|
|
Post by a on Dec 20, 2023 21:52:28 GMT
Is this because he’s “head coach” not manager? Maybe it’s what we need but given our recent history of leadership I’m yet to be convinced. I’ll be watching Saturday and supporting either way, What would convince you. As a model it’s meant to allow people to focus on their role and reduce the organisations reliance on individuals. It won’t stop you making bad deals for players. It won’t stop you making bad appointments. If that’s what you’re waiting for it will be a long wait. It’s more like trying to drag football into the real world. I mean how many jobs have you been for where you insist upon the company employing a shitload of your mates too and when you leave they all leave with you, it’s bizarre. What’s the difference then? By the way, to compare football management to almost any other business is ridiculous. I should add, I’m sure you’re a sensible person but my point is extant: football management isn’t the same as almost anything else |
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Dec 20, 2023 22:04:30 GMT
For many months, some supporters have bemoaned the club for not having a Brentford / Brighton style model despite recently appointing a Technical Director and a Head of Recruitment. ‘Too much control for the manager’ ‘We are stuck in the dark ages’ ‘Ricky Martin is Alex Neil’s best mate’ ‘John Coates doesn’t know what he’s doing’ But Ricky Martin remains post-Neil, was heavily involved in the new manager (sorry, Head Coach) recruitment process and our business in the summer, aside from a few signings, was obviously led by Dublin’s data and not from Neil’s notebook. Can those same supporters now acknowledge that we do have the model that they’ve championed?
Perhaps the key is just winning football games rather than models, trends and hipster football perspectives. I don't think that's the case at all. What has been installed is much more, and over a lot of time, replacements for the Scholes/Cartwright "model" that we had. There is no sporting director employed yet at all. The sd should be a football man, not a technical person. We had the chance to have Michael O'Neill, who had trained for the position through his university degree, upstairs in an office with a head coach below him. But we blew it - or he did. |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 20, 2023 22:04:34 GMT
What would convince you. As a model it’s meant to allow people to focus on their role and reduce the organisations reliance on individuals. It won’t stop you making bad deals for players. It won’t stop you making bad appointments. If that’s what you’re waiting for it will be a long wait. It’s more like trying to drag football into the real world. I mean how many jobs have you been for where you insist upon the company employing a shitload of your mates too and when you leave they all leave with you, it’s bizarre. What’s the difference then? By the way, to compare football management to almost any other business is ridiculous. I should add, I’m sure you’re a sensible person but my point is extant: football management isn’t the same as almost anything else What exactly is it you think that makes football management exceptional? |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 20, 2023 22:12:27 GMT
For many months, some supporters have bemoaned the club for not having a Brentford / Brighton style model despite recently appointing a Technical Director and a Head of Recruitment. ‘Too much control for the manager’ ‘We are stuck in the dark ages’ ‘Ricky Martin is Alex Neil’s best mate’ ‘John Coates doesn’t know what he’s doing’ But Ricky Martin remains post-Neil, was heavily involved in the new manager (sorry, Head Coach) recruitment process and our business in the summer, aside from a few signings, was obviously led by Dublin’s data and not from Neil’s notebook. Can those same supporters now acknowledge that we do have the model that they’ve championed?
Perhaps the key is just winning football games rather than models, trends and hipster football perspectives. I don't think that's the case at all. What has been installed is much more, and over a lot of time, replacements for the Scholes/Cartwright "model" that we had. There is no sporting director employed yet at all. The sd should be a football man, not a technical person. We had the chance to have Michael O'Neill, who had trained for the position through his university degree, upstairs in an office with a head coach below him. But we blew it - or he did. As far as I’m aware DoF sporting/technical director are alternative terms used for a similar role. Do you know of clubs having more than one position of this type whatever they choose to call it. I’ve no idea what RM credentials are but I wouldn’t have thought you’d have him in his role and MON in a DoF sporting director role. Seems to me you’re just saying you’d prefer MON to RM and using an ambiguous argument to state your simple preference. Personally think MON did some very good work and would have made a ok DoF if he hadn’t discredited himself with the football on the pitch. Also agree it should be a football person and as I’ve already admitted I’ve no idea what RM is. |
|
|
|
Post by blackpoolred on Dec 20, 2023 22:16:10 GMT
World class model - where we can only employ third rate Brits to implement it
|
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Dec 21, 2023 4:02:11 GMT
The model may be a problem. But although the consistent common denominator keeping pointing out as the infrastructure, maybe something more simple.
We have players who have consistently failed under a number of managers now. Eventually that old guard pretty much all need to go.
|
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Dec 21, 2023 7:44:30 GMT
I don't think that's the case at all. What has been installed is much more, and over a lot of time, replacements for the Scholes/Cartwright "model" that we had. There is no sporting director employed yet at all. The sd should be a football man, not a technical person. We had the chance to have Michael O'Neill, who had trained for the position through his university degree, upstairs in an office with a head coach below him. But we blew it - or he did. As far as I’m aware DoF sporting/technical director are alternative terms used for a similar role. Do you know of clubs having more than one position of this type whatever they choose to call it. I’ve no idea what RM credentials are but I wouldn’t have thought you’d have him in his role and MON in a DoF sporting director role. Seems to me you’re just saying you’d prefer MON to RM and using an ambiguous argument to state your simple preference. Personally think MON did some very good work and would have made a ok DoF if he hadn’t discredited himself with the football on the pitch. Also agree it should be a football person and as I’ve already admitted I’ve no idea what RM is. I don't have a preference at all for MON. I simply put his name forward as a man qualified for the office. I think a technical director is a Scholes type. while a sporting director is someone who's been in football at all levels, playing, coaching, managing. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Dec 21, 2023 8:04:25 GMT
I suppose I’m old fashioned, but it’s beyond me why football clubs need to create tiers upon tiers of roles to provide us with some decent footballers. Over complicated corporate bullshit for me. Parasites draining money out of the club for doing nothing, having no real responsibility and blurring the lines of accountability. I wonder if the players get confused as to who is actually in charge. For every Dan Ashworth there appears to be a lot of bullshittee types in these roles at lots of clubs |
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Dec 21, 2023 8:06:54 GMT
The model may be a problem. But although the consistent common denominator keeping pointing out as the infrastructure, maybe something more simple. We have players who have consistently failed under a number of managers now. Eventually that old guard pretty much all need to go. Who are these players that you class as "that old guard"? Can't think of anyone other than Campbell who's been here beyond MON so I don't think we've got an old guard at all. The majority of the squad have only been here since this summer. |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 8:33:42 GMT
As far as I’m aware DoF sporting/technical director are alternative terms used for a similar role. Do you know of clubs having more than one position of this type whatever they choose to call it. I’ve no idea what RM credentials are but I wouldn’t have thought you’d have him in his role and MON in a DoF sporting director role. Seems to me you’re just saying you’d prefer MON to RM and using an ambiguous argument to state your simple preference. Personally think MON did some very good work and would have made a ok DoF if he hadn’t discredited himself with the football on the pitch. Also agree it should be a football person and as I’ve already admitted I’ve no idea what RM is. I don't have a preference at all for MON. I simply put his name forward as a man qualified for the office. I think a technical director is a Scholes type. while a sporting director is someone who's been in football at all levels, playing, coaching, managing. Sorry I don’t think it is a technical director is meant to be there for their football expertise they’re not financial like Scholes. We’ve not replaced Scholes at all John has taken on the decision making side of his role and the former club secretary whose name escapes me has taken over the administration side of his role. RM has taken over the football negotiations that Scholes constantly fucked up. That’s why I don’t understand a lot of the criticism of him. He closed 18 deals in the Summer of whom he’ll have played a pretty insignificant role in identifying and choosing between targets. So like him or not, like the players or not he seems to get the deals done that the financial parameters he’s given allow. Nobody’s going to be allowed to go out and blow millions more on players than the budgets set for them without returning to the person who ultimately authorises expenditures which was the problem in the Summer. The market especially for our forward targets was a lot richer than we expected and we only reduced our expectation of what we could get for the money allocated at the last minute. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Dec 21, 2023 8:39:19 GMT
Does Steven Schumacher report directly to Richard Martin?
