The next manager

[BWFC_Insane]

^ blimey. That's quite a leap from trying an untested manager to becoming Barcelona!

For clarity - I agree, if we survive we're in for a long hard struggle. Personally, I'd rather that struggle be about trying to build something long term and sustainable a'la Pompey.

As a season ticket holder since 1982 I suppose i should be quite chuffed to be described amongst the modern fanitis

But its the notion that we're better off with inexperience I don't get. A manager with experience who has failures and successes knows what they're in for. A young manager may well be better - if so then great. But don't just appoint a young buck for the sake of it. I think people get carried away with stuff going on higher up the leagues. There's an argument for a Sam Allardyce type, someone with a bit of experience who is very ambitious. What we need most of all IMO is someone who sees this as a massive challenge rather than someone who sees it as a problem.

But let us also learn from history - the most disastrous managerial appointment we've made was a young ex-player who the fans thought would stop us "hoofing our way to safety". We don't need to repeat said mistake.

[Worthy4England]

^ blimey. That's quite a leap from trying an untested manager to becoming Barcelona!

Apparently shit hoofball is all you can play unless you are actually Barcelona. When I was using a comparison for a team that played decent football last time we were in League 1, I used Rochdale. Didn't stop the usual suspects heading straight for Barcelona and Messi.

We will have the chance when we go down, to lose some deadwood. I don't think Parky has it in his gameplan to play decent football (not to be confused with "winning football"). But it feels like this time it's going to take some "rebuilding/reinvention". We can use that time to try and alter the way we play a little, or we can lose some players as we get relegated and try and replace them "shit for shit" and carry on playing a format that has served us well in the Championship for the last two years.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

^ blimey. That's quite a leap from trying an untested manager to becoming Barcelona!

Apparently shit hoofball is all you can play unless you are actually Barcelona. When I was using a comparison for a team that played decent football last time we were in League 1, I used Rochdale. Didn't stop the usual suspects heading straight for Barcelona and Messi.

We will have the chance when we go down, to lose some deadwood. I don't think Parky has it in his gameplan to play decent football (not to be confused with "winning football"). But it feels like this time it's going to take some "rebuilding/reinvention". We can use that time to try and alter the way we play a little, or we can lose some players as we get relegated and try and replace them "shit for shit" and carry on playing a format that has served us well in the Championship for the last two years.

We may have the chance, but perhaps not through choice. I've said a few times that I'm a fan of the short-term contract, it stops you being lumbered (ho-ho) with deadwood. Trouble is, if we also factor in an embargo which bans us signing new players, then at the moment we have eight senior players contracted for next season, of which two are goalkeepers, one (Olkowski) may try to move away, and one is Luke Murphy. It's alright having a clean slate unless you can't afford chalk.

Last time we went down, we came back up precisely because Parkinson was able to keep things tight at the back. I did a dive into the figure recently (then stupidly deleted them) but our goalscoring rate was lower than all but about three of the 30 teams promoted from the third tier in the past decade. Which obviously means it can be done with more panache, but can it be done by us? Is it a division where paupers prosper? Didn't Blackburn spend £14m more than they made last season?

I'm well aware that I'm conflating two issues here: style and money. But obviously they're linked. If we're somewhat strapped, buying skilful players may be less affordable than buying doughty professionals: one might call it the Jedi vs Taylor paradigm. If we're absolutely boracic and under embargo, it's out of our hands and we'll just have to see what the (over?)promoted kids are like.

[Branagan]

I get both sides of the argument here. Regardless of age or experience, ultimately I want someone who is going to be here a long time, looking to build from one season to the next, rather than survive with panic buys and maybe men that never feel part of the actual club. I want seven players that you know will make the team from one week to the next from one season to the next. That's what will get fans behind the club again - consistency and familiarity. As boring and basic as that might sound, I do believe that's the key.

[Branagan]

I get both sides of the argument here. Regardless of age or experience, ultimately I want someone who is going to be here a long time, looking to build from one season to the next, rather than survive with panic buys and maybe men that never feel part of the actual club. I want seven players that you know will make the team from one week to the next from one season to the next. That's what will get fans behind the club again - consistency and familiarity. As boring and basic as that might sound, I do believe that's the key.

Consistently decent I should say. We've tried consistently woeful and that doesn't seem to work for some reason. Don't have to be world-beaters, but going in the right direction.

[BWFC_Insane]

I get both sides of the argument here. Regardless of age or experience, ultimately I want someone who is going to be here a long time, looking to build from one season to the next, rather than survive with panic buys and maybe men that never feel part of the actual club. I want seven players that you know will make the team from one week to the next from one season to the next. That's what will get fans behind the club again - consistency and familiarity. As boring and basic as that might sound, I do believe that's the key.

I get that. I do think however, that being here a long time is predicated on success. And building long term requires success. And modern football does not even at broke league one clubs tend to be very forgiving.
There is a strong argument that we need a structure with a Director of Football who becomes a constant even if the first team coach changes. And the Director of Football oversees everything from development to first team "strategy" by which I mean - recruitment policy and style we aspire to.

I think in modern football this approach makes sense. There is too much for a traditional manager to do. Plus the DoF provides consistency when the coach is inevitably binned off.

It also lets you focus on a coach who has motivational, and people skills - key things often overlooked. And they need to be less worried about recruitment - they still have a say - but its not their whole remit.

I think that is a necessary structure now. But if we go into league one without a stable owner or if we are owned by someone else with no money to invest - that is probably pie in the sky.

Should we find stability and an owner with means - then that is something they should look to put in place IMO.

[Worthy4England]

^ blimey. That's quite a leap from trying an untested manager to becoming Barcelona!

Apparently shit hoofball is all you can play unless you are actually Barcelona. When I was using a comparison for a team that played decent football last time we were in League 1, I used Rochdale. Didn't stop the usual suspects heading straight for Barcelona and Messi.

We will have the chance when we go down, to lose some deadwood. I don't think Parky has it in his gameplan to play decent football (not to be confused with "winning football"). But it feels like this time it's going to take some "rebuilding/reinvention". We can use that time to try and alter the way we play a little, or we can lose some players as we get relegated and try and replace them "shit for shit" and carry on playing a format that has served us well in the Championship for the last two years.

We may have the chance, but perhaps not through choice. I've said a few times that I'm a fan of the short-term contract, it stops you being lumbered (ho-ho) with deadwood. Trouble is, if we also factor in an embargo which bans us signing new players, then at the moment we have eight senior players contracted for next season, of which two are goalkeepers, one (Olkowski) may try to move away, and one is Luke Murphy. It's alright having a clean slate unless you can't afford chalk.

Last time we went down, we came back up precisely because Parkinson was able to keep things tight at the back. I did a dive into the figure recently (then stupidly deleted them) but our goalscoring rate was lower than all but about three of the 30 teams promoted from the third tier in the past decade. Which obviously means it can be done with more panache, but can it be done by us? Is it a division where paupers prosper? Didn't Blackburn spend £14m more than they made last season?

I'm well aware that I'm conflating two issues here: style and money. But obviously they're linked. If we're somewhat strapped, buying skilful players may be less affordable than buying doughty professionals: one might call it the Jedi vs Taylor paradigm. If we're absolutely boracic and under embargo, it's out of our hands and we'll just have to see what the (over?)promoted kids are like.

I could be wrong here, but I don't think they "embargo" you out of having a squad (albeit the parameters might be somewhat diminished). Last time we were under an embargo, we still signed folks if I recall correctly, up to the a total salary level agreed with the league through the "business plan" and overall squad size cap? That would theoretically give us some room to move. But like you say it could be on the basis that we have no money / little money. If that's the case we're likely to be signing frees/lower league/non-league/loans etc.

Top 6 the last few seasons in League 1 has included: Shrewsbury, Rotherham, Scunthorpe (*2), Charlton, Fleetwood, Bradford (*2), Millwall, Burton, Walsall, Barnsley - Hardly teams blessed with Premier parachute payments.

