Great squad/Average coach or Average squad/Great coach

[tenpoless]

Gary Neville could have won Zidane's 3 CL league titles in a row with that Madrid squad. Also, what makes a great coach? Pep was regarded as by far the best in the world not long ago, but he'd never had anything other than the best squad in his league, so how do we tell what the main factor was? Was it Pep or was it his players? His squad maybe isn't the best in the league for the first time ever and they're miles off the pace.

Nice one.

 

[Bilbo]

I'll throw a fireball into this:

Coaches matter very little, it's mostly down to the players.

Even the very best coaches need the right players to produce a top quality team

 

[Eckers99]

Great squad. It's easier - and quicker - to sack a manager and start again with all the right ingredients for success than it is to build a great squad from scratch under the right guy.

 

[Foxbatt]

Terrible coach and average squad with some very good players included in the squad.

 

[MikeKing]

For the longterm a great coach will make a tremendous difference, in the short term it will be totally relative to all of the circumstances in each particular situation and if he is a great coach or not might not even determine if a club will succeed or fail in that space of time.

I think the right person for the right job at the right moment isn't automatically always the one with the highest scoring points on his CV.

Relative to the situation at United, I think for the short term Ole is a sensible appointment if in fact our whole club has been united in our big picture approach, and provided the things promised will come to fruition. Hopefully the expectations will rise again, and Ole should be applauded for that if it happens, but I'm aware he might then not be good enough to deliver that final step. He might be right for the short term to get us in the right direction, and if so, we have to make sure to build on it when he has reached his limit instead of giving him infinite time based on sentimental reasons. Either way, if he is to stay he has to prove it. The signs right now might seem trivial in the context of winning things, but I've been satisfied with the change in our approach and despite my refusal to celebrate that as an achievement in it self at this point I wont take that improvement for granted.

I was flabbergasted before the season and did not expect top 4, and while that view is still true I have been pleasantly surprised by some of those relied on like Fred, McTominay, Rashford, Martial etc. My hope is that we sell those that has proved themselves useless this season like Lingard, Mata etc. No excuses left for some of these players, and it was about time.

 

[Mainoldo]

Gary Neville could have won Zidane's 3 CL league titles in a row with that Madrid squad. Also, what makes a great coach? Pep was regarded as by far the best in the world not long ago, but he'd never had anything other than the best squad in his league, so how do we tell what the main factor was? Was it Pep or was it his players? His squad maybe isn't the best in the league for the first time ever and they're miles off the pace.

So why didn’t anyone else before and after Zidane do it.

 

[Relevated]

Average squad?

Allison - top 3 keepers in the world
Trent - best RB in the world
Robbo - top 3 LB in the world
VVD- Best Cb in the world
Gomez - One of the most promising CB's around

Fabinho - Best CDM in the PL
Gini / Hendo / Keita / Ox / Milner - Good rotation options / captain / Leaders

Front 3 - Best front 3 in the world

If that is an average squad what is the following?

DDG - Past his best
AWB - One of the best defensive RB
Lindelof - Meh
Maguire - top 10 CB in the world
Shaw - Meh
McTominay / Fred / Matic - Okay rotation
Pogba - Virus
Rashford - Inconsistent
Martial - Inconsistent
James - Inconsistent

Why are you comparing to united?

You have listed their whole midfield as good squad options. And a cb that's promising, not exactly world class is it. That's average.

 

[Mainoldo]

they have more than 3 class players. Allison, VVD, Trent, Robertson, Fabinho, Salah, Mane, and Firmino are all class.

Well we have as many as them. Why we crap.

 

[ash_86]

That, quite frankly, is not true. Not saying a good but not brilliant coach cannot do well with a great squad, but even the best squads can be easiy mis-managed by the wrong guy. Success is certainly never automtic.

That's the thing. If the manager could not get beat out of a great squad he can be let go without a of doubt. Any decent to good manager will certainly challenge the league with them. Look at Pellegrini and Mancini at City. Hardly great managers but won multiple titles using the great squad.

