WTF is Stability?

[Boy Genius]

I am getting really pissed off with all the Holloway lovers, saying we should keep him on for stability?

Is it good to keep the manager for stabilities sake and drop the divisions, or is stability achieved with better results that arrive when we have the correct manager for the club, even if it means changing until we start to climb again.


Its not stability we want now, its confidence being reinstalled in the players and getting them to feel what winning regular is like

Please tell me what stability is and why it will make us win. I am thinking of Crewe, they had a manager for years but kept on going up and down through the divisions, is that stability?

 

[Steven]

I am getting really pissed off with all the Holloway lovers, saying we should keep him on for stability?

Is it good to keep the manager for stabilities sake and drop the divisions, or is stability achieved with better results that arrive when we have the correct manager for the club, even if it means changing until we start to climb again.


Its not stability we want now, its confidence being reinstalled in the players and getting them to feel what winning regular is like

Please tell me what stability is and why it will make us win. I am thinking of Crewe, they had a manager for years but kept on going up and down through the divisions, is that stability?

You seem to forget that stability is the purpose of LCFC not winning football matches. :icon_wink

 

[Biffa Bacon]

I am getting really pissed off with all the Holloway lovers, saying we should keep him on for stability?

Is it good to keep the manager for stabilities sake and drop the divisions, or is stability achieved with better results that arrive when we have the correct manager for the club, even if it means changing until we start to climb again.


Its not stability we want now, its confidence being reinstalled in the players and getting them to feel what winning regular is like

Please tell me what stability is and why it will make us win. I am thinking of Crewe, they had a manager for years but kept on going up and down through the divisions, is that stability?

I think we're talking about stability in the same way that a ship that sinks becomes more stable, who needs all that bobbing about on the sea when you can be nice and stable on the sea bed.

 

[Boy Genius]

You seem to forget that stability is the purpose of LCFC not winning football matches. :icon_wink

and here is me thinking it was down to a crap manager.

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

holloway has got to go he cant motivate the players in the championship so i cant see how he is going to do it in league 1 where it may well be tougher in some aspects, he has had 6 months of trying to motivate them and he simply cant

 

[Graz]

Surely you have to admit that the mass changing of managers in recent years is part of what has got us to where we are today?

A shit manager should not be kept on just to get some stability. Holloway should be out, no doubt in my mind. But stability is important. It's about having a squad of players that the manager actually has a use for, will fit his system, know the way each other plays, know what the manager expects, the manager knows what to expect from his players etc. Changing manager every couple of months means the players have to learn a new system every couple of months, and players that were left out in the cold come back in from nowhere and vice versa.

Constant change is not good for a club, and we do need to find someone we can stick with to build something here.


I don't think Holloway's that man.

I don't agree with those supporting Holloway just for stability, but the argument that stability isn't important is almost as bad.

 

[highland fox]

Not going into the ins and outs,sick to the back teeth of discussing him just get rid of him,I really don't understand what the delay is on announcing whether he stays or goes unless MM is trying to make sure he's got a replacement lined up before booting him out.Seems the only way Holloway will keep his job is if the person/people MM want to replace him don't want the job

 

[Boy Genius]

Surely you have to admit that the mass changing of managers in recent years is part of what has got us to where we are today?

A shit manager should not be kept on just to get some stability. Holloway should be out, no doubt in my mind. But stability is important. It's about having a squad of players that the manager actually has a use for, will fit his system, know the way each other plays, know what the manager expects, the manager knows what to expect from his players etc. Changing manager every couple of months means the players have to learn a new system every couple of months, and players that were left out in the cold come back in from nowhere and vice versa.

Constant change is not good for a club, and we do need to find someone we can stick with to build something here.


I don't think Holloway's that man.

I don't agree with those supporting Holloway just for stability, but the argument that stability isn't important is almost as bad.

so going on what you have said, we kick IH out, and bring in another bloke who gets us winning and we get promoted and establish our selves once again in the Championship. Thats stability I will agree.
We kick IH out, and bring in another bloke, and for the next couple of seasons we finish mid table in Division 1, that too is stability, but is it acceptable. Kick the new bloke out and see if we can get one who can get us up.
Winning is everything.

BTW How many managers have Real Madrid had in the last 5 years?

