Solskjaer, Arteta, Lampard and the 'Manager in/Manager out' culture

It is not a new phenomena, has been happening since ages. Never understood this, "when I was young, people used to shit gold " arguments.

Three major clubs get three novice managers with no major credentials, and ,as such, fans are uneasy.

It’s not really complicated I don’t think.

Add that ingredient to the big money/combustible nature of football and it’s a pretty straightforward explanation.

It’s up to those novice managers to prove they are up to the task, and it’s up to those clubs to stand by the choices they have made, if they truly believe in them.

Klopper76 said:

Like you say, Klopp had a CV though so Liverpool could stick with him. Arteta, Lampard and Solskjaer obviously don't have a CV yet but how're they supposed to get it if you're going to pull the plug as soon as things don't look great? Do you think United would be in a better position now if Solskjaer had been sacked after his first 17 games?

Click to expand...

I'd wager his successor would've also been sacked by now.

It's quite ironic that we've gone from some United fans last season holding up Lampard and Chelsea are some kind of example of what United and Ole are doing wrong to me thinking that Ole steadying the ship after several dicey moments and low points, and now placing United on this great upward trajectory is a great example for Chelsea to look at and what can happen if we keep the faith in Lampard..

Klopper76 said:

Those managers were all employed by Liverpool at a time when sacking managers every 12-24 months wasn't the normal thing to do though. Benitez and Houllier both had major success very early on in their tenures and Evans had us in the conversation for the title as well. Souness was the only hopeless one in that list. The others achieved something at Liverpool even if it wasn't much.

Click to expand...

They were all hopeless, you wanted the league, obviously, you're Liverpool ffs. And yet they all got time, and 25 years went by without a league.

Klopper76 said:

I take it from your post that you've been of the opinion that Solskjaer should've been sacked more than once during his time as United manager?

Click to expand...

Twice, December 2019 & again early this season.

Klopper76 said:

Again, in Klopp's first full season we qualified for the Champions League on the last day. We did the same thing the following season. We also didn't win anything in Klopp's first season, we lost two finals. He raised the expectation and made fans enjoy watching the team again but true success didn't come until 2019, over three years after he was hired.

Click to expand...

Once again, he instantly had you looking capable of a title challenge in his first full season and remained in the top 4 the entire season long, about 90% of the season was spent in the top 3.

Klopper76 said:

Like you say, Klopp had a CV though so Liverpool could stick with him. Arteta, Lampard and Solskjaer obviously don't have a CV yet but how're they supposed to get it if you're going to pull the plug as soon as things don't look great? Do you think United would be in a better position now if Solskjaer had been sacked after his first 17 games?

Click to expand...

Impossible to say but I'm happy now the club showed patience, absolutely. Had they got Poch or Nagelsmann, maybe better, maybe worse, maybe similar. As I say, who knows.

Do you think Liverpool would be in the same position now if they'd given Roy as much time as Klopp?
Do you think Bayern would be in the same position now if they'd stuck with Niko Kovac?

Bottom line is, you earn time and patience. Ole has flirted with it, but ultimately got back on track and earned his time at the club. Roy earned nothing, Kovac earned nothing, Klopp unquestionably earned his time at Liverpool. Lampard currently is flirting with the sack, moreso than Arteta.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

They were all hopeless, you wanted the league, obviously, you're Liverpool ffs. And yet the all got time, 25 years went by without a league.

Click to expand...

Bit unfair to call Rafa hopeless. They came really close to winning the league and had a solid side when they had Alonso, Mascherano, Gerrard and Torres. If anything their shambolic transfers were what let them down. I doubt even Klopp would be able to do much had the side replaced players like Alonso and Mascherano with Aquilani, Maxi Rodriguez and Andy Caroll.

Teja said:

Bit unfair to call Rafa hopeless. They came really close to winning the league and had a solid side when they had Alonso, Mascherano, Gerrard and Torres. If anything their shambolic transfers were what let them down. I doubt even Klopp would be able to do much had the side replaced players like Alonso and Mascherano with Aquilani, Maxi Rodriguez and Andy Caroll.

Click to expand...

