Steven Hollis

[blandy]

12 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

definitely sceptical about the sustainability of all this

I don't think all the appointments are long term ones, so I don't worry about the sustainability. I think it's a bit like extreme due diligence with actions - give everything a good going over and looking at, change it as necessary and then move to the next phase once it's been sorted out. SO shorter term advisers will, IMO, do their bit and move along.

[blandy]

1 minute ago, AndyBM said:

ellis. stride and ansell managed to sort everything out between them...

They didn't, they really didn't. I think the opposite is true - that both those 3 and then essentially RL, Faulkner and Krulak, followed by RL, Fox and the others had to narrow and too little expertise between them. Leading to problems under both sets of people.

[OutByEaster?]

12 minutes ago, blandy said:

Ashworth  - dunno who this is, but my impression was that the saintly sir Brian was to advise on the type of area covered by Almstadt, who seemed to be using stats rather than acquired expertise.

I wouldn't have thought Little would have been overly involved in the kind of things Alsmtadt was - making sure the training equipment and facilities were up to date, sorting physics, sports scientists, nutritionists, essentially managing all the sports stuff that wasn't football is how I'd had his job described.

Mine's all guesswork too - Bernstein is interesting, I thought he'd been the equivalent of CEO at City, but he was Chairman there, not CEO. What I'm struggling to find out is whether he had a CEO working under him or if he was hands on running the club - I'm not sure how the role of Chairman at City at that point was defined, but you might well be right on him. I hadn't realised he was responsible for the fcu-kay (French Connection) advertising campaign, he doesn't look the sort.

[OutByEaster?]

13 minutes ago, blandy said:

I don't think they need a new CEO until they have finished reviewing and deciding what needs to change.

The one thing I would say about this last line in particular is that it's the CEO's job to run the club, and run it as he sees fit. I would have thought that unless we already have someone who is doing this role, then they shouldn't be changing anything until they've got one in to decide what needs changing.

For me that comes back to Hollis acting like a CEO instead of a Chairman, which I think is the thing that worries me most about the new set up.

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I wouldn't have thought Little would have been overly involved in the kind of things Alsmtadt was - making sure the training equipment and facilities were up to date, sorting physics, sports scientists, nutritionists, essentially managing all the sports stuff that wasn't football is how I'd had his job described.

Are they not the sort of things that once in place, don't need to be put in place again - I mean a physio is a physio. Ditto a nutritionist etc. Of course you get good and bad, but unless the manager and players are struggling with big bellies or loads of injuries....

And the training facilities are new and don't necessarily need constant changes.

So basically that side of Halmstadt's job is something that maybe can be done once every 4 years, rather than needing a person to constantly do it?

[OutByEaster?]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

Are they not the sort of things that once in place, don't need to be put in place again - I mean a physio is a physio. Ditto a nutritionist etc. Of course you get good and bad, but unless the manager and players are struggling with big bellies or loads of injuries....

And the training facilities are new and don't necessarily need constant changes.

So basically that side of Halmstadt's job is something that maybe can be done once every 4 years, rather than needing a person to constantly do it?

To an extent I'm sure that once the right things are in place that the job's a doddle - but as we can see by our scouting network with people moving to Australia and plain old dropping out, he hadn't got those things in place - my understanding was that Almstadt would sort out courses for coaches, cars, hotels for scouts, all of the everyday stuff that means the manager can just point and say I want a specialist to look at Gabby's back and I want a scout at a second division match in Germany on Tuesday without having to get involved in those things himself.

 

[blandy]

5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I would have thought that unless we already have someone who is doing this role, then they shouldn't be changing anything until they've got one in to decide what needs changing.

I think the opposite, though I get where you're coming from. I think the CEO role is to run the club according to the decisions of the board. To execute the strategy. So you don't need one to run the club until the club is straightened out. Hollis, IMO is overseeing the straightening out, which is to my mind at least, right. Once that's done, like you I'd want him to revert to normal chairmanning. This I see, at the moment, is like surgery and not a normal situation.

[blandy]

1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

as we can see by our scouting network with people moving to Australia and plain old dropping out, he hadn't got those things in place

Yes, they are/were falling apart as a result of the shambles and impending relegation, perhaps. Good point. Perhaps the manager and or BL should sort those things out?

[OutByEaster?]

12 minutes ago, blandy said:

Yes, they are/were falling apart as a result of the shambles and impending relegation, perhaps. Good point. Perhaps the manager and or BL should sort those things out?

It's interesting that under the previous structure that wasn't the case at all. Riley managed the data, the information from scouts and the requests from the manager for information, and Almstadt managed the "network" if that makes sense, ensuring we had scouts in places and that they could be deployed properly to the needs of the club. My understanding is that's how a lot of clubs do it, with the modern manager not having time to work closely with scouts themselves - it's where I saw Little overseeing on football advice in a role that's in my head a bit more Riley than Almstadt, but I'd agree there's room for him in both. I still think we need somebody to do the Almstadt role though and there's a position in the hierarchy for that - Riley remains a mystery and I think we're doing one of two things; either riding out the storm and keeping him or sorting out how much it'll cost to get rid.