 

[drummindefender]

BTW How many managers have Real Madrid had in the last 5 years?

Too Many-and they haven't started doing well until recently, and arguably thats more down to barcelona being a shambles.

 

[City Fan]

I can't believe we're being compared to Real Madrid. Why don't we compare ourselves to a similar team like Coventry. They keep chopping and changing managers and they only just stayed up.

 

[highland fox]

We chop and change until we find a Manager that after 6 months in charge as improved the teams fortunes if just a tiny bit.Its folly to keep a Manager who despite spending a sizeable amount of money on his own players has managed to make us worse than we were before he started

 

[Chuck T Masala]

I'm sure we all want stability and if we have to sack the manager to achieve it well so be it.

Its not very stable dropping like a stone in to div 1 so we aint stable now and keeping IH wont give us the stability we really want which is a good team that wins a lot of matches. :icon_conf

 

[DesertFox]

Surely you have to admit that the mass changing of managers in recent years is part of what has got us to where we are today?

A shit manager should not be kept on just to get some stability. Holloway should be out, no doubt in my mind. But stability is important. It's about having a squad of players that the manager actually has a use for, will fit his system, know the way each other plays, know what the manager expects, the manager knows what to expect from his players etc. Changing manager every couple of months means the players have to learn a new system every couple of months, and players that were left out in the cold come back in from nowhere and vice versa.

Constant change is not good for a club, and we do need to find someone we can stick with to build something here.

I don't think Holloway's that man.

I don't agree with those supporting Holloway just for stability, but the argument that stability isn't important is almost as bad.

I agree with that Graz.

I think the Real Madrid situation only backs up the stability arguement. If they'd have had one quality manager in charge for that whole period, as would befit one of the biggest clubs in the world, they'd have reaped the rewards. Considering who they are, they've underperformed whilst they've chopped and changed.

However, the point is to try and find a decent manager and then give him time. I don't think IH is that man. And Milan's recruitment policy doesn't bode well for finding him next time either...

 

[Chuck T Masala]

I can't believe we're being compared to Real Madrid. Why don't we compare ourselves to a similar team like Coventry. They keep chopping and changing managers and they only just stayed up.

But they stayed up and didnt spend anything like we did on shyte. There is a real optimism amongst al ot of Cov fans as they see Coleman as the real deal and Ransome is promising multi-millions to rebuild. They may be overly optomistic, but they start from a better position than us next year.

 

[highland fox]

But they stayed up and didnt spend anything like we did on shyte. There is a real optimism amongst al ot of Cov fans as they see Coleman as the real deal and Ransome is promising multi-millions to rebuild. They may be overly optomistic, but they start from a better position than us next year.

Not according to some Chuck,they think its the best thing than we went down...

 

[Graz]

so going on what you have said, we kick IH out, and bring in another bloke who gets us winning and we get promoted and establish our selves once again in the Championship. Thats stability I will agree.
We kick IH out, and bring in another bloke, and for the next couple of seasons we finish mid table in Division 1, that too is stability, but is it acceptable. Kick the new bloke out and see if we can get one who can get us up.
Winning is everything.

BTW How many managers have Real Madrid had in the last 5 years?

So how long would you give the new manager?

And if you want to give examples like Real Madrid... how long was Alex Ferguson at United before they won anything? Bet they're glad they stuck with him now.

 

[Steven]

So how long would you give the new manager?

And if you want to give examples like Real Madrid... how long was Alex Ferguson at United before they won anything? Bet they're glad they stuck with him now.

Difference is that Ferguson went to Man U with a pedigree that suggests he should be given time. :icon_wink

 

[Durham Fox]

I'm getting really pissed off with people on this forum thinking they have all the answers and aren't willing to give peoples opinions the time of day.

 

[Graz]

Difference is that Ferguson went to Man U with a pedigree that suggests he should be given time. :icon_wink

So who can we get that has that pedigree?
Or is that your excuse for saying we should get a new manager every month if the existing manager loses more than he wins in the previous month?


I'm still saying Holloway should be gone, I just can't understand how people can't see that new managers/players won't instantly click and win every game.

 

[LS6_Fox]

I'm getting really pissed off with people on this forum thinking they have all the answers and aren't willing to give peoples opinions the time of day.

You haven't got a clue DF :icon_wink