Appointing a Manager For The Long Haul

[westcliff white]

TG you are so right - KS has galvanised the club NOW - that is what counts - there is no long term planning necessary - we needed someone to get us out of the terrible predicament FM left us in ---- and he has done it (so far)

The only long term planing we have had in the last 5 years has been the Youth academy/U21, I wonder who was in charge of that?

Surprise surprise, it was KS

Exactly and we should plan long term around the youngsters, be that KS or someone else. the way forward long term is to nurture those we have now and bring more through. That will benefit the club as a whole going forward

[MasterHaynes]

The reality is that no manager will or should be given more than a 3 year contract on their appointment. If by some miracle Kit gets us promoted, how long before other clubs with more money come knocking? We can't be certain he will reject them out of hand and elect to stay with the Fulham project. He may well commit but he has to consider his and his families security and new managerial career. Even Wenger the longest serving manager only gets a 3 year contract and doesn't renew it until the other has expired and to be honest having a manager under contract doesn't stop him having his head turned and poached.

[Logicalman]

Whereas the evidence indicates that whatever the intentions are when a manager joins that it often ends up in tears after the 3 year mark, though that shouldn't affect the decision-making process in any way, as every club should be looking for long-term stability, and that starts with the coaching and managerial teams, and then the players.

Without this outlook any club, or business is simply planning to fail.

[TonyGilroy]

Without this outlook any club, or business is simply planning to fail.

But isn't the core fact that only a small percentage of clubs can succeed. It's not just that there's a loser for every winner.

Of the 24 clubs in our division only three succeed each year. Three do disasterously. Of the other 18 a few will be happy with consolidating or coming close but most owners wil see their clubs failing to meet their aspirations.

So maybe 6 or 7 out of 24 leave their owners and fans satisfied. Solution? Sack the manager.

[SG]

There are all sorts of reasons for managers leaving but the fact is that with very few exceptions they don't often last more than 2 or 3 years.

With that as a simple truth the priority is to get the right man for now. Great if we buck the trend and he's still succeeding with us years in the future but look around and you can see that the Fergusons, Wengers and Gradis are major exceptions.

What's the longest stay for us since Bedford Jezzard? Probably Chris Coleman at 3 years I think.

Part of the reason for the turnover is that the FA keep nicking them!

[alexbishop]

TG you are so right - KS has galvanised the club NOW - that is what counts - there is no long term planning necessary - we needed someone to get us out of the terrible predicament FM left us in ---- and he has done it (so far)

The only long term planing we have had in the last 5 years has been the Youth academy/U21, I wonder who was in charge of that?

Surprise surprise, it was KS

Well, Kit was coach, Huw Jennings "was in charge of that." But I take the point.

[Baszab]

" no-good hair splitting is it?" - or whatever the Welsh bloke says !!

[F(f)CUK]

The other thing to note is that there are two main reasons for keeping a manager.

1. You are in the premiership and surviving or at least meeting expectations (Bruce and Wenger being the key examples)
2. You are a lower league team with few expectations

The longest serving Championship manager is Mick McCarthy at 2 years.  This basically shows how difficult it is to stay with a club where success only appears to be measured by being promoted to the Premiership.

[Twig]

Roy could have been here for the long haul but thought he'd achieved all he could and wanted another challenge. Managers don't have to be sacked, they are normally ambitious people with their own objectives and can move on fro their own reasons as well. Wenger is an exception but perhaps he has got his own satisfaction from running the club relatively successfully for a long time on a relatively modest budget.


IF Kit is the man who is appointed, I can see him having enough to challenge him at Fulham for several years to come, all other things being equal. That is, that he get us promoted within a timescale satisfactory to Khan and performs adequately to re-establish us. Do that, and he will have made a name for himself.

I agree that Roy could have been here for the long term and built a dynasty.  However even he might have found the whole ownership transition challenging.

[Logicalman]

Without this outlook any club, or business is simply planning to fail.

But isn't the core fact that only a small percentage of clubs can succeed. It's not just that there's a loser for every winner.

Of the 24 clubs in our division only three succeed each year. Three do disasterously. Of the other 18 a few will be happy with consolidating or coming close but most owners wil see their clubs failing to meet their aspirations.

So maybe 6 or 7 out of 24 leave their owners and fans satisfied. Solution? Sack the manager.

I see the point you make, but it really will depend on what the club sees as 'success'.

For the likes of teams such as Oxford, or perhaps Pompey, their 5 year plan is perhaps not to get up into the realms of the Premiership, but maybe to simply keep on an even keel, become financially sound and possibly get up one maybe two divisions, whilst still maintaining that financial basis.

I guess its comes down to realistic expectations.

What I would comment on regarding the managerial turnover, is that it can often be the result of two simple things, promotion and relegation. Yeah I know the second one is obvious, but the former reason?

We see all too often the powers-that-be will assign a manager when in the lower tiers, let that manager run with the squad, making all the right decisions and then, once he gets them into the Prem, either they immediately get in a 'seasoned' manager, or keep the current one and unless they win every game the same way they did the previous seasons, they sack him. That's unrealistic expectations by owners, rather than the ability of the manager, but it is life as a football manager