|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 25, 2019 13:51:28 GMT
I think you've only got to look at a massive club like Manchester United to realise how it easy it is for a board to make a string of bad managerial appointments. I would argue that our board literally LOVE our club, they've made big mistakes yes but I genuinely think we'd be incredibly hard pushed to find better owners. When will you start to question them? When they appear to not be acting in the best interests of the club and even at that point, they've surely got a huge amount of credit in the bank. Wasn't there a stat floating around last season that demonstrated that over the previous ten years we were in the top ten for net spend across the whole of Europe? I can't chastise the owners for making mistakes when their intentions are clearly good. Board's making bad managerial appointments is pretty common place.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 13:54:55 GMT
When will you start to question them? I can't chastise the owners for making mistakes when their intentions are clearly good. I could. We all know what the road to hell has been paved with.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 13:56:43 GMT
When will you start to question them? When they appear to not be acting in the best interests of the club and even at that point, they've surely got a huge amount of credit in the bank. Wasn't there a stat floating around last season that demonstrated that over the previous ten years we were in the top ten for net spend across the whole of Europe? I can't chastise the owners for making mistakes when their intentions are clearly good. Board's making bad managerial appointments is pretty common place. Chucking 50M at a manager that has never been promoted, after appointing Paul Lambert to save us in the PL after keeping Mark Hughes for too long? There's mistakes, well intentioned mistakes and borderline lunacy. You also have to factor in the statement about learning from mistakes and a promised overhaul too. That obviously was an empty statement looking back. I take your point and respect you Paul but I don't think we'll agree on this one.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Aug 25, 2019 13:58:17 GMT
coates’ manager list
Alan Ball Graham Paddon (caretaker Lou Macari Joe Jordan Asa Hartford (caretaker) Lou Macari Chic Bates Chris Kamara Alan Durban Brian Little Gary Megson Tony Pulis Mark Hughes Eddie Niedzwiecki (caretaker) Paul Lambert Gary Rowett Nathan Jones
Seems like he has to go through 5 or 6 managers before he hits on a manager that brings some success.
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 14:06:20 GMT
via mobile
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 25, 2019 14:06:20 GMT
When they appear to not be acting in the best interests of the club and even at that point, they've surely got a huge amount of credit in the bank. Wasn't there a stat floating around last season that demonstrated that over the previous ten years we were in the top ten for net spend across the whole of Europe? I can't chastise the owners for making mistakes when their intentions are clearly good. Board's making bad managerial appointments is pretty common place. Chucking 50M at a manager that has never been promoted, after appointing Paul Lambert to save us in the PL after keeping Mark Hughes for too long? There's mistakes, well intentioned mistakes and borderline lunacy. You also have to factor in the statement about learning from mistakes and a promised overhaul too. That obviously was an empty statement looking back. I take your point and respect you Paul but I don't think we'll agree on this one. So what are you suggesting then ... that they shouldn't have given Rowett any money at all to spend, or at least significantly less? Seem like they're damned if they do or damned if they don't to me.
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 14:25:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 14:25:22 GMT
Chucking 50M at a manager that has never been promoted, after appointing Paul Lambert to save us in the PL after keeping Mark Hughes for too long? There's mistakes, well intentioned mistakes and borderline lunacy. You also have to factor in the statement about learning from mistakes and a promised overhaul too. That obviously was an empty statement looking back. I take your point and respect you Paul but I don't think we'll agree on this one. So what are you suggesting then ... that they shouldn't have given Rowett any money at all to spend, or at least significantly less? Seem like they're damned if they do or damned if they don't to me. I'm suggesting he shouldn't have been in the job and if the intention was to put that kind of money on the table then at least appoint a manager with a shred of experience at promotion, or at the very, very least a manager experienced with spending money and dealing with a much higher level.of expectation. No appointment is a guarantee but you are leaving yourselves wide open if you are taking risks to that level from the outset. Were you happy with the Rowett appointment?
