Who's the Rioch to Evatt's Neal?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

My assumption is that when managers are fired their contracts are at least partially paid up, but that would almost certainly not be done as a lump sum. It probably wouldn’t be spread over the entire contract duration, but I doubt many clubs are paying those sums in one go.

This of course is going to vary from situation to situation, but, making another assumption, I’m going to say clubs are likely to agree clauses with outgoing managers to say the payments will stop if they take another job.

Lots of guesswork there from me, so perhaps I’m wide of the mark.

Not really wide of the mark mate. My understanding is that it differs from case to case. As I say, the "we'll grudgingly pay you to stay away until you get another job" is generally gardening leave, but it could be (and has been) written into some exit terms.

I'm hoping for/ expecting an announcement for Monday next week. We're in direct competition for several candidates who also appear on Wycombe's possible list. Local journos there seem to think Leam Richardson is current favourites, which is fine by me. Given the number of candidates out of work, I'd be amazed if their agents weren't crawling over broken glass to get an interview sorted this week.

Wycombe appear to have a taste for Danish - they've signed two Danish players this month, they were linked with Thomas Frank's (Danish) assistant and just today they've been linked with another Dane by Danish media. Maybe Leam should say he's from Aarhus.

Would/ could we try to steal Challinor, which would take much longer and take funds out of our transfer budget? Is Dean Holden still in the middle east or back home?

Challinor is contracted to 2026 - he extended that in 2023 after taking them to the playoff final. You sense Stockport would fight it and he's not jockeying to leave.

Iles said Holden is "available after a spell coaching in Saudi Arabia under Steven Gerrard at Al-Ettifaq" and he has made a name for himself as a coach. However, I have to ask if any candidate with his managerial record – not terrible, but hardly inspiring either, with two nine-month spells ending in dismissal - would be of interest if he hadn't played 21 games in our shirt a quarter-century ago.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

What kind of football do Schumacher teams play?

Here's the Stoke local press getting the lowdown from Plymouth on his appointment: https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/f ... er-8987544

Schumacher had Argyle playing an exciting brand of attacking football, which worked extremely well at Home Park. They have won 27 of their 34 league games there since the start of the 2022/23 season. He largely refused to compromise on his approach in away games and the Pilgrims have yet to win an away Championship match this season, although most of their matches on the road have been against the top sides, such as Leicester City, Ipswich Town, Leeds United and West Bromwich Albion.
Argyle played a 3-4-2-1 formation during their 2022/23 League One title campaign but Schumacher has largely gone with a 4-3-3 set-up this season with the aim of trying to give them more solidity playing against better teams at a higher level. One of his biggest strengths is undoubtedly working with young players and developing them. His use of substitutions to change the course of games has been good too.

And then by March:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68533796

Stoke City boss Steven Schumacher says he does not mind abandoning his footballing principles if it secures Championship survival for the Potters. [...]
"The football hasn't been exactly how we wanted it over the last three games, we haven't played out from the back [as much]. But I'm not bothered about that, I just want to get points."
At previous club Plymouth, Schumacher's Pilgrims were renowned for an attacking, free-scoring style but the 39-year-old admitted he has had to temper that philosophy in his new surroundings. [...]
"What I am really pleased about is that, in the last three games in particular, we are going until the very last minute," Schumacher added. "That wasn't the case when we first came in - the facts and the data were there, we didn't score from 75 minutes to 90, and now we look as though we can. There's also been a realisation from myself: 'What are we actually really good at?' And we're a physical type of team."

If you want a really in-depth tactical look, ask a numbers nerd (bless them).

His Plymouth team (in January of the promotion season):
https://totalfootballanalysis.com/team- ... is-tactics
In short: short passing through the thirds but also happy to mix it up

His Stoke team (Mar 2024):
https://totalfootballanalysis.com/team- ... is-tactics
In short: good high press, well organised defence, blunt attack

[Prufrock]

Challinor would be an excellent choice - maybe the best choice but I just can’t see Sharon wanting to go there - too much time and too high a cost and he’s still a risky appointment. Like any it may or may not work.

Not sure how you work out he might be the best, I thought VN and L2 promotions didn't count ...?

[BWFC_Insane]

Challinor would be an excellent choice - maybe the best choice but I just can’t see Sharon wanting to go there - too much time and too high a cost and he’s still a risky appointment. Like any it may or may not work.

Not sure how you work out he might be the best, I thought VN and L2 promotions didn't count ...?

Well I mean that’s it. He has an aura that you feel he could be a really good manager. And has a very good record. But is untested at doing what we need.

He feels to me like the right ‘sort’ of manager for a club like us but there isn’t the evidence to back that up and make it more than a hunch.

Same with the Walsall manager being touted. Great. He’s working wonders at Walsall. But he’s 39 and barely started his career.

You could put those managers in a high risk high reward category. If they are as good as their early promise suggests you are looking at top appointments but if not then….and it’s hard to know, for sure.

[jmjhb]

Challinor would be an excellent choice - maybe the best choice but I just can’t see Sharon wanting to go there - too much time and too high a cost and he’s still a risky appointment. Like any it may or may not work.

