When it comes to Xavi's time at Barcelona, it can really be split down into two different factions, the #XaviBall faction and the #XaviOut faction. Which one did I belong to? Well, neither. The last time I ever wanted a manager out was Unai Emery, and it was strictly because I didn't like his style for Arsenal, a team I support. Regarding Barcelona, however, the last coach I wanted out was Ernesto Valverde, and very soon after, I realized I was wrong.
Ernesto Valverde: If Only You Managed
Coaches or managers can be called good or bad based on several factors, which could be the titles they won, the results they garnered, or how long they lasted on the job. There are other factors, but I bring up those three because Valverde, on paper, did very well with those three. Of course, that time period saw heavy results as well, including Barcelona losing the UEFA Champions League heavy advantage twice against Roma and Liverpool respectively.
An outsider's perspective is really the only reason I wanted Valverde out, though. A simple skim over his time in Barcelona could show us why, on the outside, yes, Valverde needed to go out. So, let's go through that.
Under Valverde, you can highlight a few players as the reason behind the club's success in winning league titles among other small titles. The club had a full dependence on individual brilliance, in order from occasional to most consistent individual brilliance we say Pique, Rakitic, Suarez, Busquets, Jordi Alba, Ter Stegen, and Superman himself, Lionel Messi.
Lionel Messi's brilliance turned the chaotic, lack of tactics in Barcelona into results. It's important that he didn't turn it into order, but just found ways to get results through that chaos. The reason I wanted Valverde out is specifically that the attacking shape fully depended on Messi's individual performance and defensively, the formation can really be described as 4-4-0 because neither Messi nor Suarez would contribute defensively.
So, I wanted Valverde out simply because I thought this was happening with Valverde's approval. But, as it later came out in countless books and articles, Valverde didn't approve, reject, or really have much input into Barcelona's shape. This makes all the accomplishments not attributed to Valverde, neither do the failures, something Messi himself confirmed and took responsibility for, by the way.
So, what's left is Valvrde's length of time with the club, 3 years, a respectable number. However, we found out that the only reason he lasted that long is that he submitted to the sacred cows of the club, namely Busquets, Alba, Suarez, Pique, and of course, Superman himself, Lionel Messi. As implied by the title of this article, Valverde definitely wasn't the manager of the club as none of the deals were approved by him, but he wasn't even the coach.
So, yeah, I absolve Valverde from responsibility. Before joining Barcelona, Valverde showed clearly that if he was in control, he wouldn't let such a first-leg advantage similar to Barca's 3-0 against Liverpool go unrewarded as he previously managed to hold it against Barcelona themselves in the Super Cup while he was managing Bilbao.
Now, you might object to my statement and say that Valverde should have been more involved and I would say that is not possible as evidenced by the coach that came afterwards.
Quique Setién: If Only You Didn't Manage
Opposite to Valverde, Setién actually wanted to be more involved, the result of his attempt was Messi shouting at him for playing for not playing his "Best eleven" because he played Junior Firpo over the obviously declining Jordi Alba. Setién was essentially exiled from the club two months into the job. And when you play a ruthless Bayern Munich without a manager who could counter Bayern's attack, you get thrashed 8-2.
The reason Setién was sacked tells you the reason Valverde just aimed to please the locker room. Valverde was loved by the locker room and its biggest players, hence he added titles to his resume, but Setién couldn't. This leads us to the next coach at Barcelona.
Ronald Koeman
Honestly, I debated whether to give Koeman his own segment as it can easily be summed by the fact that he was doing the same thing Setién was doing, but it was different for two simple reasons which extended his stay. The first reason is that he was a Barcelona legend hence he had some backing in the club, coupled with a strong Dutch media backing him, but also because Barcelona didn't have the money to sack him really.
So, Setién was just a trial, a controllable coach by Barcelona's club management. Koeman was about the same, but Barcelona didn't have the luxury to sack him. This prompts the title and really the conclusion of this part of the series.
Xavi Is The First Barcelona Manager Since Luis Enrique
Does this mean that Valverde is not a good coach or manager? No, he is. However, he simply didn't try to be one at Barcelona. Does this mean that Setién is not a good coach or manager? No, but maybe he tried too hard to be one at Barcelona. Does this mean that Koeman is not a good coach or manager? Again, no. But, maybe he was too confrontational.
Obviously, none of what I am saying about those coaches is necessarily a bad thing as far as their traits are concerned. Their traits are just fine as evidenced by the fact that none of them had a problem landing jobs after Barcelona which is more than I can say about past UEFA Champions League winners like Flick and Zidane. However, those three didn't get to do their jobs as they simply weren't the men to manage a group of accomplished players with too much control and no club management to size down their egos and power.
This makes Xavi a great pick actually despite my problem with him, which I talked about before and will talk about further in the next part of this series. But, Xavi was a great pick because he does have a certain level of tactical knowledge, history with the club, a legendary status, and finally he was close to the locker room.
This meant a more swift process of players leaving the club with respect, no player objected like Rakitic did when he said "Don't treat me like a sack of potatoes", Pique left, Alba left, Busquets left, and many more, and they did with respect. Xavi managed to trim a lot of the fat in the club that would have obstructed any attempts to move forward.
In Conclusion
In the intricate tapestry of managerial transitions at Barcelona, the era spanning from Valverde to Koeman is marked by a spectrum of approaches, each with its own implications for the club's dynamics and performance. Valverde's tenure, while statistically impressive, was characterized by a perceived lack of tactical influence, seemingly yielding to the established hierarchy within the team. Setién, on the other hand, attempted to assert his authority but found himself at odds with key players and ultimately unable to enact his vision. Koeman, a Barcelona legend, faced similar challenges, compounded by financial constraints within the club.
However, amidst this managerial flux, the impending arrival of Xavi heralds a potential turning point. His blend of tactical acumen, deep-rooted connection to the club, and rapport with the players signifies a departure from the status quo. Under his stewardship, the club may finally find a harmonious balance between tradition and innovation.
The transition to Xavi represents more than just a change in leadership; it embodies a shift towards a more cohesive and forward-thinking approach. By fostering a culture of mutual respect and accountability, Xavi has already begun to instil a sense of renewal within the team, evident in the dignified exits of seasoned players.
As Barcelona looked towards the future, Xavi emerged as a beacon of hope, offering both continuity and evolution. His tenure held the promise of not only reclaiming past glory but also charting a new course towards sustained success. In the complex landscape of football management, Xavi stood poised to guide Barcelona into a new era, where the legacy of #XaviBall transcended factional divides to unite the club under a shared vision of excellence.
However, with Xavi's accomplishment comes a very painful critique of his previous three predecessors had the luxury of not facing, tactics. And that's tactics, but more on that in the next part.