Luton, Barnsley, Portsmouth, Charlton, Doncaster are all currently in the top 6. That's quite a lot of "scope" to be in the top 6 without spending like Blackburn. Didn't Sunderland spent a reported £4-6m on Grigg? They're third. We can't shrug off the notion that "who you sign" isn't more important than "how much they cost".

If "straight back up" is the mantra (that sounds rather optimistic at the moment), then yeah we could try to sign like for like if possible, crawl up again and then suffer and come straight back down again. Or we could try building something a little more sustainable - noting that should we "sign" a star or two, someone is likely to want to buy them...

[Worthy4England]

I get both sides of the argument here. Regardless of age or experience, ultimately I want someone who is going to be here a long time, looking to build from one season to the next, rather than survive with panic buys and maybe men that never feel part of the actual club. I want seven players that you know will make the team from one week to the next from one season to the next. That's what will get fans behind the club again - consistency and familiarity. As boring and basic as that might sound, I do believe that's the key.

I get that. I do think however, that being here a long time is predicated on success. And building long term requires success. And modern football does not even at broke league one clubs tend to be very forgiving.
There is a strong argument that we need a structure with a Director of Football who becomes a constant even if the first team coach changes. And the Director of Football oversees everything from development to first team "strategy" by which I mean - recruitment policy and style we aspire to.

I think in modern football this approach makes sense. There is too much for a traditional manager to do. Plus the DoF provides consistency when the coach is inevitably binned off.

It also lets you focus on a coach who has motivational, and people skills - key things often overlooked. And they need to be less worried about recruitment - they still have a say - but its not their whole remit.

I think that is a necessary structure now. But if we go into league one without a stable owner or if we are owned by someone else with no money to invest - that is probably pie in the sky.

Should we find stability and an owner with means - then that is something they should look to put in place IMO.

Genuine question (coz I don't know) - how many League One clubs currently have a DoF? How do they afford to run a DoF and a Manager?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I get both sides of the argument here. Regardless of age or experience, ultimately I want someone who is going to be here a long time, looking to build from one season to the next, rather than survive with panic buys and maybe men that never feel part of the actual club. I want seven players that you know will make the team from one week to the next from one season to the next. That's what will get fans behind the club again - consistency and familiarity. As boring and basic as that might sound, I do believe that's the key.

I get that. I do think however, that being here a long time is predicated on success. And building long term requires success. And modern football does not even at broke league one clubs tend to be very forgiving.

The two longest-serving managers in League One are Wycombe's Gareth Ainsworth and Accy's Jono Coleman, both of whom got their teams promoted into that division last summer. (For the record, at the other two promoted teams, Nathan Jones left Luton for Stoke and Mark Robins is still at Cov.)

Then it's Derek Adams, appointed by fourth-division Plymouth in summer 2015; he took them to the play-offs in 2016 and straight up in 2017. Then Nigel Clough, who took Burton up and back down again. Then it's Mark Robins at Cov.

The longest-serving League One manager who's only managed that team in League One is Kenny Jackett, hired by recently-promoted Pompey in summer 2017; last summer they finished a promising 8th, this season they're guaranteed play-offs at least.

Then it's Steve Lovell (Gillingham, Oct 2017), then Lee Bowyer (Charlton, March 2018).

Basically it's not a division for managerial longevity. By comparison, the Premier League, with four of the seven longest-servers, is a hive of stability.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I could be wrong here, but I don't think they "embargo" you out of having a squad (albeit the parameters might be somewhat diminished). Last time we were under an embargo, we still signed folks if I recall correctly, up to the a total salary level agreed with the league through the "business plan" and overall squad size cap? That would theoretically give us some room to move. But like you say it could be on the basis that we have no money / little money. If that's the case we're likely to be signing frees/lower league/non-league/loans etc.

Aye, they let you have enough players. Whether that's capped at salary level or squad level I don't know. I'm not sure they know either, they seem to make stuff up as they go along.

Top 6 the last few seasons in League 1 has included: Shrewsbury, Rotherham, Scunthorpe (*2), Charlton, Fleetwood, Bradford (*2), Millwall, Burton, Walsall, Barnsley - Hardly teams blessed with Premier parachute payments.

