Lightning In A Bottle?
As soon as Mario Gotze was announced to be leaving Borussia Dortmund the questions began. The departure of Gotze was a blow, even without it being to German rival Bayern Munchen, but was it a sign of troubles to come? Dortmund overcame financial issues on the trail to building one of the best teams in Europe over the past 5 years under 45 year old Mainz 05 wunderkind Jurgen Klopp, but how tenuous that success is may be the real question. Coinciding with the rise of Dortmund was the rejuvenation of Bayern as European elite, and losing your star creative midfielder to them may be the first in a series of body blows sending Dortmund back to the lower echelon of the Bundesliga from whence they came.
Last season saw the departure of creative ace Shinji Kagawa to Manchester United, only a minor blow with Gotze still on board, but as Klopp is being eyed up by several clubs from around Europe and several more players look to head for the exit door this off season, can Dortmund keep their trajectory as one of the top 10 clubs in all of Europe? 4 goal hero against Real Madrid in the Champions League first leg semi-final, Robert Lewandowski, has only a year remaining on his contract. Despite Dortmund's claims otherwise, its hard to imagine they will allow him to walk away for free after next season when the large offers start rolling in this summer from the likes of Bayern Munich and Manchester United. Defensive rock Mats Hummels is also on the shopping list of every major club in Europe, as are defensive midfielder Sven Bender, central defender Neven Subotic, forward Marco Reus, all the while returned midfielder Nuri Sahin is only back on loan from Real Madrid. The Dortmund team could have a very different look next season.
While Leonardo Bittencourt is a fine little player in FIFA 13, can he really be expected to fill the massive boots of Gotze and Kagawa? Can Ilkay Gundogan continue to grow in the midfield? Can the additions and replacements Dortmund could make with the money brought in from transfers gel with a team that seems to be very close knit? Is the newfound financial stability strong enough to hold this team together over the next few years while making a push for domestic and European honors? Who would/could replace the German Mourinho, Jurgen Klopp?
As Borussia Dortmund attempt this week to seal a place in the Champions League Final, most likely against fellow German club Bayern Munchen, one has to wonder, is Dortmund a team of the present as well as the future, or did they just happen to capture lightning in a bottle? While many people I respect believe this is just the beginning for Dortmund, I have to say, it feels more like the beginning of the end to me.
Sir Alex The Magnificent!
As Manchester United wait to officially lift top flight trophy #20 when they face Swansea at home in May, the autopsy on the season has already begun.
When the season began, Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini all but granted United would lift the trophy based upon the signing of Robin Van Persie from Arsenal. What is interesting about Mancini's premonition is that since United won the title, the EPL table minus club top scorer has come out, and subtracting Van Persie's league leading goals from United still would see them top of the table, and see Manchester City actually falter to third behind Arsenal. It could be said that the title was won before a ball was even kicked this season based on perception and the ultimate Fergie mind game alone.
But what may be the most impressive part of this seasons record pushing title win by Manchester United, is that as they lift their 13th EPL crown, and the 13th title of the Ferguson era, Sir Alex now has as many top flight titles as the third placed team in all of England (Arsenal) all by himself. Given his current pace of lifting the trophy, Sir Alex could tie or even better Liverpool's second place standing all by himself in just another decade at the helm of Manchester United.
While not likely, would anyone suggest it is out of the realm of possibility? For all the hate he receives for his brilliance from opposing fans, it is time they all bow down to the genius of longevity and dominance that is Sir Alex Ferguson. In fact, "Sir Alex" is no longer an impressive enough title for the man who just can't keep from lifting silverware. The history books should forevermore refer to him as Sir Alex the Magnificent.
The Damned United
Every season as I do my MLS preview, as always happens in a league based on parity, I get a few predictions miserably wrong. So far this season, no prediction has been as horribly wrong as that of the fate of DC United. Having played 8 matches, DC are firmly and miserably in the basement of MLS, not just the Eastern Conference.
