AvfcRigo82 Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 30 minutes ago, KMitch said: How long did that take you to troll back through 5 years of my posts to find anything negative I posted about Purslow? What a sad and pathetic waste of time that was... Considering it's only on page 6, about 2 minutes. Don't worry though, I have no interest in seeing any other contradictory shite you've posted. Anyway, I'm off for a beer, I hope you've got something you can be colouring in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted May 21, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 hours ago, MaVilla said: Purslow stated that it was Grealish (or his agent) that demanded the release clause in the new contract, Purslow then agreed to this in the belief that a 100m clause probably wouldnt be triggered. At least, thats what Purslow himself said, so have no reason to doubt the validity of it. He had 4 years left on an existing contract, a new one at that point wasn't required unless he wanted a pay rise which meant we had the upper hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted May 21, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 hours ago, tomav84 said: what's not to get? a whole host of reasons has been listed above...my favourite is how he goes behind managers backs to sign players and is so bad at his job that the owners have to step in and do it for him (yet still finds himself in his role) Yes, the absurdity of believing that is.......... Absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted May 21, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted May 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Steero113 said: Firstly, I cannot believe I just read all that. Secondly, this is total and utter bulls**t. in my opinion of course. Mate. Nah, I heard the same off a bloke in the pub last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Your Round Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 Having read your looong Purlsow love post, @AvfcRigo82, can I ask, why do you think NSWE haven’t sacked him? If you believe everything you’ve written then surely they’re slacking there? NSWE out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveAV1 Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 3 hours ago, MaVilla said: i really dont get all the hate for Purslow, i really dont. I don’t really think there’s any hate but some people have concerns and surely they’re allowed to voice them? My basic take on this, without going round in circles again, is that I don’t think he’s a terrible CEO. Leeds, Everton and probably Leicester, looking in from the outside are almost certainly worse run clubs. What I find a little strange is the attitude that we can’t find an upgrade. When Nas and Wes took over they were already extremely wealthy and experienced businessmen but had little or no experience of the everyday workings of an English football club. The previous series of owners had levels of ineptitude upto and including mindblowing and so we really had to start again from scratch. Under Christian Purslow we have successfully installed the various positions and management systems that were missing and had been missing for years. Now we’re a well run club and the CEO can take credit for that. However since we have a mantra of continual improvement, can we improve on the CEO? Managers and players have been improved on at the various stages of our growth over the past 5 years but I would suggest that we had stagnated until the arrival of Unai and the leap forward has been the biggest thing since the take over with only promotion being bigger in practical terms. But ultimately for where we really want to be Unai is key. On various threads in here we discuss upgrades to every position, usually players of course. Generally people say things like, “he was good enough for where we were then but not for where we want to be.” Is it not possible to view the CEO in the same way? As I say he’s a decent CEO, made mistakes yes but any criticism of him is treated almost like a blasphemy in here, by some at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 hours ago, tomav84 said: what's not to get? a whole host of reasons has been listed above...my favourite is how he goes behind managers backs to sign players and is so bad at his job that the owners have to step in and do it for him (yet still finds himself in his role) Quite bold to insinuate that NSWE are absolute idiots who are willing to continually employ a CEO that they don't trust to manage the club. Makes zero logical sense considering their prior acumen: perhaps that's just not what's been happening? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaVilla Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 14 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said: I don’t really think there’s any hate but some people have concerns and surely they’re allowed to voice them? of course you can, i was just saying i dont get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveAV1 Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 minutes ago, wishywashy said: Quite bold to insinuate that NSWE are absolute idiots who are willing to continually employ a CEO that they don't trust to manage the club. Makes zero logical sense considering their prior acumen: perhaps that's just not what's been happening? Sacking people at that level isn’t as straight forward as you may think. People have contracts and expensive lawyers and the sacking of such a high profile executive is always likely to be disruptive and expensive. Perhaps his role and remit is being changed with or without his absolute agreement. I think there’s lots of things he is good at and also things he needs keeping away from. I’d say that NSWE are too savvy to get involved with a sacking of a high profile executive but it does seem that there are changes happening, or at least plans to change them, in the senior management structure at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tomav84 Posted May 21, 2023 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted May 21, 2023 31 minutes ago, wishywashy said: Quite bold to insinuate that NSWE are absolute idiots who are willing to continually employ a CEO that they don't trust to manage the club. Makes zero logical sense considering their prior acumen: perhaps that's