What makes a good manager?

EdenHazard

In my opinion it comes down to luck, prestige, players available at a given time and how the person in question sells themselves.

And aside from that what are the qualities of a good manager? Take Arsene Wenger, he's touted as a great manager(and he probably is) but he's not won a trophy since 2005. People will look at his continued Champions League qualification but I mean who else is going to qualify? Stoke? With Arsenal's squad and resources and reputation(they can attract players that lesser clubs couldn't) you'd expect them to constantly qualify.

Take Alan Pardew what he did with N'Castle last season? Great success and he did a great job, but I don't think people would call him a great manager? Does this come down to our perception?

David O'Leary got Leeds to a CL semi final and performing in Champions League but people point to the money he spent as the reason for this and not his managing ability. Why is that?

dreamers75

An ability to manage staff and focus them to a clear goal that almost all staff work towards.

EdenHazard

My question should really be what makes a manager better than another.

I think its just so rare for managers like AVB and Mourinho to emerge, people who kinda trained to be managers as opposed to someone like guardiola who to me is just lucky he had the reputation and the players he had at barca.

In football there are just so many variables and the lines are so thin between success and failure, look at Sir Alex.

Essien

It's like asking what makes a good player, there is no single answer.

For me, Mourinho is the best tactician in the game, he thinks differently to most other managers and he's not afraid to do anything in the name of winning. He'll spot a weakness in the opposition and exploit it to the fullest. This can often mean ugly, negative football, but it doesn't matter, it wins trophies.

Ferguson is an incredible motivator. This is why his teams seem to have an endless well of character and can simply never be counted out of a game or title race. It's pretty common that people question Uniteds squad at the beginning of every season, yet ultimately end up scratching their heads when they inevitably win trophies at the end of it. It's because of Fergies motivational skills, and all round man management that his teams have typically been greater than the sum of their parts.

Wenger is obviously a great judge of potential, just look at the players he's brought in as youngsters and/or plucked from relative obscurity. He's a chairmans dream, building title contending teams on tiny transfer fees and often selling players on for large fees. If not for the rise of the mega rich clubs over the past decade, I think Wenger would have achieved incredible things with Arsenal.

Three very different world class managers there. Jose and Fergie are a cut above Wenger for me but he's still a great manager.

mike65

The mark of a good manager is making the greatest of what he has at his disposal be it money when buying, selling (knowing when to) or winning points on the pitch.

Mr.Nice Guy

Consistency.

To be able to not only make the most of your resources but to be able to do it over a number of years.

Avram Grant was a John Terry penalty kick away from being a Champions League winning manager but I certainly don't consider him a great manager and I doubt many do. I consider Wenger a managerial great for keeping Arsenal a fantastic side for well over a decade and in spite of the money thrown about by his rivals.

Turtyturd

The ability to be nice to the press.

Strongbow10

being a great manager involves creating a culture within a club that allows the most talented to thrive.

A top manager never gets over excited about big wins, nor does he plunge to the depths of despair with a big defeat. He has a vision of what is needed and he sees it out until it pays dividends.

Fergie is a world class manager but he has a major advantage over most in that he is number one in the dressing room. There is no trying to win over players. He is there so long that anyone coming into the club has to prove themselves to him rather than vice versa.

Thats where Liverpool have problems, you have managers coming into the club pandering to Carragher and Gerrard. They are number one in the dressing room until the manager does something to prove otherwise. Benitez used to sub Gerrard in big games after an hour on or so and I'm convinced it was a case of him making a statement as to who was boss.

As a previous poster pointed out, there are so many variables. You can be the best manager in the world tactically but you also need the ability to get players to play for you. They can either respect you, fear you or like you. Each player needs different fuel in order to get them performing.

You see some managers who are loyal to their philosophies but they manage to p*ss off key players, and then they manage to isolate them and try and carry on with the remainder of the squad. Its like a one size fits all approach to management (See Trap and Craig Levine). A good manager realises that team spirit and commitment is important but they also realise its important to massage the ego of the team brat if he is capable of raising the teams overall performance by 25%.

