The addition of a new assistant coach

[romufc]

There appears to be enough staff with Phelan, McKenna, Carrick and a goal keeping coach. I'd think Carrick works a lot with the midfielders, Solskjær with the forwards and McKenna is highly rated.

If they want to dig in deeper, they could start hiring specialists for set pieces and throw-ins like Klopp did.

I agree with this. I have heard on podcasts previously that McKenna is very highly rated coach. People forget Jose had him as his coach too along with Carrick.

Like you say, we might need to get a set piece coach that can help us work on them defending and attacking, if we can concede 5/6 less goals from set pieces and score 5/6 more, we will automatically be a better team.

Look at Liverpool, there are games they have struggled to win / score in and a set piece usually does it for them. The thing about a set piece is that, you do not need to play well to score from one.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Get a new assistant coach(es) good in coaching these missing things,

1. Highest priority - good structure and positioning, most useful during our build-up and against good organized high press.
2. High priority - attacking style on good organized patterns of attacks, most useful to break good organized low blocks. This is important when Bruno is out, prepare early.
3. Low priority - good organized pressing as a team together, players in sync with good structure and strategy. Good high pressings can easily lead to quick goals.

 

[Tom Cato]

The amount of excuses people make for Ole is incredible.

Is it your opinion that who the assistants are is unimportant?

This is such a werid take on this thread. No one is excusing Ole here, he got the job done and then some.

 

[Cheimoon]

Get a new assistant coach(es) good in coaching these missing things,

1. Highest priority - good structure and positioning, most useful during our build-up and against good organized high press.
2. High priority - attacking style on good organized patterns of attacks, most useful to break good organized low blocks. This is important when Bruno is out, prepare early.
3. Low priority - good organized pressing as a team together, players in sync with good structure and strategy. Good high pressings can easily lead to quick goals.

If you look at it like that, you're divorcing phases of play. But they're all linked. Especially the third one: if United isn't set up to press high up the pitch, then there is no point working on the press.

Is it your opinion that who the assistants are is unimportant?

This is such a werid take on this thread. No one is excusing Ole here, he got the job done and then some.

That post was from December.

 

[sp_107]

Hiring a technical coach from Holland/Spain/Germany who can bring in few better ideas and patterns would be a good idea, If we want to support our own we can still keep them but nothing wrong in adding somephone who can improve us.

Just to freshen up things and also to get players excited about new methods

 

[Teja]

One thing I've been wondering is why a football manager has this big all encompassing role handling everything from training, signings and tactics to motivational speeches and psychology. I guess it's nice for players to have one person to be the main guy but imagine the inverse:

There's nothing secret or magical about the way Pep / Klopp / any other top level manager set up their teams. Any coach with reasonable tactical nous with some video analysts should be able to get a side playing like Klopp or Pep and there's plenty of knock offs in the PL itself (SOU, ARS for example). Innovation is useful but major tactical shifts only happen once every decade or so, it's enough for major clubs to adapt to these shifts, you don't necessarily have to be the first to discover this brand new way of playing football.

Given all of this, why even rely on one man to coach. We can have one person specialize on offensive pressing, one on defensive positioning, one for set pieces, one that focuses on build up play etc etc. The manager ultimately is only responsible for team selections, substitutions and mentoring players. American teams kind of do this already so it's not like it's totally out there.

 

[Revan]

One thing I've been wondering is why a football manager has this big all encompassing role handling everything from training, signings and tactics to motivational speeches and psychology. I guess it's nice for players to have one person to be the main guy but imagine the inverse:

There's nothing secret or magical about the way Pep / Klopp / any other top level manager set up their teams. Any coach with reasonable tactical nous with some video analysts should be able to get a side playing like Klopp or Pep and there's plenty of knock offs in the PL itself (SOU, ARS for example). Innovation is useful but major tactical shifts only happen once every decade or so, it's enough for major clubs to adapt to these shifts, you don't necessarily have to be the first to discover this brand new way of playing football.

Given all of this, why even rely on one man to coach. We can have one person specialize on offensive pressing, one on defensive positioning, one for set pieces, one that focuses on build up play etc etc. The manager ultimately is only responsible for team selections, substitutions and mentoring players. American teams kind of do this already so it's not like it's totally out there.

Continental European time have been doing this for decades. The concept of God-Emperor manager is only in England.

 

[He'sRaldo]

Assistants are overrated anyway.

Klopp lost Buvac and proceed with no problem, while Mourinho parted away with Faria, recruited new assistants, but nothing changed in his approach and tactics

Klopp replaced Buvac with someone better, and his ideas and results improved because of it, especially the organization of the team.

 

[cyril C]

We are weak in 2 areas. On set piece, whether defence or attack; and on coaching fullback how to run and cross. If current staff can't handle then yes.

 

[Lj82]

I think Phelan was brought in to steady the ship. There is a lot more to choosing and tactics for the role of a manager. Phelan being a seasoned hand probably came in and helped with the running of the club so that Ole could focus on the footballing aspect.

Now with the club in a more steady state, and if rumours that Phelan will be returning to Oceania is true, it may be an opportunity for Ole to bring in someone else to freshen things up a bit.

 

[cyril C]

I think Phelan was brought in to steady the ship. There is a lot more to choosing and tactics for the role of a manager. Phelan being a seasoned hand probably came in and helped with the running of the club so that Ole could focus on the footballing aspect.

Now with the club in a more steady state, and if rumours that Phelan will be returning to Oceania is true, it may be an opportunity for Ole to bring in someone else to freshen things up a bit.

