Earlier this morning I read a very interesting article by Samuel Martin of the Daily Mail. In his article he seemed to argue that although most clubs want long term stability, the benefits of stability is unproven.
To back up his argument he used the example of the world's biggest and most successful football club Real Madrid and compared their trophy successes and managerial changes to Manchester United's during the Fergie era. Comparing only the 'major' honours because the Spanish do not have an equivalent to the league cup, he demonstrated that both teams had a similar trophy haul during the Fergie era. This was despite Real Madrid having 22 coaches/managers to Manchester United's. The breakdown was as followed:
Manchester United:
League titles - 13
European titles - 3
Domestic cup - 5
Super cup - 1
International titles - 2
Real Madrid
League titles - 11
European titles - 3
Domestic cup - 3
Super cup - 1
International titles - 2
Furthermore, Chelsea have managed to win 9 'major' trophies in the past 8 years despite having 9 different managers.
The full article can be found here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2437695/Manchester-United-want-stability-Real-Madrid-didnt-need--Martin-Samuel.html?ICO=most_read_module
Stability not always the key to success
posted on 30/9/13
Yes I am Arsenal fan..and while writing in rush I made a mistake redmecca
posted on 30/9/13
stability is defo overrated. No use of stability if you dont win trophies. Chelsea wont mind sacking a manager every year provided they have a constant supply of trophies nir would most United fans.
TROPHIES >>>>>> EVERYTHING ELSE
Those speaking of stability on this site probably have switched more jobs than they have fingers on their hands.
posted on 30/9/13
There is more to stability than just having a manager parking his but in the same seat for a length of time.
Despite contrary belief we have been pretty stable in the Roman era, we might not have had stability in terms of the manager but we have in every single other aspect off the club
posted on 30/9/13
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/9/13
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/9/13
The argument with Chelsea is they had the finances to blow teams like Man Utd out of the water, but failed to do so. Would they have won more than 1 domestic title in 7 years with one top manager ? Probably though can never be sure.
posted on 30/9/13
And yes, I do sometimes have trouble understanding people. Escpecially when they write like this
'Do you utd have that much of money?'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 30/9/13
Pointless analysis (really every writer and to be honest most posters on message boards need a little statistical knowledge)
There is no way united has spent 1/3 what real has spent in the time of fergies arrival. Similarly chelsea. In fact the way chelsea went from also rans to title contender without one great dominant manager SHOWS there is another factor to success in pro football.
A better analysis would be to check managers and measure their success to their time spent and theiR overall success. It will be flawed but it will paint a better picture of consistency and success. Another may be to measure the clubs with the highest net spend in a certain period of time and compare their successes between lengths of management.
Consistency is also linked closest to league performance. Cups are the embodiment of statistical anomalies. Bradford city can still qualify for cup finals with managers battling relegation shows cups exhibit a high possibility of statistical anomalies. Even champs have a small league phase, but even then that's subject to the same thing.
posted on 30/9/13
real Madrid don't have to worry about money and nor do Chelsea.
bad examples as a comparison and I don't want united run like that
posted on 30/9/13
comment by Raj (U17528)
posted 18 seconds ago
real Madrid don't have to worry about money and nor do Chelsea.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually we stopped spending as much between 06-10 to the extent where by the time we won the double, you and City both had more expensive squad s