You'd have to ask him this question mate, but it's clear he hasn't addressed the issue, hence the increasing dept, coupled with a poor squad/performances. My take on it is this. ES has ran his course and clearly failing to turn the clubs fortunes round, 10 years of bad management (at all levels) have left the club in a dire position both on the pitch and as a company/business. It's time for a fresh owner who will strip back the layers, get to the root of the problem, clear the debts and start all over again with a different business model. Hopefully bringing a bit more success on the pitch in the process. Just my opinion like, but that's what i would like to happen.
The message coming out of Wearside is that Short is by no means desperate to offload the club and will only sell if he can find a buyer with the club’s long-term interests at heart. And Sunderland fans will at least take a modicum of comfort from that, having seen the consequences of ill-fated takeovers at other clubs, such as Randy Lerner’s at Aston Villa, Venky’s at Blackburn Rovers, and Assem Allam at Hull City, in recent seasons. However one of the biggest components of Sunderland’s struggles under Short’s reign has been a lack of stability at the club, exemplified by the fact that current manager David Moyes is the seventh boss in five years, a director of football model was introduced and then scrapped after only 30 months, and there has been a huge turnover of players - only a handful of whom were sold on for a profit. Sunderland supporters had hoped that Short’s appointment of new chief executive Martin Bain this summer and, when complete, his long-overdue reforms behind the scenes, would herald a new era of stability. A club statement said: "The Premier League is the most watched sporting league in the world. "Its popularity and global reach means that there will always be interest in its member clubs and the information is simply a standardised document which is available in relation to any enquires received about the club."
See I don;t see "10 years of bad management" - I see the most successful 10 years in my lifetime (and most on here) as a continuous period, we haven't been in the top flight for 10 consecutive years since the 50's I don't think. OK a lot of the things have been wrong and I'm sick of the constant managerial and backroom shuffles. But we've still had longer in the top flight with Ellis and Drumaville than with any other chairman for half a century. There have been a number of bad decisions by Ellis and people he has brought in (he's been let down and badly advised but he owns the place so the buck must stop with him)
Absolutely no argument he`s been badly let down by the people running the club in his stead but if it`s taken him 7 years to realise it then he really hasn`t been paying attention.
It hasn't really taken him 7 years though pops - he's hired and fired loads of people (managers, backroom, Chief Execs DoF etc) If you were in a business and were employing senior staff, you employ the best person from interview and credentials/application - which, in the whole, he has done (senior staff wise, above the management position). Those people should take the pressure away from an owner/chairman but they haven't - mostly they haven't been the right person for the job - but I can;t imagine that Ellis knew that before hiring them - difficult one to call if you ask me. I've worked with and employed the wrong person a few times (in much lesser roles but same principle) - Interview and application and references check out really well then, 6 weeks in, they're terrible at the job. They get released and the process starts again. I can only employ who is, from the meetings I have with them, the best person. Ellis, IMO, is in the same boat and, while the buck stops with him as the "man in charge", I have some sympathy for his situation and don't fully blame him
For several of those years though Marcus, we've only stayed up because of fortuitous poorer quality in other clubs, not because of particularly good management in ours.
Valid points. In reply I would suggest it`s highly unlikely Ellis has held these interviews on his own. Apart from the top post (Which he has only very recent filled by someone with football knowhow) most of the rest of the re-shuffling and interviews will have been done at board level. Obviously the final decision will be his but this is the same boardroom which has been giving him duff advice throughout. I honestly can`t see him attending every interview personally. Yes he has hired & fired loads of people but I still think much of that is acting on boardroom advice rather than him personally making decisions. His latest appointment of Bain (who actually seems to know what he`s doing) is very recent so it is 7 years of poor advice and poor decisions before the penny dropped. In my view it`s a misplaced trust in boardroom inadequacy and he could and should have acted much much sooner.
I can't even fathom anybody making excuses for this bloke, it's like trying to blame the HR manager for a company going to the wall, just cos she's responsible for hiring and firing. You manage your own ****, if you don't have the knowledge and capacity to do that, then don't buy the club in the first place.
I wouldn`t consider buying into something I knew nothing about but even if I did I wouldn`t be employing people to run it who knew even less about it than I did. Plain daft imo.
Yes mate, we've had a good spell in the top flight, but i'd hardly call the annual relegation dog fight, followed by the perpetual sacking of failed managers a success. I know what you mean though, i've followed the lads since late 60's mate and apart from the obvious cup final win and the Reid years, there's been very little to shout about. ES is a multi billionaire business man with several successful companies to his name, unfortunately SAFC isn't one of them and i doubt it ever will be under his regime. He's ran out of ideas imo and now wants out, if the papers are correct of course. And as i've said previously, i'm not going to have a dig at the bloke cos at least he's pumped money into the club and no manager under him can say they haven't been backed. Unfortunately i think he's made some very bad managerial decisions in his 10 years with us and has been badly let down by many of them. BSA would have been the man to iron out the playing staff and maybe get the wage bill down and given time who knows where it might have led? unfortunately it wasn't to be and now we have Moyes who's hands are severely tied by previous managers failings. Just my opinion like.
10 years in the PL is great but we still don't look like we belong there. That's where the problem lies. Yeah we're in the premier league but we've been its laughing stock for a long time now.
There's two stories here, I'm not going to take comfort from unproven hearsay just because it's what I want to hear. I just want our club ran right but it's not, It's been ran into the ground. This is where i'll keep my concern.
In your instance the principals are probably spot on and it's a bit of a lottery, only CV's and background checks to to go on. Football managers are different though, their records are pretty transparent and there for all to see.
As it stood though Pops he took over a going concern and it took him a while to possibly identify where the problems lay in our finances and general running of the club. Despite his best efforts, events have conspired against him at just about every turn, but having said that I dread to think where we would be if he had not turned up,
Up there without the proverbial paddle mate, little doubt about that. Quinn may be a great footballer and a thoroughly nice bloke but a business man he aint. Short is. tbh I don`t think Short has given his best effort by any means. Whether it`s his other business commitments taking priority I don`t know but we don`t appear to have been given his full attention by any stretch. I still feel (for the most part) he`s left the running of the club in the hands of people who were incapable of doing it. That`s where I think it`s gone wrong and I still think he could have put that right ages ago. He didn`t appoint Byrne I know but even after 5 years he still didn`t see she was useless. Purely my opinion but I think he`s been remiss.
I think Vegas reported on here that we were far from his top priority and he left the club for others to run so maybe he did not have the oversight we would have liked, but that isn't always a bad thing with owners.
Absolutely right provided those running the show know what they`re doing. Unfortunately ours didn`t and Short failed to see that. Over involvement by know nothing owners can be soul destroying for fans. We don`t need to look far to see that but in our case I would argue that non-involvement is part of the problem. I still maintain that if Short didn`t see that those running the club were making an arse of it then he hasn`t been watching.
Yet on paper when he took the role of Chairman off Quinn you'd think he'd be more hands on. So either a) he's been here and not been able to see what has been going on under his own nose or b) he's an under committed Chairman not committing enough of his time to the club. Either way is unacceptable.
My point exactly Bri and why I`ve been rattling on for ages about him not paying proper attention to the point of negligence. I`ve never suggested he should be constantly interfering but to be ignoring it completely is a different matter altogether. It`s all very well flying in, watching match from the directors box, then "Is everything ok?" "Yes, fine", "Good, carry on" then buggering off again. Seems like he knew nothing when he bought the club and he`s none the wiser now. Anyway, time I climbed down off me soap box I reckon.
