OK, So England's Next Manager?

[Rowls]

I've no idea what you mean here?

The Spanish players are as good as the England players which means they have a completely different criteria for a manager for some unexplained reason?

What? I don't understand.

I've laid out what the criteria is. And what it is not.

The prime criteria is: Has a proven track record of being a successful manager

One criteria which should NOT be considered a benefit would be: Is in situ as current U21 coach.

It's pretty simple.

[ŽižkovClaret]

How about Carsley as FT manager, but with a duo of currently active managers as assistants / tactical consultants

[Poulton-le-Claret]

I'd seriously wait until next summer to see whether we can tempt either Klopp or Pep, and put an interim in in the meantime. We need a manager with great experience who has the respect and worldwide appeal, and is capable of handling some of the current crop who quite possibly think there better than they are. Not sure any English manager at present fits the bill, but if it was to be one then Eddie would be my choice.

Definitely agree with this.

There are currently no world class English managers and I'd rather take a foreign manager who has experience of winning trophies over someone under qualified based solely on their nationality.

[claretburns]

Poch has confirmed his interest in the job.

[claretburns]

Not sure Howe would leave Newcastle for England would he? Potter is the obvious choice.

Amanda Stavely and her husband, who appointed Howe, have sold their shares and left Newcastle. A bit of an unknown how much backing he still has at boardroom level, a shaky start and he could well be sacked.

[Rowls]

How about Carsley as FT manager, but with a duo of currently active managers as assistants / tactical consultants

Lol. Exactly.

It would be funny if it weren't for the fact that's he reportedly is on the shortlist and it was how the previous incumbent was appointed.

[ecc]

I hope people citing Guardiola are on a wind-up mission.

[basil6345789]

A foreigner

[Juan Tanamera]

He's gone thank ****

[Rick_Muller]

We have an abundance of talent that I don’t think we’ve had to this extent before. This in itself causes issues for whoever is chosen to manage them.

We’ve had previously the Lampard/Gerrard/Scholes type problem where great players were shoehorned into the team to keep them happy.

I think whoever gets the gig needs to step away from that, and choose a style to play based upon the great talent pool of players at their disposal and then pick the best players at the time of the games for those roles in the team.

If that means Bellingham or Foden etc don’t play every minute, they need to respect the decision made as to why. Players need to also be picked on form, not on past glories - Kane was not right during the Euros but “had” to be picked. Not anymore.

In terms of names to take up the job, whoever it is needs balls of steel and a strong character to boot. Ideally if we could persuade him I’d have Pep, but that won’t happen and neither would Klopp. Eddie Howe has learnt a lot over the years, but would he command the respect of the likes of Bellingham (who actually disappointed me with his arrogance and attitude during the Euros). Potter did well at Brighton but failed to get superstar players working at Chelsea. The remaining English name is Dyche, he certainly has the character, but again the superstars wouldn’t likely disrespect him and not play for him.

How about a curveball… Fabregas or Ibrahimovic? Or any other recently retired winning player?

Certainly not an easy choice. I think some may rue losing Southgate.

[TopCat]

We have an abundance of talent that I don’t think we’ve had to this extent before. This in itself causes issues for whoever is chosen to manage them.

We’ve had previously the Lampard/Gerrard/Scholes type problem where great players were shoehorned into the team to keep them happy.

I think whoever gets the gig needs to step away from that, and choose a style to play based upon the great talent pool of players at their disposal and then pick the best players at the time of the games for those roles in the team.

If that means Bellingham or Foden etc don’t play every minute, they need to respect the decision made as to why. Players need to also be picked on form, not on past glories - Kane was not right during the Euros but “had” to be picked. Not anymore.

In terms of names to take up the job, whoever it is needs balls of steel and a strong character to boot. Ideally if we could persuade him I’d have Pep, but that won’t happen and neither would Klopp. Eddie Howe has learnt a lot over the years, but would he command the respect of the likes of Bellingham (who actually disappointed me with his arrogance and attitude during the Euros). Potter did well at Brighton but failed to get superstar players working at Chelsea. The remaining English name is Dyche, he certainly has the character, but again the superstars wouldn’t likely disrespect him and not play for him.

How about a curveball… Fabregas or Ibrahimovic? Or any other recently retired winning player?

Certainly not an easy choice. I think some may rue losing Southgate.

I certainly won't.

[aclaretinstevenage]

The England Manager has to have an ego bigger than the players, be resilient against criticism and be available without the need for compensation payments............So Graham Westley then!

[Clovius Boofus]

Pep and Klopp are far too sensible to take the job. When two finals are seen as failure by many fans, then why would they want to do it. Such expectations are bonkers.

[Darnhill Claret]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Frank Lampard get the job.

[yTib]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Frank Lampard get the job.

please god no.

[Colburn_Claret]

Potter has turned jobs down, so I think he had already been sounded out. He bombed at Chelsea so I worry about his big player credentials.

Everyone bombs at Chelsea, it's the shitty end of the stick. Even Poch, so I wouldn't use them as a yardstick for Potter.

[Acting Claret]

It’ll be a bland yes man. Always the same problem.

[Mattster]

Carsley shouldn't be discounted because he doesn't have an extensive track record as a manager. Neither De La Fuente nor Scaloni - the winners of the Euros and Copa America/World Cup respectively - have extensive track records. De La Fuente's highest level spell in club management came at (at the time) 3rd tier Deportivo Alaves and last only a handful of games. The rest of his career has been youth football roles. Scaloni's had no managerial experience, he'd been an assistant at Sevilla and for Argentina.

I'm not saying he should definitely get the job, just that his record should not see him immediately discounted.

[TheFamilyCat]

Amanda Stavely and her husband, who appointed Howe, have sold their shares and left Newcastle. A bit of an unknown how much backing he still has at boardroom level, a shaky start and he could well be sacked.

I was about to post something similar. I suspect the Saudis will view last season as a failure at Newcastle so it could be a welcome opportunity to jump before he's pushed.

[Rowls]

Definitely agree with this.

There are currently no world class English managers and I'd rather take a foreign manager who has experience of winning trophies over someone under qualified based solely on their nationality.

There aren't enough but one of the reasons is that they aren't getting promoted because the same kind of woolly thinking labels them as "long ball" or "old school".

We spent the 80s and 90s promoting these guys. Now they're out in the cold. The main criteria back then were apparently "Did he play for us?" and "Can he down 10 pints and still take training?"

The results were normally self evident yet it masked the fact that managers like Allardyce and Stan were superb. They were all lumped in with the Terry Butchers and Adrian Heaths.

Even though this vogue criteria has diminished, English managers are still often tarred with the same brush. Allardyce and Dyche are perhaps the highest profile managers to not get the credit for what he achieved. Dyche really ought to have been poached from us by a top 6 club in 2018 or 2019. It's worse for our Seane because his gravelly voice heightens the false stereotype of him being part of some kind of unthinking dinosaur, which couldn't be further from the truth.

And what's the fashion today? We've moved on and now appoint sophisticated managers who are all great at their jobs? Not quite.

There's a group of managers who appear to have no discernible managerial ability and still get appointed. It's often the same kind of woolly thinking we saw in the 80s and 90s but just in reverse. "We'll get somebody continental, sophisticated and intelligent," is the thinking.

It's led to a bunch of half rate managers all aping Arsene Wenger, none of whom can hold a candle to that fantastic manager. In this category we've had the likes of Glen Roeder, the infamous Gareth Southgate and the likes of Zola laughably getting Dyche's job at Watford.

Once again, it's a failure to choose the right criteria and a failure to ask the right basic questions.

So we hear chairmen, commentators, journalists and the like talking about things like, "Has he worked with big names before?" or "Is he a progressive tactician?" or "His handful of games in charge of the U21s should put him in the running!"

What they ought to be asking is, "Does this man have a proven track record of success as a football manager?"

Ok, every now and again, especially for small clubs, it will benefit somebody to take a risk and appoint somebody with no track record. In these circumstances, they should be asking, "Does this man demonstrate the skill set required to be a good manager?" And then you have to define clearly what that skillset is: Are they charismatic? Are they a leader? Can they communicate clearly? Can they explain tactics is an easy manner? Etc.

This should never be the case for the FA.

Anybody and everybody I've ever met can talk a good game but people with real true leadership qualities are hard to find.

It's one of those issues that bothers me because I really want England to be successful but it doesn't look to me like the FA have got any clear idea of what they want. It looks to me like chance is going to play a strong role in the appointment. We can only hope they get it right and appoint somebody decent.

There's only do much a manager can do. The poker allusion, that many here either didn't understand it wilfully misunderstood, is a good one. Excellent managers often stress that once the players cross the threshold there's very little a manager can do. I've heard these sentiments from Alex Ferguson and Ancellotti on a number of occasions.

In contrast, Southgate always had the air if somebody who thought he was playing a chess game from the sidelines. His team's always looked over coached and static because of this.

So there you go. Here endeth my little treatise.

[jlup1980]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Frank Lampard get the job.

You beat me to it. He'll certainly be in with a shout.

Howe, Potter, Carsley or Lampard would be my best guess at an FA shortlist. Dyche won't be anywhere near, he's too marmite, and I don't see them going with a foreign coach as neither Sven or Capello worked out particularly well.

[claretspice]

Any comparison between Southgate and Potter is complete nonsense. Their CVs are completely different. They play the game entirely differently.

I don't especially get the argument for going for a "supercoach". Is there any example of a national team parachuting in any such coach and achieving notable success?

[Mattster]

So we hear chairmen, commentators, journalists and the like talking about things like, "Has he worked with big names before?" or "Is he a progressive tactician?" or "His handful of games in charge of the U21s should put him in the running!"

What they ought to be asking is, "Does this man have a proven track record of success as a football manager?"

Ok, every now and again, especially for small clubs, it will benefit somebody to take a risk and appoint somebody with no track record....

The current World Cup, Copa America, Euros and AFCON holders all want a word.

[ClaretLoup]

First criteria has to be that the incumbent isn’t a spiv or a nut job.

Starting with Revie, and then Venables, Hoddle, Capello and Allardyce all had to quit the job for reasons other than football. Bobby Robson also had his moments as he was carpeted by the FA for playing away from Elsie, allegedly.

The others since Ramsey up to Gareth were just varying degrees of rubbish.

[ElectroClaret]

Can anyone seriously see Sean Dyche in an England blazer?

[claret2018]

Until we have a properly world class no 6 who can dictate a game the manager won’t really matter.

[Exeterclaret]

Can anyone seriously see Sean Dyche in an England blazer?

As much as I love Dyche, I just don't think he'd be much good at coaching the level of player in the England squad.

[claretspice]

Until we have a properly world class no 6 who can dictate a game the manager won’t really matter.

This is correct.

it's fine saying England have good players and the most technically gifted set of attackers we've ever had (may be true) but we still lack the ability to dictate the game in midfield.

There are options coming through though - both Mainoo and Wharton have potential to play that role - and the critical requirement is that the next manager is adept at developing and nurturing that talent. Which is why Potter seems to me to be ideal. He's worked with young players, has experience outside England, has shown an ability to get teams playing a sophisticated brand of football.

[MT03ALG]

FA choice will be Lee Carsley

[Rowls]

Carsley shouldn't be discounted because he doesn't have an extensive track record as a manager. Neither De La Fuente nor Scaloni - the winners of the Euros and Copa America/World Cup respectively - have extensive track records. De La Fuente's highest level spell in club management came at (at the time) 3rd tier Deportivo Alaves and last only a handful of games. The rest of his career has been youth football roles. Scaloni's had no managerial experience, he'd been an assistant at Sevilla and for Argentina.

I'm not saying he should definitely get the job, just that his record should not see him immediately discounted.

I think you've misunderstood. It's not that he should be disqualified because he's the U21 boss.

He should be disqualified because he hasn't ever demonstrated an aptitude for managing a football team over a period of time.

You've demonstrated another example of woolly think: Those lot are doing it, therefore we should copy them.

If Spain and Argentina do well it's primarily because they've got good players. The manager is only a % olto what you might expect to achieve. To borrow a phrase from a good manager, "footballs all about those fine margins."

When Southgate had the margins in his favour, ie. against teams you'd expect us to beat, he had an excellent record. When the margins narrowed and we played good teams, his record suddenly dropped off a cliff. Something very similar is there to see when you compare Kompany's record in the Championship Vs his record in the Prem.

There's no guarantees of success in football. The best thing you can do is have the best players. I happen to think the England squad is as good as any and will be for at least another 3-4 years.

What the manager might potentially add is that final fine margin that could push us over the final hurdle. It's not a guarantee of success but in order to barrow those odds the surest way is by judging applicants on their managerial track record.

[Poulton-le-Claret]

Once again, it's a failure to choose the right criteria and a failure to ask the right basic questions.

So we hear chairmen, commentators, journalists and the like talking about things like, "Has he worked with big names before?" or "Is he a progressive tactician?" or "His handful of games in charge of the U21s should put him in the running!"

