Jump to content

Do we judge Stuart Gray as a 'manager' or as a 'head coach'?


Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30531089

 

After reading Gus Poyet insisting he's a 'head coach' rather than a 'manager' due to a lack of control over transfers, I wonder whether we need to judge Stuart Gray by the same standards?

 

It's noticeable that he's officially described as our 'head coach', but as fans I'm not sure many of us factor this distinction in to our thinking and our language tends to reflect that: when was the last time you heard a fan use the term 'head coach' rather than 'manager'?! I doubt many of us consider Gray's job as different to that held by Jones, Megson etc.. who were described as 'managers', but clearly the club see a distinction, otherwise they'd use the same terminology.

 

Is Gray's remit limited to coaching the first team, preparing them for match days and making tactical decisions and substitutions etc.... during the games? If so, does that mean we should cut Gray some slack when assessing the club's transfer dealings and lay any criticism in this regard at the doors of Aldridge and Mandaric, despite tradition and instinct telling us that Gray is the man responsible?

Edited by areNOTwhatTHEYseem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We judge him on results no matter wot his title is

That's probably what 99% of football fans believe, and I'm not saying that's wrong, as I'm part of that 99% as well. I just thought it was interesting to hear Poyet drawing a clear distinction between the two roles

 

I suppose the heart of the matter is: if we judge Gray on results, who's responsible for ensuring he has the players to get results?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wilyfox

Both, because clearly Gray has significant input to who comes and goes on the playing side. The whole manager/head coach title issue is a farce. I suspect it's a way of getting lazy old-school managers more hands-on so they can't delegate all the coaching responsibilities.

The notion of a chairman or director of football buying players for a manager or head coach to work with will never be successful.

Edited by wilyfox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30531089

 

After reading Gus Poyet insisting he's a 'head coach' rather than a 'manager' due to a lack of control over transfers, I wonder whether we need to judge Stuart Gray by the same standards?

 

It's noticeable that he's officially described as our 'head coach', but as fans I'm not sure many of us factor this distinction in to our thinking and our language tends to reflect that: when was the last time you heard a fan use the term 'head coach' rather than 'manager'?! I doubt many of us consider Gray's job as different to that held by Jones, Megson etc.. who were described as 'managers', but clearly the club see a distinction, otherwise they'd use the same terminology.

 

Is Gray's remit limited to coaching the first team, preparing them for match days and making tactical decisions and substitutions etc.... during the games? If so, does that mean we should cut Gray some slack when assessing the club's transfer dealings and lay any criticism in this regard at the doors of Aldridge and Mandaric, despite tradition and instinct telling us that Gray is the man responsible?

what's it matter...

as long as we judge him as underfunded...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what's it matter...

as long as we judge him as underfunded...

I don't suppose it does. Poyet's comments indicate a distinction between a 'head coach' and a 'manager' and I wondered whether it's purely semantics or whether we view the two roles differently. The responses so far seem to suggest the former, which is to be expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leicester have just sacked their DoF as he was the one responsible for recruitment in the summer, and that is what is being blamed for their form this season. Makes a change from the manager being the first to blame.

Gray's problem is we've got no Director Of Football, so the blame will always fall on him should things go wrong! Are we the first club to have a 'head coach' rather than a 'manager' without also having the other half of that arrangement, i.e. the DoF?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of issues here. For example

We supposedly have a much better scouting network. Who do they report to , who decides who they go to watch.

Who decides which players get signed into the developement squad

Who do the academy coaches and the whole academy structure report to.

We know Gray likes to spend his time on the training ground and we see the benefits of this in how the players respond to him but there are only so many hours in the day

Is John Deehan still at the club. He is not listed on official site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both, because clearly Gray has significant input to who comes and goes on the playing side. The whole manager/head coach title issue is a farce. I suspect it's a way of getting lazy old-school managers more hands-on so they can't delegate all the coaching responsibilities.

The notion of a chairman or director of football buying players for a manager or head coach to work with will never be successful.

Except in 99% of leagues around the world i agree it will be a complete flop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...