Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Coaches vs. Tacticians / Leagues vs. Cup Tournaments

  1. #1
    Fapuccino's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Apr 12
    Posts
    12,075
    Thanked
    9,265 times
    Fav. Player
    Schelotto

    Brazil

    Coaches vs. Tacticians / Leagues vs. Cup Tournaments

    Watching football all these years to me it's become apparent there's 2 types of managers: a coach and a tactician. To win a league you need a good coach, to win a cup you need a tactician.Some examples of good coaches: Klopp, Conte, Guardiola, Wenger, Mancini(dont shoot me). Some examples of good tacticians: Mou, Benitez (before Napoli), Di Matteo, Allegri(dont shoot me).


    This is not to say one manager cannot fulfill both. Every manager HAS TO fulfill both. Hold on I gotta take a shit, brb... fuck that took a while. Anyhow this I think is the main description of each role

    Coach:

    A coach focuses on his OWN team. Most coaches have their own philosophy about how the team should play. Examples that come to mind are Klopp, Conte, Guardiola, Simeone, etc...

    They focus mostly on team chemistry, on how the team should work together as a unit, etc....

    Tactician:

    A tactician focus on the OTHER team. They don't have some grand philosophy about the game should be played. They usually have 1 or 2 standard mainstream formations, and choose their lineups mainly based on how the other team plays.

    If the other team has fast forwards, they play a low def. line. If the other team has slow tall forwards, they play a high line.

    League Vs. Cup:

    Based on these attributes its easy to see why a coach would benefit more over longer amount of games, and why tacticians benefit more in single/double legged ties in cup tournaments.

    Having a good style of play and a playing philosophy benefits the team more in the long term, but being able to figure out your opponent's weaknesses, and setting your team to exploit them, benefits you more in cup tournaments.

    That is the reason why coaches like Mancini/Conte, whose team plays nice football, struggle in cup tournaments. Their inability to understand the opponent's weaknesses, and setting your team to exploit them accordingly, is hindered by their inability to adapt to different settings.

    Final Word:

    Again as I mentioned before every manager has to fill both the role of a coach and the role of a tactician.

    It's just some are more adept to one role than the other.

  2. Thanks (1): Vintage

  3. #2
    uzhang's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 May 12
    Posts
    661
    Thanked
    388 times
    Fav. Player
    Ronaldo
    Old name
    Bohir

    Indonesia

    Very nice


    Forza Internazionale Milano FC

  4. #3
    MakeInterGreatAgain! JJM's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Aug 07
    Posts
    31,668
    Thanked
    37,748 times
    Fav. Player
    Spalletti!
    Old name
    icardiscores

    Yugoslavia

    91 Forum Supporter Most Pessimistic Member
    Mou won the triplete so what category is he?! GOD of coaches?!

  5. #4
    Eu sempre venço's Avatar
    Join Date
    29 Mar 14
    Posts
    240
    Thanked
    216 times

    Brazil

    Quote Originally Posted by Fapuccino View Post
    Watching football all these years to me it's become apparent there's 2 types of managers: a coach and a tactician. To win a league you need a good coach, to win a cup you need a tactician.Some examples of good coaches: Klopp, Conte, Guardiola, Wenger, Mancini(dont shoot me). Some examples of good tacticians: Mou, Benitez (before Napoli), Di Matteo, Allegri(dont shoot me).


    This is not to say one manager cannot fulfill both. Every manager HAS TO fulfill both. Hold on I gotta take a shit, brb... fuck that took a while. Anyhow this I think is the main description of each role

    Coach:

    A coach focuses on his OWN team. Most coaches have their own philosophy about how the team should play. Examples that come to mind are Klopp, Conte, Guardiola, Simeone, etc...

    They focus mostly on team chemistry, on how the team should work together as a unit, etc....

    Tactician:

    A tactician focus on the OTHER team. They don't have some grand philosophy about the game should be played. They usually have 1 or 2 standard mainstream formations, and choose their lineups mainly based on how the other team plays.

    If the other team has fast forwards, they play a low def. line. If the other team has slow tall forwards, they play a high line.

    League Vs. Cup:

    Based on these attributes its easy to see why a coach would benefit more over longer amount of games, and why tacticians benefit more in single/double legged ties in cup tournaments.

    Having a good style of play and a playing philosophy benefits the team more in the long term, but being able to figure out your opponent's weaknesses, and setting your team to exploit them, benefits you more in cup tournaments.

    That is the reason why coaches like Mancini/Conte, whose team plays nice football, struggle in cup tournaments. Their inability to understand the opponent's weaknesses, and setting your team to exploit them accordingly, is hindered by their inability to adapt to different settings.

    Final Word:

    Again as I mentioned before every manager has to fill both the role of a coach and the role of a tactician.

    It's just some are more adept to one role than the other.

    you forgot one type: the stramaccioni. he writes random numbers of pieces of paper like "3", "5", etc., throws them into the air and determines his formation for the next match by the order how they touched down on the floor.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •