|
Post by supersimonstainrod on Sept 25, 2019 13:34:01 GMT
I think it's very harsh to take away the credit for what he did at Luton. I don't recall any Luton fans questioning his role at the time and a manager can't take the blame when it goes wrong but have none of the credit when things go right. There's a good manager in there with Jones somewhere and I suspect he'll learn from his mistakes here and be at least a decent manager elsewhere. He's suffered from making the wrong move at the wrong time and then seemingly panicking and second guessing himself at every turn, likely due to his inexperience. Tony1234 suggested at the time that the some of the higher profile players might not have been prepared to listen to the voice of an upstart in the dugout and you do wonder if there might be something in that after all as well. I think your last sentence also intimates at the (subconscious?) reasoning behind some of NJ's signings: limited players grateful for an opportunity at a club of our comparative size and ambition,who'd at least be gauranteed to listen to him and train well,they represent a sort of managerial comfort zone.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Sept 25, 2019 14:57:11 GMT
After his first press conference I had him down as a worthless windbag!
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Sept 25, 2019 15:04:55 GMT
The day I first heard his name being connected with the job.
Totally the wrong type of manager for the current predicament.
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Sept 25, 2019 15:25:15 GMT
He signed Cousins and Ward. Jesus Christ If he'd signed Jesus Christ we'd be top of the league by now. Nailed on for promotion
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 25, 2019 15:33:26 GMT
If he'd signed Jesus Christ we'd be top of the league by now. Nailed on for promotion Defence would still be holy though
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Sept 25, 2019 15:37:12 GMT
Jon Coates idiotically told us he’d taken advice from some bloke who watches loads of football who on a side role works for bet365.
Good one Jon now can we ask you to step aside please, oh and take that other idiot with you.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2019 15:49:51 GMT
Defence would still be holy though He could ride into training every day on Sam Vokes' back.
|
|
|
Post by SamB_SCFC on Sept 25, 2019 16:20:35 GMT
Probably his very first game away at Brentford last season where we got thrashed. There was some alarming tactical naivety which was instantly apparent and we were very quickly out of the game and instantly looked even worse than we did under Rowett. And while we got a good result and performance against Leeds, the naivety came straight back against Shrewsbury and confirmed my suspicions.
|
|
|
Post by sovietonion on Sept 25, 2019 16:58:08 GMT
He has Friday for me... but even I am now beginning to tip. However as I have previously stated, can we stop bringing mental health into it. Emotional responses to questions after a defeat, is not a sign of mental health. It's a sign someone cares. 100%. If this was the case, football fans themselves would be sectioned on a weekly basis after 90 minutes of emotional rollercoasting. It’s a low blow. He’s frustrated and he’s stressed but we all get like that. No-one should be beaten with that stick.
|
|
|
Post by cousindupree on Sept 25, 2019 18:11:40 GMT
I genuinely thought he was the wrong appointment for where we were. Our objective was for a quick promotion with a team full of premier league players, sky money and one of the richest owners in the championship. Yet no inexperienced manager at Jones's level has ever achieved promotion from the champs in decades. He has no experience whatsoever of managing premier league players or even championship players. They are a completely different animal to Div 1 or 2 players. I had some patience and intrigued to see what he could do in the transfer window. The result was absolutely fuck all. I thought he would bring in a couple of players of real potential from his beloved Luton...he signed no-one from his former club! He knew League 1 very well yet his signings from there were Davies and Lindsay...Davies I could have picked from the Div 1 team of the season myself and Lindsay for 2m and was available.....and that's it. The rest of the recruits in the summer were an absolute shambles not all his fault, but question what he saw in Cousins when other DM were available....Sawyers and Bielik His aversion against foreign players will have to change if he has any ambition left to be a top manager...they are an integral part of a successful side in modern football. Also he needs to learn how to use the loan market....Hogan Duffy and Carter-Vickers look like pointless loanees. So to give him another transfer window would be catastrophic even after he brought in his buddy recruitment guy. Basically no knowledge or experience above div 1 level and the board thought he was the man to get us promotion....jesus wept these guys run a multi million dollar business!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Sept 25, 2019 18:23:31 GMT
Partly, and I won't pretend that I don't have plenty of concerns. I think he's been badly let down in recruitment. It's not that he hasn't been backed or allowed to sign his own players, but I think that there has been a big breakdown somewhere in the chain. Can anybody honestly say that all parts of recruitment are fully functioning when the options presented to the manager for left back are a player way out of our league, a 30something Beswicks player and loads of others who are apparently worse than the aforementioned 30something and James McClean? It's a similar story in defensive midfield, without even looking at the failure to move on other expensive mistakes. That really leads to the main point. If you want to bring in a man with radical new ideas to radically overhaul everything, you can either let him do that and completely change the way you do things, or you can keep everything exactly the same and expect him to just get results. If you do the former, you can be richly rewarded. Those who opt to do the latter almost always fail, badly. We are currently opting for the latter, and it has taken us to the bottom of the table. I want him to stay, and do the reworking of the club properly. I accept that results are making that a remote possibility, which will ultimately be our loss. I've been quite firm that I wouldn't even review the post until December, but I think I would now have Pulis on speed dial for the international break. Were those 'the options presented to the manager' or the players the manager wanted? I find it hard to believe that a manager for whom full backs were key to his system couldn't think of more than two in the whole world. I'm sick to the back teeth about hearing that the manager (and past managers) had players foisted on them or were told they couldn't sign certain players. Until somebody can supply definitive proof that it's been anyone other than Hughes, Rowett and Jones who've been ultimately responsible for the overwhelming majority of players we've brought to the club over the past six or seven years then give it a rest. I'm quoting both of these posts at once because I think that they've slightly missed the point that I was getting at. I'm not a tinfoil hat type who thinks that a mysterious shadow government led by Tony Scholes locks the manager in a basement during the transfer window and signs a load of tat. What I am getting at is based on information that has come out of the club via all sorts of sources regarding the process. We've heard it come from a combination of the manager, the chief executive, the chairman and various members of the local press that the transfer process at Stoke is as follows: 1) The manager sets the overall direction for transfer activity in that window. He identifies areas for improvement, and the sorts of qualities that he wants from players in those areas. 2) The scouting network, which until recently was run by Mark Cartwright, goes out and does their best to rummage up any players who fit the manager's criteria, with Cartwright himself doing the 'opening doors' act that Spinks alluded to. 3) The manager is presented with a list of the players identified in step 2 and asks the club to purchase any of the players that he likes. He gets the final say on any signing that is made. I don't think that I've said anything particularly controversial so far. That's roughly 'the process' that the club operate with, although there has obviously been some wriggle room when, for example, the manager is dead keen on a certain player such as Berahino. What I'm arguing is that there is a serious deficiency in step 2 that has led to our poor recruitment in key positions this summer. The manager seems to have asked the club to find him a left back that fits certain criteria. The options presented were: 1) James Justin, who was always Premier League bound (see our high profile pursuit of him in the press over the summer) 2) Stephen Ward, a steady veteran coincidentally represented by Beswicks 3) A plethora of other options that Jones has openly said in the press were not as good as James McClean or Stephen Ward That's not a conspiracy theory, it's not tinfoil hat stuff, just stuff that has been openly stated in the press. If we are to take the manager on his word - and we have no reason not to do so - then a scouting system that can't produce a single player better at left back than James McClean and Stephen Ward is seriously deficient. We've seen this before under Mark Hughes. He wanted a right back, the club chased after Cedric Soares, lost out and immediately fell back on a well-past-his-best Glen Johnson. This is really the crux of the issue. When you appoint a manager like Jones, who is radically different to any manager that we've had in the last couple of decades, there are two ways of doing things. The first is to acknowledge that to get the best out of him, his appointment has to be just one part of a major reconfiguration of how things are done behind the scenes. In essence, this is the 'project' option, that I am quite happily signed up to. The other way of doing things is to just appoint him because he got good results somewhere else, completely ignore any context and blindly carry on as things were before with no change in strategy. If we've chosen option 1, then we just have to grit our teeth and ride out the teething problems as the project gets underway. If we've chosen option 2, then this whole thing was doomed from the very beginning and the chairman needs to race down to Sandbanks ASAP to fetch Tony Pulis back.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Sept 25, 2019 18:26:51 GMT
Were those 'the options presented to the manager' or the players the manager wanted? I find it hard to believe that a manager for whom full backs were key to his system couldn't think of more than two in the whole world. I'm sick to the back teeth about hearing that the manager (and past managers) had players foisted on them or were told they couldn't sign certain players. Until somebody can supply definitive proof that it's been anyone other than Hughes, Rowett and Jones who've been ultimately responsible for the overwhelming majority of players we've brought to the club over the past six or seven years then give it a rest. I'm quoting both of these posts at once because I think that they've slightly missed the point that I was getting at. I'm not a tinfoil hat type who thinks that a mysterious shadow government led by Tony Scholes locks the manager in a basement during the transfer window and signs a load of tat. What I am getting at is based on information that has come out of the club via all sorts of sources regarding the process. We've heard it come from a combination of the manager, the chief executive, the chairman and various members of the local press that the transfer process at Stoke is as follows: 1) The manager sets the overall direction for transfer activity in that window. He identifies areas for improvement, and the sorts of qualities that he wants from players in those areas. 2) The scouting network, which until recently was run by Mark Cartwright, goes out and does their best to rummage up any players who fit the manager's criteria, with Cartwright himself doing the 'opening doors' act that Spinks alluded to. 3) The manager is presented with a list of the players identified in step 2 and asks the club to purchase any of the players that he likes. He gets the final say on any signing that is made. I don't think that I've said anything particularly controversial so far. That's roughly 'the process' that the club operate with, although there has obviously been some wriggle room when, for example, the manager is dead keen on a certain player such as Berahino. What I'm arguing is that there is a serious deficiency in step 2 that has led to our poor recruitment in key positions this summer. The manager seems to have asked the club to find him a left back that fits certain criteria. The options presented were: 1) James Justin, who was always Premier League bound (see our high profile pursuit of him in the press over the summer) 2) Stephen Ward, a steady veteran coincidentally represented by Beswicks 3) A plethora of other options that Jones has openly said in the press were not as good as James McClean or Stephen Ward That's not a conspiracy theory, it's not tinfoil hat stuff, just stuff that has been openly stated in the press. If we are to take the manager on his word - and we have no reason not to do so - then a scouting system that can't produce a single player better at left back than James McClean and Stephen Ward is seriously deficient. We've seen this before under Mark Hughes. He wanted a right back, the club chased after Cedric Soares, lost out and immediately fell back on a well-past-his-best Glen Johnson. This is really the crux of the issue. When you appoint a manager like Jones, who is radically different to any manager that we've had in the last couple of decades, there are two ways of doing things. The first is to acknowledge that to get the best out of him, his appointment has to be just one part of a major reconfiguration of how things are done behind the scenes. In essence, this is the 'project' option, that I am quite happily signed up to. The other way of doing things is to just appoint him because he got good results somewhere else, completely ignore any context and blindly carry on as things were before with no change in strategy. If we've chosen option 1, then we just have to grit our teeth and ride out the teething problems as the project gets underway. If we've chosen option 2, then this whole thing was doomed from the very beginning and the chairman needs to race down to Sandbanks ASAP to fetch Tony Pulis back. I think that’s only partly how it works. My understanding of it was that there is indeed a list of targets scouted and presented to the manager, but the manager has his own targets and his decision is final. Most of the players Rowett signed were players he’d either worked with or tried to sign in the past. Jones clearly eschewed overseas players and again there were players he’d worked with in the past like Ward and Cousins.
|
|
|
Post by rockthecity on Sept 25, 2019 19:10:04 GMT
I have backed and backed him even though I have had to question his teams and substitutions but I am done, we need change ASAP
|
|
|
Post by wilcopotter on Sept 25, 2019 20:16:35 GMT
This is all very good in hindsight. Tend to recall his appointment being generally welcomed. Think he’s had his chips though.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2019 20:16:35 GMT
When I saw him wearing this jumper
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Sept 25, 2019 20:28:29 GMT
Starting Badou after claiming he only wanted players that were proud and actually wanted to play for us when Badou patently didn’t/wasn’t That just cemented concerns around McClean at lb Cousins Total inconsistency in media interviews To be fair, his management if Badou is about the best thing he’s done in his time here. That and actually playing Collins, albeit occasionally.
|
|
|
Post by tony1234 on Sept 25, 2019 20:33:40 GMT
From the sacking of Hughes, we needed a strategist with gravitas and experience to build the whole football capability. My heart sank when the board bought in another patsy.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Sept 25, 2019 20:34:34 GMT
I'm sick to the back teeth about hearing that the manager (and past managers) had players foisted on them or were told they couldn't sign certain players. Until somebody can supply definitive proof that it's been anyone other than Hughes, Rowett and Jones who've been ultimately responsible for the overwhelming majority of players we've brought to the club over the past six or seven years then give it a rest. I have heard that Cartwright was responsible for FINDING, Pieters, Arnie, Campbell and Etebo (presumably Bauer too but unsure) whilst being instrumental in getting Shaq to sign If managers ignore his recommendations on players that’s down to the manager, maybe Cartwright wasn’t the problem after all....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2019 20:34:52 GMT
Jordan cousins
Kangaroos learning chinese
|
|
|
Post by hogansgoals on Sept 25, 2019 20:41:42 GMT
When he signed Sam Fucking Volkes was he at the same time has Sam Vokes?
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Sept 25, 2019 20:45:15 GMT
Jordan cousins Kangaroos learning chinese I reckon you’ve the hots for Jordan, you’re certainly infatuated 🥰 🤣
|
|
|
Post by stokeykez on Sept 25, 2019 20:53:16 GMT
Were those 'the options presented to the manager' or the players the manager wanted? I find it hard to believe that a manager for whom full backs were key to his system couldn't think of more than two in the whole world. I'm sick to the back teeth about hearing that the manager (and past managers) had players foisted on them or were told they couldn't sign certain players. Until somebody can supply definitive proof that it's been anyone other than Hughes, Rowett and Jones who've been ultimately responsible for the overwhelming majority of players we've brought to the club over the past six or seven years then give it a rest. I'm quoting both of these posts at once because I think that they've slightly missed the point that I was getting at. I'm not a tinfoil hat type who thinks that a mysterious shadow government led by Tony Scholes locks the manager in a basement during the transfer window and signs a load of tat. What I am getting at is based on information that has come out of the club via all sorts of sources regarding the process. We've heard it come from a combination of the manager, the chief executive, the chairman and various members of the local press that the transfer process at Stoke is as follows: 1) The manager sets the overall direction for transfer activity in that window. He identifies areas for improvement, and the sorts of qualities that he wants from players in those areas. 2) The scouting network, which until recently was run by Mark Cartwright, goes out and does their best to rummage up any players who fit the manager's criteria, with Cartwright himself doing the 'opening doors' act that Spinks alluded to. 3) The manager is presented with a list of the players identified in step 2 and asks the club to purchase any of the players that he likes. He gets the final say on any signing that is made. I don't think that I've said anything particularly controversial so far. That's roughly 'the process' that the club operate with, although there has obviously been some wriggle room when, for example, the manager is dead keen on a certain player such as Berahino. What I'm arguing is that there is a serious deficiency in step 2 that has led to our poor recruitment in key positions this summer. The manager seems to have asked the club to find him a left back that fits certain criteria. The options presented were: 1) James Justin, who was always Premier League bound (see our high profile pursuit of him in the press over the summer) 2) Stephen Ward, a steady veteran coincidentally represented by Beswicks 3) A plethora of other options that Jones has openly said in the press were not as good as James McClean or Stephen Ward That's not a conspiracy theory, it's not tinfoil hat stuff, just stuff that has been openly stated in the press. If we are to take the manager on his word - and we have no reason not to do so - then a scouting system that can't produce a single player better at left back than James McClean and Stephen Ward is seriously deficient. We've seen this before under Mark Hughes. He wanted a right back, the club chased after Cedric Soares, lost out and immediately fell back on a well-past-his-best Glen Johnson. This is really the crux of the issue. When you appoint a manager like Jones, who is radically different to any manager that we've had in the last couple of decades, there are two ways of doing things. The first is to acknowledge that to get the best out of him, his appointment has to be just one part of a major reconfiguration of how things are done behind the scenes. In essence, this is the 'project' option, that I am quite happily signed up to. The other way of doing things is to just appoint him because he got good results somewhere else, completely ignore any context and blindly carry on as things were before with no change in strategy. If we've chosen option 1, then we just have to grit our teeth and ride out the teething problems as the project gets underway. If we've chosen option 2, then this whole thing was doomed from the very beginning and the chairman needs to race down to Sandbanks ASAP to fetch Tony Pulis back. You would think from this though is that NJ or any manager for that matter would know a better left back across the league than his ceo. If the ceo had such an amazing astute tactical knowledge of players then they would be managers right. Isnt it the job of the manager to present a list of players to the ceo and he then starts to negotiate with agents clubs etc to assess availability. My own take on this is that yet again the manager has presented justin james and weve been out priced, its then been left to the carto to come up with alternatives
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Sept 25, 2019 21:16:55 GMT
I'm quoting both of these posts at once because I think that they've slightly missed the point that I was getting at. I'm not a tinfoil hat type who thinks that a mysterious shadow government led by Tony Scholes locks the manager in a basement during the transfer window and signs a load of tat. What I am getting at is based on information that has come out of the club via all sorts of sources regarding the process. We've heard it come from a combination of the manager, the chief executive, the chairman and various members of the local press that the transfer process at Stoke is as follows: 1) The manager sets the overall direction for transfer activity in that window. He identifies areas for improvement, and the sorts of qualities that he wants from players in those areas. 2) The scouting network, which until recently was run by Mark Cartwright, goes out and does their best to rummage up any players who fit the manager's criteria, with Cartwright himself doing the 'opening doors' act that Spinks alluded to. 3) The manager is presented with a list of the players identified in step 2 and asks the club to purchase any of the players that he likes. He gets the final say on any signing that is made. I don't think that I've said anything particularly controversial so far. That's roughly 'the process' that the club operate with, although there has obviously been some wriggle room when, for example, the manager is dead keen on a certain player such as Berahino. What I'm arguing is that there is a serious deficiency in step 2 that has led to our poor recruitment in key positions this summer. The manager seems to have asked the club to find him a left back that fits certain criteria. The options presented were: 1) James Justin, who was always Premier League bound (see our high profile pursuit of him in the press over the summer) 2) Stephen Ward, a steady veteran coincidentally represented by Beswicks 3) A plethora of other options that Jones has openly said in the press were not as good as James McClean or Stephen Ward That's not a conspiracy theory, it's not tinfoil hat stuff, just stuff that has been openly stated in the press. If we are to take the manager on his word - and we have no reason not to do so - then a scouting system that can't produce a single player better at left back than James McClean and Stephen Ward is seriously deficient. We've