After 8 matches, DC have only scored 4 goals, none on the road, and have a negative goal differential of -3 at home, -6 on the road. With one of last seasons star men Andy Najar now in Belgium, and another, Chris Pontius, currently on the injured list, the turnaround for DC may be more difficult a task than expected. Manager Ben Olsen has even gone so far as to throw his hands up already and suggest that the only way to turn the season around is if the players begin to perform, and such a turnaround is solely up to them.
While Olsen is no Brian Clough, this season does seem to have an ill-fated feeling about it. Time will tell if DC can make enough of an adjustment to still make the playoffs, but MLS history tells us that if DC is still in the basement after 10 matches, this will be another wasted season in the nations capitol.
To Sell Or Not To Sell
When does a players talent outweigh his status as injury prone? If a player is "world class" when playing, can a club continually tolerate a player missing 10-20 matches a season due to injury? Should a club cut their losses and sell the player for less money than they could if he was always fit, replacing him with a lesser but healthy player?
Now think about that scenario again, but instead of the player missing a dozen matches a year or more with fitness issues, what if it was due to suspension based on behavioral problems?
Once again Luis Suarez has made the news for his on field antics, and once again he is facing a lengthy ban.
In recent weeks the Uruguayan forward has received a 10 match ban from the English FA for biting Chelsea defender Branislov Ivanovic, and may face a ban from FIFA after an incident in an international where he obviously and intentionally punched another player. This, coming on the back of his performances in recent years which have included an intentional handball in the World Cup followed by a spastic celebration of his feat, the racial abuse of Manchester United defender Patrice Evra which resulted in an 8 match ban, and the biting of PSV's Otman Bakkal which got him dubbed "the cannibal of Ajax" and resulted in a 7 match ban.
In most of these cases, Suarez has followed his actions with a quick apology. Much easier to do than change your behavior, no? So while Liverpool appear willing to stand behind the only top level talent they have, from a club as well as a public relations point of view, one has to wonder if the cost of the genius, being madness, is too high. Should the obvious pattern of behavior from the forward continue, the day will quickly arrive where Liverpool no longer have the option of selling Suarez. Common sense says that the time to cash in is now, while they still can. But this is Liverpool, and common sense does not exist.
Thank you for reading, and until next time, I will see you Off The Woodwork.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Development Of An Empire
In recent weeks I have written about the USMNT and how the results and changes amongst the youth of the country matter much more than the results of Jurgen Klinsmann's men, and also about scouting through the prism of Stoke City, how youth and coaching should be linked through style and future consideration. This week I combine the two topics a little, and discuss the future of the USMNT from youth level up, and how managerial changes and style may need to be undertaken in the near future.
Hard working. Fit. Lack of ego. Willingness to follow orders. These are the ways you hear people describe American footballers. Technically gifted. Possession minded. Tactically inventive and malleable. These are not things you ever hear when discussion of American players arises. Why is that?
Not that long ago, when I was a kid, youth soccer was played 11 v 11 on full sized pitches. If you touched the ball a few times a match you felt rather excited. Coaches ranged from parents who were begged into taking the position, or more often than not, people who had little to no knowledge of the game itself. Basic rules were barely understood, and tactics bordered on basketball or gridiron philosophies of "you give it a go, then we will give it a go".
Luckily times have advanced a little since then. 6 v 6 on smaller pitches is now much more common in under eights, coaches normally have a grasp of the rules, even if the game is itself still a bit foreign to most of them, and some coaches even are attempting to develop technical skill. One issue we still have (all the way to the top) is the faulty belief that a foreign accent means quality in coaching, ignoring the deep youth issues places like England, Scotland, and Ireland have found themselves in over the past several decades, but for the most part, progress has been made since I was a kid.
