Biggus wrote:

Interestingly he says a manager should achieve what he can in 3 years at a club and then leave.

It's funny because he was at Milan longer than three years until he was fired, and after that he hasn't been at one club for longer than three years... Because he gets fired 

The point is that the one opportunity he had to stay longer than three years, he took.

Biggus wrote:

So, how does that negate the point he was making that in his experience a manager "has an arc" of about 3 years to produce his best results?

Does it not negate the point that he should leave?

Biggus wrote:

So, how does that negate the point he was making that in his experience a manager "has an arc" of about 3 years to produce his best results?

You said: "[font=Source Sans Pro]Interestingly he says a manager should achieve what he can in 3 years at a club and then leave".[/font]
[font=Source Sans Pro]What Ancelotti does: At the one club he's offered to stay longer than 3 years, he stays.[/font]

[font=Source Sans Pro]If you don't see any contradictions here, I can't really help you. [/font]

3 years isn't anywhere near long enough to maximise what you get from a manager in my opinion. For a start, they'll make short term decisions over the long term benefit of the club. What incentive would he have to give time to a youth player if some other chump is going to reap the rewards? You'd be happy to build a squad full of 28-30yr old stars, not your problem that club will be fucked in 3 years.

I'd say in the ideal world 6-10 years is best, with a transition to a new manager taking place when the squad is at a good position.

It's all pretty situated—most of the great "dynasties" in management have been founded on a golden generation of players.

Without that, you need the type whose ingenuity and force of personality can drag a less single-minded squad together for the course of one or two seasons even if the trust and loyalty burns out afterward.

Biggus wrote:

He will also appear in the next (don't faint Klaus) Star Trek film- What a legend.

I know it's just an Abrams' production, but his career as both a human and a football manager arguably peaked here.

Biggus wrote:

Carlo said that 3 years was the most productive at one club intimating that he may have spent too long at AC Milan- What's so difficult to understand about that?

@ Goon, building is fine if you're a second tier club like ours (more so if you have an owner who doesn't care about success like we have) but it's not good enough for the top clubs.
Burnsy is right, success seems to come in waves of golden generations for clubs (and indeed countries).
I'm astounded that people criticise the Mourinho appointment to Man Utd on the basis that he may only stay 3 years and not build anything, they are thinking like the fan of a small club.
If the fucker can deliver them one major trophy in that time he will be a success in my opinion.

Who said anything about building? It's about sustained success and staying at the top. Ferguson done it for 20 years with United. A title ever 3 years is nothing but mediocrity for one of the biggest clubs in the world.

goon wrote:

Biggus wrote:

Carlo said that 3 years was the most productive at one club intimating that he may have spent too long at AC Milan- What's so difficult to understand about that?

@ Goon, building is fine if you're a second tier club like ours (more so if you have an owner who doesn't care about success like we have) but it's not good enough for the top clubs.
Burnsy is right, success seems to come in waves of golden generations for clubs (and indeed countries).
I'm astounded that people criticise the Mourinho appointment to Man Utd on the basis that he may only stay 3 years and not build anything, they are thinking like the fan of a small club.
If the fucker can deliver them one major trophy in that time he will be a success in my opinion.

Who said anything about building? It's about sustained success and staying at the top. Ferguson done it for 20 years with United. A title ever 3 years is nothing but mediocrity for one of the biggest clubs in the world.

But how many Ferguson type managers are there?

What do you mean who cares about long term success? I'd rather we challenge for the title every year for 10 seasons, winning 5 or 6 along the way, than win 1 in three years and then suffer a period of transition where we can't compete because no care was given to the future by the bloke who knew he wouldn't have to deal with the consequences. If anyone here is thinking like a small club here Biggus, it's you. Narrow horizons.

When you say titles do you mean league titles or trophies? Because 1 league title every 3 years is impressive. Madrid can't do that in Spain and they're the biggest of them all.

Yes, but Barcelona do. So have Juventus, Inter, Bayern and even our very own Manchester United at various points over the past 10 years.

Using Real Madrid as a counter example is selective.

A good leader doesn't look at the task that way Biggus, because optimising results based on finite resources and uncertain events is a process of timely speculation on risk and opportunity.

A crash through or crash manager who simply states "we have to win this season" might even make it happen from time to time. That guy's usually gone within a couple more seasons when all the cards don't fall his way.

Wenger's problem is the opposite, he's incapable of forcing the point even when we're very close to where we need to be.