We don't have an active thread for discussing the owners/the people who run the club on their behalf, so I thought I'd create one. While I was there, I thought I'd test out a concept fairly similar to @RookeryJon's fan mood graph. Every time the club does something important that we broadly agree with, I'll give them a plus and note down the date and reason, and similar for things we disagree with. At the bottom of the post I'll keep a running total of their "balance". If the mood doesn't seem obvious I won't post to be on the safe side. A few things that I thought I'd throw up as possible starters: Taking control of the club from Bassini Bringing in six loan players from foreign top flight clubs Downgrading the academy to Category 3 If the idea doesn't catch on I'll ditch the +/- thing and we can always carry on using this as a normal discussion thread.
There you go NNW - three plusses straight away that you have mentioned. I'll put one minus down - sacking Sean Dyche and one plus for good balance - giving us some financial stability.
If the Pozzo's had not taken over we would have been in administartion within 6 months or less (unless Ashcroft stepped in to prevent it). Now we can expect financial stabilty for a couple of seasons at least, while the Pozzo model is tested in the English leagues. On the football side, we are unlikely be relegated while to Pozzo's are in charge , ---that is not part of their project, and they have the resources to prevent it.So that is one anxiety removed. Promotion to the Prem is not crucial to their plan but they might aspire to it. Zola will get us a lot of media attention, but is unproven as a manager at this level, so who knows where he will lead us or how long he will stay? Investing in stadium improvements is not crucial to their plan and will not happen. We now are defined by our role in the Pozzo project which is as a finishing school and showcase for younger players from the Pozzo stable, before they graduate to Udinese or are sold on at "peak value" . Our own Academy is less central to this than it was for Watford F.C alone, so will get fewer resources and a lower priority. In future the squad will be dominated by an annually changing cast of foreign loan players, with a core of more familiar faces. This might not bother fans if we stay in or around the top half of the Championship , and if the quality of the football on the pitch is acceptable. Pick the positives and negatives out of that. I would say on balance positive, tinged with regret for something lost.
The thing we seem pretty unanimous about is that getting rid of Bassini was a good thing, so I've added that in. I'm leaning towards putting Dyche's sacking and Category Three as negatives, but would like a bit more opinion. Is the Dyche negative outweighed by the fact that we have Zola? Should category three go down as a bad thing, or do we need more information?
This is the bit that confuses me, and my grandfather has the same issue with the new club owners. Our team has been chopped and changed so much over the last few years, loanees coming in short term and long term, players being sold, quite a few new permanent signings (some of whom hardly featured for us). What we have under the Pozzos won't be much different, except the quality of the loanees is guaranteed and all of their playing time will be benefiting us (as in the parent company), rather than helping Man U or Arsenal out by giving their young players time on the pitch (after they've hoovered up anyone that could potentially be a good player). Is it the foreign bit that's an issue? Is the old 'they don't know about the Championship' reason? Football is football, and these are adults we're speaking about here. It might rain a bit more here, they might have to learn a new language, but surely we're employing them to football, something they are professionals in. I'm sure they've played in rough games before at one point in their careers, I'm sure they've played in the rain before, I really don't see where the problem is...
Anya grew up in Glasgow, which is wetter and even more of a dump than West Watford. Abdi and Geijo come from a country with slopes nearly as steep as the Vicarage Road pitch, and at one point Almunia was threatening to play for England. And having said all that, it's Pudil and Vydra who are most likely to make an immediate impact. So I don't think nationality is particularly important.
My first impressions about Category Three was one of fear for what was happening to our club but as the debate has gone on my ideas have changed. Of course, I am well away from the information stream so I may have got things very wrong, but there doesn't seem to be any reason why the Academy cannot continue as it always has, under a Category Three designation. I was under the impression that all the boys in the Academy live locally so that they can go to the arefield anyway. The locality requirement is not a problem Being Category One and Two imposed requirements which aren't necessarily to the benefit of Watford FC or the boys. These include: an enforced league with much older players; there are financial requirements; coaches have to take up certain roles; the 'wholeness' of the young man in question is not considered (as it is at Harefield); parents are being asked to pin all there hopes on their son making it as a professional footballer (and very few will); the requirements of Cat One and Two will restrict developemnt of other players at the club due to stretching financial costs. The down side is that other clubs can more easily poach our Academy players. They could do this anyway but now it will cost them one peanut less than it would have done. Of course, any self-respecting parent, boy or agent will hopefully see that the chances of becoming a professional footballer at Watford Academy, whatever category it is in, are higher than at other clubs, so they will not fall for the enticements of other clubs. Am I looking at this with yellow tinted specs?
i don't think you are NZ, i think i see it the same way. Though some of the boys don't actually come from the Watford area and stay in Watford during the week, none of them come from far afield...i'm not sure if that would change if we're cat 3. I seem to remember seeing that boys can now come from anywhere in the country...i'm not sure they will come to Watford. I just think for a parent chosing a club, they might be put off by the fact that we're not playing in the U21s, as the thought of their little wonders playing in a league like that might just be the draw that the other academies have over ours. I would hope they would still see us as a viable option, though i do think this changes that for prospective boys. Only time will tell if it'll make a difference.
