Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
What are those arguments?
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Levy's Plan
- Thread starter Lemonade Money
- Start date
MartyFunkhouser
Teddy Sheringham
No real winning track record (trophies), recently doesn't stay anywhere massively long, falls out with people. This is their view not mine so if you take exception to it you can whatsapp them
Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
You wouldn’t have got him his first choice centre back, his first choice winger and forced him to keep Richi in the squad despite the manager only wanting players bought in. You are absolutely saying that you wouldn’t have backed the manager.
MartyFunkhouser
Teddy Sheringham
I would not have paid Emirates Marketing Project more money for a player they did not want, for them to buy a player we both wanted (who is better) for less, that is not saying I would not back the manager, I would have, but it would not be so that ridiculous liberties would be made. There is a fine lines between not backing the manager, backing the manager and being fcuking stupid. If I was the chairman I would have struck a balance on certain things.
I don't see over paying for dross as backing a manager and or be in the clubs best interests. Thats not anywhere near the same as not backing the manager IMO
Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
I think those things are true, though the only club he was at who you’d expect to win is Shaktar and they won the cup in 21 and we’re winning the league in 22 when it was suspended. Brighton he took to Europe for the first time in their history with their highest ever PL finish and Marseille he took to runners up in a league that PSG win about 90% of the time so the rest of the league is basically fighting for 2nd place. I think he has therefore probably performed somewhere close to the upper end of expectations.No real winning track record (trophies), recently doesn't stay anywhere massively long, falls out with people. This is their view not mine so if you take exception to it you can whatsapp them
Not staying long is a bigger concern IMO. I suppose the question is whether he would stay if he feels he is being backed? Time will tell, or perhaps that should may tell as he could get sacked having been very well backed.
Last edited:
Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
Emirates Marketing Project did not need our money to buy Ndiaye. Also, we didn’t go in for Ndiaye until after we had signed Savio. I think it is therefore the most likely probability that the manager wanted Savio (personally I have never been particularly impressed with Savio but that’s another matter).
You also said you wouldn’t have backed the manager over Richie or got him his first choice centre back, that is the absolute definition of not backing the manager IMO.
MartyFunkhouser
Teddy Sheringham
I would not have left the manager without a Striker if we had ousted Richie either, which is the definition of backing him more than the club did..........
So as I say, its absolute fine lines between the things I mentioned.
I would have absolutely backed a manager, more so than Levy, but I would have also protected the club whilst doing so, so there is a middle ground which I am not sure you want to acknowledge as it seems very back and white between it either being Levy or the "new" regime, where as others have pretty much always identified the middle ground on how the club maybe should be run.
Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
Sorry but IMO if you were starting the summer off by denying RDZ his top choice of centre back, a player that was gettable for us for a reasonably standard PL player fee then you are following the very definition of not backing your manager. You might as well say to him “I don’t trust your football and the players you want to achieve it”
MartyFunkhouser
Teddy Sheringham
Not at all, football is more nuanced than giving a manager all the money they want, allowing them to spend it and that being the definition of backing them IMO. Backing them IMO also includes taking a critical view that they might not be able to see which may well have benefitting them in the long run. Given them the money but doing so with guidance and your own input, you are the owner/chairman in this scenario, so you 100% have to have skin in both areas. Helping a manager to not fail or set himself up to fail is also backing them
Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
It’s not about giving a manager ‘all the money he wants’ at all.
The manager had a reasonably priced first choice target for a centre back in his system knowing that he will be losing his captain and you would’ve told him ‘no you can’t have that player, you’ll instead have to make do with one already here who has never played a PL game’. I’m sorry mate but I reckon RDZ would’ve walked (and rightly so).
MartyFunkhouser
Teddy Sheringham
Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't but I would have also saved him the indignity of starting the season a striker down, so as I say it would be about building together. So maybe that might have built trust with him early, as I suspect some of that trust has eroded with the club based on him being one short comes the start
Spaffing 75m on Savio isn't backing him IMO, thats backing him to fail and leaving a legacy on the club thereafter, I think managers need saving from themselves at times.
Giving a manager 300m+ to spend but acting as a guide on the build is backing him whilst protecting him and the club IMO. Otherwise it is all just about giving the manager the money he wants regardless
Finney Is Back
Jimmy Cantrell
I don’t think the manager thinks he has started the season a striker down. He has Marmoush and Solanke and no European football. I suspect he is absolutely fine with having 2 players for that position until January, wouldn’t he have put Richarlison in the squad otherwise?
Back to Van Hecke. Let’s picture the scene…. Spurs are staring relegation in the face and trying to get De Zerbi in to save them…
De Zerbi: “I’m not sure, Spurs have a terrible history of not backing their managers and then sacking them as soon as things take a try en for the worse, even if they over achieved for a good while before that”
Spurs: “We’re different now. We’re serious about wanting to improve and win and prepared to invest to do so”
De Zerbi: “I will need a lot of changes in the summer window, I need you to sell the players not bought in to my vision and do so quickly, I need some specific players in for my style of football”
Spurs: “Of course, please just save us” and you’ll get the players you want, we’re different now”
De Zerbi (having kept Spurs up comes back after a short summer break): “OK Romero wants out, I’m fine for him to go he was a bad influence with his disciplinary issues and constant being late for training, I want Van Hecke from Brighton, he is what I need for my vertical passing system”
Spurs; “No, you can’t have him, you’ll have to use Vuskovic”
Basically Spurs under Levy for 25 years.
I think that a clubs footballing department should have/needs to have an input beyond just kowtowing to whoever happens to be the manager at any given time. If we're giving a manager free reign then our footballing department is weak and needs improving.