What they ought to be asking is, "Does this man have a proven track record of success as a football manager?"

Ok, every now and again, especially for small clubs, it will benefit somebody to take a risk and appoint somebody with no track record. In these circumstances, they should be asking, "Does this man demonstrate the skill set required to be a good manager?" And then you have to define clearly what that skillset is: Are they charismatic? Are they a leader? Can they communicate clearly? Can they explain tactics is an easy manner? Etc.

This is a particularly good point to focus on. The FA seem to be willing to consider appointing a manager to 'develop', which I find totally baffling. Lee Carsley (for example) should be absolutely no where near the top job. Imagine him trying to give Jude Bellingham advice on anything football related.

We should be looking to appoint a manager who is 'oven-ready'. Preferably a manager who has experience of winning major trophies, but since there aren't any English managers who fit that criteria (and assuming the FA want an English manager), then we need to look at the next set of criteria to find the best candidate (as you mention in your post).

[RVclaret]

Firstly, thank you to Gareth, amazing memories and progression made over his tenure.

As for who I’d want next, someone English. I like the sound of Howe, Potter and Carsley. The latter has done impressive work with the 21s, playing front foot attractive football. Obviously the pressure cooker for the first team is a different beast when you’ve got a nation of largely clueless fans abusing you if you don’t win a tournament.

[Mattster]

I think you've misunderstood. It's not that he should be disqualified because he's the U21 boss.

He should be disqualified because he hasn't ever demonstrated an aptitude for managing a football team over a period of time.

You've demonstrated another example of woolly think: Those lot are doing it, therefore we should copy them.

If Spain and Argentina do well it's primarily because they've got good players. The manager is only a % olto what you might expect to achieve. To borrow a phrase from a good manager, "footballs all about those fine margins."

When Southgate had the margins in his favour, ie. against teams you'd expect us to beat, he had an excellent record. When the margins narrowed and we played good teams, his record suddenly dropped off a cliff. Something very similar is there to see when you compare Kompany's record in the Championship Vs his record in the Prem.

There's no guarantees of success in football. The best thing you can do is have the best players. I happen to think the England squad is as good as any and will be for at least another 3-4 years.

What the manager might potentially add is that final fine margin that could push us over the final hurdle. It's not a guarantee of success but in order to barrow those odds the surest way is by judging applicants on their managerial track record.

I'm not saying we should do it because they have, I'm saying he shouldn't be discounted "because he hasn't ever demonstrated an aptitude for managing a football team over a period of time".

My reasoning for that is the managers of all the nations that are current title holders in all the biggest international football tournaments hadn't "ever demonstrated an aptitude for managing a football team over a period of time" when they were appointed to the roles.

If it was one title you could say it was an outlier and your criteria is still valid. When it's all of them then I think it's safe to say that your criteria is nonsense.

[Rowls]

First criteria has to be that the incumbent isn’t a spiv or a nut job.

Starting with Revie, and then Venables, Hoddle, Capello and Allardyce all had to quit the job for reasons other than football. Bobby Robson also had his moments as he was carpeted by the FA for playing away from Elsie, allegedly.

The others since Ramsey up to Gareth were just varying degrees of rubbish.

Ohhh there's another can or worms! As well as some historical inaccuracies.

But yes, you have a point about one of the criteria we can only assume is still in place. If the FA advertise they ought to put in bold writing: "No Bhuddists or Sikhs need bother to apply as your beliefs are 'wrong' and incompatible with being the England manager."

That time we sacked our national team manager (with the full backing and support of our PM, no less) should still be a source of deep shame and embarrassment for the FA but nobody seems to even remember it. Shocking turn of events.

[Rowls]

I'm not saying we should do it because they have, I'm saying he shouldn't be discounted "because he hasn't ever demonstrated an aptitude for managing a football team over a period of time".

My reasoning for that is the managers of all the nations that are current title holders in all the biggest international football tournaments hadn't "ever demonstrated an aptitude for managing a football team over a period of time" when they were appointed to the roles.

If it was one title you could say it was an outlier and your criteria is still valid. When it's all of them then I think it's safe to say that your criteria is nonsense.

Ok, you're saying we might want tovsay, "Let's take a punt an untried manager!" That's fair enough. I spoke about the benefits that approach can sometimes have.

I don't think the FA should be doing that for the biggest job in our national game.