Where we are still falling down is development of youth technical skill, in particular ball skills and decision making while under pressure. While the common perception currently in the game is that every nation and every youth set up should mirror that of Barcelona or Spain, reality is that most countries are not set up that way from youth on, nor should they be. There are many ways to play winning and/or pleasing football. So while technical gifts and footballing brains under pressure need to be addressed from youth up in the States, we also must consider what best is the way forward for the US character and national identity.
The USMNT itself has come a long way since my youth. Our philosophy used to be "If it moves, kick it. If it keeps moving, kick it again." Our style was physical and pesky, if not strong and dirty. Set pieces, long balls, and luck were an important part of our game. As Landon Donovan emerged, the US changed course some. What used to be Tab Ramos or Claudio Reyna and 10 brutes became Donovan and semi-skilled players still aware of the physical side, but also much more reliant upon an actual tactic, counter attacking at pace. This is where I believe we should continue to develop the US national identity.
Even the more skillful of US players aren't known for their skill at pace. While many have pace, and some have technical gifts, few if any have ever been able to apply those gifts into a package. Run down the wing with your head down at pace, and when you can, swing the ball into the box the best you can. When the Americans can perform skill at pace and under pressure, then we will become a footballing country to be taken notice of.
The question becomes how do we challenge our youth without discouraging them? Many kids these days have too many options when it comes to entertainment. The simple idea of my youth of going out to play is often a thought of the past. Getting youth players to put in the effort is a major stumbling block. But more importantly when that bridge is crossed, how do we test their developing skills while under pressure or at pace? In many countries children play in streets, alleys, doorways, or wherever they can, with balls of socks, empty cans, or anything that will roll. Close control is learned under pressure from your friends or neighbors desperate for the ball themselves snapping at your heels. In America, the game is still seen as expensive and elitist. It's been replaced by Lacrosse or Polo by the more wealthy, but it is still mainly a game of the upper and middle classes, and surely not the poor. When you take kids used to getting their own way, used to every entertainment option, and used to being coddled and protected, putting them under pressure and making them fight for every touch and every control can harm their delicate young ego.
Another issue we face is that often at youth level the sexes are combined in sport due to boys not being physically overpowering yet. While this may be part of the reason our girls develop well and are amongst the elite, it may very well be a hinderance to the boys. Again, delicate little egos come to play. I've seen boys shut down on the pitch when tackled or dispossessed by a girl, sometimes after their fathers ignorant taunting. I've seen many young boys go in hard and heavy against other boys, but attempt only the mildest of pressure when facing girls. Even at young ages, boys understand roles differ between males and females, and the way you treat a girl differs to that of how you treat other boys.
It is my belief that from youth up the US needs to put an emphasis on doing everything under pressure and at pace. Technical skill, set pieces, and counter attacking needs to be the mandate to our coaches who instruct those 12 or older. Separation of the sexes needs to be considered whenever possible. As these young players develop and advance through the youth ranks, our coaches should also develop and advance. The style of our U17's should be the same as our U21's, U23's, and senior national side. Coaches should be given opportunities to advance, hiring from within the system should be considered of paramount importance. A culture of growing our own should be undertaken. Hiring MLS or foreign managers should become a thing of the past. Style would remain consistent, which is as important as our technical development.
In a perfect world, the US would build a national youth center to rival those of the French, Spanish, or Germans. Coaches and players would all learn and develop together. Some day possibly even a national stadium could be built akin to the Azteca, with the option still there for matches across the country when need arise. When particularly talented players arise our tactical and technical outlook would be tweaked. Coaches not willing or able to join the modernization of the game in the country need to be put out to pasture. The game needs to change in America, and it needs to start now.
Well, that's my two cents worth anyway. Until next time, I'll see you Off The Woodwork.
Hard working. Fit. Lack of ego. Willingness to follow orders. These are the ways you hear people describe American footballers. Technically gifted. Possession minded. Tactically inventive and malleable. These are not things you ever hear when discussion of American players arises. Why is that?