Rafa wanted to get rid of Alonso and bring in Gareth Barry ffs

Benitez was brought in to win the league, he failed. Coming 4 points off top one season from 6 isn't "really close". Brenton came "really close", lost it by 2 points winning just 1 of the final 3 matches, that's really close.
What happened to Brenton? Proof of patience, or proof that saying "piss off mate, you're not good enough and this guy is clearly better" is more often than not, the more likely route to success?

These are the answers you are looking for.

do.ob said:

Your typical modern top (or good) coach has a distinct philosophy he implements right away. This was true especially for Klopp and Pep, but also e.g. Hasenhüttl, Bielsa, Tuchel, Nagelsmann, Rose, Bosz and loads others. They don't necessarily go from 0 to 100 in a couple of weeks, but right away you can clearly tell what they are trying to do, you see (the beginnings of) a cohesive system and what it can do when it's going well and you usually can make out clearly what the missing pieces to their puzzle are. Those guys get afforded time, because they earn themselves time.

But when you have coaches who are more "pragmatic" it's often almost impossible to tell how far they can go, because they have to improvise and figure things out as they go along to a much bigger degree. As long as they're successful in the short term that's okay for the moment, because that's what matters most in the end. But if they aren't: why should they be given time?

Click to expand...

Dominos said:

You have to remember a lot of fans don't think certain managers deserved the job in the first place. When you hire a manager with no previous track record and then results aren't good, all the fans have to go off is that they've got a rookie in charge who has never proven themselves to be a good manager previously and they're doing nothing in the current job that suggests they're a good manager - so it's not hard to understand why they'd conclude that there are better options out there. A lot of fans didn't buy into this "short term pain for long term gain" plan in the first place, so you can't expect them to be on board with the terrible results just because that's the road the club chose.

Click to expand...

Pogue Mahone said:

Managers who have won major trophies in leagues with big clubs in them have earned some patience in their next job. Not that either Pep or Klopp needed much patience, with both of them coming good in their second season.

Click to expand...

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

Rafa wanted to get rid of Alonso and bring in Gareth Barry ffs

Click to expand...

Did he want to get rid of Alonso? Rafa was the one that brought Alonso to Liverpool and he was a fan favorite during his time with Pool from what I remember. I think Alonso wanted to move to RM and they needed some sort of replacement. Barry was pretty highly rated back then - english midfielder, great passing range, played for the national team etc., did pretty well for Man City (part of their first league winning team).

1/6 is not a fair characterization either. Won the CL and took an inconsistent Liverpool side that was on the verge of dropping out of the "big four" to a solid top four side again and had them challenging for the league.

Deserved to leave when he was sacked, but I think was overall a reasonably good tenure as a manager before the meltdown. Certainly didn't deserve the sack after his first / second season as you're suggesting.

Klopper76 said:

Roy Hodgson is an extreme example and not the same as Arteta, Lampard and Solskjaer.

Click to expand...

Goalposts moving.

Ok, Brenton, would you be where you are now had you stuck?

Why didn’t patience work for Liverpool for those 20 years yet a short period of hiring and firing did? Any explanation?

I’ll give you the explanation, give the right manager time and you can be extremely successful, give the wrong managers time and you can go through a couple of decades of nothingness.

Teja said:

Did he want to get rid of Alonso?

Click to expand...

yes, it was all in the open and I remember all us United fans thinking he must’ve lost his marbles wanting to ship out Alonso and replace with Barry.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

Rafa wanted to get rid of Alonso and bring in Gareth Barry ffs

Benitez was brought in to win the league, he failed. Coming 4 points off top one season from 6 isn't "really close". Brenton came "really close", lost it by 2 points winning just 1 of the final 3 matches, that's really close.
What happened to Brenton? Proof of patience, or proof that saying "piss off mate, you're not good enough and this guy is clearly better" is more often than not, the more likely route to success?

Click to expand...

There is no guarantee with any manager klopp is not guaranteed to win anything else with liverpool nor Pep with city they could both have a bad run not win anything for a season or two and end up sacked and we could be here talking about there relative failures in a few years time.

I think your being remarkably arrogant in calling Benitez and houllier 'hopeless' they both had success they didnt manage to deliver the title but they both delivered trophies and they were largely consistent in what is a very competitive league where even the oil rich clubs of chelsea and city have had some struggles.