[Tricky Trevor]

Incredible if Carsley is genuinely in the running. He simply is not qualified.

No managerial track record to speak of whatsoever.

He turned down the RoI job so might have been given the wink.

[Tricky Trevor]

Potter has turned jobs down, so I think he had already been sounded out. He bombed at Chelsea so I worry about his big player credentials.

Bombing at Chelsea with a disparate squad in turmoil is no comparison to an England squad, who I believe all want to win something.
Pochettino in the running and his trophy record is abysmal. Klopp isn’t much better.
If you want a winning manager Tuchel should be top choice but I’d love to see what SD could do with that quality of player. We certainly wouldn’t be conceding the goals we have under Southgate.

[CoolClaret]

How about Poch?

Free agent, worked with a lot of the players before, plays a high press and dynamic, attacking football...

The only potential drawback I see is that some narrow-minded fans may not take to him, due to his Argentinian nationality.

[MT03ALG]

A foreigner

Back to the old quiz question: How many teams have won the World Cup with a 'foreign' manager?

[CnBtruntru]

I don't Luis de la Fuente as having a fantastic managerial career to press and he isn't doing to bad

[beddie]

The FA like Potter. He’s achieved bugger all apart from a large bank account.We need a different style of play with some added flair. What’s Andres Iniesta doing these days.

[aggi]

What? I don't understand.

I've laid out what the criteria is. And what it is not.

The prime criteria is: Has a proven track record of being a successful manager

One criteria which should NOT be considered a benefit would be: Is in situ as current U21 coach.

It's pretty simple.

Ah, I thought you were trying to explain why England is different to other countries (such as Spain) that have very succesfully employed managers without a noticeable track record rather than just reiterating your personal preference.

[dandeclaret]

Ah, I thought you were trying to explain why England is different to other countries (such as Spain) that have very succesfully employed managers without a noticeable track record rather than just reiterating your personal preference.

Did you really expect that? Or are you just being polite?

[Rowls]

Ah, I thought you were trying to explain why England is different to other countries (such as Spain) that have very succesfully employed managers without a noticeable track record rather than just reiterating your personal preference.

Ah, Spain and Argentina have been successful doing it you say? Well we'd better just mindlessly do the same then!

As I've explained, the biggest factor in the strength of a team is how good the players are. If a nation like Switzerland or Serbia or Slovakia were having unexpected success by appointing managers without experience then it might be worth looking into what was going on.

The reason that Span and Argentina have success is the same reason why England scraped through to the final - because they (and we) have got the best players.

[dandeclaret]

So why were France, Germany and to a lesser extent Italy and Belgium out early? Why didn’t they perform in the groups? Or Holland.

Is it because they have bad players? Cos surely if it’s the players that make you good, then it’s the players who make you bad?

[aggi]

Ah, Spain and Argentina have been successful doing it you say? Well we'd better just mindlessly do the same then!

As I've explained, the biggest factor in the strength of a team is how good the players are. If a nation like Switzerland or Serbia or Slovakia were having unexpected success by appointing managers without experience then it might be worth looking into what was going on.

The reason that Span and Argentina have success is the same reason why England scraped through to the final - because they (and we) have got the best players.

I don't think there's any suggestion of mindlessly following Spain and Argentina. Just not mindlessly writing off a manager who has a different managerial record from what some may clamour for.

But I don't really follow the logic of your argument where you list countries that have inferior players to us and say they are the model we should follow (admittedly the Slovakian manager has no track record as a manager so I'm not sure how that fits) rather than the teams who have a similar standard of players.

[kentonclaret]

So why were France, Germany and to a lesser extent Italy and Belgium out early? Why didn’t they perform in the groups? Or Holland.

Is it because they have bad players? Cos surely if it’s the players that make you good, then it’s the players who make you bad?

Germany topped their group impressively gaining 7 points (England topped their group with 5) but were unlucky to be drawn to meet eventual winners Spain as early as the Quarter Final stage.
France were also knocked out at the semi finals stage by Spain.

[equinox]

It obviously won't happen, this particular ship left port a long time ago but in my opinion the greatest football mind England has produced in my lifetime and criminally wasted.

Glenn Hoddle.

[claretskeith]

I'd like an attack-minded coach.

[yTib]

NIGEL CLOUGH!

it doesn't have to be a superstar (wigman) or a wet blanket.

it should be a football man bereft of ties and waistcoats.