Not that long ago, when I was a kid, youth soccer was played 11 v 11 on full sized pitches. If you touched the ball a few times a match you felt rather excited. Coaches ranged from parents who were begged into taking the position, or more often than not, people who had little to no knowledge of the game itself. Basic rules were barely understood, and tactics bordered on basketball or gridiron philosophies of "you give it a go, then we will give it a go".
Luckily times have advanced a little since then. 6 v 6 on smaller pitches is now much more common in under eights, coaches normally have a grasp of the rules, even if the game is itself still a bit foreign to most of them, and some coaches even are attempting to develop technical skill. One issue we still have (all the way to the top) is the faulty belief that a foreign accent means quality in coaching, ignoring the deep youth issues places like England, Scotland, and Ireland have found themselves in over the past several decades, but for the most part, progress has been made since I was a kid.
Where we are still falling down is development of youth technical skill, in particular ball skills and decision making while under pressure. While the common perception currently in the game is that every nation and every youth set up should mirror that of Barcelona or Spain, reality is that most countries are not set up that way from youth on, nor should they be. There are many ways to play winning and/or pleasing football. So while technical gifts and footballing brains under pressure need to be addressed from youth up in the States, we also must consider what best is the way forward for the US character and national identity.
The USMNT itself has come a long way since my youth. Our philosophy used to be "If it moves, kick it. If it keeps moving, kick it again." Our style was physical and pesky, if not strong and dirty. Set pieces, long balls, and luck were an important part of our game. As Landon Donovan emerged, the US changed course some. What used to be Tab Ramos or Claudio Reyna and 10 brutes became Donovan and semi-skilled players still aware of the physical side, but also much more reliant upon an actual tactic, counter attacking at pace. This is where I believe we should continue to develop the US national identity.
Even the more skillful of US players aren't known for their skill at pace. While many have pace, and some have technical gifts, few if any have ever been able to apply those gifts into a package. Run down the wing with your head down at pace, and when you can, swing the ball into the box the best you can. When the Americans can perform skill at pace and under pressure, then we will become a footballing country to be taken notice of.
The question becomes how do we challenge our youth without discouraging them? Many kids these days have too many options when it comes to entertainment. The simple idea of my youth of going out to play is often a thought of the past. Getting youth players to put in the effort is a major stumbling block. But more importantly when that bridge is crossed, how do we test their developing skills while under pressure or at pace? In many countries children play in streets, alleys, doorways, or wherever they can, with balls of socks, empty cans, or anything that will roll. Close control is learned under pressure from your friends or neighbors desperate for the ball themselves snapping at your heels. In America, the game is still seen as expensive and elitist. It's been replaced by Lacrosse or Polo by the more wealthy, but it is still mainly a game of the upper and middle classes, and surely not the poor. When you take kids used to getting their own way, used to every entertainment option, and used to being coddled and protected, putting them under pressure and making them fight for every touch and every control can harm their delicate young ego.
Another issue we face is that often at youth level the sexes are combined in sport due to boys not being physically overpowering yet. While this may be part of the reason our girls develop well and are amongst the elite, it may very well be a hinderance to the boys. Again, delicate little egos come to play. I've seen boys shut down on the pitch when tackled or dispossessed by a girl, sometimes after their fathers ignorant taunting. I've seen many young boys go in hard and heavy against other boys, but attempt only the mildest of pressure when facing girls. Even at young ages, boys understand roles differ between males and females, and the way you treat a girl differs to that of how you treat other boys.
It is my belief that from youth up the US needs to put an emphasis on doing everything under pressure and at pace. Technical skill, set pieces, and counter attacking needs to be the mandate to our coaches who instruct those 12 or older. Separation of the sexes needs to be considered whenever possible. As these young players develop and advance through the youth ranks, our coaches should also develop and advance. The style of our U17's should be the same as our U21's, U23's, and senior national side. Coaches should be given opportunities to advance, hiring from within the system should be considered of paramount importance. A culture of growing our own should be undertaken. Hiring MLS or foreign managers should become a thing of the past. Style would remain consistent, which is as important as our technical development.