|
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 8:50:23 GMT
Does Steven Schumacher report directly to Richard Martin? You’d expect so. Is a manager normally lower in a company structure than a director? |
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Dec 21, 2023 8:51:13 GMT
The model may be a problem. But although the consistent common denominator keeping pointing out as the infrastructure, maybe something more simple. We have players who have consistently failed under a number of managers now. Eventually that old guard pretty much all need to go. Who are these players that you class as "that old guard"? Can't think of anyone other than Campbell who's been here beyond MON so I don't think we've got an old guard at all. The majority of the squad have only been here since this summer. At this rate of turnover, almost anyone that's been here more than 18 months, if they can't perform under the new coach. |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 8:59:15 GMT
Who are these players that you class as "that old guard"? Can't think of anyone other than Campbell who's been here beyond MON so I don't think we've got an old guard at all. The majority of the squad have only been here since this summer. At this rate of turnover, almost anyone that's been here more than 18 months, if they can't perform under the new coach. The first team squad has been changed repeatedly during our demise. Can you not see that changing virtually the whole squad to pander to the whims of each passing manager/head coach is far costlier and more time consuming than recruiting players to a chosen style and changing the manager/coach as and when necessary to suit the players you’ve recruited not chuck everything out the window and recruit yet another squad to play yet another style? |
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Dec 21, 2023 9:02:26 GMT
I don't have a preference at all for MON. I simply put his name forward as a man qualified for the office. I think a technical director is a Scholes type. while a sporting director is someone who's been in football at all levels, playing, coaching, managing. Sorry I don’t think it is a technical director is meant to be there for their football expertise they’re not financial like Scholes. We’ve not replaced Scholes at all John has taken on the decision making side of his role and the former club secretary whose name escapes me has taken over the administration side of his role. RM has taken over the football negotiations that Scholes constantly fucked up. That’s why I don’t understand a lot of the criticism of him. He closed 18 deals in the Summer of whom he’ll have played a pretty insignificant role in identifying and choosing between targets. So like him or not, like the players or not he seems to get the deals done that the financial parameters he’s given allow. Nobody’s going to be allowed to go out and blow millions more on players than the budgets set for them without returning to the person who ultimately authorises expenditures which was the problem in the Summer. The market especially for our forward targets was a lot richer than we expected and we only reduced our expectation of what we could get for the money allocated at the last minute. It's not difficult to find 18 players out of contract or on the verge of it and sign them. There's hundreds of them during summer transfer windows. The difficult part is finding that many players to fit into one team, one style (even if AN seemed to court different styles) and to find real quality, players that can sustain the club in the long run, not just the short run of manager's. I don't think we can say that RM has succeeded in any way so far, although by emphasising 'so far' the six months since players started rolling in is of course way too short for such a project to be even judged fairly. For this reason, and this reaason only, I would have liked AN to have stayed longer, although his results and his overall management was too poor for that to have happened. But having started it it would have been better for the 18 newbies if their manager had continued. With none of them settled at the club, they now have to start all over as do the relatively oldies at the club. It's now up to SS to make it work, and for the first time in several years, I'm optimistic that he will. I'm less optimistic about RM, if, as you say, he is the quasi SD. I don't expect him to sign many in the January window, although if he does sign any it may well be players that he and AN had identified as players that would fit obvious holes in the roles of the team, and that RM was going to try and sign if AN had stayed. But to prove to the board and the fans that he is still actively working, he might push ahead with those players identifed. But as I've said, I have little faith in him getting it right, and by saying that I'm also stating my lack of faith in our new business model. |
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Dec 21, 2023 9:06:39 GMT
Who are these players that you class as "that old guard"? Can't think of anyone other than Campbell who's been here beyond MON so I don't think we've got an old guard at all. The majority of the squad have only been here since this summer. At this rate of turnover, almost anyone that's been here more than 18 months, if they can't perform under the new coach. If you're looking at it purely as players who's been employed longer than six months at the club, then even Tezgel and Lowe not to mention Blondy and Sparrows are among the old guard... |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 9:24:37 GMT
Sorry I don’t think it is a technical director is meant to be there for their football expertise they’re not financial like Scholes. We’ve not replaced Scholes at all John has taken on the decision making side of his role and the former club secretary whose name escapes me has taken over the administration side of his role. RM has taken over the football negotiations that Scholes constantly fucked up. That’s why I don’t understand a lot of the criticism of him. He closed 18 deals in the Summer of whom he’ll have played a pretty insignificant role in identifying and choosing between targets. So like him or not, like the players or not he seems to get the deals done that the financial parameters he’s given allow. Nobody’s going to be allowed to go out and blow millions more on players than the budgets set for them without returning to the person who ultimately authorises expenditures which was the problem in the Summer. The market especially for our forward targets was a lot richer than we expected and we only reduced our expectation of what we could get for the money allocated at the last minute. It's not difficult to find 18 players out of contract or on the verge of it and sign them. There's hundreds of them during summer transfer windows. The difficult part is finding that many players to fit into one team, one style (even if AN seemed to court different styles) and to find real quality, players that can sustain the club in the long run, not just the short run of manager's. I don't think we can say that RM has succeeded in any way so far, although by emphasising 'so far' the six months since players started rolling in is of course way too short for such a project to be even judged fairly. For this reason, and this reaason only, I would have liked AN to have stayed longer, although his results and his overall management was too poor for that to have happened. But having started it it would have been better for the 18 newbies if their manager had continued. With none of them settled at the club, they now have to start all over as do the relatively oldies at the club. It's now up to SS to make it work, and for the first time in several years, I'm optimistic that he will. I'm less optimistic about RM, if, as you say, he is the quasi SD. I don't expect him to sign many in the January window, although if he does sign any it may well be players that he and AN had identified as players that would fit obvious holes in the roles of the team, and that RM was going to try and sign if AN had stayed. But to prove to the board and the fans that he is still actively working, he might push ahead with those players identifed. But as I've said, I have little faith in him getting it right, and by saying that I'm also stating my lack of faith in our new business model. You seem to have RM down as the main instigator for identifying the players and I don’t believe that to be true at all. |
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Dec 21, 2023 9:35:33 GMT
It's not difficult to find 18 players out of contract or on the verge of it and sign them. There's hundreds of them during summer transfer windows. The difficult part is finding that many players to fit into one team, one style (even if AN seemed to court different styles) and to find real quality, players that can sustain the club in the long run, not just the short run of manager's. I don't think we can say that RM has succeeded in any way so far, although by emphasising 'so far' the six months since players started rolling in is of course way too short for such a project to be even judged fairly. For this reason, and this reaason only, I would have liked AN to have stayed longer, although his results and his overall management was too poor for that to have happened. But having started it it would have been better for the 18 newbies if their manager had continued. With none of them settled at the club, they now have to start all over as do the relatively oldies at the club. It's now up to SS to make it work, and for the first time in several years, I'm optimistic that he will. I'm less optimistic about RM, if, as you say, he is the quasi SD. I don't expect him to sign many in the January window, although if he does sign any it may well be players that he and AN had identified as players that would fit obvious holes in the roles of the team, and that RM was going to try and sign if AN had stayed. But to prove to the board and the fans that he is still actively working, he might push ahead with those players identifed. But as I've said, I have little faith in him getting it right, and by saying that I'm also stating my lack of faith in our new business model. You seem to have RM down as the main instigator for identifying the players and I don’t believe that to be true at all. Just so long as its not JC scouting the players. That'd be a positive 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2023 9:41:30 GMT