 

[red woppit]

There is no definitive answer to this. A world class coach would almost certainly improve a team/squad somewhat, as they probably would with our current lot, but with all the injuries I don't think we would be in top three, possibly 4th. Conversely, a world class team may produce world class performances, but if the coach has bad ideas/tactics etc, then that world class team may not put those performances in consistently. With United at the moment we neither have a world class coach or team, but personally I would give Ole another season to get in the players he wants, then we would see how good he was.

 

[romufc]

Why are you comparing to united?

You have listed their whole midfield as good squad options. And a cb that's promising, not exactly world class is it. That's average.

Why am I comparing? you have labelled Liverpool team as average.

Manutd team is average and there is probably 1 WC player in there at best.

Liverpool have Gk, RB, LB, CB, CDM, RW, LW, ST all world class.

Their midfield of Henderson (favourite to win PFA player's player), Gini are very good players and have squad options in Ox, Keita.

Having 3/11 players average does not make the team average when you have 7 WC players in your team.

I say this because those players will walk into most teams.

 

[Relevated]

no. but Revelated's post implies that they currently still are an average squad, and are only performing well collectively because of Klopp. certainly Klopp has helped make some of those players better, but it's wrong to label that squad as 'average'. it's not. Salah, Mane, VVD, Trent, Allison are all WC.

You're telling me if someone like Ole or moyes managed then they'd be top of the table? They're only collectively WC, put them elsewhere and majority are average and that's only thanks to Klopp that they're so good.

 

[romufc]

Well we have as many as them. Why we crap.

What? We barely have one WC player. They have 7. Last time I checked 7 >>>> 1

 

[harms]

It's easier to find a great coach than to assemble a great squad. On the other hand, a great coach should be given freedom to change and assemble the squad that he wants, because there was never a manager capable of achieving consistent greatness with an average side without the ability to adjust it — not Fergie, not Klopp and not Simeone.

If we're talking about one season in isolation, where the squad and the manager see each other for the first time just before pre-season training starts, I'd go with the squad. But if we're trying to fix a side with an average squad and an average manager, like United currently does, you should begin by appointing a right manager.

 

[Stelsh]

Average squad and great coach, because great coach could improve average squad, but great squad would get down by average coach.

 

[MoskvaRed]

A great coach as things stand. If we modernised the overall football club structure, we would have more chance of succeeding with a merely good coach rather than trying to land the next Fergie or Klopp.

 

[Leftback99]

How many great coaches have won anything or even finished top 4 with average squads? Contrast with how many great squads have won stuff with average/unproven managers. It's not even a debate, having top players is far more important.

 

[Varun]

Average squad, great coach.

Look at Liverpool.

Liverpool? They have 8-9 absolutely tier 1 players in their starting 11. Klopp's a great coach but their current first 11 is probably the best in world football.

 

[Chipper]

Neither United or Liverpool have an average squad. Both are considerably above.

 

[Jericho]

I'd lean towards great squad/average coach, if you look at Barca after Pep left as an example.

 

[Ish]

Liverpool? They have 8-9 absolutely tier 1 players in their starting 11. Klopp's a great coach but their current first 11 is probably the best in world football.

Tbf, there’s a massive “correlation/causation” conundrum with Pool. Before Klopp arrived, how many of their players would have been considered tier 1?

I’m sure it’s not entirely down to Klopp (some players would have developed irrespective of the coach)....but he’s certainly gotten a tune out of them. Question is, how much?

 

[Member 113277]

I see us as above average squad with some weakspots and coach who is developing. Time will see how it ends.

 

[shaky]

So why didn’t anyone else before and after Zidane do it.

It was the perfect storm of many great players in their peak, combined with a huge bit of luck going their way in so many crucial moments. I'm not sure if Zidane was really the mastermind behind it, rather than just in the right place at the right time.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

It's United we're talking about. Given the particularities and the history of our club, i'd pick a great manager every single time i had to make the choice. With patience, a great manager would create a great side. It has never worked the other way around for us.

Both Real Madrid and Barcelona would probably keep being successful with average managers, for a while, but for different reasons. The former have turned the places in their first-team into the pinnacle in a footballer's career, especially as the Spanish speaking countries are concerned. Barca have their own modus operandi, they know what type of players they want to produce. Then you have financial behemoths (with a bit of financial doping, as it seems) like City and Chelsea who can afford to buy their way into a higher status in the football world.

