EveryWednesday Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 This is a post about Wednesday's transfer system so please don't move it mods. Watford chairman or CEO/president or whatever they call him has just been on 5 live explaining that they appoint a manager to work within the philosophy of the club not to shape their own. In this way the managers are not directly involved in contract or transfer negotiations, they can give recommendations but it's sorted upstairs. God was on the show too (Chris Waddle). He said it was the system at Marseille and he liked it as the manager had to concentrate on training, team selection and winning matches. Now my question, are we running the same system at Hillsborough? Because that would explain why we are making big money signings that the manager doesn't put in the team and why we don't get the best out of players like Rhodes and Abdi. Also might explain the appointment of a continental manager. I know we had the advisory group when chansiri took over but then Roader (I think) left. But perhaps we still give Carlos minimal input into signings? I'm sure someone on here must know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chow Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 What's the point in having a manger if they don't have inputs on signings I.e. Analyse where the team is going wrong, bring the correct player to help change things. Football is changing way too much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamworthowl Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Carlos was originally brought in the establish that initial philosophy. Mark Cooper would have been the Head Coach. But Cooper said no, and Carlos' role changed. I agree that he doesn't, in my opinion, have total/final say on transfers, despite him saying the opposite previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EveryWednesday Posted May 21, 2017 Author Share Posted May 21, 2017 10 minutes ago, Animal said: What's the point in having a manger if they don't have inputs on signings I.e. Analyse where the team is going wrong, bring the correct player to help change things. Football is changing way too much That's exactly what the Watford guy said though, that football had changed and the modern manager hasn't got time for lengthy negotiations and setting policy. I don't know, I think either give the manager complete control over transfer policy and strategy on the pitch or you need a coach who will get the best out of what he's given Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Costello 77 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 You can't try to analyze the inner workings of the club..... However you can say all you like about what you see on the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Farrell Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 That system is fooked if the manager sticks to his favourites even when not fit. It's a recipe for spunking money up the wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EveryWednesday Posted May 21, 2017 Author Share Posted May 21, 2017 Indeed, but if there's problems on the pitch it's often symptomatic of the inner workings of the club. Did anyone ask at the forum thing about transfer policy? All I heard was DC said if they make a signing they expect them to play, but that doesn't translate when you look at Emmanuelson and Abdi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SallyCinnamon Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 If that was the case why did our style change from the first season under CC to the second? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fudge27 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Worked pretty well for Southampton, Watford, Barca, Chelsea etc. modern game. Makes sense to me. The club is bigger then anyone, even the manager at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EveryWednesday Posted May 21, 2017 Author Share Posted May 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said: If that was the case why did our style change from the first season under CC to the second? Carlos grew more cautious while the top brass still concentrated on bringing in attacking talent (Rhodes, Winnall, Macca, Abdi)? That would explain a mismatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owl999 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 35 minutes ago, EveryWednesday said: This is a post about Wednesday's transfer system so please don't move it mods. Watford chairman or CEO/president or whatever they call him has just been on 5 live explaining that they appoint a manager to work within the philosophy of the club not to shape their own. In this way the managers are not directly involved in contract or transfer negotiations, they can give recommendations but it's sorted upstairs. God was on the show too (Chris Waddle). He said it was the system at Marseille and he liked it as the manager had to concentrate on training, team selection and winning matches. Now my question, are we running the same system at Hillsborough? Because that would explain why we are making big money signings that the manager doesn't put in the team and why we don't get the best out of players like Rhodes and Abdi. Also might explain the appointment of a continental manager. I know we had the advisory group when chansiri took over but then Roader (I think) left. But perhaps we still give Carlos minimal input into signings? I'm sure someone on here must know Pretty much what I've said for the last couple of years Regards Carlos . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinger208b Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 37 minutes ago, EveryWednesday said: This is a post about Wednesday's transfer system so please don't move it mods. Watford chairman or CEO/president or whatever they call him has just been on 5 live explaining that they appoint a manager to work within the philosophy of the club not to shape their own. In this way the managers are not directly involved in contract or transfer negotiations, they can give recommendations but it's sorted upstairs. God was on the show too (Chris Waddle). He said it was the system at Marseille and he liked it as the manager had to concentrate on training, team selection and winning matches. Now my question, are we running the same system at Hillsborough? Because that would explain why we are making big money signings that the manager doesn't put in the team and why we don't get the best out of players like Rhodes and Abdi. Also might explain the appointment of a continental manager. I know we had the advisory group when chansiri took over but then Roader (I think) left. But perhaps we still give Carlos minimal input into signings? I'm sure someone on here must know Carlos is listed as HEAD COACH on the official website which suggests just that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 17 minutes ago, Tamworthowl said: Carlos was originally brought in the establish that initial philosophy. Mark Cooper would have been the Head Coach. But Cooper said no, and Carlos' role changed. I agree that he doesn't, in my opinion, have total/final say on transfers, despite him saying the opposite previously. I can't understand for the life of me as to why we ever wanted Mark Cooper as Head Coach. It'd have been a chuffing car crash of an appointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prowl Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 This is one of those problems arising from the differences between the European system and the traditional England one. Do we have a traditional