|
Post by tony1234 on Jan 3, 2019 16:25:08 GMT
This is where people get confused. He's a number cruncher, he deals with the contracts, the terms etc. He may block a signing because he thinks it's not good value for the club and if he feels the numbers don't add up which is fair enough as he's there to make sure the club is stable financially. The recruitment is done between the manager and Cartwright with the manager having the final say. So the numbers added up for Imbula, Wimmer, Jese, et al. So who's responsible for the complete abortion, they all turned out to be, and isn't Scholes responsible for sacking said person. Sorry, I forgot, it's all the managers fault and he sacked them! Agree completely - a Financial Manager or Analyst crunches the numbers and plots the trends. A CFO is a Board member who has the particular responsibility with overseeing the value and ROI of the club's investments. He either has done this - and failed like a loon - or isn't competent to do this so isn't up to being a CFO at a football club. He should be ensuring all due diligence is done to ensure that the investments are sound. Clearly, they weren't - investment due diligence is the process for which he is ultimately responsible.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 16:33:12 GMT
Whose fault is it then? Are we blaming the managers for players they don't want not turning into world beaters? And who at the club employs these wonderful scouts? Could it be Scholes? Which players don't they want?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jan 3, 2019 16:46:48 GMT
Imbula, Jese, Wimmer, Sobhi, Tymon, N'diaye, Wollscheid just a few. Is there any evidence they were manager's choices yet cost a lot and were sold for less
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jan 3, 2019 16:56:06 GMT
Imbula, Jese, Wimmer, Sobhi, Tymon, N'diaye, Wollscheid just a few. Is there any evidence they were manager's choices yet cost a lot and were sold for less Is there any evidence they weren't?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 16:57:16 GMT
Imbula, Jese, Wimmer, Sobhi, Tymon, N'diaye, Wollscheid just a few. Is there any evidence they were manager's choices yet cost a lot and were sold for less Imbula, Jese, Wimmer and Wollscheid were all about as Hughesian signings as you can get. Jese - 'name' flair player from Spain fallen on hard times in need of a career resurrection. Wollscheid - Bundesliga signing - a favourite shopping jaunt of Hughes dating back to his Blackburn days. Wimmer - combines both of the above. Pre-Spurs Bundesliga experience but a well thought-of 'name' seeking regular football. Imbula - tipped for huge things after impressing for Marseilles, big money move went wrong. Another Euo dogs-home job. N'Diaye was reportedly in the works before Hughes was sacked. Sobhi was a Cartwright job and I wouldn't be surprised if Tymon was, but again, the manager has power of veto. Is it not a bit weird that these are the polar opposites to the type of signings we made in the summer, with a new, more pragmatic manager at the helm, if the same person is dictating who we sign?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jan 3, 2019 17:02:36 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 17:06:29 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto? No he wasn't and almost certainly didn't sign him. Presumably he did have power of veto as the manager does. I doubt Pulis was happy at the change of structure, but then his own mistakes in the market were what led to it in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jan 3, 2019 17:08:32 GMT
Thinking of the number of times we've been used by players and the number of big money Hughes (if they were) signings failed why did we continue with the N'diaye signing if he was a Hughes choice and he'd been sacked?
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Jan 3, 2019 17:13:45 GMT
Pulis clearly wasn't happy working with Cartwright who essentially took over from Rudge who he'd always got on with.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 17:17:30 GMT
Thinking of the number of times we've been used by players and the number of big money Hughes (if they were) signings failed why did we continue with the N'diaye signing if he was a Hughes choice and he'd been sacked? Because we were a good chunk of the way through the window and needed reinforcements desperately for the impending relegation battle?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jan 3, 2019 17:20:31 GMT
That was a good decision by our CEO
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 17:25:42 GMT
That was a good decision by our CEO He's not prone to making good decisions, but given N'Diaye was one of our few decent performers in the time he was here, it was hardly a bad one was it?
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Jan 3, 2019 17:33:26 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto? Excellent question. The beginning of this decline was the end of that transfer window.
|
|
|
Post by smatty88 on Jan 3, 2019 17:36:34 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto? Excellent question. The beginning of this decline was the end of that transfer window. A decline that saw us go on to finish in our highest PL position 3 years in a row?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jan 3, 2019 17:45:43 GMT
As I understand it the CEO and Cartwright both also have power of veto so why keep funding Mark Hughes poor signings allowing him to break our transfer record twice. If Cartwright was good at his job surely he would say no
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 18:37:21 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto? Excellent question. The beginning of this decline was the end of that transfer window. No it wasn’t.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 18:38:12 GMT
As I understand it the CEO and Cartwright both also have power of veto so why keep funding Mark Hughes poor signings allowing him to break our transfer record twice. If Cartwright was good at his job surely he would say no Indeed. The transfer team either succeeds as one or fails as one.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 3, 2019 18:47:57 GMT
Does Scholes have any say in terms of who we recruit, or is he just the numbers man? This is where people get confused. He's a number cruncher, he deals with the contracts, the terms etc. He may block a signing because he thinks it's not good value for the club and if he feels the numbers don't add up which is fair enough as he's there to make sure the club is stable financially. The recruitment is done between the manager and Cartwright with the manager having the final say. Isn't that the problem in a nutshell? When he was merely the bean counter, making sure we didn't over extend ourselves as a club, all was well in the stoke city. We were the very example of the well run provincial club with local owners. When he took on a broader role and actually started to have an influence in transfers, things rapidly turned to shit at the club and relationships turned sour with the atmosphere at the club changing as a result. A new broom is needed and all the main protagonists in our downfall aside from the owners need to be sacked.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 3, 2019 18:52:09 GMT
Excellent question. The beginning of this decline was the end of that transfer window. No it wasn’t. Arguably it was. It was the moment in time Scholes went from being the accountant to actually having an influence in transfer dealings. It pissed pulis off immensely and there was probably more to the earlier collapse of the ba and huddlestone transfers than met the eye at the time. People mentioned it but such was the harmony at the club, such commentary was ovetlooked/ignored.
