Sticking with the manager

[roblues]

Can't speak for anyone else, but I am using my own eyes. I'm seeing experimental team selections work in some games and not paying off in some games, I'm seeing signings trying hard but some not yet succeeding for the team and I'm seeing negative tactics which are doing the job a reasonable amount of the time but aren't seeing us beat the big teams. My eyes can't help wandering over to the league every now and again too.

To be honest, I'm not as pro-Mancini as my posts in this thread would have people believe. I find myself not only questioning his decisions but being genuinely angry with him after some games (last night, West Brom in the CC and Kiev come to mind).
I do believe that the longer anyone is in the job, the more they will learn about how to do it and the better they will become until they reach the peak of their abilities. That's why I wanted us to stick with Reid, Horton, Royle, Sven, Hughes and now Mancini.

[Slim]

1. Have his signings been good?
2. Do his tactics appear to be working?
3. Are results improving?
4. Can you see the groundwork being laid for a long term plan?
5. Do you think his signings in the future will vastly improve the team?
6. Are we entertaining you?

I have tried to keep the questions as unbiased to my own answers as I possibly can, but this is roughly(without having written it out before) the criteria I would base keeping a manager on, screw revolving doors and stability arguments, we have seen evidence for both sides of that debate and they almost perfectly cancel each other out making the reasoning behind stability invalid.

[Ted Hughes]

Forgetting the issue of fairness/decency etc which I agree, would go out of the window if Bob hit his targets & was sacked (but it already has when Hughes went), the thing we're trying to achieve overall, is a team which will challenge for the title & or Chump's Lg next season. It doesn't have to win, just make a good fist of it.

Imo, it should be obvious to anyone that the backbone of this City team is good enough to be organised into a unit on which the right bloke can build that kind of team. The question is: which of Bob's current signings can you absolutely, 100% guarantee for certain, right now, will be in it?

Imo the answer to that is Silva.

Do the owners give him another £200m to replace his own signings if need be? Will he do it, if it needs doing or will he stick with them even if they fail, then walk out ? Will he sign the right people if he does replace them? Will Tevez go purely because of Bob if Bob stays or will he go anyway? Will there actually be more upheaval caused by keeping Bob than sacking him ? Is he actually any good ?

I don't know the answers to those questions but I'm bloody sure they need answering & he could go a long way to answering them by his actions between now & May; I mean his team's actual performance standard, not just where it finishes. Give us a sign that we have a team for next season.

It may not be as easy to finish in the top 4 next season; everyone else will be trying to improve & signing players.

[roblues]

Forgetting the issue of fairness/decency etc which I agree, would go out of the window if Bob hit his targets & was sacked (but it already has when Hughes went), the thing we're trying to achieve overall, is a team which will challenge for the title & or Chump's Lg next season. It doesn't have to win, just make a good fist of it.

Imo, it should be obvious to anyone that the backbone of this City team is good enough to be organised into a unit on which the right bloke can build that kind of team. The question is: which of Bob's current signings can you absolutely, 100% guarantee for certain, right now, will be in it?

Imo the answer to that is Silva.

Do the owners give him another £200m to replace his own signings if need be? Will he do it, if it needs doing or will he stick with them even if they fail, then walk out ? Will he sign the right people if he does replace them? Will Tevez go purely because of Bob if Bob stays or will he go anyway? Will there actually be more upheaval caused by keeping Bob than sacking him ? Is he actually any good ?

I don't know the answers to those questions but I'm bloody sure they need answering & he could go a long way to answering them by his actions between now & May; I mean his team's actual performance standard, not just where it finishes. Give us a sign that we have a team for next season.

It may not be as easy to finish in the top 4 next season; everyone else will be trying to improve & signing players.

I like the sound of this much more than the cries to get rid of him whatever happens. Whilst keeping in mind that Psycho managed the best end of a season we have had since getting back into the top flight and then went downhill from there (not wanting to open up another debate about the difference in circumstances back then), a classy finish to this season would inspire confidence that Mancini can get more of out his team in the long run (especially if we are without Tevez).

[Im_Spartacus]

long term managers are better for clubs, as they can plan for the future. Would taggart have spent £17m on hernandez and smalling if he thought he'd be sacked this year? They were buys for the future, who've only seen games due to injuries and poor form of others. In fairness, both have done extremely well, but I doubt they were expected to perform this year.

Hernandez and Smalling have played a big part in United's season this year. He bought them because they have potential, but already have the quality to have an impact, so bad example - as he was once again proved to be correct in his judgement.

It is a club's/scout's job to help identify the next lot of talent. The manager simply rubber stamps the signing if he agrees with the scout's assessment. If he delivers on his objectives, the manager will one day get to have such players in his team if he coaches them to fulfil that potential. If he fails to deliver, he doesnt. Simple.

The club have the scouting network in place, the manager leaving won't change that.