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 14:32:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 25, 2019 14:32:49 GMT
So what are you suggesting then ... that they shouldn't have given Rowett any money at all to spend, or at least significantly less? Seem like they're damned if they do or damned if they don't to me. I'm suggesting he shouldn't have been in the job and if the intention was to put that kind of money on the table then at least appoint a manager with a shred of experience at promotion, or at the very, very least a manager experienced with spending money and dealing with a much higher level.of expectation. No appointment is a guarantee but you are leaving yourselves wide open if you are taking risks to that level from the outset. Were you happy with the Rowett appointment? Yeah I was happy with the Rowett appointment, as it seemed were most of the people on this message board at the time. Who did you suggest they should have got instead at the time?
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Aug 25, 2019 14:35:57 GMT
When they appear to not be acting in the best interests of the club and even at that point, they've surely got a huge amount of credit in the bank. Wasn't there a stat floating around last season that demonstrated that over the previous ten years we were in the top ten for net spend across the whole of Europe? I can't chastise the owners for making mistakes when their intentions are clearly good. Board's making bad managerial appointments is pretty common place. Chucking 50M at a manager that has never been promoted, after appointing Paul Lambert to save us in the PL after keeping Mark Hughes for too long? There's mistakes, well intentioned mistakes and borderline lunacy. You also have to factor in the statement about learning from mistakes and a promised overhaul too. That obviously was an empty statement looking back. I take your point and respect you Paul but I don't think we'll agree on this one. That 50 million may have been better put to use by Lambert, in the final Premier League season. Just might have seen us survive.
|
|
|
Post by tony1234 on Aug 25, 2019 14:49:08 GMT
I'm suggesting he shouldn't have been in the job and if the intention was to put that kind of money on the table then at least appoint a manager with a shred of experience at promotion, or at the very, very least a manager experienced with spending money and dealing with a much higher level.of expectation. No appointment is a guarantee but you are leaving yourselves wide open if you are taking risks to that level from the outset. Were you happy with the Rowett appointment? Yeah I was happy with the Rowett appointment, as it seemed were most of the people on this message board at the time. Who did you suggest they should have got instead at the time? Bielsa?... But seriously, at the time, the average Champs manager earns 500k or less (people like Howe and Hughton even were only the 500k ish range before bonuses in 2018). if you have a 50m player budget then surely it would have been better to pay a top championship manager 1m-2m and spend a 48m budget? The question of "who is available" is rather usurped by "who do we want?". The only reason that makes sense to me why we didn't is that our board would have felt undermined by employing someone who they couldn't control - who would have demanded more decision-making rights. Weak, inept leaders feel threatened - rather than excited - by being challenged and stretched by those around them, and certainly those below them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 14:50:07 GMT
I'm suggesting he shouldn't have been in the job and if the intention was to put that kind of money on the table then at least appoint a manager with a shred of experience at promotion, or at the very, very least a manager experienced with spending money and dealing with a much higher level.of expectation. No appointment is a guarantee but you are leaving yourselves wide open if you are taking risks to that level from the outset. Were you happy with the Rowett appointment? Yeah I was happy with the Rowett appointment, as it seemed were most of the people on this message board at the time. Who did you suggest they should have got instead at the time? Potter. I went as far as to suggest we should have spent a fair percentage of our parachute money in helping to get rid of our higher earners so that we could be in total control of our rebuild, in readiness for years two and three. As we are, we've chucked good money after bad and are chasing the dragon, so to speak. Quite ironic given we are owned by a bookie. I also suggested Potter when Lambert was appointed, with a view to him remaining if he couldn't save us. Again, no guarantees at all but I thought it was the more sensible, longer term, lower risk strategy we needed and also would have gone hand in hand with the much fabled overhaul.