But it's not like that the aforementioned clubs didn't go through their own dark periods or that they didn't benefit from picking great managers at crucial crossroads in their history. Real Madrid went from 3/5 CL titles to not winning a single knock-out tie in Europe for several years under the guidance of Queiroz, Luxemburgo, a washed-up Capello, Schuster, Juande Ramos and Pellegrini. People keep pointing at Barcelona under Luis Enrique and Valverde but where would Barcelona even be now without the great Cruyff or without Pep leading their most recent team to unprecedented levels. Mourinho, at his managerial peak, used Abramovic's money to create a side with such solid defensive foundations and strength of character which all the average managers that followed after him kept milking for many years. And you seriously can't tell me that Mancini/Pellegrini's City were as intimidating and revered for the quality of their football as Pep's. In team sports, what constitutes a "great" squad is more than having 8-9 primadonnas in your ranks. It's about tactics, vision, good planning and building team character. You can take the short-cut (money) to assemble the potential but in order for that potential to be fulfilled, you need a great manager. Then the Valverdes, the Enriques and the Di Matteos can win some silverware for themselves. But when you ask these guys to do the heavy lifting and give the team an identity, they will stumble and fall on most occasions. I guess it's easy to see in which category United belongs atm.

United's successful periods always revolved around a family environment with the manager as the leader. As a club, we have always depended on the manager for guidance. We don't have a distinct way of playing football (other than being entertaining and attack) like Barcelona, we can't monopolize the local talent pool like Bayern or Juventus do, we never were as attractive as Ream Madrid and we can't afford to spend maniacally like City and Chelsea. We've always taken pride in being a traditional football club like our bitter rivals in Merseyside. Look what a great manager has done for them. Now, close your eyes and imagine them being coached by any other manager except Klopp.

It's similar to saying that someone like Solskjaer (who i suppose for some should be blameless because of the poor quality of our squad) would have been as successful as Sir Alex if he had taken over at the start of 1992/93 season when Ferguson finally had his team ready to win the title. You're fooling yourselves. That team and the ones that followed had Fergie's signature from top to bottom. An average manager might have squeezed the squad up until the mid naughties and that would be it. We would still have needed Fergie's character, his vision and his ability to adapt.

 

[oggy boy]

Think of it this way...

Would you rather be watching -

A. Bournemouth coached by Guardiola

B. Man City coached by Moyes / Solskjaer

Genuine question and probably the best way to view this debate.

Good question!

I would vote for A.

City would finish higher, but I would bleed watching great players coached by a mediocre coach,
not fulfilling their potential. On the other hand, Bournemouth would play some nice football, but probably be mid-table at the best.

 

[Bilbo]

For the longterm a great coach will make a tremendous difference, in the short term it will be totally relative to all of the circumstances in each particular situation and if he is a great coach or not might not even determine if a club will succeed or fail in that space of time.

I think the right person for the right job at the right moment isn't automatically always the one with the highest scoring points on his CV.

Relative to the situation at United, I think for the short term Ole is a sensible appointment if in fact our whole club has been united in our big picture approach, and provided the things promised will come to fruition. Hopefully the expectations will rise again, and Ole should be applauded for that if it happens, but I'm aware he might then not be good enough to deliver that final step. He might be right for the short term to get us in the right direction, and if so, we have to make sure to build on it when he has reached his limit instead of giving him infinite time based on sentimental reasons. Either way, if he is to stay he has to prove it. The signs right now might seem trivial in the context of winning things, but I've been satisfied with the change in our approach and despite my refusal to celebrate that as an achievement in it self at this point I wont take that improvement for granted.

I was flabbergasted before the season and did not expect top 4, and while that view is still true I have been pleasantly surprised by some of those relied on like Fred, McTominay, Rashford, Martial etc. My hope is that we sell those that has proved themselves useless this season like Lingard, Mata etc. No excuses left for some of these players, and it was about time.

Good post

 

[Mainoldo]

What? We barely have one WC player. They have 7. Last time I checked 7 >>>> 1

7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you taking the mick. VVD; Allisson; Mane; Robertson and Fabinho get straight into this team.

Allisson at a push. Roberston because our left backs are standard and Mane because he's world class and we have no one on the right. Fabinho's just for balance. Where are you coming in with so much conviction i don't know.

