Dortmund have scored 71 goals this season
- Thread starter Rosco
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Overall, though, they've navigated pretty well the shock caused to their system by Klopp leaving. It shows the value of having an overall strategy for the whole club and, by extension, how much we've suffered by not having one over the years. I hope that's one of the things Klopp will help to put right.
Perhaps it throws an interesting sidelight on it, namely that the stronger a club's overall strategy is, the less importance a manager may have within it. Of course the converse may be equally true. 😉
Tuchel was the perfect replacement though after his spell at Mainz. They describe him somewhere between Klopp and Guardiola in coaching style.
It was probably the right time for this Dortmund team to tweak a bit on the tactical side. He's kept most of the pressing game but added a bit more possession based football.
Loads of players that had a really bad season last year have improved. Kagawa, Mhiktaryan and Hummels. Gundogan could be involved from the start and Ginter is a year older.Aubameyang has been sensational.
It highlights the point JJ made. That the overall direction the club and team is taking is more important. So when a manager leaves you hire a manager that can work in the same direction and within the same set up.
It was probably the right time for this Dortmund team to tweak a bit on the tactical side. He's kept most of the pressing game but added a bit more possession based football.
Loads of players that had a really bad season last year have improved. Kagawa, Mhiktaryan and Hummels. Gundogan could be involved from the start and Ginter is a year older.Aubameyang has been sensational.
It highlights the point JJ made. That the overall direction the club and team is taking is more important. So when a manager leaves you hire a manager that can work in the same direction and within the same set up.
Hasn't that been pretty much Rosco's point all along? That for the most part, the manager is not as important as some make out, and the more important factor is how the club is set up and ran.
It's not a meaningless statistic.
It's a perfect example of someone who doesn't understand statistics attempting to use them
It only shows that Dortmund prospered after Klopp left.
His tactics are one-dimensional and I'm yet to be convinced it will bring lasting success. Temporary success - maybe but long term - well, just look at Dortmund. He got found out.
That said, I don't dislike Klopp. I just think he's over hyped up.
There I said it first. Eventually the forum will start questioning him. I've done the dirty work for you lot. Shoot me.
His tactics are one-dimensional and I'm yet to be convinced it will bring lasting success. Temporary success - maybe but long term - well, just look at Dortmund. He got found out.
That said, I don't dislike Klopp. I just think he's over hyped up.
There I said it first. Eventually the forum will start questioning him. I've done the dirty work for you lot. Shoot me.
If he's found out after being in the top 2 or 3 over 4 seasons or so, having won two league titles and getting to a CL final, he'll do me just fine.
Lol. I'm on roscos team.
I really want to disagree with him bur just read a great article on it all and I've seen the light.
I would c and p it but can't be bothered. Have a Google, there's some pretty legitimate arguments out there. Maybe Rosco isn't a troll after all?
I really want to disagree with him bur just read a great article on it all and I've seen the light.
I would c and p it but can't be bothered. Have a Google, there's some pretty legitimate arguments out there. Maybe Rosco isn't a troll after all?
Describing what happened as Klopp getting "found out" is just crazy. He established them as regular challengers in the league, taking them to league titles and CL finals, then reached the point - after a good few years - where he'd gone as far as he personally could with that particular club, whose good form since then has been built on the foundations he laid down. Here's hoping he gets "found out" at LFC too if that's your definition of it.
Yeah I'm coming round to the Rosco way of thinking. I mean, how many managers have we had the last 10 years and how different has it really been? They make the odd difference in one off games, but the structure and direction of the club as a whole and the structure of the scouting network, coaching staff and training are more important. The manager should be fitted into that structure, rather than the manager uprooting everything every few years with a new 5 year plan. The structure of the club should be constant and identifiable and managers should come in seamlessly and fit into the overall philosophy.
Just read this
It's where the theory is from.
You could then read this which disagrees with it.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/01431..._UL100_SR100,100_&refRID=0R5ZAXB54BSN2RQCT21S
I got as far as the first line of that review, saw they spelled "centre" center, and switched off
Here's one of the authors of Soccermaniacs writing that the authors of Numbers Game might have a bit of a point about managers making a difference
http://www.soccernomics-agency.com/?p=494
http://www.soccernomics-agency.com/?p=494
They're not one-dimensional at all. Like most approaches, they're reduced to a one-dimensional cliche ('e.g. 'running about a lot'). But they ARE physically intensive, and when there's a change, players will probably relax and feel like they're having more 'fun,' and will probably prosper, until THAT system begins to need fine-tuning (aka 'getting found out').
I think what was telling for me was that certain clubs, like Southampton and Swansea for example, were able to change manager three or four times without a discernible drop in the levels they had achieved previously, which were by and large higher than anticipated.
Either they were very good at recruiting new managers or else the manager at those clubs were't the sole, or even perhaps the most important part, of their relative success.
Mike Goodman, who was on Grantland wrote better football articles than any and every English journo.
He displayed a level of understanding and no nonsense factual analysis that would put them all to shame.
But by all means continue to read the brains trust that inhabit the English media, with their outdated bollocks that's lapped up by idiot fans everywhere.
There have been several articles which showed that Dortmund's poor form can be explained to randomness. The same way our run in 13/14 can be attributed to 3 to 4 factors being significantly higher than average - two world class strikers being significantly more productive, insanely higher number of set piece goals than we are normally used to. Dortmund had the exact opposite.
They actually bounced back in the second half of the season and qualified for Europa League. With a constant stream of important players leave, Klopp had to continuously reinvigorate the team. One very poor half season in 6 years is really not that bad.
On a slightly different note, do you know if there is going to be an alternative to Grantland? I loved that site.
- Status
Similar threads
