Rag_hater wrote:BobKowalski wrote:Stability is one component of success. Having the right men in the right positions is another. The Chelsea team and squad has been stable even if the managerial position has not - although in Ancelotti I suspect that this instability is over. City have not been stable in terms of either team/squad or managerial position partly because our squad has not been good enough so there has been a rapid injection of players irrespective of manager along with managerial instability meaning that players have been bought and discarded dependant upon who the manager is.
I expect that there will be further squad restructing in the summer although not on the previous scale with an emphasis on quality not quantity. Mancini I recall reading does not want to fill the squad with 'more of the same'. Also Mancini unlike Hughes is happy to work within the club system where players are indentified by Marwood and co that can bring real value ie Johnson.
Irrespective of whatever people think of Mancini, 'too negative, too boring' or whatever, the one thing that he does bring which is valued by the club is not only his willingness to work with the club in taking it forward (ie he does not say its 'my way or no way') but his ability to organise the team and make things more solid. From solidity and stability the club and the team can grow and progress.
Ultimately no one knows whether Mancini can take City to winning the PL and more. But at the very least he will bring City to the point where we can challenge for the PL and qualify for the CL. It may be that we need someone else to close the deal but for the next season or two we do need some continuity. We may froth and moan over this or that performance or result but we also need to have some degree of long term prespective otherwise we will be forever ripping things up and starting again which will ultimately get us nowhere.
I disagree that stability is one of the components of success.As you say Chelski have been through plenty of turmoil but still managed to compete.So this says to me that quality is more important.
They competed because the core of the team still had the 'Mourinho' imprint on their DNA. It took Ancelotti to take them back to winning the big prize though and its interesting to see the effect that he has had on the team. One is the certainty throughout the club that Ancelotti has the confidence of Abramovich. Even getting turned over by Inter has not shaken that confidence and the calmness that Ancelotti himself brings to the club is I think signifcant as you get the sense that everyone is pulling in the same direction much as they were in Mourinho's first two years. And Chelsea won with some style which is also important to Abramovich.
I am not saying that stability is more important than quality. Unless you have quality both on and off the pitch you won't win anything no matter how stable you are but a combination of the two is the best breeding ground for success. The fact that Mancini missed out on 4th spot is failure but equally Mourinho was hired by Inter to win the CL yet in his first season they surrended tamely to taggarts mob. Should Inter have sacked Jose for failing to do what he was hired to do? Or should Inter give him one more season, pump more money into the team and give Jose another shot? Well they took the latter option and have the reward of a CL final.
Its not as simple as saying 'we wanted a top 4 spot, you didn't get it so on your bike sunshine'. Mancini was clearly on some form of probation this season and to keep his job he had to convince the owners he could take the team forward. The owners have clearly seen enough to convince them Mancini can take us forward so are letting him continue. Getting 4th would have been great but I did say about a month or so ago that I didn't think 4th spot was make or break for Mancini anymore. I think I was accused of changing the rules for saying that but I do think it was pretty clear it was going Mancini's way.
[/center]