Yes, I wonder if we will lose our younger talented teenagers. It seems this is both a financial and a strategic move. Let us hope the pozzozs are in for the long term eh.... otherwise if they go we will end up in a worse position...
Taking over from Bassini, saving the club from almost certain administration and clearing all are debts are very big positives Bringing in 8 players, none of whom have cost a transfer fee, is a positive Losing Mariappa a big negative, but the lure of the Premiership was too strong, so would call that neutral btu disappointing. The sacking of Sean a negative, but bringing in Zola who is trying to play good football, counter-acts that for me. Would be have signed an Almunia-type player if Zola was not here? I would have liked Loach to have stayed and competed for the No.1 shirt with Almunia, but can't blame Scott for wanting to go As for the academy, for me that is a wait and see, but I don't see it as a negative at the moment. As long as they keep running Harefield as they are the positives are the extra expense which could be used elsewhere, the kids don't have to travel up and down the country, possibly big defeats against the bigger teams while also being in the 'shop window'. The main negative would be the attractiveness of the academy to the kids now, but if they still see a route through to the first team, I think it off-sets that! I'd certainly say the Pozzos et al are in the + column, and quite comfortably
I don't know if we were saved from administration, the snippets that have come out lead me to believe it was more likely extinction. Sean Dyche/Gianfranco Zola an interesting debate. How can anyone make a call when in one season SD over achieved and we have seen only a stuttering cup win over Wycombe Wanderers from GZ'S team so far. On the whole happy with our lot, but a little more light on where the Pozzos see the club in their empire would be welcome. I don't mean complete disclosure here (that is for them and them alone) just a general idea - take us with you, share the vision.
That's the bit that still rankles - I really don't understand how or why the EPL have been allowed to get away with this as it could potentially sound the death knell for many lower-level clubs. Does anyone know if there some sort of limit on the number of players that cat 1/2 clubs can take on, or will it be a case of open slather? The thought of EPL clubs cherry picking and stockpiling the country's finest kids makes me shudder. NZ - I hope that you weren't applying the adjective 'self-respecting' to agents as well! Self-serving would more appropriate IMO.
+ Knowledgable football people taking over the club - Sacking SD & his team giving no continuity (I wasn’t a great fan of SD & I think I will enjoy the Zola style of football) and gives a clue as to the hard nosed business model we will witness. - So many loan players (they can’t all play) and they take a place off the bench for the Youth players coming through (another sign our Academy system is likely to be watered down) - Lack of open communication (worse than I’ve ever known; all we seem to get is smooth PR speak & late, sometimes weeks late) Last year a lot of fans were moaning about Cardiff using the loan system to the extent that we are now going to do, are we now ok with it? Also even with the smaller number of loanees we have previously used some fans were complaining a Watford player was being denied a chance to progress. Now it will be much worse; Out of all our young players I would single out Thompson, Assombalonga & Massey as the most likely to miss out and be loaned out instead. Ok, with that moan out of the way I will admit that we won’t be relegated, we may get into the mix for promotion and it may well be enjoyable watching the team play this year which tbh for the most part I didn’t last season. It’s also true that financial stability will be achieved. It’s just that it’s looking increasingly like it won’t be our club that we know anymore.
The Dyche one seems to split people. Should I leave the managerial decision out altogether? Or should I put Dyche in as a negative, and put Zola in as a positive to counter it if the season starts well?
Or create a third category called 'Pending'? I suspect that most would agree that the sacking of SD was a negative, therefore has to be included as such. As yet, Zola's appointment as his replacement can't really be placed into either. It could be positive because we now have a 'name' that can attract better players - something that has already happened - and he appears to be intent on implementing a style of football many supporters appear to prefer. But then if he proves to be another Vialli......... Personally, I'm reserving judgement.
That is the solution I would pick. There is no doubt that sacking SD without him being given a crack of the whip is negativ and needs to recorded as such. However appointing Zola who fits in with the owners' chosen style ought to be a positive
The big negative for me is if Harefield links are severed. That really will be a statement of intent.
It's interesting how much we all concentrate on poaching of young players. Identifying them in the first place and developing them to a level where they can compete professionally doesn't appear to be an exact science. Perhaps young talent will still be attracted to an academy as long as it compares favourably with others. Some will continue to be poached; others may feel if you're in the best school why change?
Chris 13, I saw your one positive and three negatives in your post and was all about to think "here's another moaner before a ball has been kicked" but I have to say I pretty much agree with everything you wrote. Cautiously optimistic the football may get better but can't help feeling we, as fans, will become even more distant from the club and those that run it. Can't see many "round your place" meet ups in future.
