|
Post by liathroid on May 1, 2021 19:04:57 GMT
Norwich their a bit like WBA up ,down , up lets see how good they are next time around Sounds a lot better than what we’ve got at the moment. They’re better run than us. They basically banked the money and went down last season with the aim of putting stronger foundations in place for the club as a whole. They’ve found some of the best players in the league for a pittance. Even if they go down again next season are we saying there’s nothing we can learn from them? its a bit late , but now I think they have seen it because they cant spend
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2021 19:09:50 GMT
*bar when we were relegated. Sack MoN Sack Scholes Sack the Millwall podcaster or whatever he was. Technical director in Head coach in New business/commercial lead in It’s what the club needs. There won’t be a better time for it with the contract situation in 2022 and the young players we have coming through. We needed a clear out when we were relegated and despite changing 2 of the 3 main positions at the club nothing has changed. The root and branch overhaul needs to happen. We need a technical director who is above the manager. Who decides how this club is going forward from top to bottom football wise. And they appoint a manager to suit that style. The model we have currently just isn’t sustainable. It’s the only way forward. The discussion of a technical director being the best way forward is an interesting one. To me, it’s not exactly as foolproof as people like to spout. If you bring in a technical director who doesn’t perform, how long do you give him? How many managers do you sack before he can no longer excuse the failures of the club on the person below them? If you sack them, then you have to sack an expensive salary and the manager, another large salary, then start again.
|
|
|
Post by tosh on May 1, 2021 19:19:51 GMT
If you’d asked Norwich fans that before Webber, Farke etc came in, do you think those names would have been in their minds already? It’s a non-argument. Norwich their a bit like WBA up ,down , up lets see how good they are next time around That doesn’t really matter. Two Championship titles and two Premier League promotions in three years is exciting and streets ahead of our current level and gives them an increasing chance of staying there..
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 1, 2021 19:21:27 GMT
If you’d asked Norwich fans that before Webber, Farke etc came in, do you think those names would have been in their minds already? It’s a non-argument. Norwich their a bit like WBA up ,down , up lets see how good they are next time around Yeah but Delia hasn’t had to write a cookbook for a while
|
|
|
Post by matelot1996 on May 1, 2021 19:22:26 GMT
Stoke Fans need to stop this fantastical insistence that we are still a Premiership Club in a league where we don’t belong or deserve to be. We are now an established Championship Club that will be flirting with relegation as opposed to promotion for the next few years. We will inevitably get out of this division in due course but I’m afraid to say it will be a downward trajectory. Accept this and we can enjoy the odd small victory and one day in the distant future (hopefully) spend a few more years in the Top flight. I love my Club. My Championship club 👍.
|
|
|
Post by JesusisaStokie on May 1, 2021 19:27:42 GMT
Stoke Fans need to stop this fantastical insistence that we are still a Premiership Club in a league where we don’t belong or deserve to be. We are now an established Championship Club that will be flirting with relegation as opposed to promotion for the next few years. We will inevitably get out of this division in due course but I’m afraid to say it will be a downward trajectory. Accept this and we can enjoy the odd small victory and one day in the distant future (hopefully) spend a few more years in the Top flight. I love my Club. My Championship club 👍. 😂
|
|
|
Post by liathroid on May 1, 2021 19:29:10 GMT
Norwich their a bit like WBA up ,down , up lets see how good they are next time around Yeah but Delia hasn’t had to write a cookbook for a while because she didn't let the manager waste it , our owners let Rowett and Jones run wild with money
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on May 1, 2021 19:34:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on May 1, 2021 19:40:14 GMT
We are carefully snipping away with secateurs in a forest full of dead wood when what is required is a great big fcuk off chainsaw and a JCB excavator, sadly our owners don't have the admit their mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by datguy on May 1, 2021 19:44:08 GMT
Dean Holden is perhaps the best option for the head coach role given our financial restrictions at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on May 1, 2021 19:47:05 GMT
*bar when we were relegated. Sack MoN Sack Scholes Sack the Millwall podcaster or whatever he was. Technical director in Head coach in New business/commercial lead in It’s what the club needs. There won’t be a better time for it with the contract situation in 2022 and the young players we have coming through. We needed a clear out when we were relegated and despite changing 2 of the 3 main positions at the club nothing has changed. The root and branch overhaul needs to happen. We need a technical director who is above the manager. Who decides how this club is going forward from top to bottom football wise. And they appoint a manager to suit that style. The model we have currently just isn’t sustainable. It’s the only way forward. The discussion of a technical director being the best way forward is an interesting one. To me, it’s not exactly as foolproof as people like to spout. If you bring in a technical director who doesn’t perform, how long do you give him? How many managers do you sack before he can no longer excuse the failures of the club on the person below them? If you sack them, then you have to sack an expensive salary and the manager, another large salary, then start again. Isn’t that the same with literally any job in any company?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2021 19:56:38 GMT
