You do know that Houllier was consulted by Fergie over the signing of Cantona, after first recommending him to him earlier in his career?
Championship-winning mentality
- Thread starter rurikbird
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
You do know that Houllier was consulted by Fergie over the signing of Cantona, after first recommending him to him earlier in his career?
Ferguson has almost always thought long term with his signing. Wenger doesn't have anyone pick winners for him, but where has that got him? Mourinho has had a fair wedge to spend in all his jobs except Porto. It's not a regression to when directors singed players and as far as I'm aware the manager will have to sign off on any signings. If we had this in place two years ago I'm sure we wouldn't have wasted 20 million, let alone 35 million on Andy Carroll. It's the type of thing that should prevent signing the likes of Aquilani with a history of injury problems. I have no problems with this system if it prevents stop gap signings, overpaying for over-rated, injury prone or older players (I'm bet we're all glad we didn't sign Dempsey now and got Sturridge in January). This is not like directors signing players.
Its not bollocks.
People usually rate a squad based on what they remember about the players - a particularly great/ bad game. And make judgements based on that to determine what the potential of the squad is on paper.
The reality is a player never performs to that consistently high/ poor level and he is the totality of his performances good and bad. We totally overlook the value of consistency, and I think that's one of the things that United have in abundance. Most of the time I'd much prefer a player who'll give me a 7 out of ten every week than one who is equally likely to give a 3 as he is a 9 (creative attacking players being the exception)
Johnson is a great example - his style of play is eye catching. Lots of touches, does a lot of things that look good sometimes then other times he's awful.
Fullback is a position where consistency is preferred for me.
Whether you put it down to mentality or the nature of the players, is a matter of perception. But if you want to win the league you need consistently good performances from the majority of the squad. Not exactly news, but people are too willing to allow for players who occasionally perform spectacularly.
So we need to find a new Stevie Nicol - now he was consistency personified; not only that he could be consistent in any one of about 6 different positions.
When we had Reira he used to get criticised on this forum (and elsewhere) for not not beating his fullback and whipping the ball into the box, and now we have Downing who has at times been criticised for the same thing, and for crossing too much.
I think a lot of it is probably down to coaching (from youth level upwards), because there is no schoolboy in the entire world that was ever happy to get a cross in, but when they get allocated positions a lot of coaches seem to think that the be all and end all of being a winger / full back is to get the ball into the box. This translates to fans, where they often don't appreciate good wing play (I'm not saying Reira and Downing were great wingers before anyone starts, although I liked Reira) and often only appreciate goals.
To make matters worse, I think Johnson has 2 years left on his contract. So we're going to face a situation soon where we've to decide if we want to give him an extension, continue to pay him his high wages and suffer his inconsistency (or rather half season of productivity), or to offload him within one of the next two windows before he leaves for free.
It'd have been an easier decision if we had a ready backup, but Wisdom is still raw, Kelly still too fragile at this point, Flanagan too limited, McLaughlin untried at senior level, and the transfer kitty probably too stretched.
It'd have been an easier decision if we had a ready backup, but Wisdom is still raw, Kelly still too fragile at this point, Flanagan too limited, McLaughlin untried at senior level, and the transfer kitty probably too stretched.
If we were to sell him its reasonable to expect any fee generated would go towards replacing him so its not like the onus would fall straight onto Kelly/McLaughlin (I dont think Wisdom is a fullback and I dont think Flanagan is good enough). If we chose to let him run down his contract rather than renew then it would obviously be under the assumption that 2 years from now either Kelly or McLaughlin would be ready to take over the role full time.
At this point Id probably prefer him stay and run down his contract while blooding the younger players in slowly, on the other hand if somebody wants to offer us a stupid fee and take his wages off the books then it wouldn't be a disaster either
Great post. I think one of the reasons we turned to poo in Rafa's last season was getting rid of Riera. He wasn't spectacular, but I thought he gave us great balance, was always looking for the ball, and just made us tick along very well. It must be said that Downing post Christmas has been doing a similar job in the team.
Yes, yes, yes and yes - agree with every word you wrote. This is exactly the point I was trying to make, but you expressed it with even more clarity.