Ole would have that same Liverpool team sitting in 5th.

 

[Varun]

Tbf, there’s a massive “correlation/causation” conundrum with Pool. Before Klopp arrived, how many of their players would have been considered tier 1?

I’m sure it’s not entirely down to Klopp (some players would have developed irrespective of the coach)....but he’s certainly gotten a tune out of them. Question is, how much?

For sure but when talking about the 'current' Liverpool first 11, one has to acknowledge how ridiculously good they are.

 

[Compton22]

Look what Fergie had to work with in his last few years. I preferred watching that team to watching our supposedly better players for the 5 years after.

A great coach can improve average players and seeing that happen for me is much better than an average manager inheriting a brilliant team.

 

[Relevated]

ITT: Stockholm Stockholm syndrome is real.

 

[AshRK]

7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are you taking the mick. VVD; Allisson; Mane; Robertson and Fabinho get straight into this team.

Allisson at a push. Roberston because our left backs are standard and Mane because he's world class and we have no one on the right. Fabinho's just for balance. Where are you coming in with so much conviction i don't know.

Ole would have that same Liverpool team sitting in 5th.

Salah would walk into this team and considering Rashford is injured Firminio would also be a good shout and Mane definitely would walk into this team, so that's the fron 3 for you. In midfield considering we are without Pogba, I would say maybe Bruno would walk into their line up but apart from that I am not sure, maybe Fred. In defense the only person who has a slight claim to play in the Liverpool side is Maguire (massively underrated by some United fans), other than that I don't think others have any claim.

As for world class, well I would say they have more world class than we have. De Gea seems the only one who we can say is WC and maybe Pogba, rest could become but they are not WC now.

 

[bosnian_red]

Goal should be to build a team that can be competitive regardless of coach, like Real Madrid and Barca have been the last decade. The right coach will take it up a level and win the trophies, fight for the CL's and you'll know you are truly one of the top 3 or so teams in the world with them, while without them you'll feel like you should be better but at the end of the day, still go far.

If we luck into a coach first and they can build the side, great. But not having a great coach doesnt mean you cant build a top side that is just missing the coach. And I dont think we're too far off that IMO. Sancho, Grealish, time for young player development, and some more improvement in defence (better partner to Maguire than lindelof, might be at the club already). With the right coach, if we sign Sancho/Grealish or equivalent, should lead us to competing for trophies within the next couple of years.

 

[Ish]

For sure but when talking about the 'current' Liverpool first 11, one has to acknowledge how ridiculously good they are.

Yeah, zero arguments there. Probably/arguably have a player top 3-5 in the world, in every position, with the exception of their CM’s - and even they are magnificent in Klopp’s system.

 

[Ish]

I guess the question of the thread could be twisted a bit: is a great director of football/Board more important than a great coach!

 

[Classical Mechanic]

City won titles with Pellegrini and Mancini so you just need the squad.

 

[Class of 63]

Great squad and an Average coach obviously, was is it even open to debate?

 

[InspiRED]

Think of it this way...

Would you rather be watching -

A. Bournemouth coached by Guardiola

B. Man City coached by Moyes / Solskjaer

Genuine question and probably the best way to view this debate.

A moyes solskjaer hybrid. Gonna have nightmares tonight.

 

[darko]

Neither United or Liverpool have an average squad. Both are considerably above.

You talk sense.

When Salah, Mane or Firmino came to Liverpool did they come with bigger expectations than Lukaku, Alexis, Depay not to mention Pogba?

Wasn't it true that United fans made fun of Henderson and Milner?

I agree United have an above-average squad. I'd say better than Sheffield United and better than Leicester City.

 

[darko]

It's United we're talking about. Given the particularities and the history of our club, i'd pick a great manager every single time i had to make the choice. With patience, a great manager would create a great side. It has never worked the other way around for us.

Both Real Madrid and Barcelona would probably keep being successful with average managers, for a while, but for different reasons. The former have turned the places in their first-team into the pinnacle in a footballer's career, especially as the Spanish speaking countries are concerned. Barca have their own modus operandi, they know what type of players they want to produce. Then you have financial behemoths (with a bit of financial doping, as it seems) like City and Chelsea who can afford to buy their way into a higher status in the football world.