I can't really see us paying compo for Challinor (I'd imagine it would be considerable) as well as the exit deal for Evatt.

But who knows. Very early days yet.

[The_Gun]

I think it’s very likely that we’ll go either for an out of work manager, or for someone currently coaching at a higher level, but not as a head honcho.

Also if I’ve correctly judged the nature of our internal decision makers, the candidates’ CVs will be what gets them an interview, but it’s what they say during their meetings that will get them the job.

Presumably the expectation for all candidates will be that they give a detailed assessment of our current squad and how they’d get the best out of them. So I really wouldn’t discount an unproven coach who really impresses during the interview process.

I’m sure we’ll have already received a lot of applications anyway.

[TonyDomingos]

I think it’s very likely that we’ll go either for an out of work manager, or for someone currently coaching at a higher level, but not as a head honcho.

Also if I’ve correctly judged the nature of our internal decision makers, the candidates’ CVs will be what gets them an interview, but it’s what they say during their meetings that will get them the job.

Presumably the expectation for all candidates will be that they give a detailed assessment of our current squad and how they’d get the best out of them. So I really wouldn’t discount an unproven coach who really impresses during the interview process.

I’m sure we’ll have already received a lot of applications anyway.

If a good CV is the route to an interview, I suspect unproven coaches won't get the opportunity to impress face-to-face.

Also, I wonder whether, having experienced an unproven coach who learnt on the job, the board might prefer someone with more experience this time around.

[Worthy4England]

I think it’s very likely that we’ll go either for an out of work manager, or for someone currently coaching at a higher level, but not as a head honcho.

Also if I’ve correctly judged the nature of our internal decision makers, the candidates’ CVs will be what gets them an interview, but it’s what they say during their meetings that will get them the job.

Presumably the expectation for all candidates will be that they give a detailed assessment of our current squad and how they’d get the best out of them. So I really wouldn’t discount an unproven coach who really impresses during the interview process.

I’m sure we’ll have already received a lot of applications anyway.

If a good CV is the route to an interview, I suspect unproven coaches won't get the opportunity to impress face-to-face.

Also, I wonder whether, having experienced an unproven coach who learnt on the job, the board might prefer someone with more experience this time around.

Pretty sure CV's are just table stakes - it's pretty incestuous and a lot of stuff known about individuals from within the business, like most businesses. I'd sort of assume anyone we spoke to had a pretty realistic chance of landing the job, irrespective of their CV, because if that's not to our liking then we probably aren't wasting out time interviewing - for all we know we might have identified our preferred candidate already....and the interview is just to confirm.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

For what it's worth, which ain't much, I've done a lot of hiring and I often had at least one candidate in mind.

For the record, in our case we'd get literally hundreds of applicants so I'd get HR to do first sift by checking the CVs for certain parameters/experience; then I'd whittle down to the best 12 or so and get them to do remote tasks which me + 1 would assess 'blind'; then me +1 would interview the best handful to check they weren't unworkable with.

I suspect the latter stage (once described by a colleague as "checking they haven't got two heads") is important in hiring football managers... which speaks to Worthy's point. I don't think anyone's a clear enough favourite to do the interview as a formality unless he shits on the desk, though...

[BWFC_Insane]

For what it's worth, which ain't much, I've done a lot of hiring and I often had at least one candidate in mind.

For the record, in our case we'd get literally hundreds of applicants so I'd get HR to do first sift by checking the CVs for certain parameters/experience; then I'd whittle down to the best 12 or so and get them to do remote tasks which me + 1 would assess 'blind'; then me +1 would interview the best handful to check they weren't unworkable with.

I suspect the latter stage (once described by a colleague as "checking they haven't got two heads") is important in hiring football managers... which speaks to Worthy's point. I don't think anyone's a clear enough favourite to do the interview as a formality unless he shits on the desk, though...

Done a lot too and similarly to you post shortlisting usually you have someone in mind out of the group you are interviewing.

However, I always, always go on gut feel. I know it sounds ridiculous - I’m an evidenced based person but for me interviews you go with what your gut tells you about someone. Tests or tasks for me just check someone isn’t lying about their capability - and mostly people are not. But I think you get a good sense of someone from the interview and how they approach it. If they aren’t able to make it a good discussion and chat it’s always a red flag to me.

But I’d say the difference with football is - unlike many industries do those interviewing understand the sort of person who can build an effective team and manage footballers well? I suspect that’s where a lot of it falls down. Because there are two worlds. The board and the players and understanding what works with the latter is much more remote than many industries.

[The_Gun]

I think it’s very likely that we’ll go either for an out of work manager, or for someone currently coaching at a higher level, but not as a head honcho.

Also if I’ve correctly judged the nature of our internal decision makers, the candidates’ CVs will be what gets them an interview, but it’s what they say during their meetings that will get them the job.

Presumably the expectation for all candidates will be that they give a detailed assessment of our current squad and how they’d get the best out of them. So I really wouldn’t discount an unproven coach who really impresses during the interview process.