All true. But four of the last six automatically promoted teams were Premier emigrés (Premigrés?). The others were Sheffield United (hardly minnows) and Burton. More than one way to skin a cat, but it helps if you can afford sharp knives.

Luton, Barnsley, Portsmouth, Charlton, Doncaster are all currently in the top 6. That's quite a lot of "scope" to be in the top 6 without spending like Blackburn. Didn't Sunderland spent a reported £4-6m on Grigg? They're third. We can't shrug off the notion that "who you sign" isn't more important than "how much they cost".

Agreed, but then the correlation (causation?) between spend and finish position is obvious in the top division, increasingly strong in the second, and I think the poison is spreading. It's not failsafe, but remember that even in embargo our wage bill was something like five times the divisional standard.

If "straight back up" is the mantra (that sounds rather optimistic at the moment), then yeah we could try to sign like for like if possible, crawl up again and then suffer and come straight back down again. Or we could try building something a little more sustainable - noting that should we "sign" a star or two, someone is likely to want to buy them...

To be clear, I'd rather not grind through a season again. That was the Parky way, and he will almost certainly be gone. But I'm not as dead-set against it as some. And I fear what happens if we did manage to sneak up with a leaky defence. Basically, winning every game 1-0 makes you more likely to survive the promotion than winning every game 3-2. But, one thing at a time, winning every game 3-2 would be nice...

[BWFC_Insane]

I get both sides of the argument here. Regardless of age or experience, ultimately I want someone who is going to be here a long time, looking to build from one season to the next, rather than survive with panic buys and maybe men that never feel part of the actual club. I want seven players that you know will make the team from one week to the next from one season to the next. That's what will get fans behind the club again - consistency and familiarity. As boring and basic as that might sound, I do believe that's the key.

I get that. I do think however, that being here a long time is predicated on success. And building long term requires success. And modern football does not even at broke league one clubs tend to be very forgiving.
There is a strong argument that we need a structure with a Director of Football who becomes a constant even if the first team coach changes. And the Director of Football oversees everything from development to first team "strategy" by which I mean - recruitment policy and style we aspire to.

I think in modern football this approach makes sense. There is too much for a traditional manager to do. Plus the DoF provides consistency when the coach is inevitably binned off.

It also lets you focus on a coach who has motivational, and people skills - key things often overlooked. And they need to be less worried about recruitment - they still have a say - but its not their whole remit.

I think that is a necessary structure now. But if we go into league one without a stable owner or if we are owned by someone else with no money to invest - that is probably pie in the sky.

Should we find stability and an owner with means - then that is something they should look to put in place IMO.

Genuine question (coz I don't know) - how many League One clubs currently have a DoF? How do they afford to run a DoF and a Manager?

I suspect few or likely none. My point is that is the "ideal" structure. If someone invested a lot of money with a long term plan I think that is what makes most sense.

If you're living hand to mouth then it absolutely won't happen. But that for me is when you need a battle hardened Mick McCarthy type rather than some young buck without any experience. Or at the very least a young manager with some experience and the right qualities looking to improve themselves.

Did Southampton come up the leagues with a DoF or did they appoint one when they got to the premiership?

[Worthy4England]

No one is suggesting that it's better to have a few quid to spend than not (well they might be, but I'm certainly not!). I'm not suggesting either, that there's a correlation between teams going back up and Wonga. Like you say, DSB, 4 of the 6 automatically promoted teams had comparative cash, 5 of the promoted teams out of the last 9 didn't have the "Premier" benefit.

I do think on the whole, that if you have a fairly decent attacking unit, it's a little cheaper to try and add some solid defence to it one division up, than having a set of semi-solid defenders who you then need to try and add an attack to.

If we have bugger all, which at the moment looks like where we're heading, then all I'm saying is maybe it's now time to look at the attack and midfield a little more with a view to the future than the present.

To BWFCi's point, I don't mind particularly whether that's with a DoF or without one!

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Did Southampton come up the leagues with a DoF or did they appoint one when they got to the premiership?