This is probably why Mourihno didn't trust Johnson when they were both at Chelsea and why Arbeloa has been a starting RB for Real Madrid for 3 seasons now. That's why Mou's first purchase at Cheslea was Paolo Ferreira, who amazingly, is still there. Fans remember 1 spectacular performance and forget 3 mediocre ones, but an analysis freak like Mourinho can easily see from his stats that consistency beats occasional brilliance. Especially if we're talking about defenders.
I don't mean to make it all about Johnson; Enrique has been inconsistent too as were all of our CBs bar Carra this season (I almost wrote "last season" - it really feels like this one is long over). It's just that Johnson is the most clear example of "pure" inconsistency, because he is probably our most talented defender - that's why it's so frustrating.
A few months back I wrote a post titled "RB - a priority it winter?" I think not a single person agreed with me then. Rodgers didn't buy anyone to compete with Johnson at RB in the winter and might not buy anyone this summer either - we'll see. But I still am convinced that having just one Arbeloa or Ferreira type FB (either right or left-footed) will instantly make our team stronger.
You pick options by committee and you end up with the most risk-aversive set of options. Historically in all spheres of life that's been shown to guarantee mediocrity rather than excellence. If you think several fallible unaccountable people making decisions is smarter than one, definitively accountable, one doing it, god help you.
So Was Hendo, Downing, Carroll, Adam by committee or by Kenny mainly? because whatever that was (Committee or Individual), we need to go in the other direction
It got us Sturridge and Coutinho.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ttee-not-Brendan-Rodgers-claims-Ian-Ayre.html
And it's probably what all good clubs do, whether its visible or not.
I wouldn't argue with any of that. The only bit that I would doubt is whether it's a mentality instilled in the players.
Lets say Ferguson signed Johnson instead of us. Would Johnson be a more consistent player because of a winning mentality that he would have picked up?
I would argue he wouldn't have picked it up. He plays the game the way it suits him best from full back. And I think Ferguson wouldn't have ever signed Johnson because of his style and inconsistency. He signs defenders who can defend first and if they add anything else, that's great.
So Rodgers IS involved and is part of the thought process, I guess that still doesn't determine who has the greater say, but as you say, I don't think it's probably too different to what goes on elsewhere. Despite what other conclusions people appear to have drawn. There's no particular right or wrong set up, but it'll always be determined and judged by the outcome. So far there's not really much to complain about, so I don't think the set up matters in the slightest. We've just bought two players of the ilk that we should have been buying since we had the drastic Diouf/Diao/Cheyrou Summer.
Hopefully having more than one person scouting and deciding which players we go for will stop us from signing the wrong players. Or at least give us a better chance of succeeding in the transfer market.
Sturridge and Coutinho are a great start and the set up looks very good
Great posts by both Rurikbird and Ross in this thread.
Sturridge and Coutinho are a great start and the set up looks very good
Great posts by both Rurikbird and Ross in this thread.
As there is no sporting philosophy being handed down to Rodgers at the club and we largely seem to be following his much talked about "vision" it seems unlikely to me that he doesn't have the final say on targets.
I'm sure he's operating within certain parameters but then so are most managers - it's just that in our case those parameters are based around getting youth in, value for money etc.
I'm sure he's operating within certain parameters but then so are most managers - it's just that in our case those parameters are based around getting youth in, value for money etc.
I did look at those stats and thankyou very much, that site is awesome! I could look at that for hours. Fantastic post I really enjoyed. However, all it really says, and it's more noticeable when you change the visualization to cumulative, is that consistency only matters when it's at a decent level. Consistently shit is still shit.
Now, we all know this. But to take your specific point about the 8596's and the 7777's, if you look at those stats then Joe Allen appears to be at 4444 or possibly 5555.
I'd have a player who has the ability to hit a nine every third game over a player who always hits a 5 or 6 every game.
Excellent post - the paragraph above being especially well-written. When I was a boy United were the cup-winning, big-game team, we were the bread-and-butter team. I'd like to return to that.
Maybe it should have been called "The New Bootroom" instead of some sort of transfer committee.
