How the mighty have plummeted uncontrollably

He led Swedish club Gothenburg (I cant do umlauts, so I'm spelling it the English way) to the Swedish treble in 1982; league, league cup and UEFA Cup. He then went to Portuguese club Benfica and won the league, the cup and finished second in the UEFA Cup. After a stint with Roma (where they won the Coppa Italia) he went back to Benfica, to win another league title and finishing second in the European Cup. He then went back to Italy to lead Sampdoria to a Coppa Italia, then won a crapload with Lazio. In 2002, he got the big job: England manager. He managed a stellar record in getting England to major championships, but could never quite pull of big-game wins. He left England in 2006, and took charge of Manchester City in 2007... that ended abruptly (mentioned in this article) . He followed that up with a stint with the Mexican national team... who politely asked him to piss off after one year at the helm. But, our favourite trooper of a Swedish manager, Sven-Goran Eriksson has landed on his feet. Oh yes, he has taken over as director of football at powerhouse club... Nottingham County.

If you're scratching your head trying to work out who Notts County are, don't be discouraged, you're not alone. Eriksson's name is probably the only one on their staff list you're likely to know. But, thanks to a takeover by a Middle Eastern conglomerate (they're taking over everything these days, aren't they? Those Middle Eastern conglomerates!) they can afford a big hitter like Sven. At any rate, Notts County were relegated last season from the First Division (one below the Championship, two below the Premier League) to the Second Division, where they will face stiff competition from Accrington Stanley, Dagenham & Redbridge, Grimsby Town, Port Vale and Rotherham United.

Notts County, whose stadium (Meadow Lane) boasts a mighty capacity of 20,300 (though most of those seats are typically empty), claim to be the oldest team in England, established in 1862... EIGHT years older than Maidenhead United FC! Damn, I thought the oldest team in the country was here. Ah well.

At any rate, Sven's really come a long way from England, hasn't he? At least the supporters of Notts County can count on their team never being picked by ability, but by fame and name. Oh wait... alright maybe Notts' teams will be picked by ability, unless you've heard of, well, any of these guys.

Oh. And Sven plans on taking them to the Premiership. I'm really excited to see how this one goes. Good thing Sven took his trusty right hand man Tord Grip with him as a "General Adviser", maybe he'll be able to keep a grip on reality for his five-year stint at the lowest point of his career before deciding to find a respectable Championship club to align himself to, or just deciding to call it quits altogether.

You've got a lot to ponder there, Sven.

Keano takes the pundits over his knee

The other Keano, the one who's not playing anymore.

Roy Keane was invited onto ITV a little while ago to act as the colour guy for Celtic v Man U, but he responded by saying he'd rather be at the dentist*.

The angriest of the angry Irishmen has a poor history with television. It was an appearance on MUTV's (Manchested United's special channel, much like Leafs TV or one of those) which ended his 12 year stay at United. He has often vocally criticized the way matches are called, and has more than once admitted to turning the TV to mute when watching football.

All this reminds me of one of my biggest gripes when watching matches - commentators who can't decide who they're broadcasting to. I understand it's difficult to toe the line between good analysis and teaching analysis, but they need to figure it out.

It's especially bad in Canada, where we're subjected to some of the worst football analysis in the world. Honestly, I've heard more insightful comments watching football in India than the crap on Fox Sports World Canada, The Score, TSN or Sportsnet.

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy that I can finally watch football on TV rather than counting on internet streaming, but I'm finding myself switching the channel at halftime and watching the games on mute with music playing so that I'm not subjected to the stream of shite pouring from the speakers.

The halftime analysis from supposed experts is probably my biggest problem. I respect Craig Forrest as much as the next guy, but he's out there without a raft at halftime. Except for that English fella (apologies, his name escapes me at the moment) who did EURO, Gerry Dobson and his crew are the most useless providers of analysis and football news ever. It's painful to listen to them try to break down a half and set us up for the second half. The story is the same on the Score, when I'm watching the Footy Show or when they have live broadcasts.

Again, I'm more than happy that we're finally getting matches here, and it's absolutely a step in the right direction. But football is easily, along with hockey, the most popular sport among youth in this country. Kids understand what's going on and, for the most part, their parents do too. We can start to step into the next level of match analysis, people typically aren't learning the game anymore. People know it, people know good football, and the halftime analysis has no business explaining the offside rule or what constitutes a penalty. Discussing and arguing whether something is a penalty is fine, explaining the rule is dumb and unnecessary.

If anything, the poor quality of football analysis in this country is turning people off watching it, it's irritating to know the game and have to listen to that drivel. Craig Forrest and the other guy who's name I can't remember seem to actively try to up the level**, but they're constantly kicked down by their co-hosts, and the Footy Show is dominated by people who shouldn't be analyzing football. Honestly, that fella who looks like a fridge has never, in any of the episodes I've watched, said a helpful or analytical comment. He has a habit of summing up what happened, and pretending that he's analyzing.

Any road, let this article act as a public service announcement for channels who broadcast football: we understand what's happening, you seem to understand as well, please bring your programs up to our standards. Thank you.

-----------
* I know dentists, I am friends with dentists, but in the chair you guys are bastards.
** Although, Craig, really, we understand you played in the Premier league. Your anecdotes are nice, but you don't have to remind us every week that you played.

Shows What I Know...

Not so long ago, in this very space, I predicted a Dodgers-Red Sox final. Didn't happen. But seriously...props to anyone who predicted that either of these teams would be in the World Series at any time during the season.

So who should win this World Series?

Pitching should favor the Rays. They have 3 Starting pitchers who did really well in the regular season (Shields, Kazmir and Garza), plus a bullpen that has overachieved. David Price is the X-Factor here, as he could solidify his hombre status after his performance in Game 7 with some clutch performances in the World Series.

The Phillies have 45-year old Jamie Moyer and 24-year old NLCS MVP Cole Hamels...but not much else. The bullpen has just been outstanding, especially Brad Lidge, and has not allowed a team to come back from 7 down in the last 3 innings to win a game this post-season.

Offensively, the teams were fairly even through the regular season. Both have their high-points (Utley-Howard-Burrell for the Phils and Pena-Longoria for the Rays), and no real sinkhole (besides the pitchers' spot for the Phils). Matt Stairs should DH a bit for the Phils when they go into Tampa. The real breakpoint has been the post-season, where Bossman Junior (but actually) Upton has turned it on and has hit an absurd 7 HRs in 11 games, just 1 short of the record for a single post-season, held in part by Barry Bonds. I'd have to give the advantage to the hot team, the Rays.

Experience-wise, these teams are even in that neither have much. Although it would be funny to see Albert Pujols throwing out the first pitch in T-Bay and then pointing menacingly out to Brad Lidge, to remind him of the '05 NLCS home run that has still not come down.

The Phils should have a bit of a homefield advantage, in that their fans have been on the wagon for more than 6 weeks. Plus, as my house-mate pointed out, Tropicana Field may be the ugliest stadium to ever host a WS game.

And the most important of all deciding factors: number of Ex-Jays! The Rays boast Gabe Gross, Eric "the Dude" Hinske and Trever Miller. The Phils have Jayson Werth, Matt Stairs and Scott Eyre. So they both have a fringe-starting RF, a platoon pinch hitter and an extra bullpen arm. Have to give the advantage to the Phils for the presence of good Canadian "kid" Matt Stairs.

Besides, Philly fans really need this. They are one of the most depressed sports fan bases out there. The last pitch the Phils threw in the World Series was knocked for 3-run HR by Joe Carter back in '93. The Eagles got to the Super Bowl only to see Donovan McNabb hyperventilate on the final drive. The Flyers were crushed by the Red Wings back in '97 and had to go through that awkward, painful Lindros-Clarke divorce. The 76ers got the distinct pleasure of wasting some of the prime of one of our generations premiere competitors, Allen Iverson.

Then again, I'm looking at a crappy Leafs team, a worse Argos team, a Jays team that has just been passed and lapped by the Rays and a Raptors team that is looking up at the Celtics...I need a drink. At least I got the Bills and the Golden Gaels to hang my hat on.

As much as I hate to say it, Rays in 6 (not at all trying to reverse curse them...).

Wanted: Coach. Expected Length of Employment: Not Bloody Long.

I was reading the Citizen this morning when I came across an article about Ron Wilson becoming the new coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs, when I came across a line which really made me think. "If Wilson accepts the offer, he would become the 27th coach in the history of the franchise and the third in the past four years." Third coach in four years?? Good Lord.

The lifespan of coaches is becoming increasingly shorter, as more money is pumped into teams and expectations become absurdly high. What many owners, trustees and GMs forget is that only one team can win. In any sport.

Let's look across my two favourite leagues, the NHL and the Premier League, at the treatment of coaches.

1. Thaksin Shinawatra, ousted former leader of Thailand, owner of Manchester City FC and grade-A jackass fired former England coach Sven-Goran Eriksson after just one year. In this year, Eriksson took a team in shambles, spent some money, and achieved the goal he set with Shinawatra at the start of the year of finishing in the top-10 (9th). This is better than anyone could have expected from Manchester City, but the first half of the season was too good, and expectations were (unilaterally) altered to be too high, so when City slid in the second half of the season, Thaksin decided Eriksson had to go.

2. Avram Grant was brought in at the start of the year to replace manager extrodinaire José Mourinho. Mourinho had, in three seasons, led Chelsea to two Premier League titles, two Carling Cups and one FA Cup (and a partridge in a pear tree). When Grant took over, he was met with indifference and opposition from Chelsea's supporters and players alike. But even with all the crap flying around him, Grant led Chelsea to a Carling Cup final, Champion's League final, and second place in the Premier League. It is impossible to qualify this as a failed season (unless you're a Russian with too much time and money, or a Portuguese manager who has it out for his old team). For this "failure" of a season, Grant was booted out of Chelsea. Why?