We'd have sold Bale before he kicked on for example with such an approach - so there needs to be a balance between the natural short-termism of a manager and the medium to long term view of the club. Going too far either way will eventually cause you problems.
We'd have sold Bale before he kicked on for example with such an approach - so there needs to be a balance between the natural short-termism of a manager and the medium to long term view of the club. Going too far either way will eventually cause you problems.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Like saying no to Wellbeck and using Kane instead in 2014
SissokoWasGood (BoL)
Frederic Kanoute
We wanted Savio under Frank. We wanted Robertson and Senesi before De Zerbi.
I’m not too concerned that we’re over extending to RDZ short term while not paying enough mind to the future. The two buys that felt very RDZ are Tonali and JPVH. Both internationals, one the international team mate of his club centre back partner and the other a top midfielder that has interest from top clubs too.
If RDZ was to flame out in 4 months, we still have a good squad and we’re still set for the long term. I would be curious as to whether the kids are willing to invest again when some of the current squad age out. But beyond that, letting RDZ set the terms and build the culture is completely the right thing to do in my view.
Jurgen the German
Garth Crooks
Sorry, perhaps I wasn’t clear enough, but we didn’t do both under Levy in the same campaign. I wouldn’t argue that we didn’t turn up in the finals, but I also think the squad wasn’t as deep as it needed to be. We had an excellent starting XI, but there were still clear holes in the squad.
“Ridsdale proportions of self-destruction” and “intentional sabotaging” . Would those posters genuinely have preferred us not to sign anyone for two consecutive transfer windows? I’m not sure what alternative they think would have been preferable.
thfcsteff
Fanny Walden
It's an interesting discussion isn't it.
Thinking widely about it, of the players brought in, I'd say Tonali and JP are the only distinctly and unequivocally De Zerbi tastes. As you said, Savio and Robertson were on our list beforehand (thus seemingly club targets), and Fernandes and Marmoush are players that if offered to any manager would be desirable. I suspect he did not want to lose Danso, and in doing so, Tosin was his choice of replacement but has again been on the club list several times over the years.
I think @billyiddo is right in the theory that it is dangerous to go all-in on one manager. I also think it is good to see a manager so unequivocally supported. I suppose the question remains how tolerant De Zerbi is/has been regarding our business. It seems as though he is happy enough?
I think (ironically - and no I am not advocating this, I really am not!) this squad is one Poch would be able to sink his teeth into, and I think we'd see him look to find a balance with Gray, Bergvall, Fernandes. Bentancur as his primes...
SissokoWasGood (BoL)
Frederic Kanoute
Agreed with all of that. And I think to the extent that RDZ has been backed, whether it was too much or not enough, he’s unlikely to get another job where he gets backed as much, while also being paid as much and having the prestige of our club and our league. There’s no leverage elsewhere, so he has to make this work. This is his shot. And given that I think he’ll ride the waves (eg Richy) with us. And I hope we extend him patience too.
Would love Poch with this squad absolutely, hopefully if it does all go tits up then that is the plan.
Overall I think even though it looks like we have mortgaged the future of the club on RDZ, I’m not sure that stands up to scrutiny. I think we’ve just backed the manager. But not necessarily more than another club good at backing their manager would. Some of the fees are high, and some of the sales are low, but there’s every chance that was as much about the club (eg VV) thinking that we needed a broader cultural reset as RDZ. Dare I say there may be alignment. And then GHod willing hopefully it all starts to pay off.
thfcsteff
Fanny Walden
Overall a great discussion...far better than looking at the league table and allowing emotions to cut right across!!!
Muttley
Vedran Corluka
It's a great shout on having Poch compatible players but not sure we should be thinking that way.
In my mind, we made 5 big purchases - Tonali, Fernandez, JPvH, Savio, Marmoush
We then got creative with Senesi, Robbo, Tosin, Dubravka, Mudryk whilst retaining Davies
We balanced the squad with departures Vic, Spence, Romero, Danso, Dragusin, Vuskovic, Sarr, Lanks, Veliz, Phillip, Solomon, Devine, Scarlett, Bissouma, Palhinha....not to mention Richi.
So all in all we had about 25 changes and most were 1st team squad relevant.
Personally, I don't conform to the idea that RDZ ruled the roost and drove every process of change in the playing squad. I think the transfer market has been a team sport across the entire leadership group.
However, what would raise my suspicions is if a guy like Andy Scoulding departed. I can see a logic where he gives himself a massive pat on the back for generating all that profit that was repurposed into new players after he spent 2-3 years managing all our young loanees. I can also see a logic where he might be slightly peeved that his process of creating 1st team players was hijacked by RDZ who switched them out for journeymen senior players. He may even have a foot in both camps.
In my mind, we made 5 big purchases - Tonali, Fernandez, JPvH, Savio, Marmoush
We then got creative with Senesi, Robbo, Tosin, Dubravka, Mudryk whilst retaining Davies
We balanced the squad with departures Vic, Spence, Romero, Danso, Dragusin, Vuskovic, Sarr, Lanks, Veliz, Phillip, Solomon, Devine, Scarlett, Bissouma, Palhinha....not to mention Richi.
So all in all we had about 25 changes and most were 1st team squad relevant.
Personally, I don't conform to the idea that RDZ ruled the roost and drove every process of change in the playing squad. I think the transfer market has been a team sport across the entire leadership group.
However, what would raise my suspicions is if a guy like Andy Scoulding departed. I can see a logic where he gives himself a massive pat on the back for generating all that profit that was repurposed into new players after he spent 2-3 years managing all our young loanees. I can also see a logic where he might be slightly peeved that his process of creating 1st team players was hijacked by RDZ who switched them out for journeymen senior players. He may even have a foot in both camps.