I’m sure we’ll have already received a lot of applications anyway.

If a good CV is the route to an interview, I suspect unproven coaches won't get the opportunity to impress face-to-face.

Also, I wonder whether, having experienced an unproven coach who learnt on the job, the board might prefer someone with more experience this time around.

Yeah, I get how what I wrote could look contradictory. I think agents will be able to spin the experience of some coaches who have maybe worked in the PL under big name managers, or coached age group teams, into appealing enough CVs to get interviews.

My point was more I don’t think Sharon et al are the types to hire a Schumacher type just because he’s got a L1 promotion on his record, if he didn’t interview as well as someone who’s never been a head coach.

[jimbo]

Schumacher is the number 1 ‘sensible’ candidate isn’t he. Proven at the level we’re at, and to a degree the league above, local, and he feels achievable. Can’t be many who would grumble at him arriving. There might be other left field candidates who turn out better, but I’d back Schuey to be the most likely to make a success of it here.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Done a lot too and similarly to you post shortlisting usually you have someone in mind out of the group you are interviewing.

However, I always, always go on gut feel. I know it sounds ridiculous - I’m an evidenced based person but for me interviews you go with what your gut tells you about someone. Tests or tasks for me just check someone isn’t lying about their capability - and mostly people are not. But I think you get a good sense of someone from the interview and how they approach it. If they aren’t able to make it a good discussion and chat it’s always a red flag to me.

But I’d say the difference with football is - unlike many industries do those interviewing understand the sort of person who can build an effective team and manage footballers well? I suspect that’s where a lot of it falls down. Because there are two worlds. The board and the players and understanding what works with the latter is much more remote than many industries.

Middle par - yeah, the gut feeling is part of the "two heads" hygiene thing. You have to work with these people, and in football they may be asking your staff to run through brick walls, although hopefully only metaphorically, or HR would have to get involved again...

(I'd also note that task assessments are utterly vital in my particular creative industry, but that has nowt to do wi' this.)

[DJBlu]

Sam Allardyce has ruled himself out as potential candidate. Says he's welcome to help in some capacity but not as manager. I'm sure he's holding out for a potential Premier league survivor.

[Worthy4England]

Done a lot too and similarly to you post shortlisting usually you have someone in mind out of the group you are interviewing.

However, I always, always go on gut feel. I know it sounds ridiculous - I’m an evidenced based person but for me interviews you go with what your gut tells you about someone. Tests or tasks for me just check someone isn’t lying about their capability - and mostly people are not. But I think you get a good sense of someone from the interview and how they approach it. If they aren’t able to make it a good discussion and chat it’s always a red flag to me.

But I’d say the difference with football is - unlike many industries do those interviewing understand the sort of person who can build an effective team and manage footballers well? I suspect that’s where a lot of it falls down. Because there are two worlds. The board and the players and understanding what works with the latter is much more remote than many industries.

Middle par - yeah, the gut feeling is part of the "two heads" hygiene thing. You have to work with these people, and in football they may be asking your staff to run through brick walls, although hopefully only metaphorically, or HR would have to get involved again...

(I'd also note that task assessments are utterly vital in my particular creative industry, but that has nowt to do wi' this.)

Hmm. I doubt we'd set (for arguments sake) a test or task for Sean Dyche or Steve Schumaker. They're not the office juniors. When recruiting for grown-ups, you're generally not checking whether they're lying because that's already been done, way before they're going to get a couple of hours interview (in fact I'd hesitate to use the word "interview") to ensure there's strong cultural alignment. I find that it's probably 50% listening and 50% selling to them our vision to ensure we land who we need.

[Worthy4England]

Sam Allardyce has ruled himself out as potential candidate. Says he's welcome to help in some capacity but not as manager. I'm sure he's holding out for a potential Premier league survivor.

He said that a few days back (last week I think), before Evatt got mutually garden leaved. There's an interview somewhere...I'll try dig it out.

[BWFC_Insane]

Sam Allardyce has ruled himself out as potential candidate. Says he's welcome to help in some capacity but not as manager. I'm sure he's holding out for a potential Premier league survivor.

He said that a few days back (last week I think), before Evatt got mutually garden leaved. There's an interview somewhere...I'll try dig it out.

He’s just said it again post Evatt sacking. So I think it’s a no as manager. I doubt he wants a managerial role anywhere. He’s 70 and enjoying the high life. A boardroom role or advisor role probably suits him. He may say he misses the dressing room etc but I think that’s a big gap to actually wanting to get back into the thick of it fauly.

[Bijou Bob]

Part of me would love Emma Hayes to get the job.........just to watch EL8 go into meltdown.

Good to see BSA has ruled himself out - widening the doors to accommodate his ego would have been hugely expensive! .

[Prufrock]

I very much doubt Emma Hayes is leaving her £25k a week US Women's job to come here !

[Bertie Wooster]

I'll be surprised if we go and try and get a manager in work and have to pay compo, they could use that cash for a couple of signings if they employ an out of work manager - it would be quite a surprise if it wasn't SS, just look at our poll.