Managerial merry-go-round

Quoted from SouthLakesMariner

Agree with the sentiment, however, I don’t think you can deny it has benefitted the national team.

How so? The National team has won nothing since the formation of the Premier League.

Quoted from SouthLakesMariner

Agree with the sentiment, however, I don’t think you can deny it has benefitted the national team.

Whose national team though? Those of the 7/8 (at a guess on average) that make the starting line up each week for their club side that aren’t English

The upturn in the National sides fortune has to lie firmly at the feet of Southgate. For some reason, the FA allowed him to refresh things and put in new ideas and to some extent, it has worked. The players clearly buy into what he’s about, something we’ve never seen before.

As for Spurs, as soon as they remove their inflated ego and ideas that they’re huge they might stand a chance. Levy is a problem but is unlikely to go anywhere and they still regard Poch as a successful manager…because apparently bottling a title race and then getting to a final and caving in the first 5 minutes is success.

They’ve 3 huge managers and it’s done nothing, yet they all said the same thing…they can’t all be wrong…

Some years ago the FA took a look at our whole footballing structure in terms of how we play and how we coach and develop young players and the result was the creation of 'England DNA'.

Dan Ashworth, Matt Crocker and one Gareth Southgate were the people involved in developing this DNA and how it would be implemented. This is a large factor in how we've seen an emergence of talented youngsters playing across Europe and breaking into the national team and is also my belief as to why Southgate was always destined to have the England job.

The problem we have now is that we're creating much better youngsters but their pathways into top flight first teams are being blocked by foreign imports. Such is the necessity to stay in the top flight, break into Europe etc that Clubs seem more willing to buy and play foreign players who have impressed in first teams overseas than give their academy graduates extended runs in the team to see how they develop for fear of failure and the loss of riches that would accompany it.

We're even starting to see now English players go abroad, be given the opportunities and then English clubs spend millions on kids that were originally theirs!

Having the wealth of talent on show in the PL makes it the most exciting league on earth but given I support Town alone, I'd love to see the reintroduction of some stricter home-grown/national player rules that force the hand of the elite clubs to give more of our top promising youngsters a chance at the highest level rather than opting for foreign imports.

https://www.thefa.com/news/2014/dec/04/england-dna-launch

Greg Dyke, when he got involved with the FL,  admitted that he had been wrong and that the Premiersh*t hadn't benefitted either the National Side or the football pyramid .

Quoted from gtfc_chris

Some years ago the FA took a look at our whole footballing structure in terms of how we play and how we coach and develop young players and the result was the creation of 'England DNA'.

Dan Ashworth, Matt Crocker and one Gareth Southgate were the people involved in developing this DNA and how it would be implemented. This is a large factor in how we've seen an emergence of talented youngsters playing across Europe and breaking into the national team and is also my belief as to why Southgate was always destined to have the England job.

The problem we have now is that we're creating much better youngsters but their pathways into top flight first teams are being blocked by foreign imports. Such is the necessity to stay in the top flight, break into Europe etc that Clubs seem more willing to buy and play foreign players who have impressed in first teams overseas than give their academy graduates extended runs in the team to see how they develop for fear of failure and the loss of riches that would accompany it.

We're even starting to see now English players go abroad, be given the opportunities and then English clubs spend millions on kids that were originally theirs!

Having the wealth of talent on show in the PL makes it the most exciting league on earth but given I support Town alone, I'd love to see the reintroduction of some stricter home-grown/national player rules that force the hand of the elite clubs to give more of our top promising youngsters a chance at the highest level rather than opting for foreign imports.

https://www.thefa.com/news/2014/dec/04/england-dna-launch

They also were savvy enough to involve a number of people who weren’t involved in football but knew about how to create the right environments and how to engage stake holders. Mathew Seyed talks about it in his book Rebel Ideas as he was part of that cross background group. Whatever you say about Southgate he has brought a loads of players from different clubs together as a collective something numerous predecessors has failed to do.

Thing is, it is always going to ge cyclical. One generation, you might develop a couple of really good players, at other times, you might get a whole bunch of superstars coming through.

I seem to remember that we based our development programme on what some of the strongest countries in Europe have done - Germany, Spain, France, Italy. However, it doesn't matter how good the system is if the players either aren't there or don't get the chances.

Germany aren't up to much at the moment, but less than a decade ago, they were world champions after battering Brazil in their own backyard.

In the longer-term, they'll come back strongly because they have the systems for development in place and also because their young players have much more of a chance of making it because they don't have the same numbers of overseas players shipped in. Same goes for Italy and Spain.

Our current generation of players is good (same goes for France), but it's going to be difficult to find a striker to replace Kane in a few years and if he gets injured, we're already down to the bare bones up front. Rashford is a good player, Toney looks decent, Watkins is OK, but there's not really anyone else looking as though they will break through anywhere at present. How many PL teams have English strikers as a first or even second choice?

Barney Ronay had an article in the Guardian yesterday calling for Southgate to be brave and drop Maguire due to his lack of mobility, but the names touted as possible replacements aren't anywhere near ready at present. If Stones gets injured, we've got no replacement for him, either.

Those two players mentioned haven't even been first choices for their teams all the time over the past year or two, either, which goes to show how thin we are on the ground in certain positions.