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Jan 3, 2019 18:55:11 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto? Shea & Ramadan were both I suppose commercial signings, Shea & Ramadan were both the poster boys in their native countries/continents and with this put Stoke City’s name and shirts on the map you only had to look at Ramadan’s followers on the various media platforms to understand the commercial opportunities if they had succeeded at being footballers.
|
|
|
Post by potterenfrance on Jan 3, 2019 19:08:48 GMT
But sit go to sit lol
|
|
|
Post by potterenfrance on Jan 3, 2019 19:09:10 GMT
Buy shot go to shit lol
|
|
|
Post by potterenfrance on Jan 3, 2019 19:09:24 GMT
Shit lol
|
|
|
Post by onefatcopper on Jan 3, 2019 19:18:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 19:18:48 GMT
Arguably it was. It was the moment in time Scholes went from being the accountant to actually having an influence in transfer dealings. It pissed pulis off immensely and there was probably more to the earlier collapse of the ba and huddlestone transfers than met the eye at the time. People mentioned it but such was the harmony at the club, such commentary was ovetlooked/ignored. Pulis was already cocking things up then. He’d lost his touch in the transfer market and results and performances had declined dramatically a good 12 months before then. His summer business after the cup final was where it started to go wrong for him. We had 2.5 cracking seasons under Hughes but not being able to replace Nzonzi was the beginning of the end for him.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Jan 3, 2019 19:23:36 GMT
N'diaye was a good signing until he decided to sulk and refuse to cooperate during close season to force a loan back to Turkey so we wrote off the 8 million or what ever it was. Why didn't we insist he honoured his contract or stop his wages?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 19:25:41 GMT
N'diaye was a good signing until he decided to sulk and refuse to cooperate during close season to force a loan back to Turkey so we wrote off the 8 million or what ever it was. Why didn't we insist he honoured his contract or stop his wages? He was still training wasn’t he, however badly, so I don’t think we were in a position to stop his wages.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 3, 2019 19:25:51 GMT
Arguably it was. It was the moment in time Scholes went from being the accountant to actually having an influence in transfer dealings. It pissed pulis off immensely and there was probably more to the earlier collapse of the ba and huddlestone transfers than met the eye at the time. People mentioned it but such was the harmony at the club, such commentary was ovetlooked/ignored. Pulis was already cocking things up then. He’d lost his touch in the transfer market and results and performances had declined dramatically a good 12 months before then. His summer business after the cup final was where it started to go wrong for him. We had 2.5 cracking seasons under Hughes but not being able to replace Nzonzi was the beginning of the end for him. Pulis signed nzonzi and got huddlestone and ba in their stoke kit only months before so whilst it was ok to give pulis the criticism at that time maybe, just maybe, the angst at pulis should have been directed elsewhere from the outset.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 3, 2019 19:27:53 GMT
Was Brek Shea a typical Pulis signing? Did he not have power of veto? Shea & Ramadan were both I suppose commercial signings, Shea & Ramadan were both the poster boys in their native countries/continents and with this put Stoke City’s name and shirts on the map you only had to look at Ramadan’s followers on the various media platforms to understand the commercial opportunities if they had succeeded at being footballers. And we exploited that how exactly? We got invited to a pre season tournament in the far east and were the only club involved not to have kits on sale to the locals. The list of on and off field gaffs are practically endless and one man has been a consistent through every shambles.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Jan 3, 2019 19:33:25 GMT
Pulis was already cocking things up then. He’d lost his touch in the transfer market and results and performances had declined dramatically a good 12 months before then. His summer business after the cup final was where it started to go wrong for him. We had 2.5 cracking seasons under Hughes but not being able to replace Nzonzi was the beginning of the end for him. Pulis signed nzonzi and got huddlestone and ba in their stoke kit only months before so whilst it was ok to give pulis the criticism at that time maybe, just maybe, the angst at pulis should have been directed elsewhere from the outset. Nzonzi was the exception to the rule. Not sure Huddlestone was what we needed either. Did Pulis really want Ba? Not his style of signing at the time at all. Pulis signed about 14 players in his last 3-4 windows and of them only Crouch, Adam, Nzonzi and Cameron managed more than 20 league starts. And it took Pulis going to get the best out of all four.
|
|