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 14:51:35 GMT
via mobile
Post by LankyPotter on Aug 25, 2019 14:51:35 GMT
Fully behind Jones.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Aug 25, 2019 14:58:04 GMT
I haven’t totally given up on Jones but I’m getting very close. My biggest concern, apart from a lack of a coherent plan, is every manager we have brought in since Hughes had less experience than the previous one. Since we have to be self sustaining, it’s unlikely we’ll get anyone better unless we look overseas, which we won’t. The other problem is the squad which is clearly weaker than the one he inherited. I suspect the players he brought were players he wanted to strengthen his squad at Luton, which may well have been the case. However, they have done nothing to help Stoke. So a Jones replacement will inherit a situation that’s, well, a bit of a hotch-potch of journeymen Championship players.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 25, 2019 15:04:30 GMT
Yeah I was happy with the Rowett appointment, as it seemed were most of the people on this message board at the time. Who did you suggest they should have got instead at the time? Potter. I went as far as to suggest we should have spent a fair percentage of our parachute money in helping to get rid of our higher earners so that we could be in total control of our rebuild, in readiness for years two and three. As we are, we've chucked good money after bad and are chasing the dragon, so to speak. Quite ironic given we are owned by a bookie. I also suggested Potter when Lambert was appointed, with a view to him remaining if he couldn't save us. Again, no guarantees at all but I thought it was the more sensible, longer term, lower risk strategy we needed and also would have gone hand in hand with the much fabled overhaul. That's the point though isn't it, (as you've correctly said) ... there are NO guarantees. There were plenty of people at the time who thought that Potter didn't have enough experience to manage in the Championship. Him v Rowett was literally a flip of a coin. We could easily have appointed Potter and then ultimately ended up sacking him at the same time we did Rowett. Once Rowett had been sacked, people were desperate for the board to bring in a progressive, exciting appointment and not one of the dour, dinosaur appointments which most people were expecting from the SCFC board. Jones was that man, it was undoubtedly a massive gamble, one that it is looking increasingly likely to have failed but I could understand WHY they chose him at the time. At the risk of repeating myself, football boards up and down the land regularly make bad managerial appointments. Beyond that, I believe there are an awful lot of positives to be had from our club being owned by the Coates family.
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 15:07:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by mcw on Aug 25, 2019 15:07:39 GMT
Yeah I was happy with the Rowett appointment, as it seemed were most of the people on this message board at the time. Who did you suggest they should have got instead at the time? Potter. I went as far as to suggest we should have spent a fair percentage of our parachute money in helping to get rid of our higher earners so that we could be in total control of our rebuild, in readiness for years two and three. As we are, we've chucked good money after bad and are chasing the dragon, so to speak. Quite ironic given we are owned by a bookie. I also suggested Potter when Lambert was appointed, with a view to him remaining if he couldn't save us. Again, no guarantees at all but I thought it was the more sensible, longer term, lower risk strategy we needed and also would have gone hand in hand with the much fabled overhaul. Totally agree, we should have accepted our fate and used that parachute money to offload all the deadwood and high earners. The championship is a different beat to the Premier league- recent history has shown there is a reverse correlation to 12 years ago when we were last in it. Namely teams that now come up to the Premier league tend to do better than those who get relegated from it into the Championship. The quality gap has closed immensely in that time between 12th down in the Premier League and at least two thirds of the Championship. That quality gap is then bridged and sometimes usurped by grit, determination and team unity. I knew we would struggle with the squad we came down with, you wouldn’t have wanted more than 3/4 of them in the trenches with you.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Aug 25, 2019 15:12:11 GMT
I haven’t totally given up on Jones but I’m getting very close. My biggest concern, apart from a lack of a coherent plan, is every manager we have brought in since Hughes had less experience than the previous one. Since we have to be self sustaining, it’s unlikely we’ll get anyone better unless we look overseas, which we won’t. The other problem is the squad which is clearly weaker than the one he inherited. I suspect the players he brought were players he wanted to strengthen his squad at Luton, which may well have been the case. However, they have done nothing to help Stoke. So a Jones replacement will inherit a situation that’s, well, a bit of a hotch-potch of journeymen Championship players. Probably right, it’s likely a lot of these players were players he earmarked to bring in at Luton to keep them up, but we’re on a different level to Luton, we should have been looking at the cream of championship players.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 15:12:33 GMT