Les Reed joined the club in League One in April 2010 as Head of Football Development & Support; he later became vice-chairman. His job was to oversee youth, scouting/recruitment, sports science and even the kit and equipment (with an eye on computerised monitoring, like those movement tracers that so many players not wear strapped to the top of their spines). He left in November 2018.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I do think on the whole, that if you have a fairly decent attacking unit, it's a little cheaper to try and add some solid defence to it one division up, than having a set of semi-solid defenders who you then need to try and add an attack to.

That's a very good point: attackers cost more than defenders, and especially in this division. We were linked with loads in summer who have gone on to score regularly, from David McGoldrick to Chuks Aneke and God knows who else. But they didn't come.

As I've said on the stats thread, historically speaking this team is far from notably porous: 27 of our seasons have averaged more goals-per-game conceded. The problem is that it's easily our worst in history at scoring.

And of course it's even worse if you then sell the only two strikers who would recognise a goal if it bit them in the arse.

The corollary is that you have to find attackers who can join you in t3, be a success and then make the step up. Find them or create them: whatever anyone says about the rest of Parkinson's efforts at Bolton, only an argumentative blurt would deny how impressively he weaponised Madine from the Lennon-ravaged washing machine he inherited.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

The Legendary Flanners notes that Laurence Bassini only hired one manager at Watford: croaky-voiced bloke called Sean Dyche. Former youth team coach, became assistant to Malky Mackay then got the top job when the Scot went to Cardiff.

One of the first things the Bassini-replacing Pozzos did was turf Dyche, in order to get Zola. And then Giuseppe Sannino. And then Slavisa Jokanovic. And then Quique Sanchez Flores. And then Walter Mazzarri. And then Marco Silva. And then Javi Gracia. Nope, I definitely didn't look some of those up.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

The Legendary Flanners notes that Laurence Bassini only hired one manager at Watford: croaky-voiced bloke called Sean Dyche. Former youth team coach, became assistant to Malky Mackay then got the top job when the Scot went to Cardiff.

One of the first things the Bassini-replacing Pozzos did was turf Dyche, in order to get Zola. And then Giuseppe Sannino. And then Slavisa Jokanovic. And then Quique Sanchez Flores. And then Walter Mazzarri. And then Marco Silva. And then Javi Gracia. Nope, I definitely didn't look some of those up.

So are you saying we are getting Sean Dyche as our manager?
I'd vote for that.

[officer_dibble]

Parky’s CV would probably be pretty attractive if he was not already here...

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Parky’s CV would probably be pretty attractive if he was not already here...

Which raises its own question. Would we rather bore our way to automatic promotion or scintillate our way to glorious play-off failure? Call it the 2016/17 Parky vs McCalldiola paradox...

(For the record, I know it’s not a strict dichotomy but right now I think I’d go scintillating near-miss...)

[nicholaldo]

Parky’s CV would probably be pretty attractive if he was not already here...

Which raises its own question. Would we rather bore our way to automatic promotion or scintillate our way to glorious play-off failure? Call it the 2016/17 Parky vs McCalldiola paradox...

(For the record, I know it’s not a strict dichotomy but right now I think I’d go scintillating near-miss...)

As would I (right now, anyway). I've defended Parky, and would continue to defend him, against the "he's clueless, he's useless" type of comments, and I still ultimately think that the biggest reason for our relegation is the chaos that went on behind the scenes. The fact of the matter, though, is that his style of football, whilst often successful throughout his career, has rarely been thrilling to watch and the mood amongst everyone at the club is that we produce a better “product”. And if nothing else, the supporter base is no longer with him so no matter how much, objectively, he might be a good choice for a club recently relegated to League One, or how much some of the things that went on upstairs and negatively affected us were out of his hands, a change is needed.

[Harry Genshaw]

^ bob on.

Parky would be an attractive appointment still, for someone at our level (league 1). Best for everyone I think if he moves on.

I'll be stumping up for two season tickets again next month. It'll be easier for me to shell out knowing he's gone and I expect I'm not alone in that.