In a perfect world, the US would build a national youth center to rival those of the French, Spanish, or Germans. Coaches and players would all learn and develop together. Some day possibly even a national stadium could be built akin to the Azteca, with the option still there for matches across the country when need arise. When particularly talented players arise our tactical and technical outlook would be tweaked. Coaches not willing or able to join the modernization of the game in the country need to be put out to pasture. The game needs to change in America, and it needs to start now.
Well, that's my two cents worth anyway. Until next time, I'll see you Off The Woodwork.
Sunday, April 7, 2013
Scouting The Future
This week, Stoke City manager Tony Pulis was kicked when he was down. With his club in the grips of a death rattle toward the relegation zone, while in the throngs of the poorest run of form by any top flight English League club in 2013, it has become common place for fans of the club to take to the airwaves of national and local radio to complain about the clubs style of play and the tactical mind of Pulis. Pundits make sure they let you know how much they like Pulis, right before they stick the knife in and twist, over where Stoke seem to be headed. All of this is to be expected with the club in such a state, but what isn't to be expected, is your chief scout Lindsay Parsons laying bare to his gripes publicly, when the club needs to be its most unified for Premier League survival.
Parsons let the world know that he was not a fan in any shape or form of the style of play employed by Stoke City under Tony Pulis, and that many of the transfer targets suggested to the club from a scouting perspective had been declined due to size and technical ability issues. Not that the players were too big and too unskilled, but that they were too small and too skilled to play the Stoke way. Parsons even went so far as to suggest which players Stoke passed upon, including Demba Ba and Hatem Ben Arfa.
Unless you are a know-nothing couch jockey named Alan making a living talking out of your backside on English telly, you wouldn't have had to be a rocket scientist to have thrown those names out to any manager in the EPL a few years ago, so it would be easy to make jokes about Parsons and move on. But I believe the point Parsons was making, though completely unnecessary to make in the public eye, is much deeper than many may realize, and a very important subject to discuss.
Sticking with Stoke City for a moment, I'd like to play a little game called "what if". What if Tony Pulis were to get sacked? What then for Stoke City football club? If the players brought in from youth team to the senior side have been brought in with one style of play in mind, and a limited skill or stature set, surely any new manager brought in would have to be in the exact same mold as Tony Pulis. If not prepared to play with big strong physical players designed to live and breathe on set plays, the new manager would not only have to over turn the majority of the first team, but also every 9 year old who has walked in the door under Pulis's tenure. Vast amounts of time and money would need to be spent with the club in perpetual limbo as a reboot was performed.
On the other end of the spectrum, what if Arsene Wenger walks away from or gets sacked from Arsenal? Could "Big Sam" Allardyce or Jose Mourinho be given the job? Short answer, no. While "Big Sam" claims he could manage Real Madrid to glory, (I'm the one person on the planet who believes he could, partly because I believe almost anyone on earth could do as such) his style or that of Mourinho's does not fit with that of Arsenal. Be it Arsenal or Barcelona, when a 9 year old boy walks in the door, he is trained to play football the same way as he would in the reserves or with the first team. The game is built upon passing, possession, and technical skill, the opponent and their style of play be damned. While many consider this to be a flaw in the Wenger mind set, any new manager would have no choice but to play "the Arsenal way", without completely gutting and rebuilding the club from smallest child all the way up to the tea lady. (The tea lady is the most important person at a club, is she not? Or have I been misinformed?) While a much simpler task than the Stoke rebuild, if you don't hire the right "type" of manager, someone willing to play an attacking possession style, you are basically doomed to difficulties.