I'm sure houllier delivered the Mickey mouse treble in the same season as finishing above us, not exactly hopeless.

And Benitez won the CL and with a little more luck may well have won them a title again but hopeless.

I don't look too much into managers CVs its progress/playing style/transfers and ultimately where they actually finish that's the only things that matters.

Longshanks said:

I think your being remarkably arrogant in calling Benitez and houllier 'hopeless' they both had success they didnt manage to deliver the title but they both delivered trophies and they were largely consistent in what is a very competitive league where even the oil rich clubs of chelsea and city have had some struggles.

Click to expand...

And I think you’re being remarkably obtuse.

Houllier’s league finishes were terrible for the 2nd biggest club in the country, so were Benitez barring one season from 6.

Brenton bested both in less time. Klopp has shown the oil clubs or no oil clubs, a top manager gets it done.

Sacking managers has worked for Abramovich, it's his management philosophy. Di Matteo only lasting 8 months but won 2 of the big 3 trophies in that time being the most extreme example.

Different ways of managing a club to be successful.

Klopper76 said:

I've been thinking about making this thread for a couple of days now. During this season we've seen all three of the above managers come under pressure, so much so that all three have been on the verge of getting the sack at one point or another.

The point of this thread is to discuss why football fans are so impatient now. Is this a symptom of the modern football fan? Is it because there's more money involved and therefore more pressure from above on managers to get instant success? Is it something that started with the birth of fan channels like Arsenal Fan TV, which made Wenger's latter years entirely about whether you were Wenger in or Wenger out? Are the media some how at fault for increasing the pressure and looking for a good story?

I ask this because when I look at Arteta, Solskjaer and Lampard, I don't see managers brought in for instant success. I see long term planning and building by three clubs who wanted to make long term appointments and build for the future. If you're after instant success you bring in a manager with the CV to match. It's not always guaranteed but that's what you do. It's why United tried their luck with Van Gaal and Mourinho. It's why Arsenal brought Emery in. It's why Chelsea...oh who am I kidding it's a bloody merry-go-round there.

Solskjaer: Previous experience with Cardiff which saw them relegated, and then in Norway. Not an appointment you make for instant success.
Lampard: Ex player for Chelsea but his only experience was with Derby. It's extremely unlikely he's going to get Chelsea back to the top of the mountain right away.
Arteta: No managerial experience whatsoever.

So why is it that all three of these managers have been on the verge of the sack this season? Why are fans so impatient? Yes money has been spent but imagine where United would be right now if they'd sacked Solskjaer after losing to Burnley in January. How are these young managers ever supposed to build anything if the pitch forks are out as soon as a few bad results come in? It feels incredibly difficult for managers to build anything now with the way that pressure can build so quickly from within a club and externally as well. I've seen it on here with the constant debates over Ole in vs Ole out.

Klopp was only able to do what he did with Liverpool after several years of building a squad and adjusting his tactics. He came in with experience from Dortmund (title winning experience) but still needed several seasons to get us where we wanted to be. Pep was able to get City to a title within two seasons but only because he spent a bucket load and inherited some world class players like Kompany, Silva and Aguero. He also came from winning everything with Barcelona and Bayern Munich.

Is it unreasonable to expect some bumps in the road for young managers learning about their squads and how they want to set their sides up?

It's Arsenal Fan TV's fault isn't it?

Click to expand...

What I believe is that it's internet's fault, where every Tom, Dick and Harry have been given a voice to air their idiotic views, troll players and all. What that means is the clickbait journos/tabloids pick "fan opinions" up and start making news. Once a damning article is published by a newspaper, these shite opinions enter the mainstream and the noises around that opinion (no matter whether it is well researched or not) gains traction, and voila you have board under pressure to pull the trigger.

The issue is most people have pre-set notions about a manager and teams. For example, Mou in his 2nd season, might have finished 2nd, but every underlying stat was telling a different story. Look at this forum, and you have people worshipping Mou for that season, when in fact it was Dave's reflexes and superhuman season that got us 2nd. Similarly, last season - our underlying stats were pretty good, even Pre-Bruno, but people had made their minds that Ole is a failed Cardiff manager, and can not do anything right,

Longshanks said:

I'm sure houllier delivered the Mickey mouse treble in the same season as finishing above us, not exactly hopeless.

