The recent news regarding Eddie Howe leaving Bournemouth got me thinking , about the culture of managerial stagnation that exists in English football. We have clubs of a certain level, that always want the same type of manager, ideally British, experienced in the PL, who'll keep them safe in a mid-table to lower-mid table position, and then after a couple of seasons they can sack him.
Some of the managers that fit this description and some of the clubs they managed-
Alan Pardew- West Ham, Charlton, Southampton, Newcastle, Crystal Palace and WBA.
Steve Bruce- Birmingham, Wigan, Sunderland, Hull, Aston Villa, Newcastle
Mark Hughes- Blackburn, Man City, Fulham, QPR, Stoke, Southampton
Sam Allardyce- Bolton, Newcastle, Blackburn, West Ham, Sunderland, Crystal Palace
Tony Pulis- Stoke, Crystal Palace, WBA, Middlesborough
Now there are certain clubs here who's names you see again and again, the likes of Newcastle, Palace, WBA etc. Newcastle also had Chris Houghton as a manager, who perhaps fits this ilk as well. Palace are currently managed by another old head in Roy Hodgson. Now why don't these clubs take a chance on younger managers? Yes, one can say that the risks of getting relegated from the PL are too high, but nearly all the above listed clubs have been relegated in the last 10 years or so. So what exactly are they gaining from employing this old tried and tested method of managerial employment?
Why don't managers such as Sean Dyche and Eddie Howe get opportunities at bigger clubs? Clubs like West Ham and Newcastle certainly have a lot more scope for growth than a Burnley or Bournemouth, then why are the former clubs so hell bent on maintaining the status quo and underachieving? Yes, they did try something different with managers such as Pellegirini and Benitez, but neither of them were young, progressive managers. Both came to these clubs because they had failed at bigger jobs, not unlike Moyes at WH, Ancelotti at Everton and even Mourinho at Spurs today. None of these managers would have envisioned themselves at these clubs 5 years ago. They are here because they could not achieve the required level of success in their previous roles at bigger clubs. So why are these underachieving clubs happy to get managers who are here out of necessity rather than choice when you have a bunch of younger managers itching for a crack at these jobs?
Conversely, the bigger clubs seem happy to give younger managers a chance and it seems to work out alright for them. Liverpool gave Rodgers a chance, and he got them closer to the PL than they had been for 25 years. Then they went for an exciting option in Klopp, for whom this job represented a step up and he delivered. Spurs achieved great success with Pochettino, Utd and Chelsea seem to be enjoying life far more under Ole and Lampard than they did under previous experienced managers. Even Arteta at Arsenal seems to have given them a new wind in their sail, though its too early for judgement for him.
So why are clubs averse to making progressive decisions? Why didn't Spurs go for a Howe when they sacked Poch, instead of taking a backward step with Jose. Why is it that the likes of Newcastle or West Ham would give chances to Bruce or Moyes instead of Graham Potter? Especially, when compared to their potential, these clubs continuously keep on underachieving.
Some of the managers that fit this description and some of the clubs they managed-
Alan Pardew- West Ham, Charlton, Southampton, Newcastle, Crystal Palace and WBA.
Steve Bruce- Birmingham, Wigan, Sunderland, Hull, Aston Villa, Newcastle
Mark Hughes- Blackburn, Man City, Fulham, QPR, Stoke, Southampton
Sam Allardyce- Bolton, Newcastle, Blackburn, West Ham, Sunderland, Crystal Palace
Tony Pulis- Stoke, Crystal Palace, WBA, Middlesborough
Now there are certain clubs here who's names you see again and again, the likes of Newcastle, Palace, WBA etc. Newcastle also had Chris Houghton as a manager, who perhaps fits this ilk as well. Palace are currently managed by another old head in Roy Hodgson. Now why don't these clubs take a chance on younger managers? Yes, one can say that the risks of getting relegated from the PL are too high, but nearly all the above listed clubs have been relegated in the last 10 years or so. So what exactly are they gaining from employing this old tried and tested method of managerial employment?
Why don't managers such as Sean Dyche and Eddie Howe get opportunities at bigger clubs? Clubs like West Ham and Newcastle certainly have a lot more scope for growth than a Burnley or Bournemouth, then why are the former clubs so hell bent on maintaining the status quo and underachieving? Yes, they did try something different with managers such as Pellegirini and Benitez, but neither of them were young, progressive managers. Both came to these clubs because they had failed at bigger jobs, not unlike Moyes at WH, Ancelotti at Everton and even Mourinho at Spurs today. None of these managers would have envisioned themselves at these clubs 5 years ago. They are here because they could not achieve the required level of success in their previous roles at bigger clubs. So why are these underachieving clubs happy to get managers who are here out of necessity rather than choice when you have a bunch of younger managers itching for a crack at these jobs?
Conversely, the bigger clubs seem happy to give younger managers a chance and it seems to work out alright for them. Liverpool gave Rodgers a chance, and he got them closer to the PL than they had been for 25 years. Then they went for an exciting option in Klopp, for whom this job represented a step up and he delivered. Spurs achieved great success with Pochettino, Utd and Chelsea seem to be enjoying life far more under Ole and Lampard than they did under previous experienced managers. Even Arteta at Arsenal seems to have given them a new wind in their sail, though its too early for judgement for him.
So why are clubs averse to making progressive decisions? Why didn't Spurs go for a Howe when they sacked Poch, instead of taking a backward step with Jose. Why is it that the likes of Newcastle or West Ham would give chances to Bruce or Moyes instead of Graham Potter? Especially, when compared to their potential, these clubs continuously keep on underachieving.