Consider a simpler case: " If I knew the answer, I would tell you." This is a conditional statement in the PRESENT where the condition is contrary to fact. (I don't know, so I can't tell you.) Now change it to the to refer to the PAST: "If I had known the answer, I would have told you." (I didn't know, so I couldn't tell you.) In general, for the past we use would (or could) have + past participle instead of would (or could)+infinitive Your examples ares similar. The coach WAS fired, so we are assuming something contrary to fact: If the coach hadn't been fired yesterday, [he would have been ABLE TO STEADY] the club and [TAKE] it on to much better things next month. If the coach hadn't been fired yesterday, [IT would have been POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO STEADY] the club and [TAKE] it on to much better things next month. "Steady" and "take" are just infinitives (able/possible to steady/take), so they don't change,

You need the preposition "in" in your question above Do the words in capital letters work in the sentences? Like that. The words in capital letters have to be put in the past. You are using the conditional IF..... THEN.... HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STEADY THE CLUB. He has the ability to make it happen. Because you are suggesting a possibility in the second sentence it might be better to use the word might. :) IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO STEADY THE CLUB. He only has the possibility so the outcome is more doubtful than the first sentence. TAKE works in both sentences

Neither one of your asnwers is correct. The following would fit correctly: [he would HAVE BEEN able to...] [MIGHT HAVE taken...]