The discussion of a technical director being the best way forward is an interesting one. To me, it’s not exactly as foolproof as people like to spout. If you bring in a technical director who doesn’t perform, how long do you give him? How many managers do you sack before he can no longer excuse the failures of the club on the person below them? If you sack them, then you have to sack an expensive salary and the manager, another large salary, then start again. Isn’t that the same with literally any job in any company? My point is, how is adding someone above the manager a good way to ensure that the club will move forward. In theory, it sounds okay, but if it goes wrong, it’s just another expensive salary.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on May 1, 2021 19:57:48 GMT
Isn’t that the same with literally any job in any company? My point is, how is adding someone above the manager a good way to ensure that the club will move forward. In theory, it sounds okay, but if it goes wrong, it’s just another expensive salary. Again though, that’s the same with anything ‘if it goes wrong’. I’m not sure it’s another salary is it? You employ that person instead of Scholes.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 1, 2021 19:58:56 GMT
Isn’t that the same with literally any job in any company? My point is, how is adding someone above the manager a good way to ensure that the club will move forward. In theory, it sounds okay, but if it goes wrong, it’s just another expensive salary. It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on May 1, 2021 20:02:30 GMT
If we all know the owners will never embrace this model, and it's something we definitely need, why aren't you calling for new ownership? I’m not averse to that at all. It’s a huge risk, as I think the owners genuinely care about the club and selling could go either way, but we need more vision and cohesion and imagination than the owners have. Could a solution be selling a <50% steak in the club for financial investment, extending the board. Whilst I appriciate the owners we have, sometimes I think they are blinded by love for the club, having outside investment, with people who want a return on that money, I don’t think is a bad idea. Especially if the Coates still have majority shareholding.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on May 1, 2021 20:03:31 GMT
I’m not averse to that at all. It’s a huge risk, as I think the owners genuinely care about the club and selling could go either way, but we need more vision and cohesion and imagination than the owners have. Could a solution be selling a <50% steak in the club for financial investment, extending the board. Whilst I appriciate the owners we have, sometimes I think they are blinded by love for the club, having outside investment, with people who want a return on that money, I don’t think is a bad idea. Especially if the Coates still have majority shareholding. Absolutely, but do they want to do that?
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on May 1, 2021 20:06:16 GMT
My point is, how is adding someone above the manager a good way to ensure that the club will move forward. In theory, it sounds okay, but if it goes wrong, it’s just another expensive salary. It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic. What happens if and when they appoint a crap technical director? Who’s he answerable to, and how is his performance judged?
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on May 1, 2021 20:07:40 GMT
My point is, how is adding someone above the manager a good way to ensure that the club will move forward. In theory, it sounds okay, but if it goes wrong, it’s just another expensive salary. It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic. I agree with you here. We need a technical director that will set out a philosophy or in general business terms a framework for how we will play and operate e.g. Fast counter attacking football, High pressure, Commitment Develop players through youth system Sign over 30 on 2 year max contract. Which is bare bones of what I would like the club to ‘identify’ with. You then hire a manager who fits into that, eg not Pulis as he wants 30+ YO and won’t use the youth system. Then if the manager doesn’t work for whatever reason, you find someone else but at least you have players who can play fast counter attacking football. Rather then the rabble who’ve been bought for 433,442 diamond and 532 and now work in none of them. That’s my input on it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on May 1, 2021 20:08:31 GMT
Could a solution be selling a <50% steak in the club for financial investment, extending the board. Whilst I appriciate the owners we have, sometimes I think they are blinded by love for the club, having outside investment, with people who want a return on that money, I don’t think is a bad idea. Especially if the Coates still have majority shareholding. Absolutely, but do they want to do that? I doubt it. I think it would be the way to go though.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on May 1, 2021 20:08:45 GMT
It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic. What happens if and when they appoint a crap technical director? Who’s he answerable to and how is his performance judged? He’s presumably answerable to the owners and he’s judged on the club’s overall performance, on the pitch, recruitment, academy development, all the stuff he oversees?
