Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Pardew will be number 2 longest when Moyes officially leaves. Presumably Nigel would then have been Number 3 if he'd remained.

Posted

That is utterly ridiculous - yet the most successful team has had the same person in charge for the previous 26 years. You'd think they'd learn.

Posted (edited)

Heard this morning that Pardew has gone and to be replaced by Poyet, with Pardew possibly going to Stoke....Not sure how true that is though. The management world has gone stupid.

Edited by Saint Garrett
Posted (edited)

Since Wenger last won a trophy at arsenal, every other 91 league clubs have changed manager. And those 91 clubs have had 838 managers in that time. Crazy!

Edited by Saint Garrett
Posted
That is utterly ridiculous - yet the most successful team has had the same person in charge for the previous 26 years. You'd think they'd learn.

 

In fairness SAF only had that long because he kept on winning. Similar with Wenger at Arsenal - he won loads when he first started so he's earned a bit of grace (which I admit he wouldn't get at City, Chelsea or possibly even Tottenham). I'd be absolutely astounded if Moyes is given five years* before he wins his first trophy.

 

(*think it was 5 years before SAF won anything..?)

Posted
That is utterly ridiculous - yet the most successful team has had the same person in charge for the previous 26 years. You'd think they'd learn.

 

And yet probably the second most successful team in recent years, Chelsea, has become synonymous with managerial instability. It takes more than one example to make a rule.

Posted
Since Wenger took his position at arsenal, every other 91 league clubs have changed manager. And those 91 clubs have had 838 managers in that time. Crazy!

 

The first part is just saying that Wenger is the longest serving manager in the leagues, which at 17 years is not a surprise.

 

The second part sounds a little more surprising, but is basically saying average tenure is a little under 2 years - which intuitively sounds about right. Especially with the likes of Blackburn employing 5 in a year!

Posted
The first part is just saying that Wenger is the longest serving manager in the leagues, which at 17 years is not a surprise.

 

The second part sounds a little more surprising, but is basically saying average tenure is a little under 2 years - which intuitively sounds about right. Especially with the likes of Blackburn employing 5 in a year!

 

The more interesting stat which was being quoted in the press recently is that since Wenger last won a trophy, every other league club has changed its manager.

Posted
The more interesting stat which was being quoted in the press recently is that since Wenger last won a trophy, every other league club has changed its manager.

 

Qualification for the Champions League is now seen as more important than actually winning a trophy.

Posted
The more interesting stat which was being quoted in the press recently is that since Wenger last won a trophy, every other league club has changed its manager.

 

Ah, yes, that was what I was meant to write !!

Posted
That is utterly ridiculous - yet the most successful team has had the same person in charge for the previous 26 years. You'd think they'd learn.

 

I'm not sure longevity has anything to do with it, Arsene Wenger and David Moyes have both been around for a long time and have won the nothing between them in the last 7 years.

Posted
Qualification for the Champions League is now seen as more important than actually winning a trophy.

 

Unfortunately to the people balancing the books it is. There is far more to gain from playing a few games in the CL than actually winning a cup, which is a sad reflection of the modern game.

Posted
I'm not sure longevity has anything to do with it, Arsene Wenger and David Moyes have both been around for a long time and have won the nothing between them in the last 7 years.

 

If Man City and Chelsea didn't have their billionaire owners, I can guarantee Arsenal would've carried on winning trophies. Their board decided not to rack up hundreds of millions in debt and I say fair play to them.

Posted
If Man City and Chelsea didn't have their billionaire owners, I can guarantee Arsenal would've carried on winning trophies. Their board decided not to rack up hundreds of millions in debt and I say fair play to them.

 

I didn't say Arsenal haven't been fiscally prudent, just pointing out that longevity alone doesn't guarantee success.

Posted
I didn't say Arsenal haven't been fiscally prudent, just pointing out that longevity alone doesn't guarantee success.

 

The point I was making is that it would've in their case if Chelsea and then Man City hadn't been transformed overnight by their multi billionaire owners.

Posted
True, but at the same time, perhaps not spending big money on people like Gervinho, Arshavin and Santos might have helped. If he'd risk looking to the Championship or lower premiership for talent he'd be doing a lot better.

 

Like Aaron Ramsey?

 

Arshavin did well for a few years. Admittedly the other 2 were flops but given his other signings in the past, surely he's allowed the odd flop and it's only natural there will be the odd flop.

Posted
Unfortunately to the people balancing the books it is. There is far more to gain from playing a few games in the CL than actually winning a cup, which is a sad reflection of the modern game.

 

It is very sad when scraping 4th in one tournement you've got no chance of winning, gains you access to another tournement you've got no chance of winning, but is celebrated like winning the world cup.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...