Next permanent manager

[tedfoxxx]

Give it Bozza and Mad Nad. They’ve got something to prove.

Could be a title or a peerage in it for every single fan too.

 

[SilverFox]

No chance on Potter, he's already told us no once, if not twice now if recent reports are to be believed.

You don't go from managing Chelsea to managing in the championship in 6 months.

All he has to do is sit tight for a few months, and he'll have a number of PL options.

Well you’d think but…

Top half PL club is off the menu for him after Chelsea. That leaves bottom half which is a big risk. Relegation would ruin his reputation which has already taken a knock. In all likelihood he knows this which is why we got smith for the remaining games of the season.

Our promotion campaign is a bit different though. We will have possibly the highest budget and the club will be going all out to get back. We might even keep some players that are more than capable for the championship. For me that has more promise than a possible relegation on my CV.

 

[homer]

Well you’d think but…

Top half PL club is off the menu for him after Chelsea. That leaves bottom half which is a big risk. Relegation would ruin his reputation which has already taken a knock. In all likelihood he knows this which is why we got smith for the remaining games of the season.

Our promotion campaign is a bit different though. We will have possibly the highest budget and the club will be going all out to get back. We might even keep some players that are more than capable for the championship. For me that has more promise than a possible relegation on my CV.

If he wanted it he’d be in by now, and we wouldn’t be interviewing total ****s like Fatarse Smith and Scott ****ing Parker

 

[Brown Nose]

My reading of the current situation.

Potter is the preferred candidate of Rudkin and we will hold on until it is certain that getting him is impossible. He has probably indicated that he wants to keep his options open for now. This is reasonable from his perspective and it makes sense from ours too. It is not as if the field of candidates is strong. There is speculation around that he has rejected us but I really doubt that it true. If it is true, it will be because we have refused to adapt to his demands in terms of a say in recruitment or staffing. It will be nothing to do with us being in the Championship.

Despite some ludicrous names being linked, I think that the only two other realistic candidates are Smith and Parker. I don't see Rudkin being brave enough to employ anyone that hasn't already managed in the Championship. Just like in the PL, he never appointed anyone that hadn't done that before too.

The way we have treated Smith makes me wonder why he's not ruled himself out by now. It's quite a reflection of how low his stock in the game now is that he's happy to be the 'if all else fails' option. I thought his few weeks in charge were poor and he did nothing whatsoever to suggest that he's capable of leading us forward. Every day that goes by makes any decision to appoint him more embarrassing.

That leaves us with Parker. Two seasons in the Championship and two promotions is impressive on the surface and you can imagine Rudkin feeling that the club can spin that as a positive appointment. I think he's also likely to be prepared to accept the terms offered, little say in recruitment etc.

The links with Cairney at Fulham are interesting and relevant. Firstly, I believe that this is a genuine link and this means that the club are moving forward with squad development irrespective of the new manager. Martyn Glover was brought to the club to take over recruitment and he is doing so. That is the main reason why Potter would be reluctant to come and why Parker may well end up here.

Any half decent internal review at the club must conclude that enabling a manager to influence recruitment to any serious extent has proved to be disasterous. This is the key to our managerial situation now and why we're in a pickle. Potter would want the final say on signings (especially given his Chelsea experience) and we are determined not to follow that model. And yet, Rudkin really likes Potter.

That's the reason for the delay.

 

[Micky]

Not really. I go with my dad and either my bother or my son. I go for the day out. Admittedly the last few years have brought success we could only dream of, but there have been plenty of years of dogshit. If I went just for the football, I wouldn’t be going.

Sorry.... I was just referring to you expecting anything more with regards to our next managerial appointment. We can't expect too much - in my opinion!

 

[give_us_a_wave]

My reading of the current situation.

Potter is the preferred candidate of Rudkin and we will hold on until it is certain that getting him is impossible. He has probably indicated that he wants to keep his options open for now. This is reasonable from his perspective and it makes sense from ours too. It is not as if the field of candidates is strong. There is speculation around that he has rejected us but I really doubt that it true. If it is true, it will be because we have refused to adapt to his demands in terms of a say in recruitment or staffing. It will be nothing to do with us being in the Championship.

Despite some ludicrous names being linked, I think that the only two other realistic candidates are Smith and Parker. I don't see Rudkin being brave enough to employ anyone that hasn't already managed in the Championship. Just like in the PL, he never appointed anyone that hadn't done that before too.

The way we have treated Smith makes me wonder why he's not ruled himself out by now. It's quite a reflection of how low his stock in the game now is that he's happy to be the 'if all else fails' option. I thought his few weeks in charge were poor and he did nothing whatsoever to suggest that he's capable of leading us forward. Every day that goes by makes any decision to appoint him more embarrassing.

That leaves us with Parker. Two seasons in the Championship and two promotions is impressive on the surface and you can imagine Rudkin feeling that the club can spin that as a positive appointment. I think he's also likely to be prepared to accept the terms offered, little say in recruitment etc.