Click to expand...

No, those were two different seasons: they won their cups in 2001 and we won the league at a canter. Next season they finished above us but won nothing.

I think it's exacerbated by this season being so open, there's a genuine feeling that Liverpool/City have regressed (whether due to ageing players, injuries or poor recruitment) and fans can sense it's a year where there will be lots of crazy results. Add in that Ole, despite being quite old, is a relative novice and you can understand the nervousness around our early season form. I've seen a lot of threads about how our fanbase is knee jerk, toxic etc but we're no different to any other club, there are just more of us.

Maybe now Pochettino has gone it will calm down a bit on the United front.

We're impatient because impatience breeds results.

Chelsea showed it. Real Madrid and Barca have always shown it. City and Liverpool showed it. So have Bayern. PSG, Dortmund, Inter and Juve are no different.

You're more likely to win titles if you change managers whenever things aren't going in the right direction, than if you don't. Pretty much every single major club in Europe now subscribes to that philosophy.

I think what people consistently underestimate is that the manager one part of a huge team of coaches, analysts, medics and sport scientists. Incredibly important, don’t get me wrong - but more responsible for strategic direction of the club in co-ordination with the Sporting Director.

In most organisations, if results aren’t immediately fantastic, it’s the lower level staff who can the boot first. Then the middle managers, then ultimately the SMT. Football has largely had it the other way around for decades - few bad results and the bloke in the dugout is off.

I think clubs have increasingly recognised that constantly sacking managers is not conducive to building a winning team - and when I say team, I’m not only referring to the playing staff but also the huge number of staff who make up the background team.

The press don’t seem to have moved with the times though, they are still far too results orientated because that kind of short-term thinking sells papers and gets clicks. Most people don’t want to read stories about marginal improvements they like simple “good/bad” narratives

Klopper76 said:

Rodgers had three full seasons which you earlier defined as sticking with a manager (Souness).

Poor transfers, poor club management, players not good enough etc. There're numerous factors at play. You think in that era of football Liverpool would've had more success than they did if they'd sacked each of those managers within 12-14 months in favor of someone else?

Arteta, Solskjaer and Lampard are all completely new to managing big clubs. None of those three were brought in to be instantly successful. They were brought in with longer term visions in mind.

Click to expand...

Ole was brought in as an interim manager. He was given the job because of a couple of results. There was no long term vision. It was just the club making it up as they go. If Ole wins United something it is due to him growing as a manager and getting the right players in. United at least has no vision, just give every manager they hire all the power and hope that manager is the next Ferguson.

Dr. StrangeHate said:

Ole was brought in as an interim manager. He was given the job because of a couple of results. There was no long term vision. It was just the club making it up as they go. If Ole wins United something it is due to him growing as a manager and getting the right players in. United at least has no vision, just give every manager they hire all the power and hope that manager is the next Ferguson.

Click to expand...

Lampard was a similar story, brought in because they wouldn't convince a top manager to join whilst they have a transfer ban. No long term planning with Frank either, and I suspect he'll be out the door sooner rather than later, just like every other Chelsea manager.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

And I think you’re being remarkably obtuse.

Houllier’s league finishes were terrible for the 2nd biggest club in the country, so were Benitez barring one season from 6.

Brenton bested both in less time. Klopp has shown the oil clubs or no oil clubs, a top manager gets it done.

Click to expand...

Wow ok let's look at this liverpool's PL finishes under certain managers



Houllier:
7-4-3-2-5-4
Benitez:
5-3-3-2-4-7
Brenden:
6-2-6
Klopp
8-4-4-2-1

Houllier, benitez and klopp had remarkably similar first 4 seasons. Progress, consistency and silverware all included the kicker of course is the fact that klopp backed that up in his 5th season whereas benitez and houllier struggled and ultimately couldn't back up there initial success.

If anything brenden was the hopeless one barring a one off season sandwiched inbetween two 6th place finishes and ultimately got sacked with the team in 10th.

