Manchester City and Tottenham face issues, and the solutions for each seem unclear
Next Post Coming Soon...
By Tony Attwood
I suspect that like me you tend to look at summer transfer stories that relate to Arsenal, rather than all the made-up tales relating to players going to other clubs. And this for the simple reason that there are so many of them (stories that is, not clubs).
For not only do we have tales of players moving we also have stories of managers on the move. And sometimes both at once!
Danny Rohl, Will Still, Tom Cleverly, are all being touted as the new manager of Southampton, while Southamptonare encouraged to buy Norwich City striker Josh Sargent . Indeed “Despite having no permanent manager, Southampton are continuing the work of scouting and assessing targets as the summer transfer window looms; they are even bringing in a new chief scout.” Which seems a bit back to front to me.
In fact, if a club without senior staff can be tipped to be looking at transfers in, and if semi-decent players are willng to consider moving to a club that doesn’t actually have a manager as well as just being relegated, then we can see why clubs that have no intention of changing manager are also tipped to be buying everyone.
Alongside this is the eternal story is that Arsenal are simply no good at this transfer business. As shown by the headline that “Arsenal risk losing Garcia after long-term pursuit” according to Arsenal News.
This story is that if clubs do badly in the league, or don’t sign a player who has been tipped to be joining them, it is the club’s fault, and if only the club had some serious negotiators on board, along with those journalists and bloggers who can see what is obvious (to them at least if not to those in the club), everything would be fine. Southampton would have finished solidly mid-table, if only they had listened.
Which raises the question, why don’t the clubs go out and hire these genius negotiators and deal makers and get the players they need, plus a brilliant manager who can make them play together and then win the league?
Of course we can understand the answer with clubs like Leicester, Southampton and Ipswich – they actually don’t have the money, nor is their profile attractive enough to excite proven managers and players. (Indeed Leicester screwed themselves totally by sacking the only league-winning manager they ever had, in the following season).
Of course this happens everwhere. In the 2022/23 season, 11 clubs changed managers, and in fact there were 32 total changes in total, as clubs changed managers again and again. Southampton, you might not be surprised to know, hashad the highest number of managers (21) in the Premier League,
But then Chelsea and Tottenham each have 18 managers, with four changes in the last five years. On the other hand Liverpool has the fewest managers in Premier League history, with just 21 managers including interims. Manchester United:has 25 managers, Arsenal 26. And those are the lowest numbers.
What is also interesting is just how fast clubs can fall. Manchester United won the league five times between 2006/7 and 2012/13, Since then they have and Arsenal have each had six top-four finishes. Tottenham have had five (figures excluding this season of course).
So in terms of reaching to top part of the league the three teams are similar over recent years, so what made Tottenham and ManU sink, while Arsenal remained at the top?The reason for this can be debated of course but I would suggest a regular change of managers does not help.
Indeed results suggest that reugularly changing the boss is not a good move, although it seems to be one that clubs love to indulge in these days. Since Arry Redknapp left Tottenham in 2012 they have had no less than 12 managers including those appointed as interim managers.
Over the same period Arsenal have had four managers: Arsene Wenger, Unai Emery, Freddie Ljungberg and Mikel Arteta.
Ferguson left ManU in 2013, since then they have had Moyes, Gggs, van Gaal, Mourinho, Solskler, Carrick, Rangnick, Ten Hag, Nistelroy and Amorim.
So one might conclude that the only reason for constantly changing managers is that by pure chance the club might eventually get it right.
And in thinking about this it is worth remembering that Arteta led Arsenal to 8th place finishes twice, as he rebuilt the squad.
Turning big clubs around is not easy, and the notion that after dragging the club away from where it was when he took over, Arteta should now be moved on because he has only taken us to second place in the league is to me, quite ludicrous. Beware what you wish for, I would say, for managers can take clubs down as well as up.
Recent Posts
Manchester City and Tottenham face issues, and the solutions for each seem unclear
Next Post Coming Soon...