting boring?
Feel free to merge it with a another thread if you wish. I was trying to look at the issue of stability in general rather than turn it into a Mancini out or Mourinho in thread.
Eh? Of course it's a Mancini out thread, you have tried to disguise it as another issue but it is quite obvious what you are saying, anyway as you were.
Strange situation we find ourselves in really, we are not doing bad in the PL, bloody awful in Europe, I am quite old fashioned in that it takes a lot for me to turn against a City manager, as I don't beleive changing managers is such a panacea that people think it is, sure it works sometimes many clubs get the new manager bounce, but it hardly lasts, recent case in point Sunderland and Chelsea.
city91 said:Skashion said:The two most successful footballing dynasties in England have been built on managerial stability. Whereas our 35 years of winning feck all was built on managerial instability... Might have something to do with it.
That is a simplistic view to take IMO, The two most successful footballing dynasties also had the best resources available to them at the time. Noone will ever emulate what bacon chops has achieved with United and it is yet to be seen whether United's next manager can carry on his legacy. United's legacy is Fergie's legacy where as Barca's legacy is Barca's leagacy if you understand me. We need to be reliant on the club and not the manager something which Soriano and Txixi can achieve.