Benitez and houllier were certainly not hopeless and spouting it is frankly arrogant, they were not a complete success but they certainly weren't complete failures and definitely not hopeless.

If Klopp now fails to back up the last two seasons and liverpool struggle to a couple of top 4 finishes (or worse) would you be calling him hopeless? Or would he just be not quite hopeless?

I don’t have any time for Benitez, but he reached two CL finals with Liverpool and won one at a time when their squad wasn’t good enough. Yes he didn’t win the league, but he was hardly a failure at Liverpool.

On a different note, you can’t compare Moyes to Ole or Lampard/Arteta (but obviously I am more interested in Ole): Fergie thought (wrongly!!) that if Moyes can keep Everton upper mid table season after season by spending so little, what could he then achieve at United. So Moyes got his chance and failed at every level. He played the victim card all the time and blamed everyone but himself. Sometimes managers don’t have all the skills needed to be successful, but they still succeed for a certain time period or even long term because of certain skills / characteristics (past success/knowledge/experience, system, man management skills, getting players playing for you/buying into your ideas, legend status as an ex player/winner, dealing well with pressure, doing well with academy players. etc.). Moyes didn’t have or show any of these characteristics. That’s why he had to leave and should have been sacked much earlier. Not everyone deserves more time.

Jury will still be out long term on Ole probably for at least a couple of more seasons (assuming he stays at United), but over a shorter time period he has without doubt done much better than Moyes and dealt with setbacks much better.
Maybe Ole had it “easier” than Moyes (but you could as well argue he had it more difficult) as he didn’t take over the reigning champions but the mess left behind by Jose, and maybe he is respected more by players because of his own successful playing career.
However it’s mainly Moyes’ own fault. He openly claimed even SAF wouldn’t do better with this squad (after all that’s all players as reigning champions want to hear from their manager). Whereas Ole openly claimed he was happy with his squad and even when under huge pressure hasn’t thrown his players under the bus.
Despite Moyes’ no-show, the club actually still gave him a chance and broke our transfer record for him by giving him Mata. Mata was supposed to have a Bruno like effect. The less said about that the better.

Finally again on another note not every club is the same and history especially in terms of board and management structure does play a role.
At Bayern the board can mostly be trusted (even) without the head coach. At United this has rarely been the case. So why should it now change all off a sudden? Is Woodward going to define a play style and get the right managers and players in? I mean he hired Jose after LvG. So why should we all of a sudden assume that the board is going to get such football decisions right? Some peoples’ issues are that the manager is more important at United than at foreign big clubs. Well yes, if United had a board of legendary football people with great knowledge and experience (in football, not finance) than it would be the same here. But this is not the case and this is why at United the board and manager rely on each other more. That’s why I am all for sacking managers if there are no improvements, but not because “Bayern would have sacked their manager by now”, but because the manager is not working out at United (anymore) and there are other candidates who could do better under similar circumstances because these circumstances are not going to change short term (board, money men at board level who you may be able to convince of some changes once you have proven yourself a little bit and gained their trust, etc,).

WeePat said:

It's quite ironic that we've gone from some United fans last season holding up Lampard and Chelsea are some kind of example of what United and Ole are doing wrong to me thinking that Ole steadying the ship after several dicey moments and low points, and now placing United on this great upward trajectory is a great example for Chelsea to look at and what can happen if we keep the faith in Lampard..

Click to expand...

Chelsea need a Bruno Fernandes though.

A lot of people are impatient children who are used to/want instant gratification.

Dr. StrangeHate said:

Ole was brought in as an interim manager. He was given the job because of a couple of results. There was no long term vision. It was just the club making it up as they go. If Ole wins United something it is due to him growing as a manager and getting the right players in. United at least has no vision, just give every manager they hire all the power and hope that manager is the next Ferguson.

Click to expand...

I would suggest that Ole has instilled a sense of purpose and direction on United, being an interim manager to start now has nothing to do with that.

hobbers said:

We're impatient because impatience breeds results.

Chelsea showed it. Real Madrid and Barca have always shown it. City and Liverpool showed it. So have Bayern. PSG, Dortmund, Inter and Juve are no different.

