Read on Twitter
Here’s my take on why perfecting the process over grinding results is a more rationally sound approach:
Let’s first address that there are no absolutes in approaches to football.
....
Let’s first address that there are no absolutes in approaches to football.
....
It’s a spectrum with two ends, one which doesn’t care about the means but only the results and the other aims to perfect the process and increase the odds of winning, acknowledging the inherent uncertainties of the game. Most managers fall somewhere in between this spectrum.
I’ll talk about the extreme scenarios, considering the ideal cases of both approaches.
- Perfecting the process, means that there is an existent process in the first place! The main advantage of having a process is that it can be tweaked to adapt, change, fix issues, in other words, this is a structural approach to football.
The main feature of structure is that it allows control over the team’s dynamics.
- On the contrary, disregarding the means would imply that there’s no proper structure in place, it’s an emotional approach with drive as the key motivator. So ideally, you’re winning becuase of your drive and motivation, brute forcing your way through to victory.
- The results only approach doesn’t offer you a structure (keep in mind I’m talking about the ideas in themselves and hence talking about ideal scenarios) which means there’s no control!
- One feeds on emotion, instinct, while the other looks for patterns, structure. It’s clear which ideology is the more rational approach.
I know this is rather controversial, and I don’t mean to call an approach superior, because like I said, there are no absolutes with approaches in reality. I’m talking about the ideas in themselves and their roots.
