andersj
Nick Powell Expert
There appear to be a common misconception among supporters, and maybe even at boardroom level at our club, that a long term strategy at a football club rely on the coach/manager. Man Utd appears to have been on the search for a new Sir Alex Ferguson ever since he left.
Having one manager in charge for such a long period of time gave Man Utd several advantages and an edge on some of our rivals. First and foremost, we had continuity and a direction for our club. We could plan for the long term in a manner very few could.
In a way it makes sense that it used to be that way. When there was less money and the sport was less professional you had less staff. The manager (hence the term «manager», not a coach) acted a bit like a CEO of a small company and was literally in charge of everything relating to the sporting department of the club. Today, at a top club, you have a sport science department, including doctors, physios, data analysts etc. Specialists. All of these will, in a sense, bring continuity along with the top management at a club.
These days, it appear to be the other way around. Trying to plan for the long term through a coach/manager dont bring continuity at all. Quite the contarary actually. Building to have a manager for a longer period does not make the club robust. Rather it makes the club fragile as you could be locked to an underperforming coach. It also gives the manager the chance to hide behind the term of «a long term project».
Furthermore, the status of the head coach is volatile. It is subject to the handling of big egos and putting in place the right game plan against rival clubs. He will be measured every weekend by media and supporters on what is likely to be a small part of a managers job. Small, but very, very important and that is why you have to seperate it. A manager could do a great job developing the club, co-operating with management, but if he fails on the pitch he will be most likely be gone very soon.
Some of the most successfull clubs in Europe over the past decade changes head coach quite often. Chelsea, Real Madrid and Bayern had between seven and ten managers between 2010 and 2020. Liverpool and Man City with Klopp and Pep appears to be outliers at this point. You can not expect to stumble across a new Pep or Klopp when hiring a manager.
The fact that a club can change head coach often and continue competing for titles is, in my opinion, proof that they are robust. Their long term planing do not rely on one individual. They dont have to start from scratch every time they get a new coach. Why is that?
I’m sure there are several good reasons. But crucially, their long term strategy comes from the top (board/management). Their recruitment, that is not the job of the coach, reflects that. There are also a sport science department taking care of their assets with a long term view.
When Bayern hired Louis van Gaal it was their first step towards playing possession-football. Their intention was that he would do the groundwork for Pep Guardiola. Ever since they have hired managers who wants to play high-press, possession football. Their recruitment reflect that. When Man Utd hired van Gaal we ended up replacing him with Mourinho (ironically, Woodward later argued that Mourinho to a bigger degree than van Gaal felt like a long term solution).
Most likely, an elite coach will look for a club where a long term strategy and proper structure is in place. A good coach will likely understand what they can do and what they can not do. Implementing a long term strategy in a position that rely on short term results is in the bracket of what they cannot do. To succeed, they have to be part of a club/organization with a long term strategy that align with theirs, and where the infrastructure to succeed, including support staff, is already in place.
When Ferguson left I was convinced we could attract any manager/coach in the world. But as it turned out, the two best coaches, were never really interested. The pitch to Klopp about Disneyland was probably not the only turnoff about Man Utd.
In summary, I strongly believe that to plan long term you need to have an organization where changing coach every now and then will not be considered a big issue. You prefer not to, and try to find a Ferguson/Klopp, but you can if it is needed. You want to create an organization where the coach is part of the long term strategy, but he can never be the long term strategy or outline it. Some will say that the key is a strong DoF and that is obviously part of it. But more importantly, you need a competent board.
From the outside, it is hard to assess where Man Utd is at right now. We have recentley hired Murtough and Fletcher as DoF and technical director (whatever that mean). That could be a first step in the right direction. But the clubs unwillingness to take action the last few weeks, and rumours about prefering a long term option as coach and consequently ignoring a few great options that have been available the last twelve month, makes me less confident about the strategy and direction of our club. It feels like Man Utd have a long term strategy that are tied close to the manager making it difficult to move him on as it will make us start from scratch, Again. If that is the case, we are in a very fragile position.
