June 23, 2018, 01:51:49 PM

Author Topic: Should we sack Steve Walsh?  (Read 44804 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

January 21, 2018, 07:08:04 PM
Reply #495
Offline

kramer0


I'd be happy with Walsh going but deeply nervous about this board searching for a replacement.


January 21, 2018, 07:12:15 PM
Reply #496
Offline

Martip


I'd be happy with Walsh going but deeply nervous about this board searching for a replacement.
Realistically could anyone do a worse job given the 200m wasted ?

January 21, 2018, 07:34:28 PM
Reply #497
Offline

Ridge


I'd be happy with Walsh going but deeply nervous about this board searching for a replacement.

To be fair, I think the club made a big error in recruiting Walsh, since then, all recruitment has had Walsh involvement. But it was the original sin that has lead to the others.

Our recruitment was always very good up until Moshiri and Walsh arrival. Moshiri appointed Allardyce, but I'm not sure he would have done so without Walsh's recommendation. Once he stops getting bad advice from Walsh, it's hard to see how he or club could do any worse.


January 21, 2018, 07:49:58 PM
Reply #498
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
Anything in the David Dein taking over from Elstone rumours?


How long has Devin been out of the game?

Although he’s BKs mate, I think he left Arsenal before Moshiri had his stake.

January 21, 2018, 07:51:09 PM
Reply #499
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
I'd be happy with Walsh going but deeply nervous about this board searching for a replacement.

We wanted Monchi first remember.

*crosses fingers that we go back for similar profile*

January 21, 2018, 08:01:20 PM
Reply #500
Offline

Mayor Farnum


Since Big Sam arrived our recruitment has looked more considered. I doubt Sam would have players foisted upon him.


January 21, 2018, 08:07:47 PM
Reply #501
Offline

kramer0


I'm not buying that.

I still think the confusing power structure is our biggest issue. Walsh negotiates some deals, Kenwright negotiates others. Walsh and the manager have to agree on players, but the manager gets his way when they disagree, but Walsh still thinks it's a marriage. We have too many people looking at too many things, which is a major problem. It's then compounded by the fact that Walsh appears to be failing at the basic duties of his job (identifying suitable targets for every position on the pitch).

I think it's optimistic to expect a new director of football to sort it out because he "can't be worse” than Walsh. If you drop someone who's actually good at the job into this mess, we're still going to struggle our fair share. There is no clear division of responsibilities behind the scenes and I think that's the main reason why we spend so much time spinning our wheels on things that should be a lot more straightforward.

It's on the board to set targets for what they expect on the pitch, hire a director of football to make it happen, and stick to writing the checks. Our next director of football should have the power to oversee all footballing decisions, especially recruitment and managerial hires. And our next manager should be comfortable having someone else buy/sell players for him (based on criteria he gives, of course). Clear division of responsibilities, so everyone can focus on doing one job well and so there's accountability when things go wrong.

My biggest concern is that Moshiri is a bit of a loon and incapable of settling things down behind the scenes. It's early days and there's time to change but it's hard not to worry based on how wasteful, ineffective, and outright embarrassing we've been under him so far.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2018, 08:19:19 PM by kramer0 »

January 21, 2018, 08:31:50 PM
Reply #502
Offline

toffee_scot


First thing the club needs to do is define what exactly the director of football's mandate is. I don't suppose the board had a look at the different models that have been implemented by other clubs in the Premier League or abroad?

I'd like to know as well what the different individuals in the board do and whether they are stepping on a few toes. Not long ago we had only Kenwright, Jon Woods and the absent Robert Earl but now Earl has been replaced by Moshiri's man Alexander Ryazantsev and we've created 3 new spaces for the CEO and deputy - Elstone and Barrett-Baxendale - plus this Keith Harris fellow who was supposed to have found investment for us about 10 years ago.

January 21, 2018, 09:01:38 PM
Reply #503
Offline

Ridge


I'm not buying that.

I still think the confusing power structure is our biggest issue. Walsh negotiates some deals, Kenwright negotiates others. Walsh and the manager have to agree on players, but the manager gets his way when they disagree, but Walsh still thinks it's a marriage. We have too many people looking at too many things, which is a major problem. It's then compounded by the fact that Walsh appears to be failing at the basic duties of his job (identifying suitable targets for every position on the pitch).

