But we will probally run into problems with all our players being produced by a British system.Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
Printable View
But we will probally run into problems with all our players being produced by a British system.Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
The ideas that a continental manager, any continental manager is needed, or that only a British/Irish manager will be in tune with the players are both flawed, I think.
In fact, I'm not too convinced that there is a "continental type" of manager, or that there is a "British/Irish" type manager, all of whom share respective characteristics.
What I want is an experienced manager who is able to choose the right players, the right system, get the most out of those players and have them performing to the best of their ability as a team. Where he (or she!!) comes from doesn't matter at all.
why not go to the top and break the bank and everything else and try and convince jose mourinho to take on the challenge, optimistic i know but at least try?
Agree 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
We just need a strong experienced and respected character to come in and get the team firing on all cylinders and if that is a British, Irish or Continental manager I don't care. We can all give examples where a manager has come in from another country and turned an international team around. Equally there have also been failures. The same can be said for managers managing their own country's team. It all depends on the character of the person and their coaching ability. All appointments come with a risk of failure.
I know I keep on about this but I dont think the FAI would have a problem paying out 2/3 million if (a) it gets us to the finals and (b) a good run would guarantee full houses at CP or LR. They would be millions in if that happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Claret Murph
However, let's say that €3m a year is the price we have to pay, surely at least half of that must be results based, in this case getting us to 2010 finals, so over 2 years €3m in salary and €3 bonus when we qualify.
Do we really think the Scolari's, Lippi's would work on that basis?
I don't, and certainly not until the draw for the qualifying groups is made. I also think they would realistically look at the players we have and quickly come to the conclusion, I would not bet half my pay packet on this lot!
If there is no perfomance/results based incentive, what is the point of considering paying for the best.
Agree with your opinions on how the new manager should be payed. This is the best thread on here for awhile. I have a bet on Houllier at 40/1 getting the job but he would not be my choice. I don't believe he would be able to get the best out of this current crop of players. We need a strong character (with real football guile)to manage this team. If he is from Argentina, Antrim or Argyle I don't care. Delaney is from the "Hunch" school of football. The forced Irish asistant (or English consultant). Dream team double managers bull****. Swinging from Kerr to Stan and now "continental". Just go and get the best manager available for the money offered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Throwing every last cent available at a top manager has lots of risks attached to it too. If we fail to qualify for the next two competitions and spend all that is available on an expensive senior team manager it's bound to take some much needed investment away from the grass roots level. Then the development of the game in this country could suffer badly and we would be back to square one looking for a cheap manager to get us to a WC or EC. I like the idea of the results based salary. He could be offered a decent enough basic salary without breaking the bank and if they qualify for something he gets his bonus and the FAI gets the added cash from taking part in a tournament. If they fail to qualify then the money on his bonus is saved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
I hope this is how they do it.
Mr G Souness?Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
Anywho, re the qualification bonus, the manager should also get a bonus based on crowds. cos if we're only pulling in 40,000, we're doind something wrong and the manager has to bear part of the responsibility for that. more money for full houses, more money if we qualify. Incentivise!
Can't see a bonus based on crowds being able to work. For starters I can't see many manager (if any) agreeing to that. Besides Staunton would have got virtually all of his bonus up until the Germany match. Would it not just be easier to have a bonus based on results?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmurphyc
well, yeah, but as pointed out before, most guys are going to look at our group and think, i have no chance of qualifying, so why base half my salary on that.
maybe better would be 3m over two years, 3m for first, 2m for second and 1m for third type bonuses. though that is still a big step up from the 650k combined they were paying laurel and hardy.
either way, a big bonus based solely on qualifying or not qualifying isn't going to work.
When I said a bonus based on results I meant just that. There can be a bonus for qualifying as well of course, but have a bonus either for a win or draw, or even better, maybe based on the number of points we get. Anyway, in terms of groups, we should be 3rd seeds so I'd be surprised if anyone that takes the job would think they have no chance of qualifying. Even if we're in a toughish group I'd say we'd have a decent shot at making the finals (or the play offs if they're being used for 2010).
yeah, it will be playoffs. europe has 13 places, and there will be nine groups. but get this, the worst second placed team WILL NOT make the playoffs. The nine group winners plus 4/8 second placed teams in a playoff. 8 groups of six and one of five.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmurphyc
Bull****, the market in England warps out view on wages and the figures managers are expecting. Look at Italy, only two of the managers are earning more than a million a year... The wages we can afford are more than enough. It wont be down to wages why we dont get the right man.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Swordsman
Mills gained 19 caps, all of them awarded by a continental manager, Erikkson, who prior to taking over the England job had managed successfully in Sweden, Portugal and Italy... FACT.Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
A salary of €3 million, if offered, might expect to attract a serious number of applications, including from some highly qualified candidates. However, there is no guarantee that it would attract the top drawer applicants who might come as close to "guaranteeing" success as is possible in football. That is because club football in Europe - esp England - has long moved beyond that salary level for managers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
In fact, Spurs may just have raised the bar even further, considering they had to pay Jol somewhere over €6m (£4m Stg.) to buy out the remainder of his contract, so that they could get Ramos in, on a salary reported as €10m (£6m) a year. (Plus, of course, Spurs will have to find the money to pay his background team etc)
Interestingly, when NI appointed Sanchez, he was probably their second choice behind Jimmy Nicholl, who is said to have turned it down because the money wasn't enough. Nicholl is Assistant Manager at Aberdeen. And it is reported that Sanchez was on around €150k (£100k) a year basic, though apparently he also was cute enough to negotiate a bonus of €1,500 (£1000) for every place NI rose in the FIFA Rankings. This alone earned him almost a years salary extra during his time in charge!
Same here, but my suspicion is it'll have to be a continental manager to do this. I also think this group of players needs a coach who'll automatically command respect and get performances from the underachievers.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
On ball retention: Jim Craig was on 5 Live on Saturday answering a question on why Celtic struggle away in the CL. He says they simply don't hold the ball well enough, a failing that has cost England badly in recent tournament finals (but has been less obvious with us because we haven't even been competitive).
Craig was saying that good teams will move the ball wide and if an opportunity doesn't present itself they'll move it across the middle to the other side and so on. The style in Britain is to play it back to the defenders who'll hoof it up the pitch!
I cant view this in work, is there a podcast or media player version or something?Quote:
Link:
http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-r...007-10-27.smil
Interview starts about 7 and a half minutes in.
Fair comment. I thought the English FA had finally cracked it when they appointed a non-UK coach. BUT I think it's the case that Erikkson went wrong on exactly the kind of thing that the FA feared from an English coach ...letting tabloids pick your squads. This of course culminated in the calamitous, ridiculous, utterly pointless inclusion of a 17 year old he'd not seen play, who'd never kicked a ball in the top flight in a WC squad.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Was Ericsson that bad? He made qualification a formality for them and qualification to QF level a virtual formaility too. They had never had that status before. Qualification was very often achieved in the past but was rarely as straightforward as it was in Sven's time.
It interests me that some in the press are saying Beenhakker has "turned Poland around". They actually qualified at a canter for WC06.
Nah, Lionel there was a very sutble reason for that, he was masking something else!!Quote:
This of course culminated in the calamitous, ridiculous, utterly pointless inclusion of a 17 year old he'd not seen play, who'd never kicked a ball in the top flight in a WC squad.
Erikkson consistently got them to all tournaments without fuss and with a very good record.