just not what's been happening? Exactly. But some just totally fail to grasp those very simple fact 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishywashy Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) 34 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said: Sacking people at that level isn’t as straight forward as you may think. People have contracts and expensive lawyers and the sacking of such a high profile executive is always likely to be disruptive and expensive. Perhaps his role and remit is being changed with or without his absolute agreement. I think there’s lots of things he is good at and also things he needs keeping away from. I’d say that NSWE are too savvy to get involved with a sacking of a high profile executive but it does seem that there are changes happening, or at least plans to change them, in the senior management structure at the moment. I think your suggestions may be correct: it's sound logic and it is clear that the remit of the footballing department has been given to Emery. The real reason for that: whether it's down to distrust in Purslow or a demand from Emery to have complete control that was accepted (seeing how he was clearly hard to please, rejecting a very lucrative Newcastle project), I'm not so certain of. I'm largely just peeved at how this thread has spent the last 20 or so pages just debating Purslow's direct influence in footballing decisions that have been unpopular. It's way easier with players/managers because you see what they're doing on a football pitch, but there's been extensive debate over decisions made in private meetings that none of us have been in, and kinda just making crap up depending on how we see Purslow (and ultimately some of the resulting insinuations make little sense). Evidently, it's gone around and around in circles (because none of us are close to knowing what's actually happened) and it's now culminating in, as seen above, personal mudslinging between some. Pointing out stuff like how the ethics of the clubs marketing has gone downhill during his tenure is reasonable, I feel: the situation isn't as murky as the chain of command and decision makers are far more certain. But the debate has largely just gone in circles about the footballing decisions that have happened around the club, and assigning blame accordingly, and now increasingly contradictory as more extreme stances are being taken. Edited May 21, 2023 by wishywashy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveAV1 Posted May 22, 2023 Share Posted May 22, 2023 9 hours ago, wishywashy said: I think your suggestions may be correct: it's sound logic and it is clear that the remit of the footballing department has been given to Emery. The real reason for that: whether it's down to distrust in Purslow or a demand from Emery to have complete control that was accepted (seeing how he was clearly hard to please, rejecting a very lucrative Newcastle project), I'm not so certain of. I'm largely just peeved at how this thread has spent the last 20 or so pages just debating Purslow's direct influence in footballing decisions that have been unpopular. It's way easier with players/managers because you see what they're doing on a football pitch, but there's been extensive debate over decisions made in private meetings that none of us have been in, and kinda just making crap up depending on how we see Purslow (and ultimately some of the resulting insinuations make little sense). Evidently, it's gone around and around in circles (because none of us are close to knowing what's actually happened) and it's now culminating in, as seen above, personal mudslinging between some. Pointing out stuff like how the ethics of the clubs marketing has gone downhill during his tenure is reasonable, I feel: the situation isn't as murky as the chain of command and decision makers are far more certain. But the debate has largely just gone in circles about the footballing decisions that have happened around the club, and assigning blame accordingly, and now increasingly contradictory as more extreme stances are being taken. I agree it’s become rather divisive. There are big changes happening to our senior management structure though, so perhaps we’ll have a better idea of things in the near future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panto_Villan Posted May 22, 2023 Share Posted May 22, 2023 13 hours ago, DaveAV1 said: Sacking people at that level isn’t as straight forward as you may think. People have contracts and expensive lawyers and the sacking of such a high profile executive is always likely to be disruptive and expensive. Perhaps his role and remit is being changed with or without his absolute agreement. I think there’s lots of things he is good at and also things he needs keeping away from. I’d say that NSWE are too savvy to get involved with a sacking of a high profile executive but it does seem that there are changes happening, or at least plans to change them, in the senior management structure at the moment. A premier league football club changes the most important member of staff (the manager) on average every ten months or so. The barriers to firing people clearly aren’t that significant; they usually just mean you get a hefty payout. The disruption caused is worth it in the long term. If the owners thought Purslow was holding them back he’d be in the bin immediately. The owners are far too savvy to keep an underperformer around in such a key position. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted May 22, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted May 22, 2023 If they want Purslow out he will not be sacked he will be marginalised. They will employ other people to do his job while he's still here. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted May 22, 2023 Share Posted May 22, 2023 More scouts and football people in to keep Purslow out of football matters. Lovely. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveAV1 Posted May 22, 2023 Share Posted May 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Panto_Villan said: A premier league football club changes the most important member of staff (the manager) on average every ten months or so. The barriers to firing people clearly aren’t that significant; they usually just mean you get a hefty payout. The disruption caused is worth it in the long term. If the owners thought Purslow was holding them back he’d be in the bin immediately. The owners are far too savvy to keep an underperformer around in such a key position. I’d imagine that contracts drawn up for managers are different to those for CEOs, given that the relatively short term nature of a lot of managers these days is well known. Indeed at the time I was slightly surprised that we gave Dean an improved contract at a time when there were doubts about his long term future. I don’t think that there was much chance of him leaving for another club. The fact that we sacked him, less than a year later I think, makes the decision all the more strange.In fact Purslow himself said that the club were disappointed with the way the season had gone after a promising start. I’m not exactly sure when he got his new contract though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rightdm00 Posted May 22, 2023 Share Posted May 22, 2023 Is this thread really one guy with an axe to grind and everyone else popping in, reading the hollow earth like conspiracy theories and going..... WTF??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted May 22, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted May 22, 2023 4 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said: Is this thread really one guy with an axe to grind and everyone else popping in, reading the hollow earth like conspiracy theories and going..... WTF??? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allani Posted May 22, 2023 Share Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, tinker said: If they want Purslow out he will not be sacked he will be marginalised. They will employ other people to do his job while he's still here. No they wouldn't. If they wanted him out for being as **** as some people here claim then they'd either sack him or buy him out of his share. NS isn't as successful as he is in business by hanging around trying to "ease" under-performers out of his companies politely. If he thinks they are holding him back they will be out the door before they realise that their ass is no longer in their seat. Even if they are worried about unfair dismissal claims - there are defined (legal) processes in place that would see the person removed from their role whilst the due process is carried out. As the project gets bigger (V Sports rather than Villa) then it is almost certain that more operational tasks will be centralised and they will bring in dedicated staff to run those. This will inevitably result in the various club CEO's having less to do or (probably more correctly) having a tighter remit. I suspect that Purslow will still have plenty to do at Villa, will be doing plenty to work around / comply with FFP and might well end up getting more involved in the Premier League / European initiatives around addressing the power of the top clubs. I am sure that some will see that as marginalising him, whereas I suspect it is probably the area of football administration that he most enjoys. I also expect that there will be plenty of speculation around why Purslow is being "overlooked" for V-Sports positions. Again my gut feel is that that is partly because he doesn't have direct experience in other markets or in specific areas (i.e. a Chris Heck type character will immediately have a whole book of contacts on marketing, advertising, sports branding within the US market, etc) and partly because his expertise is as an administrator of English football clubs and specifically around FFP and so is best used trying to change the system / tighten up the system so that the gap between the State funded clubs and us (and the rest) is reduced in ways that best suit our club. Edited May 22, 2023 by allani 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted May 22, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, allani said: No they wouldn't. If they wanted him out for being as **** as some people here claim then they'd either sack him or buy him out of his share. NS isn't as successful as he is in business by hanging around trying to "ease" under-performers out of his companies politely. If he thinks they are holding him back they will be out the door before they realise that their ass is no longer in their seat. Even if they are worried about unfair dismissal claims - there are defined (legal) processes in place that would see the person removed from their role whilst the due process is carried out. As the project gets bigger (V Sports rather than Villa) then it is almost certain that more operational tasks will be centralised and they will bring in dedicated staff to run those. This will inevitably result in the various club CEO's having less to do or (probably more correctly) having a tighter remit. I suspect that Purslow will still have plenty to do at Villa, will be doing plenty to work around / comply with FFP and might well end up getting more involved in the Premier League / European initiatives around addressing the power of the top clubs. I am sure that some will see that as marginalising him, whereas I suspect it is probably the area of football administration that he most enjoys. I also expect that there will be plenty of speculation around why Purslow is being "overlooked" for V-Sports positions. Again my gut feel is that that is partly because he doesn't have direct experience in other markets or in specific areas (i.e. a Chris Heck type character will immediately have a whole book of contacts on marketing, advertising, sports branding within the US market, etc) and partly because his expertise is as an administrator of English football clubs and specifically around FFP and so is best used trying to change the system / tighten up the system so that the gap between the State funded clubs and us (and the rest) is reduced in ways that best suit our club. In your opinion? Purslow can't be described as horrendous, as we dont know his involvement in a number of questionable decisions we can only assume from the information we have and our own opinions on how bad he has been, or how good. If he sticks to the politics of the game then maybe he's is good for us. IMHO. We will see what happens, my opinion is hes been marginalised by a least one appointment and more could follow.....we will see. Edited May 22, 2023 by tinker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts