Christian Purslow

[Tomaszk]

2 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Im still team purslow in.

Far better than fox and that absolute clown wyness

Does that mean he's good though? Being better than clowns.

If he stays well away from the football side, we'll be better off.

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, Tomaszk said:

Does that mean he's good though? Being better than clowns.

If he stays well away from the football side, we'll be better off.

What's he done on the football side then? 

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, Tomaszk said:

Does that mean he's good though? Being better than clowns.

If he stays well away from the football side, we'll be better off.

I mean barring recruiting gerrard as manager cant see what else he has done wrong?

[Tomaszk]

1 hour ago, sidcow said:

What's he done on the football side then? 

 

1 hour ago, Demitri_C said:

I mean barring recruiting gerrard as manager cant see what else he has done wrong?

Sackable offence.

He let him spend money as well, which we'll be feeling for years. He put down £70m on Digne and Coutinho. You lose £70m, you deserve to get sacked.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Tomaszk

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, Demitri_C said:

I mean barring recruiting gerrard as manager cant see what else he has done wrong?

 

21 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

 

Sackable offence.

He let him spend money as well, which we'll be feeling for years. He put down £70m on Digne and Coutinho. You lose £70m, you deserve to get sacked.

He didn't hire Gerrard and he didn't let him spend the money. 

[wishywashy]

Purslow is an odd one. It's a definitive fact that we are one of the best run clubs in the country in many departments: Villa are obviously extremely professional in how they go about doing deals with other clubs, the way they've gone about the redevelopment of Villa Park, even leaders in communicating with fans, etc. And yet, when it comes to football decisions, there always seem to be very avoidable mistakes that can be traced to him. The Gerrard appointment was doomed to fail from the start, and that's not just hindsight talking: even at the time its baffling that we appointed a manager who, already clearly reliant on his assistant to do all of the work, still only won 1 out of 9 trophies available to him in a one-horse league: Celtic had dropped off massively that year. It just seemed like a weird infatuation with an ex-Liverpool legend. Although the blame cannot be solely put on him: he's not the sole decision-maker, after all. NSWE were perfectly happy with it, and it was pretty well recorded that it was a decision made between NSWE, Purslow and Lange. Regardless, bad managerial appointments just happen in football. At least we've seemingly gotten the next managerial appointment right.

He's clearly not a moral-driven individual, but you'll be hard-pressed to find a CEO of a huge corporation that is. I entirely get *why* they've gone with the BK8 deal: the disgusting way FFP is set up in England at the expense of clubs like ours means every possible financially-benefitting option has to be taken if we are to continue competing, but it does still stink: especially considering it breaks prior promises he made at FCGs, etc. It's just odd how competent is sometimes and yet other times he makes the most baffling decisions. The football industry is weird like that, though. The typical rules of business are thrown out of the window.

Edited April 14, 2023 by wishywashy

[El-Reacho]

35 minutes ago, sidcow said:

 

He didn't hire Gerrard and he didn't let him spend the money. 

Supposedly he got Gerrard in to make his pitch to the owners who ultimately hired him. I guess it's impossible to know if he recommended him to Edens and Sawaris, but given he didn't get anyone else in to make a pitch for the job he does have to shoulder a big chunk of the blame. I think once you bring a manager in you have to back him so you can't really blame him for signing Digne and Coutinho. The Gerrard appointment excluded I think Purslow's been excellent for the club.

[Tomaszk]

43 minutes ago, sidcow said:

 

He didn't hire Gerrard and he didn't let him spend the money. 

Well if you think that no wonder if you don't dislike him.