seen this before under Mark Hughes. He wanted a right back, the club chased after Cedric Soares, lost out and immediately fell back on a well-past-his-best Glen Johnson. This is really the crux of the issue. When you appoint a manager like Jones, who is radically different to any manager that we've had in the last couple of decades, there are two ways of doing things. The first is to acknowledge that to get the best out of him, his appointment has to be just one part of a major reconfiguration of how things are done behind the scenes. In essence, this is the 'project' option, that I am quite happily signed up to. The other way of doing things is to just appoint him because he got good results somewhere else, completely ignore any context and blindly carry on as things were before with no change in strategy. If we've chosen option 1, then we just have to grit our teeth and ride out the teething problems as the project gets underway. If we've chosen option 2, then this whole thing was doomed from the very beginning and the chairman needs to race down to Sandbanks ASAP to fetch Tony Pulis back. I think that’s only partly how it works. My understanding of it was that there is indeed a list of targets scouted and presented to the manager, but the manager has his own targets and his decision is final. Most of the players Rowett signed were players he’d either worked with or tried to sign in the past. Jones clearly eschewed overseas players and again there were players he’d worked with in the past like Ward and Cousins. I think you may be right, but I don't think that makes things any better. Let's say Jones identified James Justin as his number 1 target and the club threw everything behind that pursuit. Fair enough, he chose the Premier League club, most players would. In normal circumstances, you would expect the process to progress on to the players on the list. Were our scouts really only capable of finding Stephen Ward and a load of options less appealing than James McClean? Even if the manager wasn't keen on foreign targets, was there not a single available left back in the whole country who was a better fit for what the manager wanted than James McClean?
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Sept 25, 2019 21:21:28 GMT
When he lied to us and Bojan about him having a role in order to curry favour then screwed him over, and replaced him with a crocked bellend who's not even a quarter as good as him.
|
|
|
Post by kaney78 on Sept 25, 2019 22:21:06 GMT
The first time his name came up on here. I'd never heard of him then. I wish I never had now. same here.easy to say in hindsight but at the time I would have preferred a more experienced manager but was willing to give Jones A chance, his time was up a few games ago for me
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2019 22:41:59 GMT
When he continually talked about signing young athletes but then paid £9 million for Sam Vokes. And then signed Baath Gregory Duffy Hogan Cousins Powell Smith Gets rid of Verlinden And continually plays McLean and Clucas
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Sept 26, 2019 7:36:38 GMT
If he'd signed Jesus Christ we'd be top of the league by now. Nailed on for promotion I'm still awaiting the resurrection.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Sept 26, 2019 8:35:13 GMT
I think that’s only partly how it works. My understanding of it was that there is indeed a list of targets scouted and presented to the manager, but the manager has his own targets and his decision is final. Most of the players Rowett signed were players he’d either worked with or tried to sign in the past. Jones clearly eschewed overseas players and again there were players he’d worked with in the past like Ward and Cousins. I think you may be right, but I don't think that makes things any better. Let's say Jones identified James Justin as his number 1 target and the club threw everything behind that pursuit. Fair enough, he chose the Premier League club, most players would. In normal circumstances, you would expect the process to progress on to the players on the list. Were our scouts really only capable of finding Stephen Ward and a load of options less appealing than James McClean? Even if the manager wasn't keen on foreign targets, was there not a single available left back in the whole country who was a better fit for what the manager wanted than James McClean? Jones is a massive part of the process - as is Paul Hart probably. I fully expect professional football people to come up with better alternatives to a twenty-something full back than a 35 year old who ultimately isn't deemed better than McClean. Managers, assistant managers, and scouts. I'd even expect experienced first team coaches to have some input.
