Clubs Need To Show Bravery And Stop Looking For Quick Fixes.

In the modern game, and certainly in English football, it seems the shelf life of your average
manager continues to shorten with every passing season. The more we witness the coming and
going of managers, the more one begins to think that while sometimes it might be due to the manager’s
short-comings and misfortunes that the club and its owners also bear
the burden of responsibility in certain cases.

For Chelsea and Jose Mourinho, the manager’s combative, almost disruptive style had now
seemed to cause a rift between himself and the players. What had worked so well last season,
had now become the team’s primary hindrance. At this juncture, Roman Abramovich was left
with roughly two options. Get rid of the manager that had lost the players’ confidence or trust in
the manager to see out this period of hardship and regroup the squad. In the end, he went for the
more straightforward option and his decision can be vindicated, though if Abramovich truly
believed that Mourinho was the right choice for Chelsea for years to come, he should have
chosen the latter of the two and kept him. While more than one party was at fault in the events
that led to Mourinho’s eventual dismissal, there are clearer examples of clubs choosing the
seemingly safer option.

Let’s take Sunderland for example. Perennial relegation zone strugglers for the majority of seasons in the last 4-5 years and it’s not hard to see why. Their turnover managers in this time is astounding, but what is more worrying is the schematic they seem to be drawing out for themselves. Allow me to paint the picture: sitting in 16th place after achieving only two
wins in their first thirteen games of the 2011-12 season, then manager Steve Bruce was sacked in
the hopes a new manager would freshen up ideas and deliver better results. In came Martin O’Neill, and the club staved off relegation and managed to finish in 13th place. The following season however, with Sunderland again in 16th, O’Neill was shown the door in March and replaced by Italian Paolo Di Canio. After finishing 17th and avoiding the drop, Di Canio was
axed games into the new season and Gus Poyet brought in. Poyet was out the following season and Advocaat in. Starting to see the pattern?

Sunderland along with other select Premier League teams, are now stuck in a cycle that will limit them to detrimental relegation battles year after year, that they will ultimately lose sooner or later. Who knows how long Sam Allardyce will manage to stay in a job before the club looks to greener pastures? What several Premier League clubs fail to realise is that what will provide longevity and stability in the long-run is philosophy.

Philosophy is an almost clichéd term in football now, and admittedly a lot of that is because of Manchester United’s manager and the Louis van Gaal-inspired memes. More commonly though, it is often misused by the average fan or pundit to refer to something almost intangible, that a club or manager brings to the beautiful game. A quick vocabulary search of the word brings up two definitions that are pertinent to this discussion: 1.”the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group” and 2.”a system of principles for guidance in practical affairs”. Essentially, it is the club’s mission statement: what you are setting out to do in terms of the football you play.

So what can be a club’s most basic beliefs? It varies from team to team but usually goes along the
lines of entertaining the home crowd, playing attacking expansive football, bringing through
talents from the youth academy and the likes. Southampton are a stellar example of how
investing in philosophy bears long-term rewards. They are now a fixture in the top half of the
Premier League- an almost inconceivable feat 6 years ago when on the brink of administration.
This was all because the club and owner decided on a certain brand of football, used that as their
criteria for not only scouting players, but also hiring managers. When Nigel Adkins was let go,
many thought Southampton had made a Sunderland-like error, but thanks to the rigid track of
their philosophy, they brought in Pochettino who elevated the side to even better performances.
Another team that seems to be on the right track, is Stoke City. With the arrival of Mark Hughs,
there was a gradual rebrand in the way Stoke played their football and it was visible in bits and
pieces the viewers with a keener eye. Now having recruited players you would readily associate
with Arsenal or Barcelona, they seem to be enjoying a newer brand of technical football.
If philosophy is what you set out to do, then your principles are how you go about bringing your
philosophy into fruition. These include tactical concepts such as pressing high up the field,
keeping possession, type of build-up play, creating space, limiting the opponent’s space and so
on. This is where perhaps a manager like Louis van Gaal seems to be struggling. While the club’s
philosophy of playing quick, attractive football, lines up with his own, there is an obvious
disconnect between that and the instructions he gives his players or the way he approaches their
games. This is where it is important for the manager to know when to be steadfast and stubborn
and when to be flexible in his tactics and realise when something is not working or whether there
is some miscommunication between coach and player. Pep Guardiola, upon arriving at Bayern
had identified Franck Ribery as a prime candidate for conversion to the no.9 position. However,
after a few experiments he quickly realised this was not possible due to the players preference to
drift out wide and look for one on one situations. So rather than persisting with the task, he let
Ribery remain in his accustomed position.
Ultimately, short-term success seems to be valued over long-term investment. Perhaps that is the
nature of football in the modern era, where appearances and results are the highest priorities in
running a football club. A fact we have to accept is, after the final whistle is blown on the final
day of the season, three teams will have to leave to the Premier League for the Championship.
Maybe the gap in monetary compensations and endorsements between the two leagues is so large
that sacrificing philosophy pales in comparison to losing such deals. This approach, however, is
not sustainable and sooner or later it will prove costly. In times such as these, we have to be
appreciative of managers like Arsene Wenger, one of the last of dying breed, who been
entrusted with the development of the club in the long-term and have proved capable of seeing it
through. Clubs need to have a more thorough examination of what they stand for and how they
want to portray themselves in the world of football if they ever want to achieve prolonged
stability.