Data and statistical models and all this stuff are only as good as the people interpreting them. Ultimately, if we sign players based on graphs and charts, they can still turn out to be shit footballers if the person crunching the numbers isn't that great at interpreting them. We might have the right model in place, but have we got the right people in those roles? Time will tell, but I've not been impressed by Dublin's signings so far. I broadly agree but how many of the summer signings were down to Dublin? Pearson, Johnson, Hoever, Gooch, Stevens definitely down to Neil. Rose and McNally Neil had been linked to before and I suspect Wesley also a AN signing. That's roughly half the summer signings. What I'm saying is we need a bit more evidence before know if Dublin is the right man or not. Agreee on the Neil input, although I feel like Wesley was possibly a Jared suggestion as a low risk kinda deal. The rest of the more exotic deals (Burger, Vidi, Junho, Mmaee etc) I’d imagine were Jared. January will hopefully help clarify our approach in that regard and hopefully we pick up a few more gems. |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 9:43:46 GMT
You seem to have RM down as the main instigator for identifying the players and I don’t believe that to be true at all. Just so long as its not JC scouting the players. That'd be a positive 😆 He just has to make sure the targets fit into the financial parameters and into a profile that has more upside than downside. We’ve seen over the last few years how signing players in the right age groups protects your investment even when they don’t succeed at the club. They’ve proved much more sensible than the money allocated to has beens and damaged goods. |
|
|
|
Post by a on Dec 21, 2023 10:02:53 GMT
What’s the difference then? By the way, to compare football management to almost any other business is ridiculous. I should add, I’m sure you’re a sensible person but my point is extant: football management isn’t the same as almost anything else What exactly is it you think that makes football management exceptional? It isn’t like managing a successful paper merchant. I dunno mate it just seems to be totally different, getting to a cup final and getting sacked would be very strange in normal life. |
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Dec 21, 2023 10:06:00 GMT
It's not difficult to find 18 players out of contract or on the verge of it and sign them. There's hundreds of them during summer transfer windows. The difficult part is finding that many players to fit into one team, one style (even if AN seemed to court different styles) and to find real quality, players that can sustain the club in the long run, not just the short run of manager's. I don't think we can say that RM has succeeded in any way so far, although by emphasising 'so far' the six months since players started rolling in is of course way too short for such a project to be even judged fairly. For this reason, and this reaason only, I would have liked AN to have stayed longer, although his results and his overall management was too poor for that to have happened. But having started it it would have been better for the 18 newbies if their manager had continued. With none of them settled at the club, they now have to start all over as do the relatively oldies at the club. It's now up to SS to make it work, and for the first time in several years, I'm optimistic that he will. I'm less optimistic about RM, if, as you say, he is the quasi SD. I don't expect him to sign many in the January window, although if he does sign any it may well be players that he and AN had identified as players that would fit obvious holes in the roles of the team, and that RM was going to try and sign if AN had stayed. But to prove to the board and the fans that he is still actively working, he might push ahead with those players identifed. But as I've said, I have little faith in him getting it right, and by saying that I'm also stating my lack of faith in our new business model. You seem to have RM down as the main instigator for identifying the players and I don’t believe that to be true at all. I just followed on from your statement that "RM has taken over the football negotiations"... |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 10:13:58 GMT
What exactly is it you think that makes football management exceptional? It isn’t like managing a successful paper merchant. I dunno mate it just seems to be totally different, getting to a cup final and getting sacked would be very strange in normal life. Happens all the time in business and in football we’re just a bit late coming to the party in Britain. Highly successful coaches (you know like ones that win stuff not just get to a cup final) have been routinely replaced on the continent for decades Del Bosque springs to mind never mind Pulis( I take it you were referring to him). Business leaders have wide ranging KPT’s and will often move on executives who meet some of them handsomely. Managers in large organisations are routinely rotated. It’s all perfectly normal dictatorships and fiefdoms as have been traditional in English football are very uncommon in the modern world. |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 10:19:22 GMT
You seem to have RM down as the main instigator for identifying the players and I don’t believe that to be true at all. I just followed on from your statement that "RM has taken over the football negotiations"... Yes tying up the deals with clubs players agents etc on targets agreed by a group that his is but a small part of. The days of one man having total control of the organisation have been dying out for a long time. We’re pretty late coming to the party but we’re getting there slowly. Now to stop the head coach owning the entire back room operation. |
|
|
|
Post by Gabrielzakuaniandjuliet on Dec 21, 2023 10:50:26 GMT
At the moment we don't even have a Plymouth model.