[El-Reacho]

20 minutes ago, wishywashy said:

Purslow is an odd one. It's a definitive fact that we are one of the best run clubs in the country in many departments: Villa are obviously extremely professional in how they go about doing deals with other clubs, the way they've gone about the redevelopment of Villa Park, even leaders in communicating with fans, etc. And yet, when it comes to football decisions, there always seem to be very avoidable mistakes that can be traced to him. The Gerrard appointment was doomed to fail from the start, and that's not just hindsight talking: even at the time its baffling that we appointed a manager who, already clearly reliant on his assistant to do all of the work, still only won 1 out of 9 trophies available to him in a one-horse league: Celtic had dropped off massively that year. It just seemed like a weird infatuation with an ex-Liverpool legend. Although the blame cannot be solely put on him: he's not the sole decision-maker, after all. NSWE were perfectly happy with it, and it was pretty well recorded that it was a decision made between NSWE, Purslow and Lange. Regardless, bad managerial appointments just happen in football. At least we've seemingly gotten the next managerial appointment right.

He's clearly not a moral-driven individual, but you'll be hard-pressed to find a CEO of a huge corporation that is. I entirely get *why* they've gone with the BK8 deal: the disgusting way FFP is set up in England at the expense of clubs like ours means every possible financially-benefitting option has to be taken if we are to continue competing, but it does still stink: especially considering it breaks prior promises he made at FCGs, etc. It's just odd how competent is sometimes and yet other times he makes the most baffling decisions. The football industry is weird like that, though. The typical rules of business are thrown out of the window.

It's Sawaris and Edens who should ultimately determine the moral compass of the club not the CEO. It's Purslow's job to get the best deals he can for the club. It's up to the owners to say the we're not going to advertise betting companies and for Purslow to adapt accordingly.

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, sidcow said:

 

He didn't hire Gerrard and he didn't let him spend the money. 

He must have been hevaily involved in recuriting him along with lange and the owners 

[sidcow]

40 minutes ago, El-Reacho said:

Supposedly he got Gerrard in to make his pitch to the owners who ultimately hired him. I guess it's impossible to know if he recommended him to Edens and Sawaris, but given he didn't get anyone else in to make a pitch for the job he does have to shoulder a big chunk of the blame. I think once you bring a manager in you have to back him so you can't really blame him for signing Digne and Coutinho. The Gerrard appointment excluded I think Purslow's been excellent for the club.

Supposedly Purslow had no interest in getting in Gerrard but Wes Edens wanted him badly as he'd missed out on big name Thierry Henry and instructed Purslow to use his contact to get him in against Purslow's better judgement. 

[sidcow]

7 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

He must have been hevaily involved in recuriting him along with lange and the owners 

Yes but only because Wes Edens instructed him to do it. Purslow didn't want him at all. 

[Tomaszk]

1 minute ago, sidcow said:

Yes but only because Wes Edens instructed him to do it. Purslow didn't want him at all. 

Big fan of Scottish football is he?

Wonder where Nassef was when this was happening.

[sidcow]

38 minutes ago, El-Reacho said:

It's Sawaris and Edens who should ultimately determine the moral compass of the club not the CEO. It's Purslow's job to get the best deals he can for the club. It's up to the owners to say the we're not going to advertise betting companies and for Purslow to adapt accordingly.

Whoa. Hold the horses. 

Either Purslow is in charge and acts with impunity or he is just an employee who carries out the owners instructions. You can't have it both ways. 

[sidcow]

Just now, Tomaszk said:

Big fan of Scottish football is he?

Wonder where Nassef was when this was happening.

Nassef was in agreement with Edens obviously. They're the owners, they're not going to make any massive signings or key appointments without the other being in agreement. 

[Tomaszk]

3 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Supposedly Purslow had no interest in getting in Gerrard but Wes Edens wanted him badly as he'd missed out on big name Thierry Henry and instructed Purslow to use his contact to get him in against Purslow's better judgement. 

Not sure if this is what you've heard or think or whatever, but surely you see the lack of logic if that was Edens' thinking?

He missed out on big name Henry who lasted two seasons in Canadian football before never being a manager again. And the no-name Smith who he did appoint got him promotion against all odds and kept Villa up with a crap squad.

Why would he think 'Oh I really want a big name, especially after my last low profile appointment was brilliant'

[sidcow]

18 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

Not sure if this is what you've heard or think or whatever, but surely you see the lack of logic if that was Edens' thinking?