In the middle of the road, but a footballing oddity, are the clubs like Manchester United, Real Madrid, and now the likes of Chelsea, PSG, and Manchester City. (Even Hollywood FC Bayern Munchen to some extent, though Germany is a bit of Alice's Wonderland to the Dorothy's OZ that most football lives in.) What if Sir Alex Ferguson retires, Jose Mourinho walks, Roberto Mancini and Carlo Ancelotti get sacked, and the Chelsea flavor of the month gets persuaded by Uncle Roman's good buddy Vladmir Putin's good buddies to hang themselves? Quite simply, a cavalcade of top pros come in and out the door while the clubs continue to buy the best available talent they can find from youngest trainee to most revered veteran. When you buy the best available talent and employ whatever system you need to in order to be successful on the pitch, manager changes do little to shake the natural order of the club. (Fergie is a special case, I agree, but the aftermath of his going wouldn't change from all the rest.)
There are some glitches that will arise from this system as well, using Manchester United as an example, you may spend far over the odds for a player like Bebe because you believe another big club is sniffing around him. Or you may be renowned for your wingers over the generations, only to gallop to the current EPL title without any winger of note. Or you may bring in Juan Sebastien Veron for a hefty fee, only to misuse him due to his being overly gifted. There are bumps in the road with any system. Though a seemingly superior ideal, very few clubs can afford such a system, possibly not even Real Madrid or Manchester United.
In an earlier piece here on Off The Woodwork, I made the comment that Jurgen Klinsmann's performance with the US Mens National Team cannot be judged today, but will be judged in the future when the youth of today become the stars of the 2026 or 2030 World Cup. This is a slightly different spin on the concept that is my present topic, where you are not buying or scouting for a certain type of player, but scouting for a certain type of player while also trying to build those kinds of players from the lowest of youth levels on. Its an interesting sub topic, but the scope, desires, and challenges of national team scouting and identity differ in several ways to that of club football.
Over the years we have seen many clubs in English football reach the promised land of the top flight, only to change course midstream in order to play a more beautiful game. While the 70's, 80's, and 90's were littered with such clubs, I'd like to take a moment to look at two more recent top flight clubs to have the crisis of style, both concerning the aforementioned "Big Sam".
When "Big Sam" was appointed manager of West Ham United, many of the Hammers faithful were left uninspired. There was a famed academy at WHU, and the club was known for a certain style of play. Then in walked Sam, with a new vision. He pointed out that the beautiful football had seen the club relegated several times and seen many managers come and go based more on style than results. As the season has wound down many names have been floated as a replacement for Sam in the offseason, based on the desire of the fans to see something "worth watching". But the fact remains, WHU are in a solid place again in the EPL, with no danger of relegation or glory. The long ball football with occasional bursts of flair has worked. It gained promotion. It gained another season in the top flight.
Another link to the big man comes from the plight of Blackburn. Under Allardyce the club was consistently in the league. No glory, no threat of the drop. Then that was no longer good enough. The new owners of Blackburn (Venky's) wanted to play a more attractive and technical style of football. They wanted flair players like Ronaldinho to grace their pitch. In the short time since the replacement of "Big Sam", the club has gone through a succession of managers, been relegated once, and seem doomed to back-to-back relegations, finding them in England's League One, when they had been safely a top flight club just a few seasons before.
While this could be seen as a cautionary tale to anyone who employs Tony Pulis, Sam Allardyce, Alan Curbishly, or many other fine status quo managers, or any owner or chairman who fancies that their club starts playing beautiful football, I see this as a deeper issue than just the whim of a new ethos. I see this as a scouting failure at the deepest level. If a club, their fans, the owner, or the manager feel a change is needed once their "level" has been reached, be it top flight or just league football, there is no quick fix. Even bucket loads of cash aren't a quick fix if the infrastructure of the club is not properly supported for the desired changes.
Should Tony Pulis feel Stoke need a change, to be more attacking or skillful, as some of his purchases this past season seem to indicate, then shame on him for not effecting change from the bottom to the top himself. But also shame on Lindsay Parsons for not pushing harder with potential transfer targets that could affect that change. Shame on Parsons for not walking away from the job if it couldn't be done without a hand tied behind the back.
When it comes to changing the culture and style of any football club from what has gotten it promoted or solidified in a division, there is no quick fix. In my opinion it can only be done slowly, over years, with proper scouting from the youngest of youth to the most veteran first team player. There will be growing pains in such an endeavor, and perhaps some sliding down from the level the club has become accustomed to. But when it comes to addressing the style of any football club, I am of the firm belief that you need to scout the future, and if Tony Pulis finds himself looking for new employment, then so should Lindsay Parsons.
Until next time, I'll see you Off The Woodwork.
Parsons let the world know that he was not a fan in any shape or form of the style of play employed by Stoke City under Tony Pulis, and that many of the transfer targets suggested to the club from a scouting perspective had been declined due to size and technical ability issues. Not that the players were too big and too unskilled, but that they were too small and too skilled to play the Stoke way. Parsons even went so far as to suggest which players Stoke passed upon, including Demba Ba and Hatem Ben Arfa.
Unless you are a know-nothing couch jockey named Alan making a living talking out of your backside on English telly, you wouldn't have had to be a rocket scientist to have thrown those names out to any manager in the EPL a few years ago, so it would be easy to make jokes about Parsons and move on. But I believe the point Parsons was making, though completely unnecessary to make in the public eye, is much deeper than many may realize, and a very important subject to discuss.
Sticking with Stoke City for a moment, I'd like to play a little game called "what if". What if Tony Pulis were to get sacked? What then for Stoke City football club? If the players brought in from youth team to the senior side have been brought in with one style of play in mind, and a limited skill or stature set, surely any new manager brought in would have to be in the exact same mold as Tony Pulis. If not prepared to play with big strong physical players designed to live and breathe on set plays, the new manager would not only have to over turn the majority of the first team, but also every 9 year old who has walked in the door under Pulis's tenure. Vast amounts of time and money would need to be spent with the club in perpetual limbo as a reboot was performed.
On the other end of the spectrum, what if Arsene Wenger walks away from or gets sacked from Arsenal? Could "Big Sam" Allardyce or Jose Mourinho be given the job? Short answer, no. While "Big Sam" claims he could manage Real Madrid to glory, (I'm the one person on the planet who believes he could, partly because I believe almost anyone on earth could do as such) his style or that of Mourinho's does not fit with that of Arsenal. Be it Arsenal or Barcelona, when a 9 year old boy walks in the door, he is trained to play football the same way as he would in the reserves or with the first team. The game is built upon passing, possession, and technical skill, the opponent and their style of play be damned. While many consider this to be a flaw in the Wenger mind set, any new manager would have no choice but to play "the Arsenal way", without completely gutting and rebuilding the club from smallest child all the way up to the tea lady. (The tea lady is the most important person at a club, is she not? Or have I been misinformed?) While a much simpler task than the Stoke rebuild, if you don't hire the right "type" of manager, someone willing to play an attacking possession style, you are basically doomed to difficulties.
In the middle of the road, but a footballing oddity, are the clubs like Manchester United, Real Madrid, and now the likes of Chelsea, PSG, and Manchester City. (Even Hollywood FC Bayern Munchen to some extent, though Germany is a bit of Alice's Wonderland to the Dorothy's OZ that most football lives in.) What if Sir Alex Ferguson retires, Jose Mourinho walks, Roberto Mancini and Carlo Ancelotti get sacked, and the Chelsea flavor of the month gets persuaded by Uncle Roman's good buddy Vladmir Putin's good buddies to hang themselves? Quite simply, a cavalcade of top pros come in and out the door while the clubs continue to buy the best available talent they can find from youngest trainee to most revered veteran. When you buy the best available talent and employ whatever system you need to in order to be successful on the pitch, manager changes do little to shake the natural order of the club. (Fergie is a special case, I agree, but the aftermath of his going wouldn't change from all the rest.)
There are some glitches that will arise from this system as well, using Manchester United as an example, you may spend far over the odds for a player like Bebe because you believe another big club is sniffing around him. Or you may be renowned for your wingers over the generations, only to gallop to the current EPL title without any winger of note. Or you may bring in Juan Sebastien Veron for a hefty fee, only to misuse him due to his being overly gifted. There are bumps in the road with any system. Though a seemingly superior ideal, very few clubs can afford such a system, possibly not even Real Madrid or Manchester United.
In an earlier piece here on Off The Woodwork, I made the comment that Jurgen Klinsmann's performance with the US Mens National Team cannot be judged today, but will be judged in the future when the youth of today become the stars of the 2026 or 2030 World Cup. This is a slightly different spin on the concept that is my present topic, where you are not buying or scouting for a certain type of player, but scouting for a certain type of player while also trying to build those kinds of players from the lowest of youth levels on. Its an interesting sub topic, but the scope, desires, and challenges of national team scouting and identity differ in several ways to that of club football.
Over the years we have seen many clubs in English football reach the promised land of the top flight, only to change course midstream in order to play a more beautiful game. While the 70's, 80's, and 90's were littered with such clubs, I'd like to take a moment to look at two more recent top flight clubs to have the crisis of style, both concerning the aforementioned "Big Sam".
When "Big Sam" was appointed manager of West Ham United, many of the Hammers faithful were left uninspired. There was a famed academy at WHU, and the club was known for a certain style of play. Then in walked Sam, with a new vision. He pointed out that the beautiful football had seen the club relegated several times and seen many managers come and go based more on style than results. As the season has wound down many names have been floated as a replacement for Sam in the offseason, based on the desire of the fans to see something "worth watching". But the fact remains, WHU are in a solid place again in the EPL, with no danger of relegation or glory. The long ball football with occasional bursts of flair has worked. It gained promotion. It gained another season in the top flight.
Another link to the big man comes from the plight of Blackburn. Under Allardyce the club was consistently in the league. No glory, no threat of the drop. Then that was no longer good enough. The new owners of Blackburn (Venky's) wanted to play a more attractive and technical style of football. They wanted flair players like Ronaldinho to grace their pitch. In the short time since the replacement of "Big Sam", the club has gone through a succession of managers, been relegated once, and seem doomed to back-to-back relegations, finding them in England's League One, when they had been safely a top flight club just a few seasons before.
While this could be seen as a cautionary tale to anyone who employs Tony Pulis, Sam Allardyce, Alan Curbishly, or many other fine status quo managers, or any owner or chairman who fancies that their club starts playing beautiful football, I see this as a deeper issue than just the whim of a new ethos. I see this as a scouting failure at the deepest level. If a club, their fans, the owner, or the manager feel a change is needed once their "level" has been reached, be it top flight or just league football, there is no quick fix. Even bucket loads of cash aren't a quick fix if the infrastructure of the club is not properly supported for the desired changes.
Should Tony Pulis feel Stoke need a change, to be more attacking or skillful, as some of his purchases this past season seem to indicate, then shame on him for not effecting change from the bottom to the top himself. But also shame on Lindsay Parsons for not pushing harder with potential transfer targets that could affect that change. Shame on Parsons for not walking away from the job if it couldn't be done without a hand tied behind the back.
When it comes to changing the culture and style of any football club from what has gotten it promoted or solidified in a division, there is no quick fix. In my opinion it can only be done slowly, over years, with proper scouting from the youngest of youth to the most veteran first team player. There will be growing pains in such an endeavor, and perhaps some sliding down from the level the club has become accustomed to. But when it comes to addressing the style of any football club, I am of the firm belief that you need to scout the future, and if Tony Pulis finds himself looking for new employment, then so should Lindsay Parsons.
Until next time, I'll see you Off The Woodwork.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)