The difference between success and shit in tournaments is often tiny. Control what you can control. And hiring the right manager is something that can be controlled far more than whether or not you get a bad ref, a dumb red, an unlucky PK called against you, or three or four shots off the woodwork that were fractions of an inch away from being goals.
This is a ridiculous assertion. The US women have never ever dropped lower than 5 in the world rankings. EVER. Since 2019 they have won 88 games and lost, lost 6. During that time span they have won a World Cup, Olympic gold, Olympic bronze, and made it to the round of 16 (which everyone saw as a failure). It ain't the coach people. It's f*** talent. Since 2000 they have only lost 39 games and won over 300.
At least one of those "retirements" was because she knew Hayes wouldn't put up with her running the show and being the focal point of the team when she shouldn't have even been at the last WC. We can debate all day long about her tactics etc but there is no denying that she puts the team first and if you aren't one of the best players you won't get called in.
I don't know about that. We have had managers drop untouchable prima donnas before and they did not lose their job. A segment of the fanbase may be butt hurt but that is life.
I don't, but given how well she pulled off the delegation to Twila Kilgore for almost a year before parachuting in, I'm kinda curious how she'd do as a "metacoach" of both programs. Maybe when she's ready to retire from day-to-day coaching.
It's completely plausible that someone of Emma Hayes' stature can get most of the team to buy into tough personnel decisions whereas less accomplished coaches couldn't. I have no earthly idea if that was the case last summer or not.
Coaching plays a huge role in closing the gap between #5 and #1. Pep, Zidane, Ancelotti, it's certainly true they've always had the talent -- but they did phenomenally even relative to expectations. (However it's still valid to question if they could do well without a marked talent advantage.) Hayes has done tremendously so far. Kilgore did well in keeping the train on track in the interim.There was probably also a "breath of fresh air" effect no matter who the coach. And, make no mistake, winning three 1-0 games in a row against top-flight competition takes no small amount of luck, no matter how good you are.
Kind of sums up the issue with the WNT the past three or four years imo. Players were in control and that's never a good thing
Going to be careful with what I say here, but Donovan (assuming that's who you were referring to) getting dropped was career malpractice, while dropping Rapinoe getting dropped would have been career suicide.
Pep has only managed Barcelona, Bayern, and City. He has always had the very top talent of the very top team in the league. ZZ has only managed Madrid in 2 separate stints, he has also had the same cream of the crop player pool as Pep. Ancelotti has managed clubs up and down the standings over his long career and has proven that he can both design schemes to complement his players and be an excellent man manager to keep everyone motivated. However, even Carlo has not been above criticism see: After the Paris Saint-Germain match, reports surfaced that Ancelotti had lost the dressing room. It was reported that five senior players wanted Ancelotti out as manager, which Bayern's president Uli Hoeneß later confirmed. Questions were also raised about Ancelotti's tactical setup and team selection against Paris Saint-Germain, when he left several key players on the bench, and one was left to watch the match from the stands.[158] Those pesky Bayern players, sounds familiar? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Ancelotti
I'm aware they've all managed top players. That's my point. Lots of folks act like those teams coach themselves, but in truth it requires a lot of skill for the head coach to give them what coaching they need and then stay out of the way. It is, however, a categorically different skill than "coaching up" a decent team to play far above their talent. Not that the coaches are mostly to blame, but ask Chelsea if winning is as easy as assembling high priced talent and rolling the ball out.
Ancelotti is definitely one of the best coaches in the world but his track shows the difference between coaching at an elite club and someone further down the food chain. His time at Everton was not particularly notable and it’s worse than how someone like David Moyes did. But Moyes failed when he got his shot at a big club and Ancelotti has mostly excelled in his opportunities at the elite clubs globally.
i don't know who are the "lots of folks" that you are referring to? What specifically is the different skill required?
How exactly is Carlo's record at Everton worse than Moyes? Moyes managed Everton for 518 matches with a 42% win. Ancelotti managed Everton for 67 matches with a 46% win before he left to take the Madrid job. Just checked. Ancelotti got Everton just above the relegation zone and took them to 12th in his first half season. They finished in 10th his 2nd season. Since he left they have finished 16th, 17th, and 15th!
Those numbers surprise me a bit. I had assumed Ancelotti's record was worse as well since in 9 of the 11 full seasons Moyes coached at Everton (not counting the one season where he joined the club with only 2 months in the season left to play), the club finished higher in the table than they did in the brief time Ancelotti was there. But perhaps the emergence of the big 6 meant that, even with a slightly superior record, it was harder for Ancelotti's Everton to mange the 5th to 8th place finishes that were common during Moyes' time at the club, especially back when there was only really a big 4 for the most part.
In case you folks have not noticed, we're in big trouble. Beyond the lack of a top CB pair, the golden midfield we took to Qatar is gone: Adams didn't seem the same, McKennie was playing poorly, Musah was anonymous, and Weah was less effective than before, then got himself kicked out of the game. We're banking on several players coming good: Johnny (who is not a guy to cover CBs as much as Tyler, but one who can provide a better let-out to go forward), Reyna (whom I liked in Copa), Tillman and Richards (both quite subpar in Copa). Many also expect guys like Brenden and Sargent to come good, even though they have many caps already without producing much. The two saving graces have been Turner in the Nations League, and Folarin Balogun in the Copa. We can work with that, after all we've never depended on the striker to score in the most important games, and Turner with some cover and less trying to come out playing from the back may work. But, right now, our defense is bad, our midfield is in need of a total rebuilt, and all we got left is Jedi, Puli, Reyna, Balo as indisputable starters --and the hope that Dest returns the same player.
And they certainly aren't clearly 20th, either. We're not talking about identifying the specifics of what makes the difference... we're talking about the existing, obvious difference between the impact of coaching on the absolute highest level with the most talented, deepest teams on the planet vs somewhere much further down that line. And bringing up the women's team is an incredibly poor comparison because they have been one of the very most talented teams in the sport for the past 25 years. Well one was a merc, and the other brought the club back to a solid foundation with years of pretty consistent performance while operating as a selling club. Winning percentage alone doesn't tell that full story. So again, look at fuller context.
That’s a pretty negative spin on a bunch of unknowns. But comparing to the Women - it sure would be nice if we had an elite goalkeeper and center back to clean up limitations elsewhere.