But it's not like that the aforementioned clubs didn't go through their own dark periods or that they didn't benefit from picking great managers at crucial crossroads in their history. Real Madrid went from 3/5 CL titles to not winning a single knock-out tie in Europe for several years under the guidance of Queiroz, Luxemburgo, a washed-up Capello, Schuster, Juande Ramos and Pellegrini. People keep pointing at Barcelona under Luis Enrique and Valverde but where would Barcelona even be now without the great Cruyff or without Pep leading their most recent team to unprecedented levels. Mourinho, at his managerial peak, used Abramovic's money to create a side with such solid defensive foundations and strength of character which all the average managers that followed after him kept milking for many years. And you seriously can't tell me that Mancini/Pellegrini's City were as intimidating and revered for the quality of their football as Pep's. In team sports, what constitutes a "great" squad is more than having 8-9 primadonnas in your ranks. It's about tactics, vision, good planning and building team character. You can take the short-cut (money) to assemble the potential but in order for that potential to be fulfilled, you need a great manager. Then the Valverdes, the Enriques and the Di Matteos can win some silverware for themselves. But when you ask these guys to do the heavy lifting and give the team an identity, they will stumble and fall on most occasions. I guess it's easy to see in which category United belongs atm.

United's successful periods always revolved around a family environment with the manager as the leader. As a club, we have always depended on the manager for guidance. We don't have a distinct way of playing football (other than being entertaining and attack) like Barcelona, we can't monopolize the local talent pool like Bayern or Juventus do, we never were as attractive as Ream Madrid and we can't afford to spend maniacally like City and Chelsea. We've always taken pride in being a traditional football club like our bitter rivals in Merseyside. Look what a great manager has done for them. Now, close your eyes and imagine them being coached by any other manager except Klopp.

It's similar to saying that someone like Solskjaer (who i suppose for some should be blameless because of the poor quality of our squad) would have been as successful as Sir Alex if he had taken over at the start of 1992/93 season when Ferguson finally had his team ready to win the title. You're fooling yourselves. That team and the ones that followed had Fergie's signature from top to bottom. An average manager might have squeezed the squad up until the mid naughties and that would be it. We would still have needed Fergie's character, his vision and his ability to adapt.

Out of curiosity, do you think that the expectations of Klopp were /are not as great as any manager at United post-Ferguson? Is there less patience at United post-Ferguson.

What happened after the Busby years?

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Out of curiosity, do you think that the expectations of Klopp were /are not as great as any manager at United post-Ferguson? Is there less patience at United post-Ferguson.

What happened after the Busby years?

They are/were definitely not as far as, firstly, Moyes and now Solskjaer is concerned. A good chunk of our fanbase consciously lowered the expectations for these two managers. I don't remember this happening with Klopp. Coincidently (or not) these two have less impressive CVs than LvG and Mourinho. And they both performed exactly how their previous jobs suggested they would (you can say that the jury is still out on Solskjaer). And this is why i went a bit off-topic on this thread. Because many Ole-in posters are pretty adamant that an average manager could do the trick for us. They want the great squad to be created (not just assembled) by an average manager. And that's why you hear nonsense like that even Klopp and Pep would struggle with our squad. They really wouldn't. We would have been in a much better place under their guidance.

I don't think there's less patience now. If anything, we've been very kind to all managers in the post-Ferguson era. This doesn't mean that the persona of the manager isn't important for this club. Being patient doesn't mean that we should show patience with everyone. After the Busby years, we struggled because we made lots of bad choices and some of them can be traced back to Busby himself who was among the people who called the shots up until the late '70s. But this doesn't change the fact that the person who finally broke the curse for us was the closest thing to Busby we could find. When we were trying to clone Busby, we got relegated. When we found an up & coming, tactically astute manager who loves to build new sides and puts a lot of focus on a "family atmosphere" around the club, we became the best club in the world.

I think it's clear that we're trying the cloning thing with Solskjaer. And as far as this thread goes, we won't have much luck waiting for an average manager to create a great team. It's like counting how many world-class players Liverpool have compared to us while "forgetting" that most (if not all) of them gained their world-class status under Klopp.