TL;DR
Having one manager in charge for such a long period of time gave Man Utd several advantages and an edge on some of our rivals. First and foremost, we had continuity and a direction for our club. We could plan for the long term in a manner very few could.
In a way it makes sense that it used to be that way. When there was less money and the sport was less professional you had less staff. The manager (hence the term «manager», not a coach) acted a bit like a CEO of a small company and was literally in charge of everything relating to the sporting department of the club. Today, at a top club, you have a sport science department, including doctors, physios, data analysts etc. Specialists. All of these will, in a sense, bring continuity along with the top management at a club.
These days, it appear to be the other way around. Trying to plan for the long term through a coach/manager dont bring continuity at all. Quite the contarary actually. Building to have a manager for a longer period does not make the club robust. Rather it makes the club fragile as you could be locked to an underperforming coach. It also gives the manager the chance to hide behind the term of «a long term project».
Furthermore, the status of the head coach is volatile. It is subject to the handling of big egos and putting in place the right game plan against rival clubs. He will be measured every weekend by media and supporters on what is likely to be a small part of a managers job. Small, but very, very important and that is why you have to seperate it. A manager could do a great job developing the club, co-operating with management, but if he fails on the pitch he will be most likely be gone very soon.
Some of the most successfull clubs in Europe over the past decade changes head coach quite often. Chelsea, Real Madrid and Bayern had between seven and ten managers between 2010 and 2020. Liverpool and Man City with Klopp and Pep appears to be outliers at this point. You can not expect to stumble across a new Pep or Klopp when hiring a manager.
The fact that a club can change head coach often and continue competing for titles is, in my opinion, proof that they are robust. Their long term planing do not rely on one individual. They dont have to start from scratch every time they get a new coach. Why is that?
I’m sure there are several good reasons. But crucially, their long term strategy comes from the top (board/management). Their recruitment, that is not the job of the coach, reflects that. There are also a sport science department taking care of their assets with a long term view.
When Bayern hired Louis van Gaal it was their first step towards playing possession-football. Their intention was that he would do the groundwork for Pep Guardiola. Ever since they have hired managers who wants to play high-press, possession football. Their recruitment reflect that. When Man Utd hired van Gaal we ended up replacing him with Mourinho (ironically, Woodward later argued that Mourinho to a bigger degree than van Gaal felt like a long term solution).
Most likely, an elite coach will look for a club where a long term strategy and proper structure is in place. A good coach will likely understand what they can do and what they can not do. Implementing a long term strategy in a position that rely on short term results is in the bracket of what they cannot do. To succeed, they have to be part of a club/organization with a long term strategy that align with theirs, and where the infrastructure to succeed, including support staff, is already in place.
When Ferguson left I was convinced we could attract any manager/coach in the world. But as it turned out, the two best coaches, were never really interested. The pitch to Klopp about Disneyland was probably not the only turnoff about Man Utd.
In summary, I strongly believe that to plan long term you need to have an organization where changing coach every now and then will not be considered a big issue. You prefer not to, and try to find a Ferguson/Klopp, but you can if it is needed. You want to create an organization where the coach is part of the long term strategy, but he can never be the long term strategy or outline it. Some will say that the key is a strong DoF and that is obviously part of it. But more importantly, you need a competent board.
From the outside, it is hard to assess where Man Utd is at right now. We have recentley hired Murtough and Fletcher as DoF and technical director (whatever that mean). That could be a first step in the right direction. But the clubs unwillingness to take action the last few weeks, and rumours about prefering a long term option as coach and consequently ignoring a few great options that have been available the last twelve month, makes me less confident about the strategy and direction of our club. It feels like Man Utd have a long term strategy that are tied close to the manager making it difficult to move him on as it will make us start from scratch, Again. If that is the case, we are in a very fragile position.
TL;DR