Then it will only be a 1-for-1 replacement, not addition...

 

[cyril C]

Yeah, just like Sir Alex brought in Quieroz to handle the big games in Europe, we need an assistant to help us with the small games.

Sir Alex had probably over-delegated because of his age, Ole should be more hands on. particular if we are going to get a technical director handling recruitment and possibly Academy.

I am not saying we should not hire assistant coach, but not for the sake of delegation. Set piece, and fullback crossing in, are 2 major deficiency that we have. Can't find the expertise in-house, then go outside.

 

[Skills]

One thing I've been wondering is why a football manager has this big all encompassing role handling everything from training, signings and tactics to motivational speeches and psychology. I guess it's nice for players to have one person to be the main guy but imagine the inverse:

There's nothing secret or magical about the way Pep / Klopp / any other top level manager set up their teams. Any coach with reasonable tactical nous with some video analysts should be able to get a side playing like Klopp or Pep and there's plenty of knock offs in the PL itself (SOU, ARS for example). Innovation is useful but major tactical shifts only happen once every decade or so, it's enough for major clubs to adapt to these shifts, you don't necessarily have to be the first to discover this brand new way of playing football.

Given all of this, why even rely on one man to coach. We can have one person specialize on offensive pressing, one on defensive positioning, one for set pieces, one that focuses on build up play etc etc. The manager ultimately is only responsible for team selections, substitutions and mentoring players. American teams kind of do this already so it's not like it's totally out there.

They don't - it's why clubs have DOFs. The DOF assembles the squad and finds the right coach(es) to coach the group of players at the club (at any given time). They're flexible with the idea of the squad might change/age so the coach might also have to change.

Wrt the second point. Anyone who tries to just directly copy and paste what Klopp or Guardiola does without any ingenuity or originality would just be a fraud. The players would be able to tell. Remember being knowledgeable is one thing but as a coach/teacher you need to also be able to get the players to buy into what you're saying. And if they don't think you're original, you'll come across as an imposter.

Wrt 3rd point - football is a lot more fluid than American football. You don't have specialist defensive teams and attacking teams. The same players play a role in all phases of play and in fact the integration of all phases is arguably the most important thing for a coach. You need one person who can oversee that integration (i.e. the head coach).

 

[Lj82]

Then it will only be a 1-for-1 replacement, not addition...

No but the profile of the assistant manager can be different and there is room to hire someone more for footballing than operational reasons

 

[Teja]

Wrt the second point. Anyone who tries to just directly copy and paste what Klopp or Guardiola does without any ingenuity or originality would just be a fraud. The players would be able to tell. Remember being knowledgeable is one thing but as a coach/teacher you need to also be able to get the players to buy into what you're saying. And if they don't think you're original, you'll come across as an imposter.

I really doubt this. As I've said before, there are plenty of teams that play counter pressing football and plenty that play variations of Pep ball. Yes you'd have to adapt it a little based on the players at your disposal but I don't think it's very hard to get buy-in from players. A coach is hardly going to go say 'right lads, we're going to copy Guardiola's Barca'.

Wrt 3rd point - football is a lot more fluid than American football. You don't have specialist defensive teams and attacking teams. The same players play a role in all phases of play and in fact the integration of all phases is arguably the most important thing for a coach. You need one person who can oversee that integration (i.e. the head coach).

From a high level, yes you need a cohesive strategy, but at this point football has evolved into multiple distinct phases of play each with their own requirements (Defending --> Transition to attacking --> Attacking --> Transition to defending --> Defending). The movements a team makes while transitioning to defence vs out right defending are completely different and I think can be coached separately. Same with transition to attacking / attacking phases. The transition to attack phase these days is especially distinct, almost like a FK / Corner in how players / the opposition are positioned.

One person holding all these ideas in their head and creating a cohesive plan for the team is the way it was done traditionally, but I think a committee approach can work as well. Truth is probably somewhere in between where ideas from assistants like Carrick and McKenna are incorporated into Ole's overall system.

 

[Ramshock]

If Rene wasnt such a big mouth he may have been on the staff

 

[Sky1981]

You know Sir Alex didn't regularly take training and placed absolutely massive emphasis on who his assistants were?

You have examples there but it works both ways. Brian Clough was nothing without Peter Taylor.

They're key.

I don't think it's that simple, I could foresee several scenarios:

1. The manager is good, he just delegates so that he have more time to do something else. The AssMan could have been anyone that does the basic right, takes instructions and be a team player to the manager.
2. The manager is 1/2 good, he needs his AssMan to fill his other 1/2.
3. The manager is bad, the AssMan is actually the brain
4. The manager is good, but lacking in certain areas, hires the right (or wrong) AssMan to cover for him.

So it's not always the AssMan is important, but it could have been so for a few manager.

 

[Nevilles.Wear.Prada]

Attacking corners late games used to make opposition defenders panic. Now when we get additional time corners at a game We chasing and I be like mehhh

 

[E-mal]

In terms of real coaching, Phelan is the only one there with real experience. I won't be surprise if he has more influence on tactics than the rest of them.
I remember his hull city team playing some good football and getting good points before the wheels came off.

 

[Bobcat]

On one of my trips to Manchester in 2018, the guy who sat next to me was best mates with Daniel Berg Hæstad. Former Molde captain who played under Ole.

He said that at Molde Ole largely trusted his coaches to conduct the training sessions and half the time he would not even be there. That was at Molde though and i dont know if how its done here