Potter. I went as far as to suggest we should have spent a fair percentage of our parachute money in helping to get rid of our higher earners so that we could be in total control of our rebuild, in readiness for years two and three. As we are, we've chucked good money after bad and are chasing the dragon, so to speak. Quite ironic given we are owned by a bookie. I also suggested Potter when Lambert was appointed, with a view to him remaining if he couldn't save us. Again, no guarantees at all but I thought it was the more sensible, longer term, lower risk strategy we needed and also would have gone hand in hand with the much fabled overhaul. That's the point though isn't it, (as you've correctly said) ... there are NO guarantees. There were plenty of people at the time who thought that Potter didn't have enough experience to manage in the Championship. Him v Rowett was literally a flip of a coin. We could easily have appointed Potter and then ultimately ended up sacking him at the same time we did Rowett. Once Rowett had been sacked, people were desperate for the board to bring in a progressive, exciting appointment and not one of the dour, dinosaur appointments which most people were expecting from the SCFC board. Jones was that man, it was undoubtedly a massive gamble, one that it is looking increasingly likely to have failed but I could understand WHY they chose him at the time. At the risk of repeating myself, football boards up and down the land regularly make bad managerial appointments. Beyond that, I believe there are an awful lot of positives to be had from our club being owned by the Coates family. I'm not an unreasonable fan Paul. I know what the benefits of the Coates family are and I know full well going back to the mid 80s that the manager market is fraught with danger. I just think they've made far too many mistakes in a short period of time considering the experience they have, and they deserve to be seriously questioned over their actions, however well intentioned they are. Which I agree entirely with you, I believe they are. If you hadn't guessed already, I'm really passionate about modern football and the way it seems to be shifting with the ever increasing importance on a proper philosophy married to a proper footballing DOF with top end recruitment models handed down to a modern coach. Given who we are owned by, and I've said this too many times now, I'm staggered we're not at the forefront of it all and have been staggered for some time.
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 15:20:53 GMT
via mobile
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 25, 2019 15:20:53 GMT
That's the point though isn't it, (as you've correctly said) ... there are NO guarantees. There were plenty of people at the time who thought that Potter didn't have enough experience to manage in the Championship. Him v Rowett was literally a flip of a coin. We could easily have appointed Potter and then ultimately ended up sacking him at the same time we did Rowett. Once Rowett had been sacked, people were desperate for the board to bring in a progressive, exciting appointment and not one of the dour, dinosaur appointments which most people were expecting from the SCFC board. Jones was that man, it was undoubtedly a massive gamble, one that it is looking increasingly likely to have failed but I could understand WHY they chose him at the time. At the risk of repeating myself, football boards up and down the land regularly make bad managerial appointments. Beyond that, I believe there are an awful lot of positives to be had from our club being owned by the Coates family. I'm not an unreasonable fan Paul. I know what the benefits of the Coates family are and I know full well going back to the mid 80s that the manager market is fraught with danger. I just think they've made far too many mistakes in a short period of time considering the experience they have, and they deserve to be seriously questioned over their actions, however well intentioned they are. Which I agree entirely with you, I believe they are. If you hadn't guessed already, I'm really passionate about modern football and the way it seems to be shifting with the ever increasing importance on a proper philosophy married to a proper footballing DOF with top end recruitment models handed down to a modern coach. Given who we are owned by, and I've said this too many times now, I'm staggered we're not at the forefront of it all and have been staggered for some time. I think that's fair. Maybe they need to ask themselves, if they're actually qualified enough to make the big decisions and if they're not, then how do they address that issue? But (as I said earlier) if Manchester United, one of the biggest clubs in world football, can get a string of managerial appointments completely wrong, then maybe it isn't that easy of an issue to address. Any calls for the Coates family to stand down as a result, are hugely premature imo however.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 15:29:45 GMT
