Goals for Pellegrini

[City64]

Goals for Pellegrini ?

Two league titles please before you are replaced by Guardiola in two years time !

[Mark Garrett]

If it is to be Pellegrini, then I wish him all the best but let's be frank he needs to hit the ground running, we've sacked a successful and popular manager in Mancini so that is the way it will be.

The targets of having to win the league are very optimistic, not saying it cannot be done but in the context that only Jose and Ancelotti have won leagues in their first season and this bloke has never won a trophy at all in European domestic football, then we should have some realism.

We need to win any trophy whether it be the league, fa cup or league cup, challenge for the league again - hopefully it will go beyond February on this occasion.

Qualify for the knockout stages of the Champions League although we will be in Pot 3 again next season after being in Pot 2 this year, fat lot of good it did us.

[Alioune DVToure]

Personally, expecting any new manager in the premier league to come in and win the league in their first way is crazy.
It may happen, but putting that as a criteria to make or break the season is a little outlandish. Players need to figure out
the new manager and vise versa. And the manager needs to figure out the league.

Again, this is my opinion.

Criterion.

Otherwise you make a good point. I'd have fancied our short-term chances more under Mancini than under any new manager.

[john68]

Thanks Tokyo Mate, and to those who have PMed me with their concerns.

This has fuck all to do with Mancini. This is far more important than that. We are now setting the foundation for how City will operate in the foreseeable future. Whatever structure or design is put in place now will govern what City become over the next ten years or more.

Piccs, Jsu so you are aware. Whilst your train remains parked up outside the buffet at Cloudcuckooland Station. You may not have noticed the rest of us have moved on down the line. When you finally stop spilling your jelly and ice cream on the bouncy castle, please catch up.

[Blue Since 76]

We are now designing a football model which will be under the total control of someone who is NOT a footballer. Someone who is already planning our new players. Who has already decided the strategy not just of club policy but how teams play on the pitch. They have already decided that any newmanager will simply have to do as he is told regarding football matters...Shades of Swales anyone?

Let's put Marwood back in charge then. He was a football man and that went well. Or maybe Franny, again a brilliant period in our history.

If you stick with a traditional chairman role, they appoint a manager to manage the team. Surely in doing that they define how the teams play on the pitch, hence all the complaints from West Ham fans about Fat Sam.

They only concern I have relates to buying players - if they buy more Sinclair's, whose fault is it if we don't perform? That's something I don't get from the European model, but it obviously works over there, so there's no reason it couldn't work here just because it's never been tried before.

[Saul Goodman]

Personally, expecting any new manager in the premier league to come in and win the league in their first way is crazy.
It may happen, but putting that as a criteria to make or break the season is a little outlandish. Players need to figure out
the new manager and vise versa. And the manager needs to figure out the league.

Again, this is my opinion.

Criterion.

Otherwise you make a good point. I'd have fancied our short-term chances more under Mancini than under any new manager.

Shit, that's what i was going to put. I thought criterion was plural and criteria was singular, instead its the other way around. Doh!

[john68]

We are now designing a football model which will be under the total control of someone who is NOT a footballer. Someone who is already planning our new players. Who has already decided the strategy not just of club policy but how teams play on the pitch. They have already decided that any newmanager will simply have to do as he is told regarding football matters...Shades of Swales anyone?

Let's put Marwood back in charge then. He was a football man and that went well. Or maybe Franny, again a brilliant period in our history.

If you stick with a traditional chairman role, they appoint a manager to manage the team. Surely in doing that they define how the teams play on the pitch, hence all the complaints from West Ham fans about Fat Sam.

They only concern I have relates to buying players - if they buy more Sinclair's, whose fault is it if we don't perform? That's something I don't get from the European model, but it obviously works over there, so there's no reason it couldn't work here just because it's never been tried before.

Why did you find it necessary to jump to an extreme in your response. I think you should go back and read my posts more thoroughly before responding.

Your last point is valid. The Director of football model has been tried over here but I can't think of anywhere it has been successful. The important point point is the quality of the director of football, not the model. At Bayern, the power behind the coach is KHR and Hoeness. both from good football backgrounds, who have developed the football policy there successfully. The model can work, dependent on who's running the show. I don't trust that Trixie is a man of that quality.

[Blue Since 76]

Why did you find it necessary to jump to an extreme in your response. I think you should go back and read my posts more thoroughly before responding.

Your last point is valid. The Director of football model has been tried over here but I can't think of anywhere it has been successful. The important point point is the quality of the director of football, not the model. At Bayern, the power behind the coach is KHR and Hoeness. both from good football backgrounds, who have developed the football policy there successfully. The model can work, dependent on who's running the show. I don't trust that Trixie is a man of that quality.

It was an extreme to prove a point - a football background doesn't make you a good football person. Wenger, Mourinho and AVB have virtually no experience yet have made good coaches and no reason why it's different in the boardroom. In some ways, football people can be worse as they'll always think they can offer something. Outside of Bayern, I can't think of too many examples of where the senior execs are ex-pros.

As for director of football, it's never worked here, but I'm not sure anyone really understands it and tries to have the director and a manager. You them get the arguments over who's in charge and the power battles (as we also saw with Mancini and Cook, them Mancini and Marwood and finally the Spaniards who just got rid). It's a more standard set up on the continent, so if you set everything up around it, maybe it can work.

If I find that the Spaniards are getting involved in detailed tactics or play, then I wouldn't be happy. If they're just setting up a philosophy for the club - promote from within (players and coaches), all playing the same attractive passing football then I'm struggling to see the downside, outside of the issue when someone buys a donkey and then whose fault is it?

[Swales4ever]

Lol

[john68]

Blue since 76,

Do you actually read my posts? If you did, you patently didn't understand them. I have quite clearly made the point that I have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER WITH THE DIRECTOR OF FOOTBALL/COACH MODEL.

If your next question is what am I on about then? Go back and read what I have said and then oppose me with a relevant argument, if you deem necessary.

[Wooders]

Did these guys tell pep how to setup his team? I seriously doubt it
I dont beleive a word that they want influence the managers tactics, otherwise why bother getting one like pellegrini in? Just give Vieira the big job and crack on with the season
Getting rid of mancini because, in part, they thought his tactics were crap, doesnt mean they want to have a say in them

[Im_Spartacus]

Did these guys tell pep how to setup his team? I seriously doubt it
I dont beleive a word that they want influence the managers tactics, otherwise why bother getting one like pellegrini in? Just give Vieira the big job and crack on with the season
Getting rid of mancini because, in part, they thought his tactics were crap, doesnt mean they want to have a say in them

I think that the club have decided on a footballing framework, and a new manager will have to work under that framework. In the first instance that will involve having a particular "default" system, but within that system there are a million combinations that the manager has control over.

If we actually appoint a manager who is used to playing in a 4-3-3 (or variant thereof), then it's hardly dictating tactics to him, when he would have gone with that anyway. Its exactly the same principle as why we would never appoint a kick and rush merchant like Allardyce, because he wouldnt fit with the ethos of the club - if we appoint Pellegrini, no doubt one of the key reasons will be that he fits the footballing dorection the club want to take - its not taking a square peg and putting it in a round hole, so there will be no power struggles on that front.

So for all the soft cunts whining and whinging about this (when in reality their beef is are just that they were proved wrong about Mancini) it really is a minor thing in the big scheme of things, and there is absolutely no indication that the "spafia" (might as well define a term for them now) ever imposed on Mancini, nor is there any suggestion that Pellegrini's job is simply to pick and motivate the team.