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on May 1, 2021 20:12:14 GMT
What happens if and when they appoint a crap technical director? Who’s he answerable to and how is his performance judged? He’s presumably answerable to the owners and he’s judged on the club’s overall performance, on the pitch, recruitment, academy development, all the stuff he oversees? Agreed, with a completely separate Commercial Director/CCO/CRO to focus on growing us as a brand and maximise the revenue into the club and our commercial exposure.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 1, 2021 20:13:37 GMT
It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic. I agree with you here. We need a technical director that will set out a philosophy or in general business terms a framework for how we will play and operate e.g. Fast counter attacking football, High pressure, Commitment Develop players through youth system Sign over 30 on 2 year max contract. Which is bare bones of what I would like the club to ‘identify’ with. You then hire a manager who fits into that, eg not Pulis as he wants 30+ YO and won’t use the youth system. Then if the manager doesn’t work for whatever reason, you find someone else but at least you have players who can play fast counter attacking football. Rather then the rabble who’ve been bought for 433,442 diamond and 532 and now work in none of them. That’s my input on it anyway. That’s exactly how I’d want it to work. 👍
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on May 1, 2021 20:27:12 GMT
I wouldn’t lose any sleep if MON plus all his staff plus Scholes left the club before the season ends. Plus the players..... don’t forget the players. I wonder if anywhere in the world, that a club at one point has just “ on yer bike” to a whole squad and just started over.....? Would it be so terrible? Them shite hawks on the pitch couldn’t have been less interested today if they tried
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on May 1, 2021 20:43:16 GMT
I agree with you here. We need a technical director that will set out a philosophy or in general business terms a framework for how we will play and operate e.g. Fast counter attacking football, High pressure, Commitment Develop players through youth system Sign over 30 on 2 year max contract. Which is bare bones of what I would like the club to ‘identify’ with. You then hire a manager who fits into that, eg not Pulis as he wants 30+ YO and won’t use the youth system. Then if the manager doesn’t work for whatever reason, you find someone else but at least you have players who can play fast counter attacking football. Rather then the rabble who’ve been bought for 433,442 diamond and 532 and now work in none of them. That’s my input on it anyway. That’s exactly how I’d want it to work. 👍 I said when we came down the best signings we could make is the entire SLT at Brentford along with the recruitment dept.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2021 20:48:40 GMT
What happens if and when they appoint a crap technical director? Who’s he answerable to and how is his performance judged? He’s presumably answerable to the owners and he’s judged on the club’s overall performance, on the pitch, recruitment, academy development, all the stuff he oversees? But ultimately, it would be weighted for overall performance of the first team, right. “Good recruitment” only looks good if the players signed perform. They may well be good signings that aren’t working in that manager’s style. If they don’t perform, you can put all the blame on the manager (who you’d have employed). I am genuinely confused by this concept. I’m sure it works in some teams. I’m sure it fails in others. How many unsuccessful managers would it take for the club to remove a technical director? If it’s a long-term project, do you just keep them on, even if the team is failing hard, but other areas of the club are doing well?
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on May 1, 2021 20:52:31 GMT
He’s presumably answerable to the owners and he’s judged on the club’s overall performance, on the pitch, recruitment, academy development, all the stuff he oversees? But ultimately, it would be weighted for overall performance of the first team, right. “Good recruitment” only looks good if the players signed perform. They may well be good signings that aren’t working in that manager’s style. If they don’t perform, you can put all the blame on the manager (who you’d have employed). I am genuinely confused by this concept. I’m sure it works in some teams. I’m sure it fails in others. How many unsuccessful managers would it take for the club to remove a technical director? If it’s a long-term project, do you just keep them on, even if the team is failing hard, but other areas of the club are doing well? I agree. It’s got the potential to be a messy, finger pointing, self preservation exercise when things go wrong. I’d also worry about how the players would look at it. Who’s actually in charge?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on May 1, 2021 20:55:54 GMT
He’s presumably answerable to the owners and he’s judged on the club’s overall performance, on the pitch, recruitment, academy development, all the stuff he oversees? But ultimately, it would be weighted for overall performance of the first team, right. “Good recruitment” only looks good if the players signed perform. They may well be good signings that aren’t working in that manager’s style. If they don’t perform, you can put all the blame on the manager (who you’d have employed). I am genuinely confused by this concept. I’m sure it works in some teams. I’m sure it fails in others. How many unsuccessful managers would it take for the club to remove a technical director? If it’s a long-term project, do you just keep them on, even if the team is failing hard, but other areas of the club are doing well? No it doesn’t work like that. The style is something agreed on above the manager’s level and you appoint a manager who fits in with that style in the same way that you sign players who fit in with it.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on May 1, 2021 20:56:29 GMT
But ultimately, it would be weighted for overall performance of the first team, right. “Good recruitment” only looks good if the players signed perform. They may well be good signings that aren’t working in that manager’s style. If they don’t perform, you can put all the blame on the manager (who you’d have employed). I am genuinely confused by this concept. I’m sure it works in some teams. I’m sure it fails in others. How many unsuccessful managers would it take for the club to remove a technical director? If it’s a long-term project, do you just keep them on, even if the team is failing hard, but other areas of the club are doing well? I agree. It’s got the potential to be a messy, finger pointing, self preservation exercise when things go wrong. I’d also worry about how the players would look at it. Who’s actually in charge? It’s more holistic than that. It’s a collaborative process.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2021 20:57:59 GMT
My point is, how is adding someone above the manager a good way to ensure that the club will move forward. In theory, it sounds okay, but if it goes wrong, it’s just another expensive salary. It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic. Why 3 years? That makes no sense. So, if a manager take over under a technical director and the following unfolds: Year 1: safety from relegation Year 2: play off final Year 3: promotion You’d turn around and say, “okay thanks for that, good luck with the rest of your career?”
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on May 1, 2021 21:00:14 GMT
It’s a more long term thing though imo. Managers shouldn’t be at a club longer than 3 years ideally for me. A technical director would be long term and strategic. Why 3 years? That makes no sense. So, if a manager take over under a technical director and the following unfolds: Year 1: safety from relegation Year 2: play off final Year 3: promotion You’d turn around and say, “okay thanks for that, good luck with the rest of your career?” I said ideally. I just think after 3 years now managers tend to struggle unless they’re very very good. So no. You’re looking at it way too black and white.
|
|