You're more likely to win titles if you change managers whenever things aren't going in the right direction, than if you don't. Pretty much every single major club in Europe now subscribes to that philosophy.

Click to expand...

I'm still not convinced although a few people are arguing this in the thread. If you expand out the hire / fire philosophy to all clubs, then apart from an initial new manager boost, results don't change significantly on the whole. I think Soccernomics had a deep analysis on this subject and I'll treat that as true unless I see evidence otherwise.

With the top clubs specifically:

Chelsea are a bit of an anomaly, I don't know what to make of them.

RM / Barca / Bayern it works because their transfer policy is so good (helps that you can basically get any player you want) and at any point in time they have a squad that can win the league / CL. I don't think Madrid / Barca even in the depths of their rebuild had a side as bad as the one we / Liverpool had. The coach is "just" a tactician + man manager. The new guy can work with a clean slate can go about the job of calming egos which is 60% of the job there.

PSG / Dortmund / Inter / Juve - Sample size is still too small, can't claim this approach is fool proof yet. Inter haven't won anything, Juve spent shitloads and still got knocked out in the CL and are struggling in the league. PSG is RM-lite but remains to be seen if Poch can be successful where others have failed.

alexthelion said:

I would suggest that Ole has instilled a sense of purpose and direction on United, being an interim manager to start now has nothing to do with that.

Click to expand...

Of course nothing to do with it now. I am talking about how he was hired.

Longshanks said:

Wow ok let's look at this liverpool's PL finishes under certain managers



Houllier:
7-4-3-2-5-4
Benitez:
5-3-3-2-4-7
Brenden:
6-2-6
Klopp
8-4-4-2-1

Benitez and houllier were certainly not hopeless and spouting it is frankly arrogant, they were not a complete success but they certainly weren't complete failures and definitely not hopeless.

Click to expand...

If you think Houllier and Benitez league records there are anything other than hopeless for the second biggest club in the country, you are quite frankly off your rocker la'. Utterly hopeless.
For what it's worth, all said and done, Big Ron was also hopeless with us.

If Big Ron, Houllier or Benitez had been managing say, Arsenal, I'd say they did just about "ok". But they weren't, and they all failed.

Longshanks said:

If Klopp now fails to back up the last two seasons and liverpool struggle to a couple of top 4 finishes (or worse) would you be calling him hopeless? Or would he just be not quite hopeless?

Click to expand...

Hopeless of course. Although that said, 4th in 2020 is miles better than 7th, 4th etc in Houllier time without moneybags City and Chelsea.

renandstimpyfan83 said:

Brighton?

Watford had one of the best periods of the club’s history doing it. Southampton have had lots of managerial changes (not always by choice to be fair) and have consistently outperformed their budget. Leicester have been smart at knowing when to pull the trigger since coming up.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure Brighton qualifies for this in/out culture.

In 11 years we’ve had 5 managers. One, Garcia, resigned after a year, while the only other short lived one was Hyypia, who was the worst manager ever, he was sacked. The others Poyet and Hughton both stayed for more than 4 years and of course Potter is in the job right now.

Watford right now are a great example of why you shouldn’t switch managers at the drop of a hat.Soton wouldn’t have changed so much if it were purely the clubs choice, I’ll give you Leicester, but again they hardly have a reputation for hiring and firing.

anant said:

What I believe is that it's internet's fault, where every Tom, Dick and Harry have been given a voice to air their idiotic views, troll players and all. What that means is the clickbait journos/tabloids pick "fan opinions" up and start making news. Once a damning article is published by a newspaper, these shite opinions enter the mainstream and the noises around that opinion (no matter whether it is well researched or not) gains traction, and voila you have board under pressure to pull the trigger.

The issue is most people have pre-set notions about a manager and teams. For example, Mou in his 2nd season, might have finished 2nd, but every underlying stat was telling a different story. Look at this forum, and you have people worshipping Mou for that season, when in fact it was Dave's reflexes and superhuman season that got us 2nd. Similarly, last season - our underlying stats were pretty good, even Pre-Bruno, but people had made their minds that Ole is a failed Cardiff manager, and can not do anything right,

Click to expand...