The links with Cairney at Fulham are interesting and relevant. Firstly, I believe that this is a genuine link and this means that the club are moving forward with squad development irrespective of the new manager. Martyn Glover was brought to the club to take over recruitment and he is doing so. That is the main reason why Potter would be reluctant to come and why Parker may well end up here.

Any half decent internal review at the club must conclude that enabling a manager to influence recruitment to any serious extent has proved to be disasterous. This is the key to our managerial situation now and why we're in a pickle. Potter would want the final say on signings (especially given his Chelsea experience) and we are determined not to follow that model. And yet, Rudkin really likes Potter.

That's the reason for the delay.

Not sure about the recruitment part. Potter would have had zero say in recruitment at Brighton beyond identifying the areas of the team that needed strengthening. Individual players for those positions would have been sourced by the analysis team they have down there that resembles NASA mission control. Of course he could be ego driven & want to change that at a different club but if that's the case I'd be a lot cooler on his appointment. Changing things that have previously worked well for you because you think you're better then proven experts is a dodgy road to go down.

Of course, against that our new recruitment team have yet to prove they're not as utterly shite as the previous one.

 

[lazzer]

Not really. I go with my dad and either my bother or my son. I go for the day out. Admittedly the last few years have brought success we could only dream of, but there have been plenty of years of dogshit. If I went just for the football, I wouldn’t be going.

Same here a good social day out ruined by 90 mins of football

 

[pork pie fox]

Sorry.... I was just referring to you expecting anything more with regards to our next managerial appointment. We can't expect too much - in my opinion!

Yes I agree. Last season, when we were mostly calling for Rodgers to be sacked, there were good names being suggested. Look at the shite we’re linked with now. Amazing how much can change in a relatively short period of time.

 

[M17TT C]

Well you’d think but…

Top half PL club is off the menu for him after Chelsea. That leaves bottom half which is a big risk. Relegation would ruin his reputation which has already taken a knock. In all likelihood he knows this which is why we got smith for the remaining games of the season.

Our promotion campaign is a bit different though. We will have possibly the highest budget and the club will be going all out to get back. We might even keep some players that are more than capable for the championship. For me that has more promise than a possible relegation on my CV.

But that is looking at it with hugely blue tinted glasses.

Realistically, I'd say we have as much chance of being relegated again next season than we have of getting promoted again.

We have a squad full of players who couldn't give a flying **** about being here, hence why we got relegated, so there isn't really anything to suggest any of the current squad really give a **** about us being promoted again.

Also, failing to get us promoted with the biggest budget in the league would be seen as more of a failure than keeping the likes of Luton, Burnley, Bournemouth, even Palace, Wolves, Sheff Utd or Forest next year, let alone Everton who are all either massively punching above their weight or are as much of a basket case as we are.

If Potter drops down to the Championship and fails then he is no way getting another PL job himself without taking the team there - he could take any of the above jobs, fail, and he would still be in a much better position then if he were to come here and fail.

That's even before you consider any financial implications for him. Some might think we are still the big boys that won the league a few years ago but compared to any of the above, we haven't really got a pot to piss in, in comparison, now - that PL TV money is massive and all the above, with the PL money would be able to offer any manager more to keep a team in the PL that what we could offer for getting promoted.

Even if we did somehow manage to get him, he still has to get us to the PL and keep us there Vs just keeping a team in the PL that is already there with some absolute dross in there currently - for us he has to take 2 steps but anywhere else, it is just 1 step.

 

[taupe]

The links with Cairney at Fulham are interesting and relevant. Firstly, I believe that this is a genuine link and this means that the club are moving forward with squad development irrespective of the new manager

I don't know Cairney (nor anyone in truth!) but, yes, I agree. Whoever we appoint will also indicate the direction we're taking as a club. Allied to that....

Any half decent internal review at the club must conclude that enabling a manager to influence recruitment to any serious extent has proved to be disasterous.

Agreed 100% Emphasis being on "decent". I don't think there's a will within the club to scapegoat anyone but neither do I think we'll hear the full conclusions of said review.

for us he has to take 2 steps but anywhere else, it is just 1 step.

Yes, it is a tough call for Potter. As a club, I think any manager would recognise the pressures inherent in our position. I maintain however that we are a decent project as a club, so it's really a matter of whoever backing themselves and feeling right and comfortable in whatever set-up the club identifies as taking them forward.

 

[taupe]

I've been thinking a bit more around this point...

enabling a manager to influence recruitment to any serious extent has proved to be disasterous.

I think that was the case at the club, for whatever reason (might have been a condition Rodgers had when we employed him) Perhaps too much 'power' was placed with one person?

Any business relies on key people in strategic persons to advise decision makers. When same key person is also in a position to make decisions then perhaps you lose... what is it? Oversight?