I think it's optimistic to expect a new director of football to sort it out because he "can't be worse” than Walsh. If you drop someone who's actually good at the job into this mess, we're still going to struggle our fair share. There is no clear division of responsibilities behind the scenes and I think that's the main reason why we spend so much time spinning our wheels on things that should be a lot more straightforward.

It's on the board to set targets for what they expect on the pitch, hire a director of football to make it happen, and stick to writing the checks. Our next director of football should have the power to oversee all footballing decisions, especially recruitment and managerial hires. And our next manager should be comfortable having someone else buy/sell players for him (based on criteria he gives, of course). Clear division of responsibilities, so everyone can focus on doing one job well and so there's accountability when things go wrong.

My biggest concern is that Moshiri is a bit of a loon and incapable of settling things down behind the scenes. It's early days and there's time to change but it's hard not to worry based on how wasteful, ineffective, and outright embarrassing we've been under him so far.

That's basically the current setup, Walsh has that authority and it's been worse than most managers without a DoF. 2 heads are better than 1, until they work against each other or both are poor at respective jobs. There are not that many clubs who use DoF in PL, you need the full squad because of the quality of league and volume of fixtures. DoF typically want to go a bit lighter to not waste resources, but Walsh only did that in positions we needed players, everywhere else we chucked money down the drain.

When you give that sort of authority to a DoF, it becomes their direction for the squad, he decides the strengths and weaknesses of the team and somewhat the style of play, because of the power in recruitment. We went for him because of Leicester recruitment, but given the fallout the season after title, think it's fair to say he didn't want Ranieri and Pearson looks more like a Walsh recruitment choice. Maybe it would work better if Walsh didn't have so much authority, or was tasked with uncovering undervalue talent, but he might as well be a head scout at that point.

I think it would be better if we got a very good DoF, but we take a similar risk that we have with Walsh. Why not just have a scouting network that operates in managers interests? DoF only provides continuity and security, if he recruits well. When he's wasting resources, procuring average talent for premium prices, it's only going to end badly.

January 21, 2018, 09:36:14 PM
Reply #504
Offline

kramer0


Before I say what I'm going to say, this is not directed at you but is more of a criticism of what is prevailing point-of-view around the league, especially in the media.

There are not that many clubs who use DoF in PL, you need the full squad because of the quality of league and volume of fixtures.

The PL has disappeared so far up it's own asshole with the notion that it's special and that things that work abroad won't work here and that players who are "proven" in the league have special value.

With few exceptions, all of whom are members in what has become a clear "top 6", PL teams are fucking lazy. They make the same lazy managerial appointments, spend all their money on the same lazy player types, and justify it all by saying that other things just won't work in the PL. In reality, they're just afraid to try some different, which I find amusing because they have no shame about wasting their TV money -- which makes them richer than pretty much every club in the world -- on players and managers that plainly aren't worth it. I'd rather us fail trying to be more efficient than fail doing the same old crap.

There's a real chance for us to get ahead of the rest of the league (outside the top 6) by doing some different and doing it effectively. But instead, we're tending towards the same old lazy bullshit. It's a ceiling we impose on ourselves.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2018, 09:38:52 PM by kramer0 »

January 21, 2018, 09:37:50 PM
Reply #505
Offline

Duncs_a_legend

NSNO Subscriber
Whispers that Tosun is a bit awful too.
"I would never die for my beliefs...because I might be wrong"

January 21, 2018, 09:43:02 PM
Reply #506
Offline

sam of the south


Whispers that Tosun is a bit awful too.

He hasn't looked awful to me.

Dignity does not consist in possessing honours, but in deserving them

January 21, 2018, 09:44:36 PM
Reply #507
Offline

Duncs_a_legend

NSNO Subscriber
"I would never die for my beliefs...because I might be wrong"

January 21, 2018, 09:44:38 PM
Reply #508
Offline

Thornton_19


Looks like we might be in the market for a new DoF after what I've heard.

Kenwright wants him out.
I could kiss you after that news mate.

January 21, 2018, 09:44:48 PM
Reply #509
Offline

blueToffee

NSNO Subscriber