So you're saying idiots on the internet are ultimately causing clubs to be impatient. And the two examples you name are Mourinho, who I take it was shown too much patience by the club in your opinion and Solskjaer who still seems safe in his seat, despite part of the fans complaing on the Internet from day one?

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

Well @Klopper76, I'd say you should know better than any.

How successful is patience? I mean:

• Souness: 3 years
• Roy Evans: 4.5 years
• Houllier: 6 years
• Benítez: 6 years

You guys went 20 years without a league and sacked only 4 managers .

Then you sacked 3 managers in just 5 years until you landed on a winner, and finally after 30 years of hurt you had a league title to show for it.

It's not just "impatience", we've all seen clubs stick with managers too long and it go very wrong, having an average or nothing CV only adds to that anxiety. We've also seen the likes of Bayern, Chelsea, Madrid make quick decisions regarding sacking managers and it having a hugely positive effect.

Click to expand...

Liverpools problem wasn't just the managers - I would actually say that Liverpool's biggest problem was that they constantly where left behind. While United turned into a gigantic money-machine, Liverpool stayed a small family-run company. We made a fortune with a much bigger stadium, a superbly run marketing-department etc - and Liverpool didn't develop at all. I would say you could easily claim that it took until 2010-> before Liverpool started to catch up. So they didn't have the money to catch up, and since we had the best manager in the business - they would have needed more money to compensate

Klopper76 said:

In 2017 and 2018 we had to win our final games to finish 4th. We were touch and go until the final day in both seasons.

Click to expand...

As another posted already pointed out, you were in top 4 the entire season, needing the final game was down to other teams below you not giving up.

When you confirm the top 4 spot has little bearing on whether a manager's job is under threat during the season if the team spends most of the season in the 3rd or 4th spot on the table. Ole was facing the sack because he was double digit points behind fourth and languishing in the 7-8th position by the time burnley loss happened. No manager of a team trying to be a top 4 team is going to be under pressure of losing the job if he is in the top 4 for most of the season.

rotherham_red said:

That's just not true re Klopp in his first two seasons. They didn't firmly establish themselves as a top 4 club under him until his 3rd full season (virtually his 4th season).

Klopp undeniably made great progress but it wasn't on the basis of his league form. It was, perhaps quite ironically considering his attitude towards them now, his cup runs in the EL and EFL Cup, as well as his run in the CL in 17/18, that gave the biggest glimpse. In the league they were patchy within games and over the course of the season and they almost habitually seemed to run out of steam by February/March.

I still maintain though, that above all else, even Klopp's methods, that it was their astute use of the Coutinho money that transformed them. Much like a lot of those outside of Utd think that Ole can only go so far, I thought the same of Klopp back then. I thought he'd done well to get them consistent top 4 status but that he didn't quite have it within him to topple prime Pep and the City project when it was at its zenith (if Pep wasn't there however, then I did think it would be a level playing field which would have given Klopp, as well as Poch and Jose at the time a much bigger chance). Fast forward 12 months from that Coutinho sale though, and they managed to bring in three crucial pieces which turned them into a serious team.

I know a lot of people don't like the comparison to Klopp and think it's insulting, but the parallels between Ole and him are certainly there for me and while he might never win the PL and CL, I would be interested to see what he'd do if the board actually backed him properly for once and brought in all his first choice targets on time. Because make no bones about it, some of the first choice players we have in 3 key positions in particular, would be squad players in a proper title challenging side. The players in question are IMO McTominay &/or Fred, Lindelof, and the non-existent RW, where we're having to make do with Rashford/Greenwood there, who are more suited to the Left and striker roles respectively. Bring adequate players there and I'm sure you will see a marked difference.

It's to Ole and the team's credit that we're in the position we are at this point because the last time a Utd manager had a similar level of backing from the board to the one Ole received in 2020, the club was ending the year closer in terms of points to relegation than they were to the top 4, and rather than look upwards, we were looking over our shoulders at Wolves and Bournemouth coming up from behind.

The progress from that low point has been undeniable, and as long as the progress is sustained, Ole deserves the time and support. If we don't meet the minimum threshold under him at the end of the season then he should go and we should wish him all the best, but not until then. Once he brings in the first choice targets in the key positions he requires (i.e. a RW, CB and DM) then the targets would be increased, like I'm sure they had been for Klopp once Allison, Fabinho, and VVD had been bought over that 6-12 months period in the summer of 2017-18. Klopp rose to the challenge, and the question for Ole is if he would do likewise.