 

[TRO]

On 24 March 2016 at 18:47, OutByEaster? said:

I'd love to be able to give a more specific answer, but, put simply, I don't like him- I don't think he's any good.

I thought his initial press conferences were dreadful and he strikes me as an accident waiting to happen - what he's done so far in removing the people that were here was straightforward, needed doing and it's bought him a honeymoon period, as has the appointment of Little. The appointment of Bernstein was a good one, but I'm not sure we can trust him to keep his nose out and let Bernstein do his job.

He's probably better at being the de-facto owner of a football club than Lerner, but I don't think he can keep himself to that, he's been talking and acting like a CEO from day one and he's not qualified or experience enough to do that job. If i felt he could sit back and be the head of the board, someone that the "Football Board" (or senior management team that was) meet up with maybe once a quarter to report on how they're doing and we the fans hear from, well....never, then I'd be happy to have him as part of the solution.

I just suspect that he'll want to be very hands on and will quickly become part of the problem.

 

We are football people.....so we want to hear football speak.

He is not a football person.....so you won't get football speak, you will get boardroom jargon.

Thats why we have structured a football board to give us a broader church of skills at senior level.

He will do his job.....and they will do theirs.

He will just have the final call......well at B6.

 

 

[OutByEaster?]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

He is not a football person.....so you won't get football speak, you will get boardroom jargon.

I'm not expecting football speak, it's his lack of professionalism in his business speaking that put doubt in my mind so start with. He's careless with words and in his position he can't afford to be.

 

[terrytini]

11 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I'm not expecting football speak, it's his lack of professionalism in his business speaking that put doubt in my mind so start with. He's careless with words and in his position he can't afford to be.

 

Agree Hollis has already shown he has a foot where his mouth should be, but as long as he thinks ok I can let his outblubberings be.

I'm with Blandy on the CEO - couldn't agree more with your reasoning OBE but I think at present these are specific steps for specific times, and not for all eternity, I think a more traditional CEO role will appear AFTER the repairs are done.

Other than that largely see things the way Blandy outlined above, and really not much like how we were before.  In fact the more I consider how the new people will fit in, and what they would have wanted to hear in order to take the jobs, the more I am convinced that there was virtually nothing in place before, which would, of course, explain everything, and be an accurate reflection on the owners disinterest.

Brian Little I would see as a roving brief myself.  "Keep an eye on the football" and whatever comes under that - he may want to ask questions of the scouting network, or whats available as facilities, but more directly just be someone to keep their eye on the ball while so much (clearly a lot more than even we guessed) is being either put in place or repaired.

 In an ideal world I'd like him to be the guy who outlines what we should be seeing on the pitch too - not sure how much he will do this though - but certainly at first we could do with somebody - football wise - outlining a brief for what we are as a football team.  For myself, I don't really know anymore. Are we a 'Swansea' or an 'Everton', are we still a largely winger based counter attacking side with mostly grit and a little flair (how I would see us historically) or a 'hoof it' side or a 'tippy tappy' - are we 'young and hungry' or 'continental' or 'moneyball' etc. I hope this is addressed, and of all the people we have appointed I would hope it is Little who addresses it.  I can't really see how we can appoint the next Manager without this, although clearly there is a pressing need to escape the Championship first. He isn't Cruyff, but he could be our version, and is as good a choice as anyone for that job.

 

[AntrimBlack]

Too many people with undefined or conflicting roles.

Hollis - unimpressive; Bernstein - too old; King - only a fan and a name; Little - no expertise at this level; Bevington - no idea what his role will be; Krulak - yeah, right.

I am getting a very bad feeling about all this.

[AntrimBlack]

2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

It's interesting that under the previous structure that wasn't the case at all. Riley managed the data, the information from scouts and the requests from the manager for information, and Almstadt managed the "network" if that makes sense, ensuring we had scouts in places and that they could be deployed properly to the needs of the club. My understanding is that's how a lot of clubs do it, with the modern manager not having time to work closely with scouts themselves - it's where I saw Little overseeing on football advice in a role that's in my head a bit more Riley than Almstadt, but I'd agree there's room for him in both. I still think we need somebody to do the Almstadt role though and there's a position in the hierarchy for that - Riley remains a mystery and I think we're doing one of two things; either riding out the storm and keeping him or sorting out how much it'll cost to get rid.

 

Might have been an idea to keep him.

[YGabbana]

Made the decisions the majority of fans wanted to see, cant fault him so far

[Brumstopdogs]

Tick in the box for making some decisive changes and some, seemingly, sensible ones.

[villa4europe]

to be fair i think he's made the easy and obvious decisions and brought down the axe, we've shown many many times in the last 10 years its the decision that comes next and the luxury of hindsight that he'll be judged on

sacking garde is only as good a decision as the new manager

[krisagg75]

so far so good.but the real work starts now.

[MikeMcKenna]

55 minutes ago, YGabbana said:

Made the decisions the majority of fans wanted to see, cant fault him so far

Bear with me. Say for arguments sake you personally had been brought in to make 'decisions' on who stays/goes (excluding players) what would they have been? 

Edited March 29, 2016 by MikeMcKenna

[Guest av1]

Hopefully he is as ruthless with the playing staff.

At the request of the new manager of course.