Tuesday - July 25, 2017
Home    About    Writers    Links    Contact     RSS

About the Author

Bobby McMahon

Bobby McMahon

You can see me on Soccer Central most Mondays and Thursdays on Rogers Sportsnet in Canada. I write a regular column for Forbes.com and Soccerly.com and frequently guest on various podcasts and radio shows.


Why This Premier League Season Shows That Managers Do Matter

Written by on March 2, 2014 | 8 Comments »
Posted in Money Game

In 2009 Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski authored a very successful book called “Soccernomics”. In support of the book Kuper penned an article for the Financial Times that referenced material and key “findings” from the publication.

Time to end our deluded obsession with club managers,” was the title of the article and it attacked the belief that managers of soccer clubs mattered.

To read more please click on the link.

8 responses to “Why This Premier League Season Shows That Managers Do Matter”

  1. Smiley says:

    Good stuff.

    Your folow-up should be a piece entitled Why Owners Do Matter (i.e. Venkys, Carson Yeung, Gillett & Hick, Silent Stan as opposed to Abramovich, Glazers and others who have brought success to ther respective clubs and not just used their business to make a profit or other nefarious gains).

  2. The Glazers have not made a profit? Capital rather than operating but a profit none the less.
    For Abramovich it has been the equivalent of an insurance premium.

  3. Rob says:

    Bobby do you have any info on the success rate of a manager who is more attacking to that of one who is more inclined to make sure their defense is covered? Like if you look at Rodgers, who is offensive, and Benitez or Mourinho, who are more defensive/cautious. Do you have anything on that?

  4. Rob says:

    It might even be better to describe Rodgers as proactive

  5. Smiley says:

    Bobby – Every owner is out to make a profit but not every owner provides the necessary transfer kitty season after season which at least prepares their team to start off the season as a proper BPL side, proper contenders on all fronts or winners of silverware.

    No one is innocent but the likes of Abramovich (even if he does use the high profile position as an insurance policy) would surely not sit around with a thumb up his ass counting his profits as one of the richest soccer clubs wins bubkas for nearly a decade and falls so far behind the other top European clubs… N’est-ce pas?

    * ‘Bout time for a certain delusional Wengerite to chime in methinks. LOL

  6. Over 600M pounds is transferred from the club to banks with the Glazers ultimately benefiting and you see that as something that is good. No need for anyone to chime in on this one. We just need to let it sit there for all to read.

  7. Ed Gomes says:

    American owners are businessmen. The leagues are structured so they become wealthier through their clubs.
    For example, the NFL is such a cash cow that the lowly Jaguars (Fulhams owner) would be in the top 10 in baseball in revenue.
    The only owner that was willing to make less money, spend to win, was George Steinbrenner. He was a tyrant, but he also took in a lot less profit in trying to win. All that “investing” has made the Yankees even a bigger juggernaut, especially through the YES Network. Granted the club improved dramatically when George was ousted from daily operations due to his craziness.
    The two Steinbrenner sons aren’t as liberal with their money as dad was.

    European futebol is run completely different. Its more about passion, although finding more and more revenue streams is key to maintaining the toy. Champions League play is key for “big clubs”. It’s not only about the revenue from it, but added revenue through it.
    In my opinion Andy Carrol would have been a cash cow for Liverpool if he would have played better, earn an England spot and make them contenders.

    Way off track.
    A manager can be great if he’s at the helm of a mid-table club and plays defensively in order to maintain relevancy in the league.
    A manager can be great if the manage a “selling club” that wins by showcasing their players attacking form and earn big transfers fees.
    It doesn’t mean either of those can manage big time clubs, no matter the size of money available.
    To his credit, I think that Wenger could make a lesser club better, due to his style. But I also think Mourinho could as well, imposing a lock down style.
    Great managers are all about expectations being met, whatever they may be. Either they’re able to adjust to talent (they should be able to) or they build what they want. Either way, remain relevant, and that relevancy is in the eye of the beholder.

  8. Smiley says:

    “Over 600M pounds is transferred from the club to banks with the Glazers ultimately benefiting and you see that as something that is good.”

    And still Manyoo has:
    1)recorded record revenues over the second half of 2013
    2)is the second most valuable club with 3rd highest revenue according to Forbe’s list
    3)has been consistently winning silverware
    4)has been providing the manager with a substantial transfer kitty each window
    5)is not under FFP scrutiny
    6)has shown no signs of financial crisis or administration…

    So what exactly is your point here? I mean we can see another Great Depression tomorrow and every business with a leverage buyout will be up shit creek without a paddle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

House Rules

Please refrain from posting comments that;

  • Attempt to demean, intimidate or bully fellow readers
  • Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, intolerant or otherwise abusive
  • Includes language likely to offend or attempts to try and circumvent this request
  • Could be considered spam

The House reserves the right to delete any such comments and to block further participation on the site.

Soccer Report Extra
© copyright 2010. All rights reserved.
Designed and Developed by:
Bills'eye + Underscorefunk Design