I wonder if the summer sulk was partly do to the club pulling in the reins? Rodgers was open about talking to players (tapping up???) over the summer only to be told there was no money (his summation) Maybe it was as much about process as money, about oversight, and the club no longer trusted Rodgers to make purchasing decisions? Maybe that put his nose out of joint? Or maybe, tbf to Rodgers, it was an effective change to his terms of employment?

 

[Brown Nose]

I've been thinking a bit more around this point...



I think that was the case at the club, for whatever reason (might have been a condition Rodgers had when we employed him) Perhaps too much 'power' was placed with one person?

Any business relies on key people in strategic persons to advise decision makers. When same key person is also in a position to make decisions then perhaps you lose... what is it? Oversight?

I wonder if the summer sulk was partly do to the club pulling in the reins? Rodgers was open about talking to players (tapping up???) over the summer only to be told there was no money (his summation) Maybe it was as much about process as money, about oversight, and the club no longer trusted Rodgers to make purchasing decisions? Maybe that put his nose out of joint? Or maybe, tbf to Rodgers, it was an effective change to his terms of employment?

I agree and it's not just a Rodgers issue.

Both Ranieri and Puel were supported when they advocated for specific players and I think the record was entirely terrible.

For example, Ranieri fought for players like Inler and Benaloune and Puel Diabate despite strong objections from people employed to analyse potential signings.

We know that Rodgers overrode the recruitment team more as time went on and he insisted on signing the likes of Vestergaard and Bertrand.

The lesson is that our managers tend to know feck all about squad development.

The current problem is that many of the key personnel that were part of our good recruitment left over the last few years because they knew that Rodgers didn't want their advice. Therefore we're not well placed to go back to our previously successful model.

 

[tedfoxxx]

For example, Ranieri fought for players like Inler and Benaloune and Puel Diabate despite strong objections from people employed to analyse potential signings.

This is a Staff announcement; Pop to the ‘Next Permanent Manager’ aisle.

That’s Pop to the ‘Next Permanent Manager’ aisle.

 

[pork pie fox]

This is a Staff announcement; Pop to the ‘Next Permanent Manager’ aisle.

That’s Pop to the ‘Next Permanent Manager’ aisle.

With BN as Director of Football. Perfect harmony.

 

[popillius]

This is a Staff announcement; Pop to the ‘Next Permanent Manager’ aisle.

That’s Pop to the ‘Next Permanent Manager’ aisle.

If the advice had a ****ing X before it you're absolutely sure as shit I'd ignore it.

 

[ThaiSweetChilli]

I agree and it's not just a Rodgers issue.

Both Ranieri and Puel were supported when they advocated for specific players and I think the record was entirely terrible.

For example, Ranieri fought for players like Inler and Benaloune and Puel Diabate despite strong objections from people employed to analyse potential signings.

We know that Rodgers overrode the recruitment team more as time went on and he insisted on signing the likes of Vestergaard and Bertrand.

The lesson is that our managers tend to know feck all about squad development.

The current problem is that many of the key personnel that were part of our good recruitment left over the last few years because they knew that Rodgers didn't want their advice. Therefore we're not well placed to go back to our previously successful model.

How do you know this?

 

[Brown Nose]

How do you know this?

Vestergaard himself did an interview not long ago where he confirmed that Rodgers was desperate to sign him for 18 months.

It was reported by multiple legitimate sources. Here is an extract from an Athletic article:

Rodgers ignored key data analysts in the scouting department who advised Rodgers and his team against multiple signings including Vestergaard and Bertrand, but the moves were forced through anyway, leading to some of our key Data Analysts leaving the club having become "exasperated at the change in approach and felt their work and their previously trusted process were being ignored".

 

[The Old Fox]

I am unable to comment upon the accuracy, or otherwise, of Rodgers' input into the signings of Bertrand and Vestergaard (cos I'm an ignorant know nothing).

I do, however, feel that a manager should have some input into the purchase of players. If 100% accurate, the buying of these two failures (merely in terms of their Leicester career) may have been a reason to question Rodgers' position as the right man to take the club forward; but a manager, when interviewed for the job, should give a view as to how he sees the team progressing and, giving him the job, should be seen as the club buying into that philosophy.

The manager must have a strong say in who is/isn't bought. Look at Chelsea, where it appears that Potter was handed a random selection of good but ultimately incompatible players...

 

[Lako42]

Vestergaard himself did an interview not long ago where he confirmed that Rodgers was desperate to sign him for 18 months.

It was reported by multiple legitimate sources. Here is an extract from an Athletic article:

Rodgers ignored key data analysts in the scouting department who advised Rodgers and his team against multiple signings including Vestergaard and Bertrand, but the moves were forced through anyway, leading to some of our key Data Analysts leaving the club having become "exasperated at the change in approach and felt their work and their previously trusted process were being ignored".

Criminal

 

[popillius]

How do you know this?

Some of you don't learn....