Chelsea dismissed Maresca, and now Amorim departs United. These are two clubs whose owners seem to be sacking managers without giving them their full backing.
Today, we discuss why certain owners can sometimes be a hindrance to a football club’s success.
Successful clubs are when clubs back their managers by providing them a squad that fits their system.
However, it seems that one club is obsessed with developing young players to sell them for pure profit. While the other looks totally inept at running a successful club.
Were the managers actually being backed with transfers?
Amorim’s stubbornness with his 3-4-3 system was a reason for his departure from the club, along with a poor win rate. However, he also wanted more authority over the team, like a manager, not a coach.
According to him, more experience was needed to help the team move forward.
This is also what Maresca had requested from Chelsea, especially at centre back.
Maresca wanted an experienced centre back.
Amorim specifically asked for a central defensive midfielder and a wing back.
The CDM and wing-backs are the most essential positions in a 3-4-3 system. It requires two Central Midfielders, who can quickly transition from defence into attack.
United instead brought Matheus Cunha, Brian Mbuemo, and Benjamin Sesko to boost the forward line.
They also brought in a young goalkeeper, Senne Lammens, who you could argue has been one of their better players.
Chelsea also bolstered their forward line and midfield, but Maresca needed higher-quality, more experienced centre-back options.
United and Chelsea are only three points behind fourth-placed Liverpool.
It wasn’t like the two ex-bosses had the team in a terrible place.
Yes, the performances haven’t been up to standard, but it wasn’t like both teams had thrown in the towel for the Manager.
Clear plan at Chelsea and Strasbourg, but unsustainable
BlueCo, which owns Chelsea and RC Strasbourg, are interested in developing young players and selling them for pure profit.
Though it has brought the Blues some success, winning the UEFA Conference League and the Club World Cup, many will argue that it’s not sustainable.
What’s more baffling about this project is that the Managers are forced to develop young players by giving them game time to increase their market value.
This is not a sustainable process.
Managers are not robots; they have their own morale and will not like being dictated to about the system they play and the players they get.
There is no doubt that Liam Rosenior and Amorim’s successor will be excited to manage these two giants of a football club, but how long will it be before their bubble bursts?
Although INEOS has control of the football side at United, there is still no clear plan for where they want to take the team.
Whereas BlueCo’s trust in the process with under-23s is just ridiculous
Whatever happens to both these clubs in the future is a matter for debate, but one thing is for sure: this is an excellent example of why Owners can be a hindrance to a football club’s future.