I'm not an unreasonable fan Paul. I know what the benefits of the Coates family are and I know full well going back to the mid 80s that the manager market is fraught with danger. I just think they've made far too many mistakes in a short period of time considering the experience they have, and they deserve to be seriously questioned over their actions, however well intentioned they are. Which I agree entirely with you, I believe they are. If you hadn't guessed already, I'm really passionate about modern football and the way it seems to be shifting with the ever increasing importance on a proper philosophy married to a proper footballing DOF with top end recruitment models handed down to a modern coach. Given who we are owned by, and I've said this too many times now, I'm staggered we're not at the forefront of it all and have been staggered for some time. I think that's fair. Maybe they need to ask themselves, if they're actually qualified enough to make the big decisions and if they're not, then how do they address that issue? But (as I said earlier) if Manchester United, one of the biggest clubs in world football, can get a string of managerial appointments completely wrong, then maybe it isn't that easy of an issue to address. Any calls for the Coates family to stand down as a result, are hugely premature imo however. I understand that Paul. What I would do is spend a bit of any remaining money on speaking to Ted Knutson, who worked heavily with Matt Benham at FC Midtjylland and Brentford - who helped him set up his entire scouting and recruitment model from scratch (at FC Midtjylland first, then copied and honed it further in moving to Brentford) to try and work something out that suits us from where we are at the moment and the scouting network we have. From there, i'm confident that if we can reproduce just some of the success they've had, that we'll be in a far better place and also that we have far more resilient owners that won't look to sell off the family silver in such haste that Brentford do. I'd also remove the CEO and replace him with a proper football man (the family must surely have the contacts?) to design a top down strategy of first team style and DNA all the way down to the youth setup. As much as I criticise the owners for the decisions they've made, I also can't help feeling more than a bit sad at the good money that has been chucked away in the best of intentions. Sadly we won't see that money again now, but that doesn't mean we can't make positive changes to the way we run. It's never too late for that. Check this out as an example, he's a very strange character, but obviously excellent at his job. Ironic given he has come from a gambling background: statsbomb.com/2017/09/inferior-tactical-strategies-the-bizarro-world-of-brentford/
|
|
|
Post by tosh on Aug 25, 2019 15:56:51 GMT
I should stay well behind if I were you. He seems to be accelerating over the rapids!
|
|
|
Post by jontimmis on Aug 25, 2019 16:05:29 GMT
Fact is the only manager I am aware of with a worse record than Jones is Chris Kamara.
Jones has had 25 league games now?
He’s won 3 league games, and that was probably due to the fact the crowd were immense against Leeds in his first home league game.
Any other manager in recent history would be slated to the hilt on what we’ve seen and his record. We are starring into the abyss and another five games in we could be 10 points adrift.
He hasn’t got the experience it’s as simple as that to deal with this, he’s never been I. This position
|
|
|
Post by del63 on Aug 25, 2019 16:38:32 GMT
I haven’t totally given up on Jones but I’m getting very close. My biggest concern, apart from a lack of a coherent plan, is every manager we have brought in since Hughes had less experience than the previous one. Since we have to be self sustaining, it’s unlikely we’ll get anyone better unless we look overseas, which we won’t. The other problem is the squad which is clearly weaker than the one he inherited. I suspect the players he brought were players he wanted to strengthen his squad at Luton, which may well have been the case. However, they have done nothing to help Stoke. So a Jones replacement will inherit a situation that’s, well, a bit of a hotch-potch of journeymen Championship players. Delusional. Fact, Jones made reference that the best centre back in league one last season was Matt Clark and that is the only centre back he would wish to add to Luton's other centre backs to create better competition. He went to Brighton for 3.5M. Luton thought the best keeper in the division was McLaughlin at Sunderland besides their own in Shea. Now Jones decides to sign Lindsay who was second best to Pinnock at Barnsley. Pinnock greater power, composure, strength. Ask any Barnsley supporter who the better of the two were. Pinnock went to Brentford for 3M, Stoke pay 2M for Lindsay. So Stoke purchase to cheapest option and certainly not a player on Luton's radar. As for Davies, he is about par with Shea so no upgrade for Luton. Luton went in for McLaughlin twice and got knocked backed with Sunderland valuing him at 3M. Luton then sign Sluga, Croatian number two and he was on Luton's radar for a whole season. As for Stoke's other summer purchase's, cant see any having been regular starters and none that were on Luton's radar. So before making statements that you clearly have no idea and are just guessing at for something to write, I recommend you do some research. And if you say that Luton were linked with this player or that player as it was on various speculation sites like, take a close look. Not one of Luton's signings were out on the internet before they signed someone or if it did make it's where onto the web, it would have been no more than 24-48 hours. That's how Luton do their business. On the quiet. Thank you anyway for thinking Stoke players were an acceptable level for Luton.
