|
Post by miggoscfc on Jul 2, 2020 9:17:21 GMT
Im sure he is a very decent and nice person and has the best intentions, but that does not mean he has inherited his Dads (or Sister's) understanding on how to run a business. As you about Peter, John's record speaks for it self, 4 years of failure that shows no sign of letting up. Re John, Never said it did as I don't know. Re Peter, I've watched stoke through late 80's 90's pre prem shite. What he has done for this club still deserves huge respect. Without him we'd have been scratching around the 2nd/3rd tier for last 15 years, like the period before. Which as we know, he was also part responsible for. For me he still has credit and he's still plowing cash in. Also who else is there? Again all those things considered does not mean he is above blame in any of this regardless of what credit he has in the bank.
|
|
|
Post by mamasgloves on Jul 2, 2020 9:30:52 GMT
What? On what basis? Seriously, this fucking forum No player signed for this club that TP didnt want with the exception being Palacios who had to come as a make weight in the Crouch deal who TP had highlighted as his No1 target that summer. Part of the reason he left was due to the appointment of MC and no longer having full control of who came and went from his squad and the Coates trust TPs word on every aspect of the club. Over the last few years we have allowed Cartwright and Scholes too much control over first team affairs and the results speak for themselves. It's not as black and white as that though is it? The recruitment function is intrinsically tied to the financial running of the club taking into account things like FFP, amortisation of contracts/player values, all of which need to be formally considered and protected during any targetting/negotiating of players. This re-writing of history when it comes to TP drives me mad. He signed more than his fair share of dross and keep giving them new deals (how many for Tonge?!), would meet players behind the club's back to agree wages (without the kind of information he should consider), signing players without medicals - is that the person you want to turn that function around? Really? He's also a man of entirely questionable character being subject to 3(?) court cases brought by former employers. This club has always needed a Director of Football as without it the identity is passed to individual managers who come and go, recruitment is based on that and managers too - that is the problem. He also didn't want Shea or Butland
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jul 2, 2020 10:18:47 GMT
Having met John and Peter a few times. Forget Peter for a minute, his record speaks for it's self. My meetings (social not business) doesn't put me in a position to give my opinion on how good John is at business or running a football club. It has however allowed me to form an opinion, that John is a down to earth nice guy, that loves the club. I also believe he's see it like a true Stoke City loving fan. He may be very wealthy, but I think silver spoon is well wide of the mark. I met whole family except for Denise. They are all down to earth Stokies. Im sure he is a very decent and nice person and has the best intentions, but that does not mean he has inherited his Dads (or Sister's) understanding on how to run a business. As you about Peter, John's record speaks for it self, 4 years of failure that shows no sign of letting up. The coates family pay others to run the club for then in reality. They simply bank roll it. They may be to loyal or too slow to swing the axe but their financial support for the club is beyond question
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Jul 2, 2020 10:25:08 GMT
Maybe he's not fit to run a football club. Maybe he's picked the wrong managers. Maybe he's let his CEO have too much his own way. I said a few years ago that he could be the big problem at the Club. Little junior taking over from papa. Silver spoon blah blah... Nowt like petty rich family empire building. Having met John and Peter a few times. Forget Peter for a minute, his record speaks for it's self. My meetings (social not business) doesn't put me in a position to give my opinion on how good John is at business or running a football club. It has however allowed me to form an opinion, that John is a down to earth nice guy, that loves the club. I also believe he's see it like a true Stoke City loving fan. He may be very wealthy, but I think silver spoon is well wide of the mark. I met whole family except for Denise. They are all down to earth Stokies. I am glad John is a nice guy. However it doesn't qualify him to have the ability to run a football club. I am quite certain I couldn't do it either. There is no shame in him getting in a well paid director of football and a better CEO to take over the job for him. It would be a much wiser use of money compared to the amounts we have spunked on failed over paid signings. Our signing record is haphazard because the club itself has failed to set out its identity. Instead leaving it to luck of the draw. They need to get their shit together or we are going to keep heading downwards.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 2, 2020 10:31:33 GMT