Last year's team looked way more like a typical Alex Neil side than this year. The cohesion between departments has clearly been ineffective up to now. There's a lot more to making a complicated business work than changing a couple of job titles.
We just appointed a very good coach but let's see how it goes
|
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Dec 21, 2023 10:51:18 GMT
We are ten years late but better late than never I suppose. Hopefully we are now heading in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by thestatusquo on Dec 21, 2023 12:44:55 GMT
Data and statistical models and all this stuff are only as good as the people interpreting them. Ultimately, if we sign players based on graphs and charts, they can still turn out to be shit footballers if the person crunching the numbers isn't that great at interpreting them. We might have the right model in place, but have we got the right people in those roles? Time will tell, but I've not been impressed by Dublin's signings so far. This. After vidigals initial start nobody has really stood out. We spent decent money on RM and WB and both have hardly pulled up any trees. I can imagine them being decent in the leagues below but neither are currently justifying the outlay afforded to them |
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Dec 21, 2023 13:01:09 GMT
Data and statistical models and all this stuff are only as good as the people interpreting them. Ultimately, if we sign players based on graphs and charts, they can still turn out to be shit footballers if the person crunching the numbers isn't that great at interpreting them. We might have the right model in place, but have we got the right people in those roles? Time will tell, but I've not been impressed by Dublin's signings so far. This. After vidigals initial start nobody has really stood out. We spent decent money on RM and WB and both have hardly pulled up any trees. I can imagine them being decent in the leagues below but neither are currently justifying the outlay afforded to them Don’t like him personally but we spent €2M upfront on RM I’d hardly call it decent money considering the striker market in the Summer. How are Coventry meant to be thinking about Ellis Simms, Leicester Tom Cannon, Southampton Ross Stewart? |
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Dec 21, 2023 13:19:07 GMT
I just followed on from your statement that "RM has taken over the football negotiations"... Yes tying up the deals with clubs players agents etc on targets agreed by a group that his is but a small part of. The days of one man having total control of the organisation have been dying out for a long time. We’re pretty late coming to the party but we’re getting there slowly. Now to stop the head coach owning the entire back room operation. I haven't really followed the incomings at Stoke over the last 17 months. Once AN was appointed, I - wouldn't say lost interest in the club but - grew disillusioned, so to be honest I wouldn't know Martin from Dublin if I saw them. Then last ummer I thought the massive clearout was the daftest thing ever, and once the names of players that with a couple of excptions I heard never heard of, further disillusion set in, not helped obviously by indifferent results and performances. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2023 14:07:00 GMT
Time will tell with RM as to how it goes. He hasn’t done it before, right? Rumours that he was hired because he and AN were pals.
I personally would have pushed the boat out for the crew at Peterborough. They’ve given some great, relative success to a small club and have a habit of finding good players to sell for profit. Not sure if that model only works because of Ferguson though. The whole unit seems to work best together.
|
|
