Cesc Fàbregas, coach of Como 1907, recently said something relevant on this subject and on competitive standards: “If the Ballon d’Or [Ousmane Dembélé] can press the whole pitch, everyone can do it.”
As leagues approach their final stages, it is common to hear words like luck or misfortune used to explain outcomes. However, in long competitions between similarly matched teams, the usual pattern is that the side that has done more to deserve success prevails. Final standings tend to reflect the work accumulated throughout the season.
It is increasingly difficult to understand how some clubs still believe that changing a coach one or two matches from the end can produce “miracles”. Except in very specific circumstances, these decisions have a very low probability of success. They are often based on the idea that everything was done correctly except the coaching choice—ignoring that recruitment and dismissal processes reflect the identity and maturity of an organisation.
These last-minute changes are generally acts of desperation. They also reveal repeated structural mistakes, especially in how clubs select and evaluate coaches. The way such decisions are made says a great deal about internal organisation and leadership maturity.
Team performance should not be assessed only through short-term results, but through a broader lens that includes structure, recruitment, leadership, and internal alignment. Football is not a spreadsheet where budget automatically determines league position.
When a higher-spending team consistently finishes behind others with fewer resources, even after multiple coaching changes, it becomes clear that the problem is not limited to the dugout.
So-called “miracles” in sport, when they do happen, are rarely accidental. They are usually the result of consistent work, solid structure, and well-defined processes—often invisible to those who only see the final result.
0 Comentários