Why do the managers always get the brunt of the flak?

[JHAGa]

Do people really not see the repeat patterns? We sack a manager on practically an annual basis and whilst they all make mistakes, they're hardly given an easy hand due to the decision-making by the higher-ups at the club.
 

Post Coppell, all managers have had a difficult task.

 

Millen - Kept us up. The following summer given hardly any money and forced to buy Taylor and Bolasie for small fees and Kilkenny on a free.

McInnes - Again, keeps us up. Good start to the season (well, 2 wins in 3 games...) but we still struggled defensively post-Cunningham's injury. Club weren't keen on paying Bikey/Cisse's wages - resultung in defensive frailty, panic loans such as McManus and Bates, and relegation.

O'Driscoll - Doesn't keep us up. Very limited budget, which he didn't really complain about to be fair, had to scrape by to bring in Pack on a free. Brought in a lot of good players for where we were, just didn't see the reward on the pitch. Probably deserved the sack although I appreciated what he was trying to do in turning the club around after years of negativity at the time.

Cotterill - Backed fairly well, but even net-spend when Baldock was sold. Fair enough. Following season after leading us to two titles, absolutely let down by the club and that summer will always be one of the biggest shambles to ever be known in football - we should have built on that positive momentum. Then SC obviously falls out with the higher-ups after being let down so badly and admittedly proved too sulky and stubborn when doing things such as only fielding 5 subs, but if he'd got support we could have built on that success that he'd brought us. Instead he was binned off when we had a bad start, which was no surprise with our squad depth. We were actually playing well in a lot of matches, we just had a young squad new to the level with no support at all.

LJ - Brought in, close connections with the club, kind of a 'yes man' due to his good relations with LJ, especially when compared to SC. I actually supported the appointment and don't thing he deserves the sack, although he has made mistakes like all of the above did. Keeps us up, has seemingly a good summer but then has to sell his best player without any replacement TWO days before the window closes. Panic bids on deadline day to no avail and he's left having to rely on a young 19 year old with no first-team experience to carry a Championship team as well as a 37 year old up front. Yes, the bid was great from Villa. But surely any competent club would make sure a replacement was lined-up before selling? In the end, LJ's net spend last summer was probably in the negative.

 

Now, LJ isn't without fault. But for a club with supposed ambition we sure do shoot ourselves in the foot a lot. We're currently lower mid-table in the Championship. Where we should be considering the extent of our ambition. We face a relegation battle and are on a horrendous run. LJ has made mistakes. I'm just so tired of our board making stupid mistakes when they claim to have such big ambitions. SL has the clubs' interests at heart, he wants the club to do well and his financial backing has been amazing - I wouldn't want a different owner. But we continue to put our managers under pressure and then sack them when things go awry.

 

The board and the managers share blame for our continued mistakes. Not just the manager every single time.

[054123]

Couldn't agree more.

The club dont have a clue.

[JHAGa]

15 hours ago, 054123 said:

Couldn't agree more.

The club dont have a clue.

 

I just don't understand how so many always resort to blaming the manager when the same patterns emerge every year.

[KevP]

3 minutes ago, JHAGa said:

 

I just don't understand how so many always resort to blaming the manager when the same patterns emerge every year.

Because the Manager ( head Coach ) picks the team, sets up the formation, deals with the training, holds 121s with the players, looks for new players, signs new players, liaises with the board. Etc, etc......The buck ultimately stops with him. I'm not in the Johnson out camp ( yet ) but just pointing out a few things. This said, the Board need to take some responsibility as well. As do the players, problem is, if a Manager loses the dressing room, the players possibly may not want to perform to the best of their abilities. just sayin like...       

[JHAGa]

3 minutes ago, KevP said:

Because the Manager ( head Coach ) picks the team, sets up the formation, deals with the training, holds 121s with the players, looks for new players, signs new players, liaises with the board. Etc, etc......The buck ultimately stops with him. I'm not in the Johnson out camp ( yet ) but just pointing out a few things. This said, the Board need to take some responsibility as well. As do the players, problem is, if a Manager loses the dressing room, the players possibly may not want to perform to the best of their abilities. just sayin like...       

 

My point is the board often don't get what the manager wants and leaves them to take the flak when things go awry. It's a repeated cycle, hire a manager midway through the season, the manager keeps us up, the board don't fully back manager in the summer and he ends up getting sacked. It's an annual cycle that has happened almost every year since 2010.

[KevP]

8 minutes ago, JHAGa said:

 

My point is the board often don't get what the manager wants and leaves them to take the flak when things go awry. It's a repeated cycle, hire a manager midway through the season, the manager keeps us up, the board don't fully back manager in the summer and he ends up getting sacked. It's an annual cycle that has happened almost every year since 2010.

That happens in many walks of life and organisations. Its called "delegation"..."teflon shoulders" ...or "bottling it"....

[JHAGa]

20 minutes ago, KevP said:

That happens in many walks of life and organisations. Its called "delegation"..."teflon shoulders" ...or "bottling it"....

 

It may happen in many walks of life, but the point stands that it's naive to blame the manager every year. Especially when the same events repeat themselves over and over.

[KevP]

23 minutes ago, JHAGa said:

 

It may happen in many walks of life, but the point stands that it's naive to blame the manager every year. Especially when the same events repeat themselves over and over.

I know, I know....but it happens !! And you and me and others can point it out but .......

[Ivorguy]

5 minutes ago, KevP said:

I know, I know....but it happens !! And you and me and others can point it out but .......

But ... we can lay the blame where it should be laid; at the door of the owner and Board

[KevP]

3 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

But ... we can lay the blame where it should be laid; at the door of the owner and Board

Yep....not disagreeing but also the bigger picture...the manager, and the players.....we can but surmise !

[Ivorguy]

3 minutes ago, KevP said:

Yep....not disagreeing but also the bigger picture...the manager, and the players.....we can but surmise !

OK think we agree lots of problems at all levels and no one shot solution

[KevP]

3 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

OK think we agree lots of problems at all levels and no one shot solution

This.

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, KevP said:

Because the Manager ( head Coach ) picks the team, sets up the formation, deals with the training, holds 121s with the players, looks for new players, signs new players, liaises with the board. Etc, etc......The buck ultimately stops with him. I'm not in the Johnson out camp ( yet ) but just pointing out a few things. This said, the Board need to take some responsibility as well. As do the players, problem is, if a Manager loses the dressing room, the players possibly may not want to perform to the best of their abilities. just sayin like...       

Losing the dressing room has become a cliche but as you hint it does not follow that the fault is with the manager. It may just as easily be players who are the problem but of course you can't just sack a player so it's the manager who carries the can  The last thing footballers seem to want to do is take personal responsibility; it's always somebody else's fault.

Personally I always want to perform to the best of my ability regardless of who my boss is but then if I downed tools because I don't get on with my manager I would be the one fired.

[KevP]

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Losing the dressing room has become a cliche but as you hint it does not follow that the fault is with the manager. It may just as easily be players who are the problem but of course you can't just sack a player so it's the manager who carries the can  The last thing footballers seem to want to do is take personal responsibility; it's always somebody else's fault.

Personally I always want to perform to the best of my ability regardless of who my boss is but then if I downed tools because I don't get on with my manager I would be the one fired.

I was also making the point with a mate earlier...if I failed to perform in my job I'd be sacked and get nothing in terms of "pay off"....unlike some Footie Managers nowadays.....

[Olé]

Managers always get flak but it's important to remember that "flak" by its nature is vocal and visible without necessarily being representative. It could just be a loud minority. Furthermore, one persons flak one season may be another's loyalty the following year. Just because there is always criticism doesn't mean the same fans are always turning on the manager, I'm sure there will be many who took different views when flak came in for DMC / SOD / SC and now LJ.

For a start, in my experience under many of the previous managers there was a lot of innuendo about poor player recruitment and attitude. As such, I very often took the view that players were at fault and managers needed time to rid the club of assembled wasters (DMC himself openly identified but never fixed this problem). So I actually think for every bit of flak directed at prior managers, there were plenty of others who took up for the failings in the playing squad.

And the same will happen now with LJ. But ultimately some (and that some can differ from manager to manager) will always blame the manager because he is most responsible and accountable for the team on all fronts, and that's perfectly okay. The interesting debate now on LJ is how much that perennial view of ridding wasters from our playing squad still applies - given a close-knit promotion squad and well narrated, self-congratulatory MA recruitment process?

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

Most managers are paid handsomely. For this reward, you would like to think they had the minerals/ cojones to take some flak when the chips are down, and to deal with any loose cannon players. They are certainly well recompensed if the P45 is flourished. I find it hard to feel sorry for them.

