Well shit, it’s a whole lot easier for me to roll off restaurants in my neighborhood than to tell you which managers are available or where to find them, but that doesn’t change the fact that I can still give you my opinion of whether one selected seems to pass muster or is a panic signing.
All we ever hear about is how NYCFC is a desirable club in MLS for future players and managers. If that’s the case, and CFG has the resources they do to get in touch with any/everybody, then it’s on them for the other possibilities. I’d like to assume they did kick over a few rocks for other managers, and if so, it’s telling that they then went internally. If not, then that’s troubling. But to ask the forums who else to choose is shifting responsibility.
If their entire plan is to promote from within and they've been working assiduously to stock their pipeline with coaching talent, how does that shift your thinking?
Possession-heavy, build-from-the-back is hardly unique to CFG teams. If a style is mandated by CFG (and honestly, despite everyone talking about "The City Way", I'm highly skeptical that it's particularly rigid... Man City sets up with a "free 8" running around in Silva and De Bruyne and it's not mandated that we try to do the same [though Maxi's movement might be very generously interpreted that way, I suppose]). But if ownership wants to say to prospective managers "are you willing to commit to building from the back and playing a quick-passing possession style?" I'm sure there are many potential candidates both willing and able to comply.
It doesn’t. I haven’t seen the HG players get a real chance yet even though Sands is a better option than TMac. And I don’t want NYCFC to be a testing lab for MCFC coaches that want to be managers. There’s only so many places these coaches can graduate to within CFG, and unless Pep leaves, it’s even smaller. Plus, and this is probably my biggest issue, is that all development from within creates a completely homogeneous culture that lacks outside contrarian views, and in sports, a singular way of thinking/doing, even if proven the “best” ultimately whithers away painfully because the system is figured out and adapted to by opponents. If CFG wants to develop their academies with the tactics/skills of short passing/possession, that’s fine, but they should be constantly looking for offensive-minded coaches that can appreciate those skills while applying them in different ways/tactics. Example being Pep versus Klopp & Teuchel - they all play attacking and attractive soccer that keys on possession, but Klopp and Teuchel are less rigid in their ways and modifies their tactics as needed. At the same time, any one of those three could step into the others’ club and get results because the general principles are similar.
I agree with your thoughts on homogenous cultures. The great thing about sports vs other industries is that it's really hard to ignore external ideas when you are held accountable for your ideologies on relatively short cycles, because you have games every week and various competitions.
Waiting for a real job.
I still think Medina is better than Jack.
Medina is amazing....massive upgrade from Jack >>>> medina is shit
Will the super sensitive reactions on this site swing back?
We should hire Pep Ljinders. Or this guy. What the fuck do I know when it comes to hiring dudes who coach academy kids. I’m sure there’s a difference. I’m sure we can’t tell it. And I’m pretty sure CFG can’t either.
I am pretty fine with being a feeder club and league as long as the upside of investing in MLS remains low relative to other leagues they are investing in. I hope that they see how much more quickly they can grow MLS here by pushing against the boundaries - and I hope that LAFC and Atlanta keep them from becoming complacent. I don't think their feeder strategy even really works if they aren't making us a great brand and a winning team because it has to be an attractive team to join and plunder, so that's why I remain at ease. For now.