3. Martin Jol from my club Tottenham. Though I have to say, now I'm pleased about Ramos being at the helm, the firing of Martin Jol was unwarranted and the management of the side set him up to fail. The season started shakily, after the players brought in from summer spending failed to make an impact. This was cited as one of the reasons Jol was given the boot - but most of these signings were made by Director of Football (and grade-B jackass) Damian Comolli. In fact, Jol's choices for signings were successes, most notably Berbatov and Bale. During the summer before the season had started - after two seasons in which Spurs finished 5th, and finishing 9th in his first year after being unexpectedly thrust into the position of manager after a mere 13 matches - Jol's job was in question, with sources citing Juande Ramos as a replacement. Again, this is before the 2007/08 season had began, after 3 incredibly successful seasons!!! And so, only about a month into the season, on October 25, 2007, Martin Jol was booted during a UEFA Cup match. How did he find out? The crowd's singing, followed by a text message from a family member. Shame.

4. John Tortorella, Jack Adams and Stanley Cup winner in 2004 was fired about a week ago. Let's look at his career in Tampa. In his first year, (2001/02) the Lightning finished 3rd in Southeast, and the missed playoffs by quite a bit. Of course, only one member of the Southeast actually made the playoffs that year. In his next season, the Lightning topped the Southeast, and were bumped out of the playoffs in the second round. After that, they finished first in the Southeast and won the Cup. This was followed up by two years of finishing 2nd in the Southeast and going out of the playoffs in the first, and finally, this year, where they missed the playoffs altogether, for only the second time in Tortorella's six years at the helm of the team. What warranted firing there? I'd peg that as a pretty successful run for a team like Tampa Bay.

These are the only coaches I'm going to go into much detail with, but numerous coaches across the board lost their job this year for perceived "unsuccessfulness". But you have to ask yourself, what are the expectations, and what is possible? Does Abramovich expect to win everything, always? Because that's an unacceptable expectation, and Grant had a season in which Chelsea finished runners up for 3 trophies when he didn't expect to be manager, I'd say he overperformed by quite a margin! There was absolutely no reason for Eriksson to lose his job, hell, he was in Manchester for such a short period that he'd been living in a hotel the whole time (the article's somewhere in the BBC, I'm too lazy to find it)! The firing of Jol was absolutely ridiculous, when you start a season with your job in question after 3 successful seasons, you can't be expected to perform at full capacity.

The problem becomes expectations. Owners nowadays want to win. Now. The reality of sport is that it's a building process. To take a team and make them win immediately is silly. Coaches need time to build an understanding of the team, the team needs time to understand the workings of the coach. This process is in no way immediate, and it is irresponsible to assume it will be. If we look at that line that started this whole train of thought: "If Wilson accepts the offer, he would become the 27th coach in the history of the franchise and the third in the past four years." We'll assume they mean the history of the franchise starting at the NHL's inception, which means: since 1917, in 91 years, Toronto has had 27 coaches and only 13 Stanley Cups to show for it. 13!!!. If you look back, the average coach of the Leafs has had about 3 years at the helm. Their most successful run was 4 cups between '61 and '67. All these were won under Punch Imlach, who was coach between 1959-1967. It took him 2 years to get his team together, then reaped the benefits and led the Leafs to an outstanding decade of winningness. They haven't won since, and the average coach life has been about 2 years. TWO! How can you build up an unsuccessful and confidence-lacking team in two years?

Now, obviously, there are some coaches who are just not suited to a team, or who shouldn't have been put in charge in the first place (*ahem* Steve McLaren in England *ahem*). But more often than not, it's a case of not having time to get settled with a team, and too much expectation from the powers that be.

Manchester United has had Sir Alex Ferguson at the helm since 1986, and it's working out pretty well for them. A bit of a shaky start, his first cups came in 1992/1993 and, after years finishing outside the top 10, they finished second. There's been no looking back since. Bar a few years, Manchester United is arguably the most consistently successful side in English football, and that comes back to a consistent manager and style. The same could be argued for Arsenal under Arsene Wenger, who became manager of Arsenal in 1996. After 3 years of relative mediocrity, Arsenal has (unfortunately) become one of the most feared sides in the Premier League which can, again, be traced back to a consistent manager.

The revolving door for coaches is not the answer for mid-league or unsuccessful teams. What they need is a consistent coach who has time and opportunity to build a team for an eventual climb. Like I say, only one team can win at any given time, and when taking on the management of a team in trouble, only so much can be expected of coaches.

Or, I guess you could hire some guy from Portugal, give him a transfer budget amounting to the combined GDP of the Pacific Islands and let him go nuts. Wait...that wouldn't work in the new NHL. The salary cap strikes again!!!

A list of 2007/2008 coaching changes in the NHL can be found here