This is more the player I’m taking about. There are many managers who played the pro game a long time. The Rooneys, Gerrards, Ronaldo would be another example of a guy who wouldn’t be a good manager, these guys will struggle. Zidane is a strange one. Accomplished a lot with an excellent team being his one and only managerial sting. Have to give him props. Would like to see him take another swing at it. Larry Bird is another weird one. Actually did very well as an NBA coach. Maybe not a useful rule of thumb. Could also be that guys who made shedloads of coin as top players don’t need or want the headaches of management.
Something seems disjointed with his approach to the role…
A bit like Ole GS, seems to talk a good book with the pithy statements and rallying cries, but sometimes that impacts negatively on the ones he needs most, the players…
He also had Bob Paisley officially working with him in a mentor role.
2 Likes
Yep I can imagine the boot room was quite the learning experience back in the day!
Almost certainly. But that is the point. Almost without exception, all the top players who transitioned to becoming top managers talk about how as players they were always thinking of the bigger picture rather than just trying to get through the drills assigned to them. In my experience, this is not just an issue of there being a lost opportunity that can be regained by starting to think about the game more deeply now. It reflects a personality type. It’s reflects an ability to think about ideas and concepts deeply.
I dont know why you call Bird out as weird. To me he is the textbook example of what sort of players transition well into coaching. Bird was a fundamentals guy. He was good because he could do them better than you could, and he could do that because he’d worked his socks off to perfect those skills. That is someone who had to spend a lot of time thinking about how to be best version of himself he could be. Magic in contrast…However, thinking about this, Jordan is probably the more interesting contrast. He was famous for his work ethic and the complete commitment to tearing everything down to see what he needed to work on to improve. Yet look at what he worked on…things that focused on his game not the team’s game. That is a far narrower scope of thinking about the game than Bird would have had throughout his playing career which then directly impacts how well you can communicate this to a group of players.
However, your point about money and the headache is a great one. People I think under appreciate how all consuming a job it is. Doing it well tends to be an 80 hour a week 50 weeks a year thing. There is great money to be made doing it, but these guys don’t do it because of the money they do it because they need to. How many ex pros get into management because they dont know what else to do with their life, but also dont really want to go from a 25 hour work week to an 80 hour one? How many of them then just kind of phone it in, convincing themselves they are putting in the effort?
3 Likes
That’s true about Bird and a great point. Then after he proved he was also sound as a coach but tasted all the work of it, he said piffle to this. What a player that guy was.
1 Like
as my wife would say
it’s not your message, its the delivery
A scotsman learning from an Englishman, showing that travelling the world isn’t a guarantee of becoming a good manager. There are so many more factors which Gerrard may or may not necessarily have in order to succeed at the top level.
A lot of flak seems to be coming his way in regards to Beale being the actual brain behind the operation. Whilst there might be some truth behind that, I get the feeling Villa is just a bit of a shit job to take at the moment anyway. A lot of overrated players in that squad who aren’t anywhere near as good as the media or fans would have you believe. Fan expectations are high and the reality is the actual quality of the squad probably isn’t anywhere near what it needs to be to compete for a top half finish. I bet whoever takes over will keep them in the top flight but the football will remain shite to watch.
I understand why he took the job but was a bit skeptical at the time. Something about it just didn’t feel like the right fit, but fair play to him for having the bollocks to try it. Would have been easy for him to stay at Rangers and cruise along for a few more years.
I love Stevie but I don’t see him managing Liverpool.
3 Likes
Best, concise, sentiment free comment that could be made.
Its how most people probably feel but need a thousand words to say!
1 Like
Maybe now that he’s been given the boot at Villa, he might come out of retirement and play for us for the remainder of the season. Even at 42, he would probably be better than what we ended up putting out yesterday.
No, I’m not serious… or am I?
Neither can I to be honest. Not while we are owned by FSG anyway.
The standout for me and it is touched on by many comments above is identity. The best managers have a footballing identity or a philosophy. I cant say I’ve seen or heard that being said about Stevie (yet). That, to some degree comes from tactical nous and an understanding of the game but also a belief on how the game should be played (to deliver results maybe). They also need to have a personality that can deliver that philosophy.
I cant say where Stevie sits in that spectrum but the evidence above doesn’t provide compelling evidence unfortunately.
I have a hypothesis that the very best players, and Stevie was obviously one of those, don’t make great managers because they don’t know how to explain to inferior players how to execute things which just came naturally to them.
2 Likes
Yes but @Limiescouse beat you to it…
like…
Zidane?
Dalglish?
Cryuff?
Ancelotti?
Beckenbauer?
How many of those proved themselves at clubs that weren’t already elite? 
1 Like
so be be considered a great manager,
you must have had success at a non elite club at some point in your career?
4 Likes