manager or a continental head coach? If Carlos is a manager the club should let him decide which players he needs and, within reason, the club should try to sign them. If we have a head coach he should coach the players the club provides and pick the team from those players who can best play the clubs style. If a head coach refuses to pick players provided by the club then he should be fired and a new manager brought in. Before any one suggests I want Carlos fired that isn't the case, I've no idea if he is a manager or a coach. I'm not sure it is obvious one way or the other from what we as fans see. My own preference is for a manager, I think that might be because it is what I'm used to seeing (it's an age thing). It is wasteful though when one manager gets the boot and a new one is brought in. Half the squad gets dumped and new players are brought in by the new manager to play his way. It gets expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pompeyowl Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Problem with that model is you become very predictable, and easy to play against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i used to be sc_owl Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 At this level... One manager = one philosophy/vision Management by committee = clusterfook of epic proportions. Why does it work for bigger clubs? Simple £££ €€€ $$$ that pays for a vast scouting and coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudentOwl Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 I think if this season has taught us anything, it's that whoever is in charge of our transfers shouldn't be so Personally, I think we could do with someone who has an eye for a player heavily involved in bringing players in. If that means having that person as DoF as part of a long-term strategy, then so be it. Look at Brentford, no DoF but they have a very clear brand and strategy that was dictated by the chairman and his insistence on statistical-based recruitment... Yet again they've massively over performed on a shoestring budget. So get so, so much bang for your buck with that recruitment technique, it's all about making it work and establishing that structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 (edited) The issues that arise out of this are whether your signings are coming from the top drawer. And whether they fit the way you play. For example and seeing as he's mention in the OP. When Waddle went to Marseille.... IF the manager said "get me a winger" he'd have been delighted that they got Waddle as he was a World Class talent. "Get me a striker." Papin joins. Again world class. But the lower down you go the more teams rely on the team unit than having world class match winning talent who can win games off the cuff. Imagine this style of operation at Wimbledon with Dave Bassett... Bassett : Get me a striker, we're one player away from promotion Two days later.... Committee .We have signed Robert Fleck for you Bassett : Fleck! Erm....I don't know if you've noticed how we play.....I need someone 6"4 Committee : But the lads an excellent reputation Bassett : Oh. He's a lovely little player, no doubt. But I can't play him. He doesn't fit what the other ten players are doing! Committee : Dave, you'll have to.We'll look mugs with the fans if he doesn't play Bassett: We're a route one outfit, he's 4"9 tall! Committee: Well you'll have to try and play it on the floor to suit him then. Bassett: But the other 10 players cant play football! they're a rag tag mob of physical bullies You can't change a system that suits ten to suit one Commitee: Well, we've signed him now. Bassett: fackin hell. I wish you'd let me sort it out. I know what we need to fit the system. How much is left in the kitty? I could still get Fashanu from Millwall for about £100k and he'll get us 100 goals in 250 games. Commitee: Erm, the kittys empty ,Dave. Bassett: How do you mean empty?! Commitee Fleck cost £1.2m Bassett: Shitabrick I could have got Fash AND had £1.8 left to get one or two others in for that. Almost certainly guaranteeing promotion and we coulda built some new bogs and bought a team coach. Fackin hell Edited May 21, 2017 by Lord Snooty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EveryWednesday Posted May 21, 2017 Author Share Posted May 21, 2017 14 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said: The issues that arise out of this are whether your signings are coming from the top drawer. And whether they fit the way you play. For example and seeing as he's mention in the OP. When Waddle went to Marseille.... IF the manager said "get me a winger" he'd have been delighted that they got Waddle as he was a World Class talent. "Get me a striker." Papin joins. Again world class. But the lower down you go the more teams rely on the team unit than having world class match winning talent who can win games off the cuff. Imagine this style of operation at Wimbledon with Dave Bassett... Bassett : Get me a striker, we're one player away from promotion Two days later.... Committee .We have signed Robert Fleck for you Bassett : Fleck! Erm....I don't know if you've noticed how we play.....I need someone 6"4 Committee : But the lads an excellent reputation Bassett : Oh. He's a lovely little player, no doubt. But I can't play him. He doesn't fit what the other ten players are doing! Committee : Dave, you'll have to.We'll look mugs with the fans if he doesn't play Bassett: We're a route one outfit, he's 4"9 tall! Committee: Well you'll have to try and play it on the floor to suit him then. Bassett: But the other 10 players cant play football! they're a rag tag mob of physical bullies You can't change a system that suits ten to suit one Commitee: Well, we've signed him now. Bassett: fackin hell. I wish you'd let me sort it out. I know what we need to fit the system. How much is left in the kitty? I could still get Fashanu from Millwall for about £100k and he'll get us 100 goals in 250 games. Commitee: Erm, the kittys empty ,Dave. Bassett: How do you mean empty?! Commitee Fleck cost £1.2m Bassett: Shitabrick I could have got Fash AND had £1.8 left to get one or two others in for that. Almost certainly guaranteeing promotion and we coulda built some new bogs and bought a team coach. Fackin hell Brilliant Do you think this is what is happening at Hillsborough? Carlos: I need a winger Board: We've spent the loan budget bringing you macca. He's fast and attacking. Scare em feckless he will Carlos: No I meant a passing wide man who comes inside and helps the play in midfield for our slow build up. A possession player Board: I see. An expensive bench warmer then Think it fits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, EveryWednesday said: Brilliant Do you think this is what is happening at Hillsborough? Carlos: I need a winger Board: We've spent the loan budget bringing you macca. He's fast and attacking. Scare em feckless he will Carlos: No I meant a passing wide man who comes inside and helps the play in midfield for our slow build up. A possession player Board: I see. An expensive bench warmer then Think it fits Well...that might be nearer to the truth than we think... .it has to be said that, some of the signings make little sense. Buckley and McManaman about as near as you'll get to old school wingers. But genuinely very few team play old school wingers any more. Not in a four man midfield. It's tantamount to suicide. Most teams you'll see with 'proper' wingers. In any division will be playing from three. Which makes them coming here absolutely bizarre to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now