[JHAGa]

10 minutes ago, Mike Hunt-Hertz said:

Most managers are paid handsomely. For this reward, you would like to think they had the minerals/ cojones to take some flak when the chips are down, and to deal with any loose cannon players. They are certainly well recompensed if the P45 is flourished. I find it hard to feel sorry for them.

 

I'm not saying a manager shouldn't expect or receive criticism. It's just madness to keep being so short-sighted and act as if it's always the manager at fault at this club. More often than not they're dealt an extremely difficult hand.

[chinapig]

27 minutes ago, Olé said:

Managers always get flak but it's important to remember that "flak" by its nature is vocal and visible without necessarily being representative. It could just be a loud minority. Furthermore, one persons flak one season may be another's loyalty the following year. Just because there is always criticism doesn't mean the same fans are always turning on the manager, I'm sure there will be many who took different views when flak came in for DMC / SOD / SC and now LJ.

For a start, in my experience under many of the previous managers there was a lot of innuendo about poor player recruitment and attitude. As such, I very often took the view that players were at fault and managers needed time to rid the club of assembled wasters (DMC himself openly identified but never fixed this problem). So I actually think for every bit of flak directed at prior managers, there were plenty of others who took up for the failings in the playing squad.

And the same will happen now with LJ. But ultimately some (and that some can differ from manager to manager) will always blame the manager because he is most responsible and accountable for the team on all fronts, and that's perfectly okay. The interesting debate now on LJ is how much that perennial view of ridding wasters from our playing squad still applies - given a close-knit promotion squad and well narrated, self-congratulatory MA recruitment process?

Going further back, there were demonstrations demanding Alan Dicks be sacked. We struggled for years before he built a successful team, built as much on character as ability. In recent years we've too often had a shortage of the former, as I fear may be the case again now.

[shelts]

The players have been shocking at time and all people can do is throw insults at LJ. 

They are highly paid and pampered and are as much of the problem as the current manager. 

Tammy apart I wouldn't give the rest house room, thank god we have him. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 12/31/2016 at 16:00, chinapig said:

Losing the dressing room has become a cliche but as you hint it does not follow that the fault is with the manager. It may just as easily be players who are the problem but of course you can't just sack a player so it's the manager who carries the can  The last thing footballers seem to want to do is take personal responsibility; it's always somebody else's fault.

Personally I always want to perform to the best of my ability regardless of who my boss is but then if I downed tools because I don't get on with my manager I would be the one fired.

Far easier and cheaper in football to just sack the manager, squad stay broadly the same- rinse and repeat, indeed the lengthy contracts of players, accumulates dead wood, loses sell on value and more deadwood is added by each new manager. Rinse and repeat- whereas in 'real' jobs like most of us on here, obviously far easier to sack an individual under a manager. Players are often culpable though/

[Mr Popodopolous]

Maybe this is a naturalish level for us, a naturalish ceilings. I wondered how much progress has been made looked at some past seasons and we are basically no further on in terms of on pitch results than 5 years ago- 27 points, 25 games under McInnes Jan 2012. Hell even the Coppell debacle season saw us in a better position at this stage under Millen. Obviously we now are better run off the pitch but on the pitch, what's changed really?

[MarkRed!]

Bottom line for me is that the board are 100% responsible. They select the manager and decide the criteria for appointing. LJ met their criteria, in fact, "he was the stand out candidate" according to Ashton. The reality is that there has been fiddling by those above for years and our recent history is littered with very poor managerial appointments:

1. Tinnion, Millen and McInnes were given the team sheets and told who to play. We had bloated squads because the managers did not buy the players. 

2. O'Driscoll was tasked with culling and then recruitment on the cheap. 

3. Cotterill played a blinder with only 16 or so real first team players. To get us up and as double winners was truly a wonderful job. He was cruelly exposed in the Championship and I think the frustration he saw was because he knew all of the good work done was about to be wasted because of a lack of investment in Championship quality players. There is no doubt that there was a clash of wills between SC and the board. Plainly, there was only one winner. Poor results gave the board the screen to sack Cotterill. He was sacked because he would not revert to the structure SL wanted - Ashton et al. 

