So if the club announced they have found a manager/coach but he's in work, I know it happens all the time but we would be admitting we are tapping up a coach who is currently employed elsewhere. The club announced that Dodds will be interim boss till the end of the season. It may not be what people want but it's what they said they were doing. People saying the club should say this and the club should say that. The club are doing what they said. Looking back, since KLD took over the club has done exactly what they said they would do. The problem we have is that's not what some of our fans want. Yes we've been **** this year and improvements need made, but I could understand the frustration and anger more, if he'd said I'm going to spend millions and get us back to the PL as quickly as possible. Can someone point out exactly what they have done that they didn't state they were going to do in the first place. I know the aim is to improve every season but unfortunately in the real world that's not guaranteed
seems the fella plays defensive. Id say with the players as have we're probably more attacking. I'm going to protest if he comes. lol
Has anyone thought that the Club are managing our expectations? A little pain now for greater benefit later. Hear me out. If the Club had appointed a new Head Coach straight away to replace Beale and the results had not improved sufficiently to satisfy the rabid, I want it all and I want it now supporters, then come the close season there would be calls to replace the new Coach. These calls could be dismissed or ignored by the Club but the Coach would start next season under undue pressure to produce instant results. If the Club takes it's time, finds the "right" Coach and brings him in during the close season, but he already been monitoring our peformances, then he starts with a clean slate and few more games to assess the squad and set up the team. All the new Coach then has to do is to keep us in and around the play off places, say 5th to 9th to ease the demands. I say "all" accepting that it's not easy to do that. To an extent I think Speakman actually caused some of the current problems for himself before the season started when he said that promotion was the target. If he had stated that we had, in effect, over performed last season and that we were looking to consolidate this season and grow the team and the squad with the aim of being in and around the play offs at the end of the season it would have drawn critisism but would have taken a lot of pressure off Mowbray. OK, he probably caused himself more of a problem by not signing an oven ready striker and CDM, but... So there you have it, it's all a cunning plan by Speakman to manage our expectations for next season before he pulls an absolute rabbitt out of his hat by way of a decent Head Coach and 2 -3 decent players and we go on to storm the league next season. I think I may have taken too much cough medicine. Nurse, nurse... Well you have to laugh, dont you
I think quite a few were keen on Farioli when we were looking at replacing Mowbray. Seems like his style is to defend and try and pick teams off, doesn't sound any better than Beale really. From The Guardian: "Farioli’s philosophy leaves shackled Nice in a slump and lacking a plan B Defensive tactics have served side well this season but after recent poor results maybe it is time the handbrake came off." Doesn't strike me as someone we should have hired.
After living there for many years, having once been a steward at Nice and still having French mates there ... ... I can say they're not impressed. They have a good squad but Farioli seems chaotic, only picked the same side twice. It doesn't help that the Nice supporters are rabid and impatient but Farioli seems transfixed and lost.
Even regarding recruitment we have fans that want instant gratification! Some of the signings made in the last year are very young and may well need time to adapt (some fans just want it now) only time will tell if they will be good enough but previous signings suggest their may well be one or 2 good signings in there. Most clubs will tell you that not all signings will be superstars and that you will get as many misses as hits but because of our recent history and tha fact we have had to rebuild the youth teams I think our squad deficiencies have been highlighted mor especially the lack of more established players, these problems in my eyes are more historic in the same way as the deals for refreshments and the strips have been. We as a club have got to put back the strong foundations to allow the club to progress and that has meant a bit of sacrifice which is evident at first team level as this is for most the tip of the spear where any weakness will be magnified. So as I have said earlier our youth teams are looking good so IMO this is where our recruitment needs to be ultra focused on first team affairs as we are now in a position with a stable base to work from which should provide the opportunity to really start and fully shape the first team properly.
Can you describe what the Model is so I know what we should be evolving because as far as I know nobody is able to tell me exactly what the model is the only info I have seen is that the club do not wish to pay large transfer fees for players over the age of 26 and will look to protect the club in Contract negotiations with players over 30. Both fairly solid statements IMO, they have also stated that the 26 year old age limit is a guideline not a hard and fast rule. ??
Funny thing is, keeping him would have seen us lose him anyway due to his health. Just need to get a long term appointment sorted and things will look bright. The essence of the model, as far as I can tell, is that it's a convenient stick to beat the club with over and over and over again.
That's probably a decent summary. What it means in real life is buying a load of kids who aren't ready for a full season and pushing out anyone kicking 30. That may improve in a few years time as these kids mature, but it currently means we've removed all our experience. You've got to keep the business of now going while you build the future.
the trouble was we did not have a business of now, so we had to buy young and allow development. we have retained some more experienced players such as LON, PR and have added BD to that mix. We have gotten rid of or let go RS who has played about 20 minutes of football (I know I have exaggerated this) since last year we let DB leave and he is a bit part player at his new club and then LG left because he wanted more football and was not guaranteed it with us, Then AP who wanted a longer contract and as much as I liked him at times I would not have given him more than the years extension he wanted nor would I have given him a increased offers.
The model gets bandied about so often now the words have started to lose meaning. What we are trying to do is no different to Dortmund, Brentford, Brighton etc in buying, developing and selling players for profit. It's not something new, the subtle difference is we are also trying to be sustainable and not rely on an owner funding it continuously. For example Tony Bloom at Brighton has pumped 500 million into Brighton to get them where they are now, of that 500 million roughly half was spent on improving the club the rest on the playing side. When a player is sold for a big profit, some of the money will go to improving the squad, increasing wage budgets etc and some no doubt on infrastructure, thus keeping us improving on and off the pitch with minimal (if any) owner reliance. Doing it the way we are trying also keeps the football affordable for the match going fans and doesn't sell its soul to a nation or rely on the benevolence of a rich owner.
Would we have been promoted with Gooch, Baath and Pritchard, I doubt it ... ... and if we'd signed a small ageing midfield player, who struggles after 60 minutes, I doubt people would be too thrilled. I'd have kept Gooch, I think the club would, but he wanted to play more football, nit less.
We needed to replace those players given how often those experienced ones left are injured. The result of not doing that has been an over reliance on the kids, whose form is naturally up and down. Once we've got the 'conveyor belt' going the approach is fine because there's a ready made replacement at the club. It's staying in the league while you're implementing the approach that should be a higher priority. We've gambled this year and probably won, but this season should be taken as a warning and not carte blanche to shift experience again and rely on kids because we got away with it this time. I'd like to think we'll take option 1 and make sure we don't have another season like this one, because that would hinder the progress.
I think I have often said on here that I understand the approach from the recruitment team and I believe that we are now in a position to recruit a more established player if they are the right fit for our club. I keep saying it we have been building the foundations which are very strong but this has left the squad at first team level a little vulnerable especially considering the injuries, however if we had not had as many injuries to key players how many extra points do you think this squad would have gotten??? that is probably a debate worth having as it may give a little more insight of what to expect next season.
Zero injuries and think we’re looking at the top 8, lack of proper 9 would have potentially seen us fall just short of the play offs but always a chance of pinching 6th