Click to expand...

That is just pure bs, i don't know where you are getting this alternate history from but it definitely did not happen in the real world. Klopp in his first full season got liverpool into the top 4 on matchday 5, from that point onwards to end of the season liverpool spent all but 1 week in top 4. For most of the season liverpool were 2nd or 3rd eventually they finished 4th.

And since you see similarities between ole and klopp, just to show similar they are. Ole also had utd 4th by match day 5 mid September, but from then on united were not in top 4 until second last game of the season. Ole deserves to keep or lose his job based on his performance and same goes for every other manager, that was never my problem.

My issue is with people twisting facts about Klopp's start at liverpool to try and paint a rosy picture about ole or lampard or arteta with key word always being patience, when reality is different. Klopp brought consistency to liverpool, something others who seek comparison with him haven't to their respective clubs. Patience is reward for his consistency.

do.ob said:

So you're saying idiots on the internet are ultimately causing clubs to be impatient. And the two examples you name are Mourinho, who I take it was shown too much patience by the club in your opinion and Solskjaer who still seems safe in his seat, despite part of the fans complaing on the Internet from day one?

Click to expand...

The examples were for our club, and Mou was given a longer leash because of idiots on the internet, when he should've been sacked earlier. Solskjaer was on the verge of sack after Istanbul, despite us having had an exceptional record this year.

Surely there are a lot more examples where managers have been sacked thanks to fan pressure, but no one knows if the situation would have turned around (and that's not an argument I'm willing to get into)

Regulus Arcturus Black said:

If you think Houllier and Benitez league records there are anything other than hopeless for the second biggest club in the country, you are quite frankly off your rocker la'. Utterly hopeless.
For what it's worth, all said and done, Big Ron was also hopeless with us.

If Big Ron, Houllier or Benitez had been managing say, Arsenal, I'd say they did just about "ok". But they weren't, and they all failed.



Hopeless of course. Although that said, 4th in 2020 is miles better than 7th, 4th etc in Houllier time without moneybags City and Chelsea.

Click to expand...

At what point would you of sacked big Ron? Benitez? Houllier? None of them were hopeless, ultimately your right in the fact they all failed but utterly hopeless? Pretty much every manager in our history has been hopeless other than sir Matt and Sir Alex in your world then?

You are aware that 2nd biggest guarantees nothing? We are the biggest and our last 7 years have been worse than what houllier and Benitez delivered for liverpool.

In all honesty whatever I say wont change your mind, you are very much the modern fan where success is winning the title and failure is not I suspect you call it having high standards.

Benitez and houllier both built competitive liverpool sides that challenged for and won some trophies. If that's hopeless I would argue your standards are too high and you will be forever unhappy.

SmallCaine said:

That is just pure bs, i don't know where you are getting this alternate history from but it definitely did not happen in the real world. Klopp in his first full season got liverpool into the top 4 on matchday 5, from that point onwards to end of the season liverpool spent all but 1 week in top 4. For most of the season liverpool were 2nd or 3rd eventually they finished 4th.

And since you see similarities between ole and klopp, just to show similar they are. Ole also had utd 4th by match day 5 mid September, but from then on united were not in top 4 until second last game of the season. Ole deserves to keep or lose his job based on his performance and same goes for every other manager, that was never my problem.

My issue is with people twisting facts about Klopp's start at liverpool to try and paint a rosy picture about ole or lampard or arteta with key word always being patience, when reality is different. Klopp brought consistency to liverpool, something others who seek comparison with him haven't to their respective clubs. Patience is reward for his consistency.

Click to expand...

Top 4 wasn't assured for him until the last game week in that first season he reached it and it was only slightly better the season after.

Like I said, Ole at a bare minimum needs to sustain top 4. If he doesn't, then he will be just about deservedly sacked, even if there are some potential mitigating factors. But even if he went, there have been a boatload more positives than negatives.and he will be looked upon fondly, which isn't something you could say about Jose, LvG or Moyes.