|
|
|
Post by pushon on Sept 26, 2019 8:52:59 GMT
Were those 'the options presented to the manager' or the players the manager wanted? I find it hard to believe that a manager for whom full backs were key to his system couldn't think of more than two in the whole world. I'm sick to the back teeth about hearing that the manager (and past managers) had players foisted on them or were told they couldn't sign certain players. Until somebody can supply definitive proof that it's been anyone other than Hughes, Rowett and Jones who've been ultimately responsible for the overwhelming majority of players we've brought to the club over the past six or seven years then give it a rest. I'm quoting both of these posts at once because I think that they've slightly missed the point that I was getting at. I'm not a tinfoil hat type who thinks that a mysterious shadow government led by Tony Scholes locks the manager in a basement during the transfer window and signs a load of tat. What I am getting at is based on information that has come out of the club via all sorts of sources regarding the process. We've heard it come from a combination of the manager, the chief executive, the chairman and various members of the local press that the transfer process at Stoke is as follows: 1) The manager sets the overall direction for transfer activity in that window. He identifies areas for improvement, and the sorts of qualities that he wants from players in those areas. 2) The scouting network, which until recently was run by Mark Cartwright, goes out and does their best to rummage up any players who fit the manager's criteria, with Cartwright himself doing the 'opening doors' act that Spinks alluded to. 3) The manager is presented with a list of the players identified in step 2 and asks the club to purchase any of the players that he likes. He gets the final say on any signing that is made. I don't think that I've said anything particularly controversial so far. That's roughly 'the process' that the club operate with, although there has obviously been some wriggle room when, for example, the manager is dead keen on a certain player such as Berahino. What I'm arguing is that there is a serious deficiency in step 2 that has led to our poor recruitment in key positions this summer. The manager seems to have asked the club to find him a left back that fits certain criteria. The options presented were: 1) James Justin, who was always Premier League bound (see our high profile pursuit of him in the press over the summer) 2) Stephen Ward, a steady veteran coincidentally represented by Beswicks 3) A plethora of other options that Jones has openly said in the press were not as good as James McClean or Stephen Ward That's not a conspiracy theory, it's not tinfoil hat stuff, just stuff that has been openly stated in the press. If we are to take the manager on his word - and we have no reason not to do so - then a scouting system that can't produce a single player better at left back than James McClean and Stephen Ward is seriously deficient. We've seen this before under Mark Hughes. He wanted a right back, the club chased after Cedric Soares, lost out and immediately fell back on a well-past-his-best Glen Johnson. This is really the crux of the issue. When you appoint a manager like Jones, who is radically different to any manager that we've had in the last couple of decades, there are two ways of doing things. The first is to acknowledge that to get the best out of him, his appointment has to be just one part of a major reconfiguration of how things are done behind the scenes. In essence, this is the 'project' option, that I am quite happily signed up to. The other way of doing things is to just appoint him because he got good results somewhere else, completely ignore any context and blindly carry on as things were before with no change in strategy. If we've chosen option 1, then we just have to grit our teeth and ride out the teething problems as the project gets underway. If we've chosen option 2, then this whole thing was doomed from the very beginning and the chairman needs to race down to Sandbanks ASAP to fetch Tony Pulis back. I was with you all the way,until that horrific last paragraph!!
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Sept 26, 2019 10:17:18 GMT
I think that’s only partly how it works. My understanding of it was that there is indeed a list of targets scouted and presented to the manager, but the manager has his own targets and his decision is final. Most of the players Rowett signed were players he’d either worked with or tried to sign in the past. Jones clearly eschewed overseas players and again there were players he’d worked with in the past like Ward and Cousins. I think you may be right, but I don't think that makes things any better. Let's say Jones identified James Justin as his number 1 target and the club threw everything behind that pursuit. Fair enough, he chose the Premier League club, most players would. In normal circumstances, you would expect the process to progress on to the players on the list. Were our scouts really only capable of finding Stephen Ward and a load of options less appealing than James McClean? Even if the manager wasn't keen on foreign targets, was there not a single available left back in the whole country who was a better fit for what the manager wanted than James McClean? Ward wasn't found by 'the process', he'd worked with Jones before. For all we know we identified a load of left backs and Jones wouldn't have any of them?
|
|