Maybe it should be called 'throwing darts at a piece of paper.' At least you genius people will know who to sack next time. 'Yes, er, that bloke, don't know his name, and the bloke next to him, yes, that's him, and him, don't know his name either, wow, isn't this modern! And the bloke next to him...'
I think the lack of visibility as you call it is done so as not to undermine a manager, as soon as you get a situation where you have high profile publicly visible people at the club taking decisions out of a managers hands then people will look at it as a source of conflict. Every manager has a scouting network, backroom staff who advise him on players, financial people who work out the money side of things etc all of them have an input in the signing players. Its not some sort of conspiracy just because we dont know their names.
The managers primary job is coaching the first team and get the best out of the players available to them, managers often don't last very long, why should they be given total control over signings academies etc just so the club can rip it all up and start again every 2 or 3 years with a new manager? The manager should be working within a framework developed by the club for the long term success of the club not re organising the club to do suit their needs. I dont see anything wrong with transfer targets being worked on by a group or committee rather than one person, the manager should certainly be one of the voices in that group but not the only one.
Besides there is no club where the manager has final say on all transfers, that has always and will always be a decision made by the money counters, once a manager has identified a player and recommended him to the board thats pretty much all he can do, if the execs cant make the figures add up then the manager wont be getting the player no matter how much autonomy he has.
The managers primary job is coaching the first team and get the best out of the players available to them, managers often don't last very long, why should they be given total control over signings academies etc just so the club can rip it all up and start again every 2 or 3 years with a new manager? The manager should be working within a framework developed by the club for the long term success of the club not re organising the club to do suit their needs. I dont see anything wrong with transfer targets being worked on by a group or committee rather than one person, the manager should certainly be one of the voices in that group but not the only one.
Besides there is no club where the manager has final say on all transfers, that has always and will always be a decision made by the money counters, once a manager has identified a player and recommended him to the board thats pretty much all he can do, if the execs cant make the figures add up then the manager wont be getting the player no matter how much autonomy he has.
From the link that Rosco pointed, I assume the committee is made up of these guys below? Not really sure though if Barry Hunter (chief scout) is part of that since Ayre didn't mention him subsequently.
-----
"Since Rodgers joined the club, Dave Fallows has joined as head of recruitment and Barry Hunter as chief scout from Manchester City, while head of analysis Michael Edwards has become a central figure in assessing targets for owners Fenway Sports Group.
Ayre said he, Rodgers, Edwards and Fallows effectively created the director of football model between them.
“We have a head of analysis, a head of recruitment, a first-team manager, myself,” Ayre said. “All of those people are all inputting into a process that delivers what a director of football would deliver.
-----
"Since Rodgers joined the club, Dave Fallows has joined as head of recruitment and Barry Hunter as chief scout from Manchester City, while head of analysis Michael Edwards has become a central figure in assessing targets for owners Fenway Sports Group.
Ayre said he, Rodgers, Edwards and Fallows effectively created the director of football model between them.
“We have a head of analysis, a head of recruitment, a first-team manager, myself,” Ayre said. “All of those people are all inputting into a process that delivers what a director of football would deliver.
Maybe if more people are throwing darts, there's more chance one of them might hit the piece of paper.
I don't see what your issue is with all this. It really doesn't seem that different to how everything's been done before.
There's absolutely nothing to suggest anything other than this is a group of scouts tasked with finding and assessing the players the manager wants and then recommending the best ones.
.... And if Brendan Rodgers says "I want Ashley Williams at £8m" and his transfer committee says "no, we've found better and cheaper options" then I'd be delighted.
I wish they'd been in place since about 1989, to be honest when you look at some of the gash Dalglish, Sounness, Evans, Houllier, Benitez & Hodgeson have signed over the years.
We've been acting like we pick names out of a hat at the end of the season to be our transfer targets for a long time.
Yeah he's been more hit than miss so far which is a nice change from what we're used to. I still believe allen will come good. If we can now get 2 cb's, 1 LB and a defensive midfielder for a good price I'll be ecstatic.
Really? Based on what? His passing stats look pretty good... I didn't study them too closely though.
- Status
Similar threads