So the incompetence is in some way related to the amount we've spent? Lambert aside the managerial appointments have generally been something the fanbase could see merits in. Funnily enough the two least well received, Hughes (who was stated by Peter as John's first decision/influence) and Lambert were those that arguably had the greatest degree of success. Lambert came closer, in terms of points, than Rowett and Jones did to their targets. It isn't a mark of your incompetence if when your house is on fire you call out the fire brigade and your house ends up burnt to the ground. Believe it or not even if every team in the league makes brilliant, flawless decisions, someone still has to finish bottom of the league by virtue of how it works. As an owner you can do everything right and still finish bottom of the league. That isn't to say everything has been done right, but its a simple reality. So 4 years of dog shit and you still don't think upstairs need questioning. I just don't get it at all. Its their club they own it, they have to be accountable somewhere along the line. Its not the appointments, some have been ok as you say, its the ethos and identity of the club. And guess what the useless lumps have left us without one for a long time now. That is their responsibility. So of course they are to blame. Maybe not totally but they are to blame. Under the Coates', we've had 10 seasons in the Premier League but if the worst happens this year, it'll be eight seasons in the third tier and counting since they first took ownership (I know some of that time served was under the Icelanders but they were clearing up the shit show left by Coates' previous reign, and even then he was still in situ on the board). In fact, our only other season in the third tier without any kind of 'Family' involvement was 1926/27, so you could argue that their watch has seen us spend more time as a third division club than at any time in our history, whilst the PL spell saw us playing in the top flight, which is where we've spent a lot of our time (18th most appearances in the country). And the current malaise is occuring when we have the richest owners we've ever had. Two notable Coates achievements there...
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 2, 2020 10:33:38 GMT
What? On what basis? Seriously, this fucking forum No player signed for this club that TP didnt want with the exception being Palacios who had to come as a make weight in the Crouch deal who TP had highlighted as his No1 target that summer. Part of the reason he left was due to the appointment of MC and no longer having full control of who came and went from his squad and the Coates trust TPs word on every aspect of the club. Over the last few years we have allowed Cartwright and Scholes too much control over first team affairs and the results speak for themselves. Tuncay
|
|
|
Post by mamasgloves on Jul 2, 2020 10:37:00 GMT
No player signed for this club that TP didnt want with the exception being Palacios who had to come as a make weight in the Crouch deal who TP had highlighted as his No1 target that summer. Part of the reason he left was due to the appointment of MC and no longer having full control of who came and went from his squad and the Coates trust TPs word on every aspect of the club. Over the last few years we have allowed Cartwright and Scholes too much control over first team affairs and the results speak for themselves. Tuncay Good call, think he was part of the Huth deal...another 2 for 1 to get the player he wanted which was to the detriment of the club
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jul 2, 2020 10:40:54 GMT
Good call, think he was part of the Huth deal...another 2 for 1 to get the player he wanted which was to the detriment of the club Yes if memory serves we wanted Huth but Boro insisted we signed both. And Tuncay, despite being a mercurial talent, wasn't a Pulis 'cage' player and was largely used as a sub. In fact, wasn't he subbed on and off again in one game?
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Jul 2, 2020 12:20:32 GMT
Im sure he is a very decent and nice person and has the best intentions, but that does not mean he has inherited his Dads (or Sister's) understanding on how to run a business. As you about Peter, John's record speaks for it self, 4 years of failure that shows no sign of letting up. The coates family pay others to run the club for then in reality. They simply bank roll it. They may be to loyal or too slow to swing the axe but their financial support for the club is beyond question Is that the case though? Does Tiny Scholes appoint the manager or sanction transfer spending? I don’t think so, he executes the strategy but doesn’t set it. We were clearly very keen to land our last 4 managers and obviously gave them the freedom to choose their own signings. And Hughes towards the end and the other 3 have consistently failed to develop a coherent transfer strategy. Buying players with little apparent thought to how they might fit into a team.
|
|