|
|
|
Post by chigstoke on Aug 25, 2019 20:15:27 GMT
|
|
|
Jones out
Aug 25, 2019 20:18:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by berahinosgoals on Aug 25, 2019 20:18:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 20:21:08 GMT
He’s bat shit. I read another article today where he said he didn’t drop Joe Allen for poor performances he just needed a rest. After yesterday saying he’d been dropped for poor performances. Tomorrow there will yet more clap trap. His jibber jabber is an insult to the ears and his football is an insult to the eyes.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 25, 2019 20:36:31 GMT
coates’ manager list Alan Ball Graham Paddon (caretaker Lou Macari Joe Jordan Asa Hartford (caretaker) Lou Macari Chic Bates Chris Kamara Alan Durban Brian Little Gary Megson Tony Pulis Mark Hughes Eddie Niedzwiecki (caretaker) Paul Lambert Gary Rowett Nathan Jones Seems like he has to go through 5 or 6 managers before he hits on a manager that brings some success. A broken clock tells the correct time twice a day.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Aug 25, 2019 20:46:41 GMT
Jones’ problem is we don’t have a preferred style of play, say what you want about pulis but he had a very definite game plan, it’s simple and everyone knows what it is, we don’t currently have a definitive game plan.
We don’t play for set pieces We don’t have wingers who get down the line We don’t have a creative midfielder We don’t have a target man We’re not a passing side We’re not a route one side We’re not a counter attacking side
We need an identity and a definitive system/style of play, currently we’re just a bunch of players, no cohesion, no shape, no organisation, no game plan, nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 20:49:00 GMT
Jones’ problem is we don’t have a preferred style of play, say what you want about pulis but he had a very definite game plan, it’s simple and everyone knows what it is, we don’t currently have a definitive game plan. We don’t play for set pieces We don’t have wingers who get down the line We don’t have a creative midfielder We don’t have a target man We’re not a passing side We’re not a route one side We’re not a counter attacking side We need an identity and a definitive system/style of play, currently we’re just a bunch of players, no cohesion, no shape, no organisation, no game plan, nothing. He has a plan and a system is it just absolutely shite and doesn’t work with the players he has. That’s a problem with the players apparently and not his limitations as a manager/one trick pony
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Aug 25, 2019 21:04:51 GMT
The bloke deals in rhetoric.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 21:23:03 GMT
Jones’ problem is we don’t have a preferred style of play, say what you want about pulis but he had a very definite game plan, it’s simple and everyone knows what it is, we don’t currently have a definitive game plan. We don’t play for set pieces We don’t have wingers who get down the line We don’t have a creative midfielder We don’t have a target man We’re not a passing side We’re not a route one side We’re not a counter attacking side We need an identity and a definitive system/style of play, currently we’re just a bunch of players, no cohesion, no shape, no organisation, no game plan, nothing. I honestly think we have an incredibly well defined style of play. Attack wide with full backs/wing backs in order to allow the midfielders and strikers to overload the centre of the pitch. Even though we were defensive against Leeds, our style of play is obvious and easy to see. Plenty of criticism of Jones I can understand, even if I don't always agree, but our style of play is very definitive.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 25, 2019 21:29:28 GMT
The bloke deals in rhetoric. Indeed and it appears he doesn't realise how cheap the value of it is ... he's probably got one league game left.
|
|