Quoted from Maringer

Thing is, it is always going to ge cyclical. One generation, you might develop a couple of really good players, at other times, you might get a whole bunch of superstars coming through.

I seem to remember that we based our development programme on what some of the strongest countries in Europe have done - Germany, Spain, France, Italy. However, it doesn't matter how good the system is if the players either aren't there or don't get the chances.

Germany aren't up to much at the moment, but less than a decade ago, they were world champions after battering Brazil in their own backyard.

In the longer-term, they'll come back strongly because they have the systems for development in place and also because their young players have much more of a chance of making it because they don't have the same numbers of overseas players shipped in. Same goes for Italy and Spain.

Our current generation of players is good (same goes for France), but it's going to be difficult to find a striker to replace Kane in a few years and if he gets injured, we're already down to the bare bones up front. Rashford is a good player, Toney looks decent, Watkins is OK, but there's not really anyone else looking as though they will break through anywhere at present. How many PL teams have English strikers as a first or even second choice?

Barney Ronay had an article in the Guardian yesterday calling for Southgate to be brave and drop Maguire due to his lack of mobility, but the names touted as possible replacements aren't anywhere near ready at present. If Stones gets injured, we've got no replacement for him, either.

Those two players mentioned haven't even been first choices for their teams all the time over the past year or two, either, which goes to show how thin we are on the ground in certain positions.

All very good points mate, but is there not also an argument that in his stubborn refusal to give other players a chance  Southgate is stifling development of players who could come through in a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy? If he was more flexible/bolder in introducing players to the international games we may not be so thin on the ground.

As for Spurs, as soon as they remove their inflated ego and ideas that they’re huge they might stand a chance. Levy is a problem but is unlikely to go anywhere and they still regard Poch as a successful manager…because apparently bottling a title race and then getting to a final and caving in the first 5 minutes is success.

They’ve 3 huge managers and it’s done nothing, yet they all said the same thing…they can’t all be wrong…[/quote]

Spurs are the ninth richest club in the world and generate more home income per home match than any other club and in addition are adding more and more income streams from use of their stadium. One trophy in 25 years but still have home crowds in excess of 60,000 so I think they’ve every right to consider themselves a big club, albeit one that doesn’t win any trophies. The biggest issue at Spurs is poor recruitment with over £300m spent in the last couple of years and unfortunately most of their signings, like Richarliason, cannot get in the team. As for caving in during the first 5 minutes I believe they went 1-0 down following a quite horrendous penalty decision.

The performances on the pitch mean they are an average premiership club but off the field they are anything but and if the financial fair play rules are ever properly applied then they will be in an extremely good position.

Quoted from Maringer

Thing is, it is always going to ge cyclical. One generation, you might develop a couple of really good players, at other times, you might get a whole bunch of superstars coming through.

I seem to remember that we based our development programme on what some of the strongest countries in Europe have done - Germany, Spain, France, Italy. However, it doesn't matter how good the system is if the players either aren't there or don't get the chances.

Germany aren't up to much at the moment, but less than a decade ago, they were world champions after battering Brazil in their own backyard.

In the longer-term, they'll come back strongly because they have the systems for development in place and also because their young players have much more of a chance of making it because they don't have the same numbers of overseas players shipped in. Same goes for Italy and Spain.

Our current generation of players is good (same goes for France), but it's going to be difficult to find a striker to replace Kane in a few years and if he gets injured, we're already down to the bare bones up front. Rashford is a good player, Toney looks decent, Watkins is OK, but there's not really anyone else looking as though they will break through anywhere at present. How many PL teams have English strikers as a first or even second choice?

Barney Ronay had an article in the Guardian yesterday calling for Southgate to be brave and drop Maguire due to his lack of mobility, but the names touted as possible replacements aren't anywhere near ready at present. If Stones gets injured, we've got no replacement for him, either.

Those two players mentioned haven't even been first choices for their teams all the time over the past year or two, either, which goes to show how thin we are on the ground in certain positions.

There was an article recently where Southgate spoke of percentages of English players playing in the PL and then the CL and it was very low. If you were to place yourself in the position of a manager who all have owners and fans baying for success and all the riches that brings then it's wholly understandable that they will pick the players who they believe are good enough right now.

There was also a thread on here (can't remember which one), that suggested footballers (or any sports person) who play with or against players/teams of a higher standard will learn more alongside/against them. There is definitely benefit in young players going on loan to lower leagues, but if the belief is that a player is truly talented and they will go on to cut the mustard at PL level, is it not beneficial to play them at that level to learn in the deep end? Wayne Rooney, Phil Foden and Bukayo Saka spring to mind as players having not gone out on loan and thriving 'in the deep end'. I'm willing to bet there are plenty more of these types of players in the academies who won't get the same opportunity but could/would thrive if given the chance.

The counter-argument to that, if I remember correctly, was from Arsene Wenger, who cited that clubs in France and other Euro countries allow the players to develop longer in their academies because they're not fully matured until around 21 and so judgements can be skewed. The average age fro debuts was higher on the continent than it was in the UK. I'm sure this was one of the rationale behind the U23 league, giving high quality players the chance to develop with like-minded and like-bodied fellow professionals.