Coaches

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

A long running theme on here is about the standard of coaching at the club. Often blamed for players under-performing or younger players not developing.

Having read the article about Webber, Im left with a few burning questions.

As an avid fan of Football Manager, I regularly get in the best coaches I can, and as many as I can.

At a real football club, the size of ours, how many first-team coaches would we have? Would they have specialist roles/areas as in FM, or does this just happen at the super-clubs?

I know we have a goalkeeping coach, probably a specialist fitness coach, but what about the other areas? Often posters have said we need to get a specialist defensive coach in, or someone to work with the strikers etc. Do we not have that already? Or do we have general coaches? If so, how many?

The point of all this is Webber. As sporting director coaching will surely fall under his remit. As someone seemingly ambitious he will surely want to bring in the best available.

He is likely to have extensive contacts, but how does one go about getting hold of a ''good'' coach. Presumably they''re not all sat on their hands doing nothing, Im guessing we''ll need to poach them from other clubs. What would it take to sell the club to them? If theyre any good they''re likely to be at better clubs than ours. Do we have the money to tempt them with higher wages? - should this be where we invest? Does Webber hold enough clout himself to tempt the standard needed, or do we need a manager with a reputation that makes them say ''Holy sh*t! XXX is on the phone!'' (something alas poor Alex Neil never had a chance of doing)

My point is if we dont do this, our coaching team will surely be those who are here at present, or those currently unemployed, and I dont see how that will happen.

Oh how I would love to see us bring in some continental coaches Webber is familiar with who might see us as an attractive entry into the English game, rather than simply finding some ex-players and assuming they''re good enough coaches.

What are we likely to get? A new ambitious exciting coaching team? Retention of current staff? or a dredging up of ex-players?

[Lessingham Canary 108]

What are we likely to get? A new ambitious exciting coaching team? Retention of current staff? or a dredging up of ex-players?

In answer to that, i can only see "A new ambitious exciting coaching team", there will definitely be a new team, and would hope that there will be a mixture of defensive and attacking coaches in the mix, if they are not ambitious i cant see Webber entertaining them.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

Sorry, should say, Im not going to fall into the trap of just because they''re exotic they must be special. My point about them being continental is they may offer new ideas and approaches rather than English Football 101, and also, might see a move to England as a good career move, and be willing to overlook our relative status (think Dijks and Klose) to give them a foothold in the English game. (Also they may not be on other club''s radar if based abroad).

If we employ ex-players, tired old journeymen British coaches as we seemingly do, Im not sure how the coaching standard goes up.

Indeed, how do you assess how good a coach is? Unlike a player you cant go and scout him really. What if there is someone really talented coming up at a lower league club? If he is a great coach, how do bigger clubs come to learn of his talents?

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

In answer to that, i can only see "A new ambitious exciting coaching team", there will definitely be a new team, and would hope that there will be a mixture of defensive and attacking coaches in the mix, if they are not ambitious i cant see Webber entertaining them.

That really is the hope. I hope he brings in some innovators and settles for nothing but. Not necessarily young, but certainly hungry! I really hope we dont just see an ex-player drafted in

[Captain Birdseye 0]

Coach 1 and 3 are a joke I go for 2 everytime

[FenwayFrank 2,717]

I''m sure Hucks would love being described as an old tired ex player with nothing to offer

[daly 551]

Anything has got to be an improvement on the present setup, as AN said when asked at the AGM regarding coaches he stated we do not have specialist defensive/attacking coaches we all just muck in

Great reply for a team hoping to return to TP

[Baldyboy 1]

It will be very interesting to see which first team coaches, if any, get kept on by the new Head Coach

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="Baldyboy"]It will be very interesting to see which first team coaches, if any, get kept on by the new Head Coach[/quote]The answer will be none as after all there is only Irvine who does not want the job and Frankie The Pieman.

[Baldyboy 1]

What about Kiely then, Tilly?

[Guest]

Unless there are no replacements available then all first team coaches must go.

For instance, we have two senior goalkeepers who are unreliable. How has Kiely improved them?

And I do not understand why McAvoy wasn''t paid off with Neil. Obviously we had to keep Irvine until a replacement came in.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

I''m sure Hucks would love being described as an old tired ex player with nothing to offer

I loved Hucks as a player, but my point is that playing football and coaching football are very different things.

There is an over-riding tendency to assume that good player will make good coaches. Really, someones playing ability is really rather unrelated to their coaching ability.

Players who had great careers have an advantage in that their playing experience means they were likely to have been the recipient of good coaching, but its not as simple as Monkey See Monkey Do.

Hucks specifically may prove to be a great coach. He might prove to be utter dog sh*te. How good of a player he was is irrelevant, its a totally different skill-set