The one size fits all approach is becoming dated in football, every good manager will say they treat all the squad the same but they really don't. They know how to treat and deal with players individually given their status and importance. But they are shrewd enough to make all of their squad think that everyone is equal to avoid any appearance of bias in the dressing room.

A top manager is stubborn to see out his vision of what makes a squad successful but knows there is no point cutting his nose off to spite his face.

A_Sober_Paddy

EdenHazard wrote: »

In my opinion it comes down to luck, prestige, players available at a given time and how the person in question sells themselves.

And aside from that what are the qualities of a good manager? Take Arsene Wenger, he's touted as a great manager(and he probably is) but he's not won a trophy since 2005. People will look at his continued Champions League qualification but I mean who else is going to qualify? Stoke? With Arsenal's squad and resources and reputation(they can attract players that lesser clubs couldn't) you'd expect them to constantly qualify.

Take Alan Pardew what he did with N'Castle last season? Great success and he did a great job, but I don't think people would call him a great manager? Does this come down to our perception?

David O'Leary got Leeds to a CL semi final and performing in Champions League but people point to the money he spent as the reason for this and not his managing ability. Why is that?

With DOL, it was a mix of money spent on players as well as a great crop of young players coming out of our academy...

His record at Leeds is quiet good, but at other clubs, he failed so thats why people will always point at the money he spent to put down his good work at Leeds...But I will point out, that not winning a league with that amount of investment just isn't good enough

Neil3030

I think it was Giles who put it best when he said that a good manager will always leave a club in a better state than when he took over.

PhlegmyMoses

Essien wrote: »

It's like asking what makes a good player, there is no single answer.

For me, Mourinho is the best tactician in the game, he thinks differently to most other managers and he's not afraid to do anything in the name of winning. He'll spot a weakness in the opposition and exploit it to the fullest. This can often mean ugly, negative football, but it doesn't matter, it wins trophies.

Ferguson is an incredible motivator. This is why his teams seem to have an endless well of character and can simply never be counted out of a game or title race. It's pretty common that people question Uniteds squad at the beginning of every season, yet ultimately end up scratching their heads when they inevitably win trophies at the end of it. It's because of Fergies motivational skills, and all round man management that his teams have typically been greater than the sum of their parts.

Wenger is obviously a great judge of potential, just look at the players he's brought in as youngsters and/or plucked from relative obscurity. He's a chairmans dream, building title contending teams on tiny transfer fees and often selling players on for large fees. If not for the rise of the mega rich clubs over the past decade, I think Wenger would have achieved incredible things with Arsenal.

Three very different world class managers there. Jose and Fergie are a cut above Wenger for me but he's still a great manager.

Mourinho can be an excellent tactician but towards the end of his time at Chelsea he used to bring on Huth or Terry up front if Chelsea were struggling in a game. I'd say he is a better motivator than tactician. Creates squad unity, deflects attention from the players in the press and gets them to play in any style he wants them to.

Fergie is an incredibly underrated tactician. He is a very good motivator but his bigger picture tactics have almost always been spot on. He gets outdone in the odd match here and there but that's par for the course after a quarter of a century in the game. He has a great feel for the ebb and flow during a game and his substitutions are usually spot on.

It's hard to tell how good Wenger is anymore. He basically built one great Arsenal squad, maybe two at a push, but financial limitations have weakened his hand there. I've never thought of him as a great tactician, more an exponent of a certain style of play, but he must be doing something right to continually nurture and bring through players whilst staying in and around the CL.

Essien

Oh I'm not saying Mourinho isn't a great motivator or Fergie isn't a great tactician, I just think they aren't their very strongest traits. Both are obviously excellent at most aspects of the job.

JPA

A good manager is one who brings success, relative to the club, over a long period or a at a few different clubs.


Luck plays a part but over time it takes a lot more.
David O'Leary had a brief success and then things went pear shaped, why? Because he can't manage players on a personal level.

As for the original post, it's basically showing a complete lack of knowledge of what Wenger is and has been achieving.

Esse85

The ability to get the best out of others around him be it players/staff and to make the best of the resources at his disposal e.g. transfer funds, training facilities etc.