4. Only LJ has had the kind of backing one would expect. He should, therefore, be doing better. However, the question is whether the players we have brought in are championship quality. How many would get in a top 6 team? Answer probably only Tammy and Tomlin. Therein lies the problem. Most of the squad is top end League One/bottom of championship standard. Surprise surprise, we find ourselves at the bottom of the championship.

5. In any business, one has to ask what the criteria for success is. In that regard, who can say what BCFC's short to medium plan is. Going for the PL is not sufficient. 

The decision making by the board is there for all to see and whilst no-none can criticise SL for the amount of money he has put in, he certainly has not had the return when smaller clubs have excelled and ended up in the PL.My own view, is there is a lack of winning mentality at all levels of the club. We think we are a big club and people are satisfied with their lot....  

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

10 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Maybe this is a naturalish level for us, a naturalish ceilings. I wondered how much progress has been made looked at some past seasons and we are basically no further on in terms of on pitch results than 5 years ago- 27 points, 25 games under McInnes Jan 2012. Hell even the Coppell debacle season saw us in a better position at this stage under Millen. Obviously we now are better run off the pitch but on the pitch, what's changed really?

This is why we will always be mediocre.

The complete acceptance of our lack of ambition (not directed at you, just generally!). And that is not being Billy Big Bollocks......but every club should have some belief and aspiration (maybe not the slags...they are beyond all help!)

Naivety and being 'too nice and soft'....the bane of our club.

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 minutes ago, Mike Hunt-Hertz said:

This is why we will always be mediocre.

The complete acceptance of our lack of ambition (not directed at you, just generally!). And that is not being Billy Big Bollocks......but every club should have some belief and aspiration (maybe not the slags...they are beyond all help!)

Naivety and being 'too nice and soft'....the bane of our club.

Tend to agree with much of that. However I first started following in Autumn 1998 under Benny and there was not much difference to now in a big picture- yes we are a few places higher than then and yes we are losing by a bit less but we were still in bottom 3rd of this level. I well remember, Hengrove Park new stadium, European football within a few years, GatePost...

Oddly and I know he had his flaws but oddly two of the best- the two best managers in my time following (Johnson Sr and Cotts)- lots of people call them not very nice and such. Yet both of them took us up, and in the first case nearly the double promotion?? They had to be sacked when they did but there's a lesson in there maybe- as you say naivety, 'too nice and soft' and such.

I sometimes wonder how the future would have turned out if we had kept Johnson in 2010, had a big clearout and given him one final opportunity to rejuvenate the squad, with conditions i.e. restrictions on short term pointless yet costly loan deals...Couldn't have been any worse than the seasons which followed up to and including the end of O'Driscoll.

[Bazooka Joe]

Perhaps they get the flak, not because they mistakes (as we all do) but because of the severity and regularity of their mistakes and some of the rubbish they spout.

Like the latest "Johnson admits we need new faces"

Admits?.... WTF !.........has he been in denial or was he just being bloody-minded?

Christ Almighty - most of us knew we needed new faces way back, when we gave that dismal, feeble performance against crappy free-falling Baadiff.

So assuming he could see what we saw, Johnson and Ashton should have had plenty of time to suss out some quality players to bring in to do the business now rather than poncing about getting prospects for the future (who, in City's case, rarely live up to the hype)..

 

.

[Jack Dawe]

On 31/12/2016 at 16:28, JHAGa said:

 

I'm not saying a manager shouldn't expect or receive criticism. It's just madness to keep being so short-sighted and act as if it's always the manager at fault at this club. More often than not they're dealt an extremely difficult hand.

When football first turned professional in the late 1800s and clubs became limited companies, with a board of unpaid directors, there were no coaches or managers as we know them today. 

But there were gobby supporters ready to heckle and jeer when their team was not doing well. So who did they aim their unhappiness at?

I read somewhere once that it was those early football club directors that created the position of football club manager - I think Preston were the first - to be a kind of buffer between them and the baying mob. And the disgruntled, baying mob is a long, long tradition in professional football. A tradition that Ashton Gate has a long history of too.

The football manager came about to take the "flak" from the gobby minority when things went tits up, instead of the local businessmen, who put in a fair bit of their hard-earned fortune to bask in a little reflected glory and did not take kindly to being subjected to the vitriol of the ungrateful working man.

It's just one of many traditions in the game that go way back to the early days of the professional game.

But you're right. It makes little sense.