He missed out on big name Henry who lasted two seasons in Canadian football before never being a manager again. And the no-name Smith who he did appoint got him promotion against all odds and kept Villa up with a crap squad.

Why would he think 'Oh I really want a big name, especially after my last low profile appointment was brilliant'

My point is what I've written has as much evidence and logic as this ridiculous ongoing attack on Purslow that he was responsible for hiring Gerrard and that he was responsible for squandering transfer fees. 

The reality is all these things will be joint board decisions. 

In fact my statement actually rings MORE true because the ruthless, highly successful businessmen who own us are clearly happy for Purslow to remain in his job.  Make no mistake, if they thought he'd **** up he would be gone.  People like that don't accumulate billions by entertaining weaklings who make fan boy appointments. 

Therefore I suspect they actually did have far more involvement than people know.

But my main point, the one that makes me angry, is the constant attacks on this guy who I think is doing a great job, with absolutely zero evidence. 

You ask me what I've heard? What have you heard? You've heard nothing other than made up rumours on the Internet. No one knows what the decision making process was other than Purslow, Edens and Sawiris.*  

My made up nonsense is every bit as valid as the made up nonsense you've heard. 

 

* except maybe a 21 year old American in a chat room. I'm not ruling that out. 

Edited April 14, 2023 by sidcow

[The Fun Factory]

Does he still own a small portion of Villa? He has made some mistakes but look at the state of the club when he came in and to where it is now, it is night and day.  

[NurembergVillan]

13 minutes ago, sidcow said:

In fact my statement actually rings MORE true because the ruthless, highly successful businessmen who own us are clearly happy for Purslow to remain in his job.  Make no mistake, if they thought he'd **** up he would be gone.  People like that don't accumulate billions by entertaining weaklings who make fan boy appointments.

FWIW I'm in complete agreement with your standpoint on all of this (not only the bit I've quoted) - I just can't be arsed to argue it as defiantly as you!

My experience of working for multi-billion dollar brands, and within football, tells me that he'd have been hoofed out long ago if he wasn't doing a good job. Rarely does a CEO have unilateral authority on something like a strategic appointment (ie Gerrard).

Also, if we're going to flan him for Gerrard should we not also laud him for Smith?

On and off the pitch, this club is in a completely different stratosphere than when Purslow took over the day-to-day running of it. That some fans can get so annoyed over one manager and a handful of signings is remarkable, really.

[sidcow]

4 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

FWIW I'm in complete agreement with your standpoint on all of this (not only the bit I've quoted) - I just can't be arsed to argue it as defiantly as you!

My experience of working for multi-billion dollar brands, and within football, tells me that he'd have been hoofed out long ago if he wasn't doing a good job. Rarely does a CEO have unilateral authority on something like a strategic appointment (ie Gerrard).

Also, if we're going to flan him for Gerrard should we not also laud him for Smith?

On and off the pitch, this club is in a completely different stratosphere than when Purslow took over the day-to-day running of it. That some fans can get so annoyed over one manager and a handful of signings is remarkable, really.

It just makes me angry so I'll continue to call out the nonsense.

What I know is in my job I will present to the CEO something as mundane as their insurance renewal. 

It's often a big cost but ultimately in the scheme of things not gigantic.  

The response will always be "I'll take it to the board for a decision" 

They're not going to instruct insurance renewals without calling a board meeting. And I know the CEO will face questions, often get a real grilling before he's authorised to confirm renewal.  They'll often come back with questions before reporting back to the board. 

This is not one company, this is all companies, all companies of any size with proper corporate governance anyway. 

If that's how they deal with an insurance renewal I don't see them agreeing to spend £20-£30m on a player, or making a key appointment like team manager (which also includes a whole team of people and large severance payments) without full board agreement. Without vigorous questioning and reasons given. 

And I always come back to why they haven't sacked him. All culpable, joint decision. Same for Lange, if it's a football matter it would be Lange on the chopping block before Purslow anyway.